Will the President sign Tar Sands Pipeline deal?

[SHRED]

Will he approve it?

My understanding is that the decision will rest with him alone.
A pure "up or down vote" on his part. No Congress needed.

He either signs it and this nasty stuff flows south and into the corporate oil coffers while devastating our environment.
Or he refuses to sign it and continues towards a sustainable future, as he promised during his campaign.

LINK added:

http://www.tarsandsaction.org/




---

[Little Star]

1. He'll sign on for it! jmho

[AtomicKitten]

30. It's Hillary that supports the project and the State Dept cleared it; O hasn't weighed in yet.

Bill McKibben, who helped organise the protests at the White House, said the approval from the State Department had been expected. The secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, indicated last year that she favoured the pipeline.

"Everyone has known exactly what they would say all along. And everyone knows that they've valiantly ignored the elephant in the room - the fact that this would go a long ways towards opening up the world's second-largest pool of carbon," he wrote in an email.

However, McKibben held out hope that Obama - who still has final authority over the project - might step in to stop the pipeline.

mis-titled article here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/aug/26/obama-approves-pipeline-alberta-texas

[doc03]

2. Judging from his past record he will sign n/t

[blkmusclmachine]

3. Yep. It's the "reasonable," "adult," "bi-partisanshit" thing to do.

:thumbsdown:

[Ozymanithrax]

4. Yes, he will sign it.

There is absolutely no doubt.

It would be an uncharacteristic in your face moment for him to say no and demand that Republicans and Corprocrats pass comprehensive energy legislation that does not meet 99 and 44/100ths of business interests. And, tar sands are a market solution to a problem and market solutions are preferred.

[gateley]

5. Is there a deadline for his decision? I can't say with certainty either way because I

don't have the gift of predicting the future, but I'm very interested in the outcome. Thanks.

[Supersedeas]

6. Is this the same pipeline discussed in a recent National Geographic article?

[Supersedeas]

7. Consider this: the oil may be bound for China

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2011/08/110819-keystone-xl-canadian-oil-and-chinese-market/

<<Chinese investors have helped to finance early work on an alternate route out of Alberta. That pipeline would take the oil west across the Canadian Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, where tankers could ship it to Asia. But the project so far appears a pipe dream because of steep opposition from Canadian environmentalists and native Indian nations that control parts of the route through British Columbia.

.....

Once again, Verleger is arguing that the United States cannot escape the reality of living in a global oil market. Getting Canadian oil to the Texas Gulf Coast would put it onto ships bound for Asia, he predicted. He calls it a "Tar Sands Road to China," a play on the famous Silk Road that moved Asian goods to Western markets for 3,000 years. Although it's a long, tortuous route to ship oil through the Gulf of Mexico and around Africa's Cape of Good Hope or South America's Cape Horn, economics will favor this journey to the Far East, he contends. The bottom line for Verleger is that refineries on the Gulf Coast have long-term commitments to buy oil from current suppliers—including Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Mexico. Those nations don't want to cede market share to Canada. All three have ownership in Texas refineries, and they can also match any discount that comes with the Canadian crude. "There will be too much oil, it's got to go somewhere, and it's going to China," Verleger says.>>

[woo me with science]

8. K&R

We know where this administration's loyalties lie.

[_ed_]

9. I know this:

When he signs it, there will be 5 or 6 posters here on DU explaining how great it is and how we don't understand him, followed by mindless lists with "accomplishments."

[Supersedeas]

10. let's wait and see

[_ed_]

11. Been waiting for almost three years now...

.

[COLGATE4]

22. And the explanation that it's really 16-dimensional chess, or something

equally trite.

[robcon]

12. I hope he signs on for it.

n/t

[Supersedeas]

13. so do Chinese investors and TX oilmen

[truebrit71]

14. I think you forgot your sarcasm emoticon, yes?

..or do you not like planet earth?

[truebrit71]

15. Absolutely he will, and he'll tell the tree-huggin hippie left to STFU about it too...

...I have already offered to donate $25 to his campaign if he DOESN'T sign it...because there's no other way he's getting another red cent from me otherwise..

[okieinpain]

27. lol. n/t.

[Supersedeas]

16. I guess we got our answer -- the project is approved

http://www.truth-out.org/state-department-allow-canadian-pipeline/1314380586

<<Washington - The Obama administration gave a crucial green light on Friday to a proposed 1,711-mile pipeline that would carry heavy oil from Canada across the Great Plains to terminals in Oklahoma and the Gulf Coast, saying the project would provide a secure source of energy without significant damage to the environment.

In reaching its conclusion that the Keystone XL pipeline from the oil sands deposits in Alberta would have minimal environmental impact, the administration dismissed criticism from environmental advocates, who said that extracting the oil would have a devastating impact on the climate and that a leak or rupture in the 36-inch-diameter pipeline could wreak ecological disaster. Opponents also said the project would prolong the nation’s dependence on fossil fuels, threaten sensitive lands and wildlife and further delay development of clean energy sources.>>

Oil Industry....ask and you shall receive.

[kwolf68]

17. Wow that was quick

...I am about done with this President.

[Supersedeas]

19. this is a tough one....like a kick in the stomach

[kwolf68]

20. Here is the other thing

I know that part of this deal is there are TONS of regulations of the pipeline. TransCanada or whoever it is agreed to every last one of them.

So what happens if the other side gets into power? Do they drone on about regulations and seek to eliminate those on this deal? Which WOULD place our ecology in great peril.

That's the problem with this...Obama's department agreed to the deal, but DID PUT IN stipulations...what happens to those when the freaks get in charge?

[Supersedeas]

21. Yeah, but no amount of stipulations and regulations can paper over a spill

I thought the recent pipeline spill into Yellowstone would have given the President plenty of political leeway to reject this deal. The Yellowstone pipeline was wrapped tight with paper regulations, but that does prevent spills. The only real safeguard is to find alteratives to pipelines and alternative sources of energy.

I guess that heavy advertising about oil lands and the Kearl Project, you know the one, with the concerned dad and the little girl on the school bus, it was too much of a pitch not to swing at it.

This decision will be difficult to overlook.

[kwolf68]

23. No argument

I never trusted Obama's environmental record as it was. Just didn't think it was that important to him, but he was CLEARLY better than the other side and I figured the other 'good' about him would be enough.

I am sick of it...off the top of my head

trade deals, off shore ban lifted, the health care debacle, the debt deal, putting SS and Medicare on table, allowing for subsidies of foreign profits, firing staffers for bashing Republicans..doing nothing if they bash Liberals, considering a Republican for the fed, sustained Bush tax cuts, his attitude toward unions....

Shit, he's doing shit the Republicans would be doing. Other than the appointment of judges, religious quackery and the fact he isn't strumming guitars and eating cake on the eve of a potentially disastrous hurricane I can't find much difference between him and the last boss.

The Democratic Party should fight for ideals and being corporate stooges isn't part of that. Maybe after the nation is turned into rubble by the corporate Dems and the right, a new Democratic Party can emerge that will give a shit about the sick, the poor, the working class, the environment, animals, children...basically, those entities that don't have a fucking bit of power, but have every right to exist here on the planet without being exploited and discarded by the ruling elite.

Democratic Party is dying....it will soon become the moderate wing of the Republic Party and a new Liberal opposition will emerge, at least that's my dream.

[Supersedeas]

24. I feel your disappointment, kw

There is still some hope that the President will ultimately reject the pipeline project, despite the State Department's approval. But, it doesn't look good. It really doesn't look good.

[lonestarnot]

28. Fucking A.

:thumbsdown:

[Cali_Democrat]

18. This is Obama we're talking about

Of course he'll approve it and collectively moon the "tree hugging hippies" on the left.

[ProSense]

25. Here's the NRDC

State Department Keystone XL Environmental Review: It's Easy to Find "No Significant Impact" if You Do No Significant Study...

Today, the U.S. State Department released its http://www.keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/clientsite/keystonexl.nsf?Open">Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. The State Department’s finding that there will be no significant environmental impact to most resources is completely without merit. Our initial analysis of the environmental review makes one thing clear: it was premature for the Department of State to issue the review. The detailed studies needed to fully demonstrate the need for and evaluate risks of this tar sands pipeline have not been completed. In fact, the FEIS seems to ignore information that clearly points more to how the pipeline will cause an increase to air pollution, greater greenhouse gas emissions and a higher potential for oil spills threatening drinking water resources. What the FEIS should find is that the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is not worth the environmental and safety risks. We have better alternatives to meet our transportation needs than dirty tar sands oil from Canada.

Unfortunately, Secretary of State Clinton did not fulfill her promise to “leave no stone unturned” and the State Department’s pledge to do a “thorough and objective” assessment. The things missing are all the more glaring because they relate to the issues that have been most controversial and the source of most of the public debate. It appears the State Department continues to rush the decision on this pipeline manufacturing an urgency that doesn’t exist.

While the State Department claims they have exhaustively considered all of the issues, there in fact are gaping holes that have remained with only superficial analysis since the beginning of the process:

<...>

[Supersedeas]

26. Once the President is infomed of the gaping holes in the studies,

I hope ultimately rejects the proposed pipeline.

[AtomicKitten]

29. Hillary supports the pipeline and the State Dept cleared it, but Pres O hasn't weighed in yet

... and he has the final say.

This is the last time I'm going to post this mis-titled piece from
The Guardian. If people bothered to actually read the article, they would realize it's Hillary Clinton specifically that supports the pipeline and the State Department cleared it, but President Obama has the final say and he hasn't weighed in yet.

Mis-titled Guardian article here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/aug/26/obama-approves-pipeline-alberta-texas

Bill McKibben, who helped organise the protests at the White House, said the approval from the State Department had been expected. The secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, indicated last year that she favoured the pipeline.

"Everyone has known exactly what they would say all along. And everyone knows that they've valiantly ignored the elephant in the room - the fact that this would go a long ways towards opening up the world's second-largest pool of carbon," he wrote in an email.

However, McKibben held out hope that Obama - who still has final authority over the project - might step in to stop the pipeline.

[Supersedeas]

33. McKibben has faith that the President will override the State Dept

[NorthCarolina]

31. Does a cat have an ass? Does the Pope protect pedophiles?

Would a Republican support it?

Of course he'll sign it.

[Fearless]

32. I guess that we'll have to eat our peas again!

:mad:

:nuke:

[robcon]

34. The pipeline is the most important project we have as a country. I hope it's approved soon.

I think the p[resident knows he has to approve this vital program.