Salon: Did Obama Just Kill Keystone XL?
Emphasis mine.
Did Obama just kill Keystone XL?
Not necessarily, but his new policy makes it less likely the administration will approve the pipeline
BY ALEX SEITZ-WALD
A 2011 Keystone video protest outside the White House (Wikimedia)
Just ahead of the president’s big speech on climate change, the Huffington Post’s Sam Stein breaks the news that President Obama will ask Secretary of State John Kerry to reject the Keystone XL pipeline if State finds the pipeline increases carbon emissions. It’s huge news that took environmentalists completely by surprise. They didn’t expect the president to address Keystone in his speech — he’s avoided discussing the pipeline at all since issuing an executive order to have State study the environmental impact some time ago.
So is this the end of Keystone? Stein says the “policy somewhat splits the difference — not killing the project outright, but ensuring that it meets a basic environmental standard.”
Environmentalists are thrilled, but reserving a healthy skepticism because there’s still a big “if” here.
While it may seem obvious that the pipeline would increase emissions (and most climate scientists have said it would), the State Department’s initial environmental impact statement (EIS) concluded the pipeline would have negligible impact on global greenhouse gas emissions, because oil sands from Alberta would still be transported via rail or other pipelines if Keystone XL was never built. The assessment, written by a contractor that was seen as overly friendly to the industry, was immediately controversial and even drew criticism from the EPA. It’s currently under review.
more...
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/25/did_obama_just_kill_keystone_xl/singleton/
= new reply since forum marked as read
We ARE getting the pipeline one way or the other, and we're going to like it. 
We will pipe sludge, but not water to states that really need it. Instead of letting towns flood, why not come up with a water pipeline to send the overflow throughout the US. Why must we put more at risk with this monster that some "terrorist" could probably blow up and cause havoc. Why are we allowing ourselves to become more vulnerable?
""environmental impact statement (EIS) concluded the pipeline would have negligible impact""
Don't you just love the way the corps 'game' the reporting system. Don't include the, mining, refining, possible leak/containment accident, of the resourse in their impact statement. 
Later on when the pipeline breaks because of some flood, killer tornado, or wild fire and contaminates 50 square miles the corp will whine for billions in clean-up funds, "the president signed the ok"
Granted, TBH, it doesn't necessarily mean that Keystone's finished for good, but it does seem to show that Obama has, once again, taken the facts into consideration.....and we need that right now. 
