"Scientists Tell US State Department Excluding Climate Impacts in Keystone XL Review 'Neither Wise nor Credible'"

2 posts / 0 new

I found this item on the web today about the evaluation of the Keystone XL northern route application thanks to a tweet from Brendan DeMelle (@bdemelle) that was retweeted by CMD's PRWATCH (thank you for this new source of info : http://www.desmogblog.com/ ). When ten of the nation’s top climate scientists write a letter to the US Secretary of State questioning the methods being used to evaluate the Keystone XL northern route, you know that things are not looking good for stopping this thing. Political pressure may end up getting the northern route built (I hope not), contrary to the advice of these and other scientists that have spoken out against the project. According to Brendan DeMelle,

The State Department is currently accepting comments on the scoping evaluation that will determine what environmental considerations will be included in the supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) required for the northern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline.The public comment period ends July 30.

http://www.desmogblog.com/scientists-tell-us-state-department-excluding-climate-impacts-keystone-xl-review-neither-wise-nor-credible

The evaluation of the application for the extension of the Keystone pipeline southern route into Texas is a separate important issue, and is still in the hands of the US Army Corp of Engineers. Some of the districts the extension will pass through have given approval already, while other districts' decisions are still pending.

miksilvr
Joined:
Jul. 7, 2011 12:13 pm

Comments

THANK YOU for posting this. Can you believe what is going on with regards to this project? I can't believe how they are trying to PRETEND to do the right thing but I guess they think that if they sweep the dirt under the rug no one will know it was there (if you know what I mean). Read below.

“At the moment, your department is planning to consider the effects of the pipeline on ‘recreation,’ ‘visual resources,’ and ‘noise,’ among other factors,” wrote the scientists. “Those are important—but omitting climate change from the considerations is neither wise nor credible.” The department’s previous pipeline EIS downplayed climate risks by arguing that the tar sands would be developed with or without Keystone XL and therefore the project had no responsibility for the additional greenhouse gas emissions that come from burning tar sands oil. The above argument that tar sands would be developed with or without Keystone XL shows you just how far they would go to make this filthy pipeline! I hope there is an especially HOT place in HELL for those who would defile our planet.

MrsBJLee's picture
MrsBJLee
Joined:
Feb. 17, 2012 9:45 am

Latest Headlines

Pulitzer Prize Reporter Exposes Trump’s Lack of Wealth, Mob Ties, Failure to Support Charity, and Much More

Author: K.J. McElrath is a former history and social studies teacher who has long maintained a keen interest in legal and social issues (From: www.ringoffireradio.com)

Taxpayers Fund Yet Another Unneeded Building in Afghanistan

The latest disclosure raises the total for surplus buildings uncovered by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction to nearly $42 million

Hillary Clinton email trove shows concern with Netanyahu's psyche

As US secretary of state, Hillary Rodham Clinton spent plenty of time in daunting foreign territory

Time To Start Treating Guns Like Abortions

It's time we start regulating guns like we regulate abortions.

Because it just makes sense that we regulate these individual rights in the same way.

Because the Supreme Court, in the Heller case, concluded that there is an individual right to own firearms found in the Second Amendment - just like they ruled in Roe v. Wade that there is an individual right to have an abortion found in the Fourth Amendment.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system