A discussion of Climate Change topics: Keystone XL; where Obama goes now; business and religious interests; denial

590 posts / 0 new
Last post

Climate change was one of the main topics on the Saturday November 17th episode of Up with Chris Hayes.  Bill McKibben of 350.org was one of the guests, the day before he was to appear at the march around the White House to protest against the Keystone XL pipeline.

Attention redirected on climate change, but is it too late?

What Obama will do on climate change

Business and religious interests against climate change

The stages of climate change denial


a segment from the show about climate change post-Sandy (11/3/12):

What’s at stake with climate change



Probably if the Pres. would

Probably if the Pres. would stop saying we have to address climate change for future generations and begin telling the truth...we have to address climate change to prevent hardships for the current generation...something might be done.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

MrsBJLee's picture
There was a protest in

There was a protest in Washington D.C. November 18th of 3,ooo people against the Keystone XL pipeline! Check out the article!




11/29/12 - Forest reveals

11/29/12 -

Forest reveals climate change's surprising damage to moose, maple syrup

from today's Democracy Now

from today's Democracy Now headlines:

Report: Susan Rice Holds Stock in Keystone XL Oil Firm

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice is receiving criticism of a different kind after it was revealed she holds up to $600,000 worth of stock in the firm behind the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline. TransCanada is seeking federal permission to transport Canadian tar sands oil to the U.S. Gulf Coast. If confirmed as secretary of state, Rice could play a key role in determining the fate of the pipeline.


MrsBJLee's picture

THIS IS NOT GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Students Push for Divestment

Students Push for Divestment from Fossil Fuels at Universities Across the Nation

ThinkProgress ‏@thinkprogress

Mounting evidence shows possible link between air pollution and autism 

MrsBJLee's picture



More on Rice, from Canadian

More on Rice, from Canadian press:

TransCanada stock complicates Rice’s route to U.S. secretary of state job


More on Rice and Canadian oil

More on Rice and Canadian oil investments, from Politico:

Susan Rice holds TransCanada stock

Carney blames oppo research

think i missed this link

think i missed this link yesterday:

Stake in Keystone Pipeline Is Potential Conflict for Susan Rice


{Rice and her husband may want to take notes from the college students mentioned above in this item if she wants the State dept job:}

Students Push for Divestment from Fossil Fuels at Universities Across the Nation


new today:

Reports That Sec. of State Candidate Rice ‘Has a Major Financial Stake in Canadian Tar Sands’

New video from Thom Hartmann

New video from Thom Hartmann and The Big Picture:

Papantonio: Big Money for Politicians While The Planet Melts

MrsBJLee's picture
TransCanada isn’t the only

TransCanada isn’t the only Canadian energy company in Rice’s portfolio. She also has investments in pipeline firm Enbridge, utility TransAlta and oil and natural gas companies Encana, Suncor and Cenovus.

About a third of Rice’s personal wealth — an amount as high as $43.5 million — is invested in Canadian energy interests, according to On Earth.

Rice has other holdings in Chesapeake Energy, Royal Dutch Shell, Devon Energy, Iberdrola, ATP Oil & Gas Corp. and Rio Tinto Limited

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/84355.html#ixzz2DpFYNu6K

12/3/12 -  Another call from

12/3/12 - 

Another call from a students of a university to have their school divest fossil fuel assets; this time, its the University of Wisconsin students and alumni:

Climate Campaigners Demand UW Divest from Fossil Fuel

Another day, another

Another day, another exaggerated claim from the oil industry on how many jobs approving the Keystone XL pipeline would bring to the US ... make that greatly exaggerated in this case!:

Oil Industry Urges Obama To Approve Keystone Pipeline

My question is: yeah, well, its not a good thing if the majority of those jobs are in sectors dealing with pipeline spill cleanup and tarsands refinery pollution mitigation!

The Keystone XL pipeline job

The Keystone XL pipeline job creation total is like that fish story Eddie told the Germans in the Humphrey Bogart movie "To Have and Have Not" with Walter Brennan and Lauren Bacall ... every time he told the story about the fish he caught, the fish got bigger!

Every time they tell the story about the the number of jobs the pipeline will create, the fish gets bigger!

12/6/12 -  Bayou Frack-Out:

12/6/12 - 

Bayou Frack-Out: The Massive Oil and Gas Disaster You've Never Heard Of

11/30/12 -  Senate panel

11/30/12 - 

Senate panel Democrats bash climate change deniers


12/2/12 - 

Climate march through the streets of Doha

12/05/12 -  Susan Rice's

12/05/12 - 

Susan Rice's Environmental Stances: Keystone XL And Climate Change In The Spotlight

Keystone XL: Welcome to the Proxy Energy War

12/7/12 - {i am not

12/7/12 -

{i am not surprised, and , at the same time, disappointed in news coming out of Doha.}


New York City Meets the Colorado River at Qatar Climate Talks?

A Call to Reject False Capitalist Solutions to Climate Crisis

"Your Governments Have Failed You": Syrian-American Student Calls For Climate Justice - from Democracy Now

            other Democracy Now videos: Democracy Now! - YouTube

Doha: Climate change deal limping towards 'disappointing' conclusion

COP18 Climate Change Conference in Doha Ends in Colossal Failure

MrsBJLee's picture


MrsBJLee's picture


12/7/12 -  more about the

12/7/12 - 

more about the failure of COP{out}18, and energy issues in Canada:

Civil society breaks the silence, confronts governments at climate negotiations

MrsBJLee's picture
I was checking out one of my

I was checking out one of my Senators website and found this letter from her to Hillary Clinton regarding the Keystone XL. Thought I would post it just incase no one has seen it even though it's from last year it's part of the history. I would have loved to see the reply.



MrsBJLee wrote: I was

MrsBJLee wrote:

I was checking out one of my Senators website and found this letter from her to Hillary Clinton regarding the Keystone XL. Thought I would post it just in case no one has seen it even though it's from last year it's part of the history. I would have loved to see the reply.



I remember hearing about complaints by some in congress to the state department on the handling of that review, but was not aware of this particular letter.  Complaints from constituents to Sen Boxer and others were one of the driving forces behind the administrations decision to not approve the northern route TransCanada had submitted for the keystone XL pipeline.  Problem is, instead of klling the northern leg outright, TransCanada was asked to submit a new route, which the have done with very minor modifications.  

The new route still passes through environmentally sensitive areas which would not only be greatly disturbed by the construction, but even more so by spills caused by pipeline breaks.  The decision on whether to approve the northern leg of the Keystone XL still is in the state departments hands.  I have not heard much about the current process, but hope it will be more transparent than the previous one, with the result being flat out NO!  We don't need more refinery pollution in the gulf states, especially for the purpose of TransCanada exporting gasoline refined from tarsands out of Texas ports.

Bill McKibben, 350.org, the Sierra Club, and other environmental organizations have planned another protest of the Keystone XL pipeline for Washington DC to be held on President's Day, February 18, 2013.  I missed the March Around the White House event on November 18th , and hope I can make this next one.  The president was out of town for the event in November; I don't know if he'll be in town for this one.

I could not find more detail on the President's Day event, but the links below can be checked for more information as the date approaches: 


350.org | Facebook

350.org on Google+

12/8/12 -  Nations extend

12/8/12 - 

Nations extend weaker Kyoto Protocol

MrsBJLee's picture
I had not heard about the

I had not heard about the event for February 18th. Although the event in November drew quite a decent crowd I don't remember seeing anything on our local news about it. Thanks for posting the event and lets try and keep it on the board so hopefully others will try to go.

The organizers need to get the media's attention somehow. It needs to make the local news all across the country.

Do we still have protesters in the trees in Texas? I still have not heard one bit about it in our local news and I find that to be UPSETTING!


MrsBJLee wrote: I had not

MrsBJLee wrote:

I had not heard about the event for February 18th. Although the event in November drew quite a decent crowd I don't remember seeing anything on our local news about it. Thanks for posting the event and lets try and keep it on the board so hopefully others will try to go.

The organizers need to get the media's attention somehow. It needs to make the local news all across the country.

Do we still have protesters in the trees in Texas? I still have not heard one bit about it in our local news and I find that to be UPSETTING!


Friday 12/7 was day 80 of the KXL Blockade in Texas (today is day 82).  There are still people in the trees, but from what I have read, the TransCanada contractors may have bypassed the tree sit by going outside of the right of way to go around it.  I do not recall the details on that; there is a question of whether the pipeline itself can follow the wider path the contractors cleared, and whether that was inside or outside the legal limits to their right of way. 

The march in Washington DC on November 18th had only been announced 10 days prior, which accounted for part of the relatively small turnout of protesters and the lack of media coverage.

Too many of our media and press outlets have their hands tied on stories like the Keystone XL pipeline and climate change in general because of either ownership ties to energy companies or restrictions placed on them by corporations that advertise on them.

MrsBJLee's picture

DAY 82??? HOLY COW! I AM AMAZED THIS ISN'T ON THE NEWS! I do understand what you are saying about the ownership ties to energy companies. They have a strangle hold on EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE! How can we fight that much power and win?

12/4/12 -  more on the

12/4/12 - 

more on the divestment movement at US colleges and universities:

To Stop Climate Change, Students Aim at College Portfolios


12/9/12 - 

"Exxon Hates Your Children"

12/9/12 -  WikiLeaks reveals

12/9/12 - 

WikiLeaks reveals US bribes help stop climate action

MrsBJLee's picture
It's GREAT that college

It's GREAT that college students across the nation are truely getting involved!

As far as "Exxon Hates Your Children" ad, I wonder why they are only picking on Exxon? Wouldn't Shell, BP, TransCanada and all the others fall into that category too?

12/4/12 -  There Is No

12/4/12 - 

There Is No Stopping Climate Change Unless We Can Mobilize Against Plutocracy


12/10/12 - 

"Incredibly Disappointed": Civil Groups Decry Weak COP18 Deal amid Deadly Proof of Climate Change

12/7/12 -  Climate Change? US

12/7/12 - 

Climate Change? US and Canada talk a good game, obstruct

12/10/12 -  {here we go

12/10/12 - 

{here we go again! ... in Nebraska this time}

Keystone Conflict (Again): HDR Must Be Fired


Keystone XL Protests Rage On in East Texas

douglaslee's picture
   Audobon The Ecologist

The Ecologist
Environmental Health News
Environmental News Network
Labor Union News
Labor Union Report
Labour Start
Monthly Review
National Geographic
Science Daily
Society of Environmental Journalists

Some of the links are labor instead of eco, but from an aggregator standpoint they fit in the source book because labor does turn out, they are active and motivated, and know how to make public statements about issues of concern..

harry ashburn
harry ashburn's picture
Poisoning the Well: How the

Poisoning the Well: How the Feds Let Industry Pollute the Nation’s Underground Water Supply

 by Abrahm Lustgarten
 ProPublica, Dec. 11, 2012, 12:01 a.m.

Federal officials have given energy and mining companies permission to pollute aquifers in more than 1,500 places across the country, releasing toxic material into underground reservoirs that help supply more than half of the nation's drinking water.
In many cases, the Environmental Protection Agency has granted these so-called aquifer exemptions in Western states now stricken by drought and increasingly desperate for water.

EPA records show that portions of at least 100 drinking water aquifers have been written off because exemptions have allowed them to be used as dumping grounds.
"You are sacrificing these aquifers," said Mark Williams, a hydrologist at the University of Colorado and a member of a National Science Foundation team studying the effects of energy development on the environment. "By definition, you are putting pollution into them. ... If you are looking 50 to 100 years down the road, this is not a good way to go."
As part of an investigation into the threat to water supplies from underground injection of waste, ProPublica set out to identify which aquifers have been polluted.
We found the EPA has not even kept track of exactly how many exemptions it has issued, where they are, or whom they might affect.
What records the agency was able to supply under the Freedom of Information Act show that exemptions are often issued in apparent conflict with the EPA's mandate to protect waters that may be used for drinking.
Though hundreds of exemptions are for lower-quality water of questionable use, many allow grantees to contaminate water so pure it would barely need filtration, or that is treatable using modern technology.
The EPA is only supposed to issue exemptions if aquifers are too remote, too dirty, or too deep to supply affordable drinking water. Applicants must persuade the government that the water is not being used as drinking water and that it never will be.
Sometimes, however, the agency has issued permits for portions of reservoirs that are in use, assuming contaminants will stay within the finite area exempted.
In Wyoming, people are drawing on the same water source for drinking, irrigation and livestock that, about a mile away, is being fouled with federal permission. In Texas, EPA officials are evaluating an exemption for a uranium mine — already approved by the state — even though numerous homes draw water from just outside the underground boundaries outlined in the mining company's application.
The EPA declined repeated requests for interviews for this story, but sent a written response saying exemptions have been issued responsibly, under a process that ensures contaminants remain confined.
"Aquifer Exemptions identify those waters that do not currently serve as a source of drinking water and will not serve as a source of drinking water in the future and, thus, do not need to be protected," an EPA spokesperson wrote in an email statement. "The process of exempting aquifers includes steps that minimize the possibility that future drinking water supplies are endangered."
Yet EPA officials say the agency has quietly assembled an unofficial internal task force to re-evaluate its aquifer exemption policies. The agency's spokesperson declined to give details on the group's work, but insiders say it is attempting to inventory exemptions and to determine whether aquifers should go unprotected in the future, with the value of water rising along with demand for exemptions closer to areas where people live.
Advances in geological sciences have deepened regulators' concerns about exemptions, challenging the notion that waste injected underground will stay inside the tightly drawn boundaries of the exempted areas.
"What they don't often consider is whether that waste will flow outside that zone of influence over time, and there is no doubt that it will," said Mike Wireman, a senior hydrologist with the EPA who has worked with the World Bank on global water supply issues. "Over decades, that water could discharge into a stream. It could seep into a well. If you are a rancher out there and you want to put a well in, it's difficult to find out if there is an exempted aquifer underneath your property."
Aquifer exemptions are a little-known aspect of the government's Underground Injection Control program, which is designed to protect water supplies from the underground disposal of waste.
The Safe Drinking Water Act explicitly prohibits injection into a source of drinking water, and requires precautions to ensure that oil and gas and disposal wells that run through them are carefully engineered not to leak.
Areas covered by exemptions are stripped of some of these protections, however. Waste can be discarded into them freely, and wells that run through them need not meet all standards used to prevent pollution. In many cases, no water monitoring or long-term study is required.
The recent surge in domestic drilling and rush for uranium has brought a spike in exemption applications, as well as political pressure not to block or delay them, EPA officials told ProPublica.
"The energy policy in the U.S is keeping this from happening because right now nobody — nobody — wants to interfere with the development of oil and gas or uranium," said a senior EPA employee who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "The political pressure is huge not to slow that down."
Many of the exemption permits, records show, have been issued in regions where water is needed most and where intense political debates are underway to decide how to fairly allocate limited water resources.
In drought-stricken Texas, communities are looking to treat brackish aquifers beneath the surface because they have run out of better options and several cities, including San Antonio and El Paso, are considering whether to build new desalinization plants for as much as $100 million apiece.
And yet environmental officials have granted more than 50 exemptions for waste disposal and uranium mining in Texas, records show. The most recent was issued in September.
The Texas Railroad Commission, the state agency that regulates oil and gas drilling, said it issued additional exemptions, covering large swaths of aquifers underlying the state, when it brought its rules into compliance with the federal Safe Drinking Water Act in 1982. This was in large part because officials viewed them as oil reservoirs and thought they were already contaminated. But it is unclear where, and how extensive, those exemptions are.
EPA "Region VI received a road map — yes, the kind they used to give free at gas stations — with the aquifers delineated, with no detail on depth," said Mario Salazar, a former EPA project engineer who worked with the underground injection program for 25 years and oversaw the approval of Texas' program, in an email.
In California, where nearly half of the nation's fruits and vegetables are grown with water from as far away as the Colorado River, the perennially cash-strapped state's governor is proposing to spend $14 billion to divert more of the Sacramento River from the north to the south. Near Bakersfield, a private project is underway to build a water bank, essentially an artificial aquifer.
Still, more than 100 exemptions for natural aquifers have been granted in California, some to dispose of drilling and fracking waste in the state's driest parts. Though most date back to the 1980s, the most recent exemption was approved in 2009 in Kern County, an agricultural heartland that is the epicenter of some of the state's most volatile rivalries over water.
The balance is even more delicate in Colorado. Growth in the Denver metro area has been stubbornly restrained not by available land, but by the limits of aquifers that have been drawn down by as much as 300 vertical feet. Much of Eastern Colorado's water has long been piped underneath the Continental Divide and, until recently, the region was mulling a $3 billion plan to build a pipeline to bring water hundreds of miles from western Wyoming.
Along with Wyoming, Montana and Utah, however, Colorado has sacrificed more of its aquifer resources than any other part of the country.
More than 1,100 aquifer exemptions have been approved by the EPA's Rocky Mountain regional office, according to a list the agency provided to ProPublica. Many of them are relatively shallow and some are in the same geologic formations containing aquifers relied on by Denver metro residents, though the boundaries are several hundred miles away. More than a dozen exemptions are in waters that might not even need to be treated in order to drink.
"It's short-sighted," said Tom Curtis, the deputy executive director of the American Water Works Association, an international non-governmental drinking water organization. "It's something that future generations may question."
To the resource industries, aquifer exemptions are essential. Oil and gas drilling waste has to go somewhere and in certain parts of the country, there are few alternatives to injecting it into porous rock that also contains water, drilling companies say. In many places, the same layers of rock that contain oil or gas also contain water, and that water is likely to already contain pollutants such as benzene from the natural hydrocarbons within it.
Similarly, the uranium mining industry works by prompting chemical reactions that separate out minerals within the aquifers themselves; the mining can't happen without the pollution.
When regulations governing waste injection were written in the 1980s to protect underground water reserves, industry sought the exemptions as a compromise. The intent was to acknowledge that many deep waters might not be worth protecting even though they technically met the definition of drinking water.
"The concept of aquifer exemptions was something that we 'invented' to address comments when the regulations were first proposed," Salazar, the former EPA official, said. "There was never the intention to exempt aquifers just because they could contain, or would obviate, the development of a resource. Water was the resource that would be protected above all."
Since then, however, approving exemptions has become the norm. In an email, the EPA said that some exemption applications had been denied, but provided no details about how many or which ones. State regulators in Texas and Wyoming could not recall a single application that had been turned down and industry representatives said they had come to expect swift approval.
"Historically they have been fairly routinely granting aquifer exemptions," said Richard Clement, the chief executive of Powertech Uranium, which is currently seeking permits for new mining in South Dakota. "There has never been a case that I'm aware of that it has not been done."

Aquifer Exemptions Granted
The aquifer exemptions approved by the EPA each year are according to a partial list of approvals provided to ProPublica by the agency in response to a FOIA request.
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
In 1981, shortly after the first exemption rules were set, the EPA lowered the bar for exemptions as part of settling a lawsuit filed by the American Petroleum Institute. Since then, the agency has issued permits for water not "reasonably expected" to be used for drinking. The original language allowed exemptions only for water that could never be used.
Oil companies have been the biggest users of aquifer exemptions by far. Most are held by smaller, independent companies, but Chevron, America's second-largest oil company, holds at least 28 aquifer exemptions. Exxon holds at least 14. In Wyoming, the Canadian oil giant EnCana, currently embroiled in an investigation of water contamination related to fracking in the town of Pavillion, has been allowed to inject into aquifers at 38 sites.
Once an exemption is issued, it's all but permanent; none have ever been reversed. Permits dictate how much material companies can inject and where, but impose little or no obligations to protect the surrounding water if it has been exempted. The EPA and state environmental agencies require applicants to assess the quality of reservoirs and to do some basic modeling to show where contaminants should end up. But in most cases there is no obligation, for example, to track what has been put into the earth or — except in the case of the uranium mines — to monitor where it does end up.
The biggest problem now, experts say, is that the EPA's criteria for evaluating applications are outdated. The rules — last revised nearly three decades ago — haven't adapted to improving water treatment technology and don't reflect the changing value and scarcity of fresh water.
Aquifers once considered unusable can now be processed for drinking water at a reasonable price.
The law defines an underground source of drinking water as any water that has less than 10,000 parts per million of what are called Total Dissolved Solids, a standard measure of water quality, but historically, water with more than 3,000 TDS has been dismissed as too poor for drinking. It also has been taken for granted that, in most places, the deeper the aquifer — say, below about 2,000 feet — the higher the TDS and the less salvageable the water.
Yet today, Texas towns are treating water that has as high as 4,000 TDS and a Wyoming town is pumping from 8,500 feet deep, thousands of feet below aquifers that the EPA has determined were too far underground to ever produce useable water.
"You can just about treat anything nowadays," said Jorge Arroyo, an engineer and director of innovative water technologies at the Texas Water Development Board, which advises the state on groundwater management. Arroyo said he was unaware that so many Texas aquifers had been exempted, and that it would be feasible to treat many of them. Regarding the exemptions, he said, "With the advent of technology to treat some of this water, I think this is a prudent time to reconsider whether we allow them."
Now, as commercial crops wilt in the dry heat and winds rip the dust loose from American prairies, questions are mounting about whether the EPA should continue to grant exemptions going forward.
"Unless someone can build a clear case that this water cannot be used — we need to keep our groundwater clean," said Al Armendariz, a former regional administrator for the EPA's South Central region who now works with the Sierra Club. "We shouldn't be exempting aquifers unless we have no other choice. We should only exempt the aquifer if we are sure we are never going to use the water again."
Still, skeptics say fewer exemptions are unlikely, despite rising concern about them within the EPA, as the demand for space underground continues to grow. Long-term plans to slow climate change and clean up coal by sequestering carbon dioxide underground, for example, could further endanger aquifers, causing chemical reactions that lead to water contamination.
"Everyone wants clean water and everyone wants clean energy," said Richard Healy, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey whose work is focused on the nexus of energy production and water. "Energy development can occur very quickly because there is a lot of money involved. Environmental studies take longer."


12/11/12 -  this may be

12/11/12 - 

this may be temporary (i hope not) but, i's good news for once out of Texas Keystone XL site:

BREAKING NEWS: Texas Landowner Granted Temporary Restraining Order Against Keystone XL on Basis of Fraud

Texas judge halts TransCanada oil pipeline work

TransCanada Keystone Pipeline Temporarily Halted in Texas

BREAKING: Judge Halts Construction on Section of KXL!

Landowner Wins Restraining Order Against Keystone XL Pipeline


Watch and read more about Mike's story here: 

12/13/12 -  "Pictures don't

12/13/12 - 

"Pictures don't do it justice !"

You've seen the , now it's time to ACT! SIGN THE PETITION TO : NO ON KXL! 



President Obama: Hear our stories, focus on climate action

12/13/14 -  Tar Sands

12/13/14 - 

Judge lifts restraining order against KXL, another hearing set for Dec 19th    

MrsBJLee's picture
I wonder why he dissolved the

I wonder why he dissolved the restraining order? So there is a hearing Wed Dec 19th. I hope it turns out in favor of all those who feel that they have been bullied into signing an agreement with TransCanada. Guess we'll have to wait until then to hear more about this case.


12/13/12 -  Community Rallies

12/13/12 - 

Community Rallies in Support of Michael Bishop as Legal Ruling Allows KXL Construction to Move Forward on His Land

12/13/12 -  TransCanada Wins

12/13/12 - 

TransCanada Wins Bid to Lift Order Blocking Pipeline

MrsBJLee's picture
They have been hunger

They have been hunger striking for 17 days now???? OMG! Pray for them!

MrsBJLee's picture
I found this part of the

I found this part of the article to be extremely interesting as I didn't know about the Railroad Commission. The landowners are getting railroaded alright!

Bishop has also filed a lawsuit against the Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates pipelines in Texas, challenging the agency’s certification of Keystone as a common carrier under state law. A hearing in that case is set for next week in Austin, the state capital.

It would be very interesting to see what happens. All along I have wondered how this for profit pipeline could be considered a common carrier which allowed them to claim eminent domain. It all seems illegal to me.

Among other things, the link

Among other things, the link on this tweet from Bill McKibben of 350.org describes the coming protest against the Keystone XL pipeline in Washington DC on Feb 17th, Presidents Day Weekend, 2013.

The numbers on Keystone XL: it's equivalent to 7 new coal-fired power plants 

MrsBJLee's picture
Frightening numbers. Everyone

Frightening numbers.

Everyone should try and email the president at least once a week asking him to reject the Keystone XL. If we all took a pledge and wrote at least once a week he certainly would end up reading at least one of the messages......don't you think? On the White House website you can also start a petition and if the required number of signatures are reached they you will get a reply. I wonder if that has been tried?

Ecowatch has some good Keystone articles.



Keystone Pipeline Blockade

Keystone Pipeline Blockade Update: 80 Days In Trees, Hunger Strikes, And An Army General Speaking Out

In addition, a national ‘day of action’ is being planned for President’s Day (February 18, 2013) by the Sierra Club and 350.org. The organizers are calling upon citizens from across the nation to gather in Washington, D.C. for “the biggest anti-Keystone Pipeline” protest to date. A similar ‘day of action’ in November 2011 gathered over 10,000 people. Read about the upcoming day of action against the Keystone Pipeline here.

speaking of "the end of the

speaking of "the end of the world as we know it" ... 

Our friends with Global Power Shift have put together this incredibly powerful video with a little shout out to... 


  View media 


Global Power Shift

12/19/12 - Mike Bishop and

12/19/12 -

Mike Bishop and Supporters Respond to His Case Being Moved to District Court

The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline faces a wide ranging sea of opposition

12/20/12 -

Judge Delays East Texas TransCanada Pipeline Decision