So green nuts would rather have the oil shipped by more environmentally dangerous rail and tanker truck. What nincompoops.
PHOTOGRAPH BY GARY CAMERON, REUTERS
Published May 6, 2014
Can a group of U.S. senators really bypass the Obama administration and force approval of the controversial and long-delayed Keystone XL pipeline?
"The review process has been thorough," said Senator Mary Landrieu (D-La.), who introduced a bill to approve the pipeline with Senator John Hoeven (R-ND) last week. "The five studies that have been conducted, as required by law, are complete. It is time to stop studying and start building."
The pipeline, which would carry crude oil from Canada to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, has been under review for more than five years.
In April, the State Department extended the review process indefinitely, citing pending litigation in Nebraska and the need to study the "unprecedented" number of public comments it had received. (Related: "State Department Further Postpones Keystone XL Decision.")
"The legislation Senator Hoeven and I have introduced will green-light the construction of the pipeline immediately," Landrieu said in a statement.
The idea of pushing past the White House to expedite Keystone XL is certainly appealing to proponents of the pipeline. But after years of controversy, is it just more political posturing or could it really work?
The answer seems to be that there's a reasonable legal case for overriding the president on the issue, but the necessary votes probably aren't there.
The history of the project is politically fraught.
The State Department, charged with reviewing Keystone XL because it crosses international boundaries, rejected the project in 2011, in part because of concerns over its route through Nebraska's Sandhills region, a native grasslands that contains one of the largest aquifers in North America. (Related: "Interactive: Mapping the Flow of Tar Sands Oil.")
TransCanada, the pipeline's Calgary-based operator, revised the Nebraska route and resubmitted the application for the presidential permit two years ago. (Related: "Keystone XL Pipeline: 4 Animals and 3 Habitats in Its Path.")
The new route addressed some of the environmental concerns about Keystone, but not about the pipeline's broader impact on emissions and climate change. President Obama has said that he would approve the pipeline only if it "does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution." (Related: "3 Factors Shape Obama Decision on Keystone Pipeline.")
In January this year, the State Department's final environmental impact statement seemed to address that concern, saying the pipeline was "unlikely to significantly impact the rate of extraction in the oil sands or the continued demand for heavy crude oil at refineries in the United States."
That is because oil transport by rail has surged, filling the gap in pipeline capacity—and raising safety and environmental questions similar to those surrounding the pipeline. (Related: "Oil Train Derails in Lynchburg, Virginia" and "North Dakota Oil Train Fire Spotlights Risk of Transporting Crude.")
The Legal Debate
Senator Hoeven has been trying unsuccessfully for the past two years to move Keystone XL forward with congressional action. He points to research he requested in 2012 that says the commerce clause of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to approve such projects.
The report from the Congressional Research Service said that legislation to approve the Keystone project "appears likely to be a legitimate exercise of Congress's constitutional authority to regulate foreign commerce."
The same report also noted that the executive branch's ability to act on cross-border project permits was covered under its own constitutional power to conduct foreign affairs. And there isn't much precedent for congressional challenges to executive authority in this area, the report said.
Still, if Keystone proponents in Congress could muster the political force to pass legislation, it seems they would be on firm legal ground.
"Although I hope that Congress doesn't intervene, I think it's pretty clear that they have the power to do that, since the Constitution explicitly gives them the power to 'regulate commerce with foreign nations,'" Daniel A. Farber, a law professor and co-director of the Center for Law, Energy, and the Environment at the University of California, Berkeley, said via e-mail.
There could still be a court challenge, of course. "There's no way of knowing, but just about anything the government does these days prompts a lawsuit, so I wouldn't be surprised," said Farber.
The Political Debate
Landrieu and Hoeven represent states that stand to benefit economically from the TransCanada pipeline: Louisiana's refineries are hungry for discounted Canadian heavy crude to replace declining production from Mexico and South America; North Dakota is seeking outlets for its own ever-increasing production of oil from the Bakken shale. (A little more than 10 percent of the pipeline's 830,000 barrels per day capacity would be set aside for Bakken crude.)
Hoeven suggests that the State Department has already done the work necessary to determine whether Keystone XL should go forward. "The Keystone XL pipeline project has been under review for more than five years, with four favorable environmental reports completed to date," he said in a statement. (Related: "Oil Spill Spotlights Keystone XL Issue: Is Canadian Crude Worse?")
David Goldston, director of government affairs for the Natural Resources Defense Council, disagrees. He warns against the idea of legislators taking on work that, in his view, should be done by the federal agencies that are accustomed to evaluating such projects.
"I doubt that most folks on [on Capitol Hill] have read through [the State Department analysis] in its entirety," Goldston says. "Agencies are still in the process of weighing in on it ... Congress acting as a permitting agency doesn't seem like a very wise policy approach."
"A Real Challenge"
The push to hold a vote on Keystone XL comes as the Senate weighs a different bipartisan energy bill on Tuesday: the long-delayed Shaheen-Portman measure on energy efficiency. That legislation would strengthen efficiency standards for federal, commercial, and residential buildings and boost investment in energy-saving technologies, among other things.
Keystone proponents may use the Shaheen-Portman bill as leverage to get progress on their issue. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he is "open to anything" that will move Shaheen-Portman forward, but has not yet signaled whether he will allow a binding vote on Keystone.
Last year, the Senate passed a nonbinding resolution in favor of building Keystone XL with 62 votes.
But even if the Senate passed a binding bill, then won easy approval in the House and was able to send legislation to President Obama, it would need 67 votes to override a presidential veto. Hoeven said last week on C-SPAN that getting even 60 votes would be "a real challenge."
The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which has been pushing the Shaheen-Portman bill, wrote in a blog post Monday that amid the battles over Keystone, health care, natural gas exports, and other issues, "It's easy to forget that there is an energy-efficiency bill in there that does not get much press attention ... Why? Because nobody is fighting over it!"
Why send the toxic diluted bitumen to refineries on the US Gulf Coast? Move the refineries to Alberta! Keep all the filth in one place where people apparently like it.
If this sensible step had been taken rather than dallying around waiting for approval to build a pipeline the refinery would already be on-line and the pipeline could carry refined petroleum.
Carbon emissions, greenhouse gases, defining climate change as man caused is a hoax. The people propagating this are deceived by this notion and they are deceiving the public at large. About the middle of the 1980's I had a vision that said this. "We are coming into a time of illumination, and you ARE GOING TO see whole civilizations walking around naked. It's meant to pass genetic strengths down upon the whole human race." We are meant to absorb this energy while it lasts. Plants and animals are also going to be absorbing this energy. This vision has also returned to me on a recurring basis over the years until this present day to continue to reinforce this impression upon my mindset that I may with authority communicate this to the world. Laugh fools. But this is what you're going to see.
Carbon emissions, greenhouse gases, defining climate change as man caused is a hoax.
The people propagating this are deceived by this notion and they are deceiving the public
at large. About the middle of the 1980's I had a vision that said this. "We are coming into a
time of illumination, and you ARE GOING TO see whole civilizations walking around naked. It's meant to pass genetic strengths down upon the whole human race." We are meant to absorb this energy while it lasts. Plants and animals are also going to be absorbing this energy. This vision has also returned to me on a recurring basis over the years until this present day to continue to reinforce this impression upon my mindset that I may with authority communicate this to the world. Laugh fools. But this is what your going to see.
ship the oil via a pipe that will leak (eventually)....or send it in outdated rail containers (older ones split on low impacts) or trucks with baffels (that help keep the motion of the oil...semi in check...with drivers who could fall asleep...other drivers with road rage....inclememnt weather....and many many more variables)....in other words damned if we do....and screwed if we dont.
atleast in with the pipeline...we know were the oil could leak....(not guess what r&r crossing ...or town or city will have the joys of a crude oil fire.
no easy answer.....its a nine fingered leper proctologist visit without a kiss and no foreplay.
So green nuts would rather have the oil shipped by more environmentally dangerous rail and tanker truck. What nincompoops.
Why risk our environment to fill the coffers of a few greedy pigs for dirty oil that will merely pass through our lands without adding any benefit of significance to us? Remember, stupid is as stupid does -- stupid and corrupt senators aside, it is a winning proposition for a few investors, and a loosing one for American, with a risk that will only increase as the pipeline ages..
The Keystone XL does not facilitate significant jobs. The pipeline does not contribute to energy independence. The increased oil commodity negatively impacts greenhouse gas emissions, and generates profit for oil exporters and investors. The dangers of pollution and contamination are just slicks on the surface.
Special interests are funding lawmakers and threatening negative repercussions to opposition, it is vital to humanity and our environment that each of us support those who oppose this and likeminded projects.
Energy is important. We face many challenges, but we can do better than bad.
Keystone XL is bad.
Sure it can -- we have seen this Rightwing Government force Christianity as the US religion of only choice, our Supreme Court overthrew our government in 2000 and installed King Bush, so of course they can do as they wish. The Rightwing owns all major news outlets so they can and do as they damn well please.
US elections are rigged by Rightwing stooges so voting in America is totally meaningless. Time for a good old fashioned Revolt and drag out the guillotine please!
You do realize that to refine in colder climates cause more energy to be used and that the resulting liquids need to be transported south to the markets for sale.
@JOE PROPHET I didn't find your name on the list of client scientist in Wikipedia. What have you published that qualifies you as an expert on climate science - are you a phd or physicist? Where did you go to school? Stanford Penn State, MIT?
@John C. A lot of emotional rhetoric.
@Donn Clark I guess you have not had time to think it out. How many people in the world are SAVED by plastic medical supplies. How much food is provided and shipped. How much clean water is made by the very energy you want to stop
@KENNETH LANE "Go sell crazy somewhere else. We're all full up here."
Switch to de-caf.
I attend the school of the divine instructor. As a Saint of God I am taught by divine revelation. God gives those who do not resist it, a revelation, and the bible puts that revelation into words. I do not go to University's to memorize lies and intellectualism based on men's philosophy's and thought's. Ask God personally what's causing climate change/global warming and He'll tell you the same thing He told me. It's a solar phenomenon. It's a "time of illumination". You publish that. Put your name on what God told you. Maybe they'll give you the Nobel Peace Prize. You won't have to ride the bus anymore.
Romans 1 verses 18-25
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
24Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
Recent Energy News
New EPA ozone rules could prompt greater efforts to clean the nation's air.
India's new leader talks about protecting nature, but what will he do about global warming?
Several aging coal plants are being reconfigured to burn natural gas.
The Big Energy Question
Join the debate over whether we should view natural gas as a transitional fuel that eventually gives way to renewables, or whether it is blocking the way forward.
From better mass transit to a stronger mix of renewable energy, what is the most important thing we can do to make cities smarter when it comes to energy use?
As shipping and energy activity increase in the region, what do we urgently need to learn more about? Vote and comment on the list.
The Great Energy Challenge
The Great Energy Challenge is an important National Geographic initiative designed to help all of us better understand the breadth and depth of our current energy situation.