Skip to main content

View Diary: Keystone XL and the fragmented left (66 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  part of the problem (8+ / 0-)

    is the acceptance of false propaganda. like this:

    the truth is that the oil was going to enter the U.S. no matter what
    that's a lie. you've been suckered into taking it for granted. and i quote:
    The SEIS states that the difference between not building Keystone XL and building it would not significantly boost carbon emissions into our already overburdened atmosphere. The authors' argument behind this conclusion is that other means of transporting the bitumen from the tar sands—notably railroads—will replace Keystone XL if it is rejected. And thus the tar sands will be extracted at just as fast a pace as before.

    One big problem with this theory. TransCanada CEO Russ Girling, president and CEO of Statoil Steve Tungesvik, CEO of Cenovus Energy Inc. Brian Ferguson and the International Energy Agency all have said that Keystone XL is crucial to rapid, expanded development of the tar sands.

    Canada's Environment Minister Joe Oliver said (to Greenwire, subscription required) last August:

    “In order for crude oil production to grow, the North American pipeline network must be expanded through initiative, such as the Keystone XL Pipeline project.”
    Are they all bluffing? Do they not mean it when they say Keystone is essential to expansion efforts?

    Anthony Swift writes:

    State’s environmental review found that tar sands are significantly more carbon intensive than conventional crude. In particular, State concluded that tar sands crudes are more carbon intensive than other heavy crudes and are 17 percent more carbon intensive on a lifecycle basis than the average barrel of crude oil refined in the United States in 2005. According to State, the tar sands in Keystone XL would have total emissions of up to 168 million metric tons CO2e—equivalent to the tailpipe emissions of 35 million passenger vehicles. Even when you consider the increased emissions from tar sands flowing  (over and above the emissions that would occur if the pipeline carried conventional oil), Keystone XL would add 27.4 million metric tons CO2e, equivalent to the tail pipe emissions of 5.7 million passenger vehicles.

    Over Keystone XL’s projected 50 year lifetime, State estimates that Keystone XL’s increased greenhouse gas emissions could be as high as 1.4 billion metric tons of CO2e. Under the Administration’s Social Cost of Carbon guidance, these increased emissions from Keystone XL (over and above what would happen if the pipeline carried conventional oil) would generate up to $100 billion in costs.

    That is the reality.

    The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

    by Laurence Lewis on Thu Feb 06, 2014 at 09:03:14 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site