Skip to main content

Keystone XL pipeline route
For those of us who oppose the Keystone XL pipeline—as well as other means of transporting highly polluting tar sands petroleum—the latest Washington Post-ABC National Poll cannot but generate sighs.

Two thirds of those surveyed want it built, very much in line with what polls have been saying about rank-and-file opinions on Keystone XL for a long time. What's disturbing and disappointing is how many of those who want the pipeline nevertheless acknowledge that building it contains risks for the environment.

And then there's the fact that 85 percent believe the pipeline will create a significant number of jobs even though President Obama himself has said jobs from Keystone XL would be a "blip relative to the need." However, given the huge range of predictions we've been showered with about how many jobs would be created, and given the desperation many Americans feel nearly five years since the official end of the Great Recession, a big chunk of those who answered yes to the jobs question may simply be expressing their hopes for the project as much as anything. No way to know that for certain.

The poll itself suffers, as do so many issue-oriented opinion surveys, not so much from bad questions as incomplete ones. It would, for instance, be useful to know what percentage of that 65 percent think human-caused climate change is happening. And how big a percentage know what tar sands even are. And it would be enlightening to know where they got their information about the tar sands and the pipeline.

But there is no sugar-coating the fact that the long-running battle against Keystone XL has failed to persuade more Americans of the pipeline's true nature, failed to upend the propaganda. The predicament for pipeline foes is neatly summed up by the Post:

“I’m concerned about the environment, but we also use a lot of oil and we need to transport that oil,” said Laura Dabose, 54, a retiree in Palm City, Fla. “There’s an inevitability in it. It’s just a matter of finding the right route, and getting people to go along with it.”
As for so many people, economics trumps the environment for Dabose. The widespread view that the environment and the economy are two separate entities is what must be overcome as we battle to keep fossil fuels in the ground to avoid putting more carbon into the air. The economy and the environment are, in fact, permanently intertwined. A healthy economy depends on a healthy environment. Can't have one without the other. Whether Keystone XL gets built or not, that's a message we must focus more attention on if we ever hope to shift opinions about energy policies that currently are driving us toward catastrophe.

The poll questions and answers in chart form can be found below the fold.

Keystone poll

Originally posted to Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:09 PM PST.

Also republished by Climate Hawks, DK GreenRoots, Climate Change SOS, Kitchen Table Kibitzing, and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I guess some people are (6+ / 0-)

    willing to take a few risks for some shovel-ready jobs...

  •  poll ppl along the pipeline route and see what (23+ / 0-)

    they say.    
    i'm sure lil ol florida lady would not allow it if it came thru her backyard or water supply.
    dumb poll, nice diary.

    I am tired of laughing at the irony of their stupidity.

    by stagemom on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:19:04 PM PST

    •  Exactly. (6+ / 0-)

      I bet the results would be a hell of a lot different.

      •  we'll see: canada just approved pipe thru NE!!! (6+ / 0-)

        will new england wake up and kill this?
        it's like a game of checkers!
        http://thinkprogress.org/...

        “Today’s decision should energize residents of New England to stand up and say unequivocally: We do not want tar sands in our communities and we do not want to play any role in encouraging the tar sands industry to continue with its irresponsible and dangerous development,” NRDC’s Canada Project Director Danielle Droitsch wrote in a blog post Thursday.

        I am tired of laughing at the irony of their stupidity.

        by stagemom on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:49:43 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  More like whack a mole... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          maryabein

          Stymie them here, and they pop up somewhere else. If Canada feels that a pipeline is the only way this hellish brew can be transported, maybe they could find or create a route over or through the Canadian Rockies to the coast. The cost of the pipeline, all on Canadian soil, could be reflected in the price of the oil. If this means the tar sands oil is no longer competitively priced, then this means it was priced at a loss to begin with, since its price didn't include the societal costs of its production and transport.

          Your black cards can make you money, so you hide them when you're able; in the land of milk and honey, you must put them on the table - Steely Dan

          by OrdinaryIowan on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 09:48:33 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I found this on DKOS (0+ / 0-)

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      I have no doubt in my mind that this very man voted for the newest member of the NE. Legislature, a lock step Tea Party Loyalist, who as it turns out attempted a land grab of her own. Her Family had been grazing their livestock on a neighbors property for yrs. the wante d to buy the property but her neighbors didn't wan to sell so the Good Senator took them to court arguing that since they had been given grazing rights the land somehow should belong to her Family. the court shot the argument down but that didn't stop her neighbors from having to spend thousands to protect their property from this vulture. I'm betting this Rancher is now regretting his choice for that Senate Seat and as NE. farmers and Ranchers are a very tight knot group you can bet she'll face some real challenges when it comes time for her to campaign again.

      "The Liberty of Democracy is not safe if the People tolerate the growth of Private Power to a point where it becomes stronger than their Democratic State itself. That, in it's essence, is Fascism, ownership of Government by an individual or a Group" FDR

      by Kirk Welch on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 03:23:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Very disheartening. n/t (6+ / 0-)


    ODS results in Obama's amazing ability to humiliate his biggest critics, on the right and the left.

    by NoFortunateSon on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:22:24 PM PST

  •  It WILL create jobs (12+ / 0-)

    Don't you realize how much work there is cleaning up oil spills?  Is all that BP oil cleaned up on the Gulf Coast?  I rest my case.

  •  Democrats haven't been able to sell the ACA (25+ / 0-)

    Why would anyone think that environmental advocates would be able to get their story to average Americans when there's still strong unfavorable opinion about the ACA.

    Our side doesn't have the media machine, we don't have a group of billionaires paying for our message and we don't have die hard politicians advocating for our side.

    That said, the results of this poll are very disappointing no matter how you cut it. The Post, with it's neocon Republican outlook, isn't able to push the polling results this far to the right. Our message isn't getting out to the majority of Americans.

    “Industry does everything they can and gets away with it almost all the time, whether it’s the coal industry, not the subject of this hearing, or water or whatever. They will cut corners, and they will get away with it. " Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D, WVa

    by FishOutofWater on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:23:24 PM PST

  •  The President (10+ / 0-)

    was instrumental in turning public opinion about gay rights and marriage. I have no doubt that he can do the same with the pipeline and climate change, but he needs to speak strongly and truthfully. A televised address to the nation would force the enablers and denialists to contradict him with evidence instead of platitudes. Something they are not capable of doing.

    "If you do not change direction, you may end up where you are heading."- Lao-Tzu

    by Pakalolo on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:25:11 PM PST

    •  To Pakalolo (0+ / 0-)

      I agree w/ your comment, entirely.
      The President- and I think especially this president- could really change the tide on not only the attitudes about climate change, but the attitudes towards the changes and infrastructural changes we need to make to protect ourselves from the effects that are already impacting us.  

  •  Great report out today on climate change ed (12+ / 0-)

    Why the US Academy of Science and the Royal Academy’s Easy To Understand Report On Climate Change Science Has Ethical Significance -

    It's stats like these that make the point! A grassroots climate change education campaign like that we are producing at 350 in Marin is the answer to turning this idiocy around.  Folks have to begun hearing about this in their supermarkets, their health clubs, yoga studios, kid's assemblies, church halls, local clubs, every every day place imaginable and now 350 has the structure to do this!

    RIP Nelson Mandela

    by boatsie on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:28:35 PM PST

  •  misinformation works (15+ / 0-)
    but we also use a lot of oil and we need to transport that oil
    the oil is for export!

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

    by Laurence Lewis on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:32:19 PM PST

  •  As usual, the Koch Brothers, API and AEI (6+ / 0-)

    are doing a bang-up job of promoting their talking points.

    1)It will create lots and lots of jobs
    2)It's inevitable anyway
    3)But we need oil!

    We're not as pwned on every issue, messaging-wise, as we sometimes think we are. But we are pwned on this one. The Kochs have our number. The American people don't make the connection between water and survival, except for the farmers and ranchers. Most of the rest of us think clean water is an aesthetic proposition, and climate change is inevitable so why bother to do anything.

    Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:32:20 PM PST

    •  in addition to that (9+ / 0-)

      I think a lot of people just think its only those whacky lefty tree-hugger environmentalists who are opposed to it, not really plain ol' sane folks. Plain ol' sane folks think Jobs ... Ive shared just this one blockquote with a few people here and there and they go "Oh! I didnt realize that!"

      How many jobs will it create?
      Proponents say it would create anywhere from 20,000 to 100,000 jobs, while critics say it would only create a couple dozen. Both numbers are inaccurate: a new State Department assessment found it would create 1,950 jobs for a two-year period, after which it would generate 50 permanent jobs. the U.S. economy, according to State Department estimates. It would contribute $3.4 billion to the U.S. economy, which would account for 0.02 percent of the nation's gross domestic product.
      according to WaPo

      If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution. ~ Emma Goldman

      by Lady Libertine on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:45:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The people who say it will only create a couple (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eyesbright

        dozen are actually referring to permanent jobs, but I don't expect that much love from WaPo that they would admit that.

        Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:18:02 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I had a friend, an environmentalist, recite (3+ / 0-)

        the inevitability talking point at me. He'd heard it on NPR.

        JimP has been right for years that what we have to focus on is building a successful alternative media and messaging infrastructure, or it won't matter what else we do.

        The blogosphere by itself is not enough.

        Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

        by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:37:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Scott Walker rejected that much investment (7+ / 0-)

        in Wisconsin alone by killing several large wind projects, cancelling the higher speed rail improvements to one of the largest cities in the US not accessible by rail, and rejecting the Medicaid expansion in Obamacare. The sum total of these lost investments in Wisconsin's economy likely exceeds the TOTAL contribution expected from Keystone XL to the US GDP.
        Yet what do we hear from the corporate media on this issue of austerity, and lost opportunity in the upper Midwest? Crickets.

  •  like fracking it's about NIMBY /nt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kfunk937

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:33:42 PM PST

  •  Existing pipelines are designed for oil (10+ / 0-)

    and not for pumping hot abrasive slurry through them, like Keystone XL would. Sticky tar sands oil has to be heated before if can become viscous enough to flow through a pipeline. The mixture is laden with minerals and sediment with many abrasive components almost as hard as diamond. Then it must be pumped at very high pressure to make the mixture flow through a pipeline.

    The effects of pumping this heated and pressurized abrasive mixture through steel pipe over long periods is something the industry has little experience with. The potential problem from increased wear on the pipes by pumping an abrasive is a new one and could lead to chronic catastrophic failures over time.

    "If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:35:07 PM PST

    •  Abrasive hot slurry? (0+ / 0-)

      Oil would be transported, the sand is separated in Alberta so I think "abrasive slurry" overstates the case.  How or why is the transported  oil any hotter than non-tar sands oil?

      •  Most of the sand gets filtered but some remains (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eyesbright, stagemom, Ginny in CO

        especially the smaller particles. It becomes a toxic waste during the refining process. Then the oil goes overseas but the toxic waste stays in the US.

        "If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on." ~ Will Rogers

        by Lefty Coaster on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:16:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Is that mixture of sediments (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lefty Coaster

          what has appeared in large piles in Detroit near the midwest refining plants that have been changed to process the Alberta tar sands crude?

          IIRC, the piles are at companies owned by the Kochs and might have use for energy by some countries.

          Couldn't access the study linked below by LakeSuperior and the abstract was unhelpful.
          There is a huge difference between slurry and sludge, so I am not understanding how the article applies to your comment. You also stated:  

          Most of the sand gets filtered but some remains, especially the smaller particles. It becomes a toxic waste during the refining process.
          Having been married to an Env Eng (MS, hazardous) LS' comment  
          Tar sands crude is not regulated as a hazardous waste.
          almost made me laugh. Thanks to lobbying, revolving doors of employment between business and regulatory agencies, there are a lot of chemicals that go unregulated, including hazardous.

          I didn't reply to LS partly because the time is running out for another comment on KXL, so just wanted to clarify what seemed inappropriate since I can't get into much discussion this evening. Appreciate your input LC.

          "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

          by Ginny in CO on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:27:48 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  you said: (0+ / 0-)
            Is that mixture of sediments what has appeared in large piles in Detroit near the midwest refining plants that have been changed to process the Alberta tar sands crude?
            That is petroleum coke, which is a solid and which is mostly elemental carbon.   Petroleum coke is also produced from heavy sour crude from conventional sources.

            Couldn't access the study linked below by LakeSuperior and the abstract was unhelpful.
            Hit the "table of contents" tab here and then click on
            each chapter.   You have to read it one page image at a time, as they don't provide it as a free PDF as near as I can tell:

            http://www.nap.edu/...

            Most of the sand gets filtered but some remains, especially the smaller particles. It becomes a toxic waste during the refining process.
            Petroleum refineries do not want non-hydrocarbon solids and sand in delivered crude oil.   Such contents of heavy sour crude from tar sands are restricted in international tariffs to very low volume percentages of the crude.   Read the National Research Council report for detailed information on this specific issue of sediment and water in delivered crude.
            Tar sands crude is not regulated as a hazardous waste.
            almost made me laugh. Thanks to lobbying, revolving doors of employment between business and regulatory agencies, there are a lot of chemicals that go unregulated, including hazardous.
            Neither tar sands crude, nor any conventional crude or refined hydrocarbon products, nor any petroleum coke are considered or regulated as a hazardous waste, pe se.   It has been this way since the passage of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act was first enacted.

            However, certain waste streams at petroleum refineries are considered as hazardous wastes -- things like tank bottoms and materials recovered from industrial wastewater treatment equipment, unless these streams are recycled or processed into petroleum coke or petroleum products, instead of being disposed in a RCRA treatment, storage or disposal unit.

    •  Most of your claims about 'abrasive slurry' (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peregrine kate, peptabysmal

      'abrasive components',  'claims of 'little experience' with tar sands crude pipeline transportation' have been conclusively rebutted by none other that the United States National Research Council:

      http://www.nap.edu/...

      Diluted bitumen is not a sludge.   Sludges are primarily solid particles and not liquids.   Neither refineries nor pipeline companies want either non-hydrocarbon solids or water in crude for pipeline shipments.

      Calling synthetic crude 'toxic waste' and 'sludge' is committing environmental engineering malpractice.   While synthetic crude from tar sands clearly contains toxic substances, so do all forms of crude and produced petroleum and natural gas liquids.  Tar sands crude is not regulated as a hazardous waste.

      Synthetic crude from tarsands as diluted bitumen has similar viscosity, mass density, elemental analysis (including metals) to heavy sour crude from conventional sources.   They are pumped at similar temperatures and pressures in pipelines.

      Synthetic crude for pipeline shipment is similar to other heavy sour crude in the % solids/water content.

      However, tar sands crude is much harder to clean up when spilled because it will not float on water like most crude oil produced from conventional sources.

      •  Response to Lake Superior (0+ / 0-)

        You said, "Diluted bitumen is not a sludge."  
        And you're right:  DILUTED bitumen is not sludge after its been injected w/ light hydrocarbons and methane, to make it something a little less than a solid.  Then it still has to be heated, in order for it to flow through the pipelines.  TransCanada has already admitted that these pipelines are little different than any of their other pipelines that carry a genuine oil.  And the pipelines that are already carrying the tarsands have sprung hundreds of leaks over the last few years, not the least of which was in the Kalamazoo River and, more recently, Arkansas.  The "oil" could not be cleaned up, because it SUNK- like tar.  The bitumen, even after dilution and heating, is still not oil.  
        Why are you defending this?  It's not in America's interest.  We have almost nothing to gain from it, but environmental catastrophes are inevitable.  

        •  You said: (0+ / 0-)
          DILUTED bitumen is not sludge after its been injected w/ light hydrocarbons and methane, to make it something a little less than a solid.
          In the production process for heavy sour crude, production of bitumen requires hot water and/or steam and the form of the bitumen is a viscous liquid because it is considered as an oil.

          Methane is not used from treating or processing heavy sour crude from tar sands.

          Then it still has to be heated, in order for it to flow through the pipelines.
          While thermal processes are used for heating tar sands to release bitumen hyrocarbons, after such bitumen is produced it exists as a viscous liquid which is then blended with other light hydrocarbons produced from either tar sands, conventional oil or petroleum naphtha or natural gas liquids.   The product is a liquid and not a solid as a product of 'froth' formation from the tar sands bitumen release process.  

          No thermal process is used to heat heavy sour crude from tar sands in order to transport it through pipelines.  Tar sands crude is similar in properties to conventional heavy sour crude which is commonly transported in pipelines.

          And the pipelines that are already carrying the tarsands have sprung hundreds of leaks over the last few years, not the least of which was in the Kalamazoo River and, more recently, Arkansas.

          Tar sands crude was not the cause of the loss of pipeline integrity that caused the Kalamazoo River spill.   Tar sands crude is what was spilled, but it was not the cause of the loss of pipeline integrity, which was from external corrosion and stress cracking.   Read the National Transportation Safety Board report on the Kalamazoo River Enbridge spill.

          The bitumen, even after dilution and heating, is still not oil.  
          This statement does not have any meaning or validity as to petroleum and pipeline engineering and science-based approaches to this issue.
          Why are you defending this?  It's not in America's interest.  We have almost nothing to gain from it, but environmental catastrophes are inevitable.  
          I'm opposed to the KXL pipeline.   My comments are not a defense of the pipeline or tar sands crude oil.
  •  I don't want it, but it will harm the environment (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jgkojak, Aquarius40

    whether or not it gets built in the U.S. Because, if it does not get built here, it'll route over the Canadian Rockies into BC to the Pacific. So unless one believes that pollution is only a national issue, the concern for the environment is a lost cause, unfortunately.

    No one is stopping construction; it is only a matter of which route it takes, south or west.

    I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires. - Susan B. Anthony

    by pajoly on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:46:51 PM PST

    •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

      And I think the problem solves itself once the pipe cracks/breaks after a few years (or less) -

      they really don't know what they're doing here

    •  I agree, moreover (0+ / 0-)

      reducing reliance on oil from the Middle East  could facilitate changes in our horrific foreign and military policies in the ME. One can hope anyway.

    •  But... (0+ / 0-)

      ...we can still choose not to be party to it.

    •  I have heard/read many times that (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eyesbright, kfunk937

      the reason Canada is pursuing this is their citizens have a very NIMBY attitude toward the pipeline. I think there are also some construction issues that make the Canadian routes too expensive.

      So I disagree with

      No one is stopping construction; it is only a matter of which route it takes, south or west.
      Since pollution has no borders, concerns about the environment should be universal for humans.  

      "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

      by Ginny in CO on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:37:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not Over the Rockies (0+ / 0-)

      The amount of time and money, not to mention energy, to haul that stuff up over the Rockies and back down ain't happening anytime soon. British Columbia is likely to refuse to let it pass through. Meanwhile the percentage of Americans and Canadians who'd tolerate that stuff in the Greenhouse dwindles over time, and alternatives become more a familiar part of their economy.

      It's not inevitable. Especially with US leadership in the right direction, instead of the wrong one.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 07:22:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I greeted news of these polling results (6+ / 0-)

    with an angry screech followed by tears rather than a sigh.  I mean, I know what the polls say, I just can't get my head around the shortsighted stupidity of it all.  I blame our worthless Congress and ineffective Democrats as well as a totally incompetent journalist class for this as much as anybody, because it's hard to blame uneducated masses clamoring for a job, any job.

    Sometimes I think we're just biding our time as we circle the drain.  This would be one of those times.

    "The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places." Ernest Hemingway

    by Got a Grip on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 01:57:54 PM PST

  •  Republicans win (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NoMoreLies

    the message war, they always do. Granted, it helps to have a fake news network repeating the same lies over and over and over. Keystone = job creator is now etched into history.

  •  So sad. People that take a dump in their (6+ / 0-)

    living room and then wonder why the house stinks.

    "I guess you think you can psych me out by saying really random stuff." -Sora, Hollow Bastion, KH2

    by SphericalXS on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:02:12 PM PST

  •  I wouldn't be surprised if a significant number (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mattc129, NoMoreLies

    of respondents approve of Keystone because they know it will be harmful to the environment: "Ha! That'll make those hippies sad!"

    These people would gouge out their own eyeballs if they thought it would be an affront to liberals.

    I will not vote for Hillary!

    by FutureNow on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:02:15 PM PST

    •  No, I don't think so. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      maryabein

      They want jobs. They're desperate for jobs.

      The Kochs have a great message machine and have been saying Keystone XL=Jobs...Keystone XL=Jobs....Keystone XL=Jobs for roughly the last two months.

      The construction workers' union isn't helping, being more than willing to sell our birthright for pottage, and I have no doubt they're spreading the word through their own networks.

      For two years of work, they're willing to mortgage our water supply.

      Then, in two years, they'll be out of work like they are now, and the Kochs and Transcanada will be nowhere to be found, and 30-50 additional Americans will be employed. And we'll be left waiting for the first spill.

      Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:18:47 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The power of corporate propaganda (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SphericalXS, NoMoreLies

    coupled with mass media is probably one of the most insidious inventions of the human race.

    You can literally program a percentage of the populace to believe anything.

    Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

    by The Dead Man on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:02:21 PM PST

  •  Very crazy.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hbk, Eyesbright, maryabein

    We are building a pipeline clearly to export more while at the same time they claim that we don't have enough energy and need to drill more.

    At some point in time there will be a major leak and the govt will again come in with our tax dollars to clean up.

    Again and again privatizing profits and socializing the cost.

    "I know the meaning of life. It doesn't help me a bit."

    by dss on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:11:05 PM PST

  •  Almost 65% also wanted to invade Iraq (11+ / 0-)

    And now most regret it.

    It was about oil too.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:16:17 PM PST

  •  I use to build pipelines and.... (10+ / 0-)

    I can tell you unequivocally that pipelines DO NOT create long term employment for more than about 40-50 people. These are just facts.
     I could list the type of jobs there are, and how many people are required depending on the time frame, the terrain, and how many stages there are. A big job would typically employ 400- 1000 employees for about 12 months, then pipeliners are looking for the next job.

    Whoever controls the media, the images, controls the culture

    by nezzclay on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:17:18 PM PST

  •  My problem with this issue (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    6412093

    is that, although it is indeed environmentally bad, the pipeline is planned to move 830,000 barrels of oil per day. World consumption is over 50 million barrels per day. So it represents 2% of world oil consumption. A barrel of oil generates about 320 kg of CO2. A ton of coal creates about 2.9 tons of CO2. World consumption of coal in 2010 was about 5 billion short tons producing roughly 15 billion tons of CO2 per year or 41 million tons per day. So adding together the CO2 produced by coal and oil, you come up with emissions of about 42 million tons per day. The emissions from the oil from Keystone would be around 118,000 tons by my calculation. So, when you look at the fraction of fossil fuel emissions that Keystone contributes, it's about 0.2%. The atmosphere doesn't care where the CO2 came from and I get the idea that it's probably not a good idea. But the real damage to the environment is not coming from oil so much as from coal and I don't see much of anything being done about that.

    BTW, I am not claiming to be all that at math; so my numbers are kind of back-of-the envelope. But, still, is Keystone so much of a disaster that it should just be completely opposed without compromise, or would it be a better strategy to extract some kind of guarantees about retiring coal-fired power stations faster?

    Voting is the means by which the public is distracted from the realities of power and its exercise.

    by Anne Elk on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:18:52 PM PST

    •  Your numbers are off (10+ / 0-)

      You have to include the energy spent to extract the oil. Tar sands oil requires the energy from one barrel of oil to extract 2.9 barrels. Not very efficient. And you also don't figure in the destruction of the boreal forest, which is a carbon sink. When compared with oil extracted from the ocean bottom, or from arid climates such as Texas or the Middle east, there is a much larger destruction of potential carbon sequestration.

      We would do better just by mandating a four day work week to reduce oil use.

      •  Thanks. I didn't think of those factors. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        6412093

        However, when you consider coal consumption vs oil consumption, it looks to me like oil represents a relatively small contributor to global CO2, which is almost the only thing that matters ultimately. If my numbers are correct - and they may not be - coal is generating about 40-fold more CO2 globally than oil. It would seem, on this basis, that you could more or less forget about the oil issue and focus on stopping coal burning if you really wanted to affect global climate change. Right? I mean, a 4-day week wouldn't have any significant effect on total global CO2 unless people were driving coal-powered cars.

        Voting is the means by which the public is distracted from the realities of power and its exercise.

        by Anne Elk on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 03:20:48 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Both oil and coal consumption need to be cut. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          peregrine kate, Meteor Blades

          And the subsidies and external costs (wars, contaminated runoff, flooding, waste, and other factors) related to our fossil fuel dependent transportation system need to be addressed as well.

          All subsidies and aid to both coal and oil industries need to be taken away and replaced with a fee and dividend carbon tax that would apply to all forms of fossil fuels.
          And cutting the work week to 4 days creates other benefits besides conservation of fuels: less wear and tear on the roads, less costs to workers, potential for higher employment, etc.

          •  Well that's going to happen! Not! (0+ / 0-)

            Of all of them, I think attacking coal production is the key, but that's just me. I prefer to go after the biggest, fattest targets. I would point out that the world's biggest coal exporter, Australia, doesn't offer any subsidies to coal to my knowledge. I think subsidies are overrated anyway as a driver of emissions. My view is that nothing whatsoever will be done about emissions that will make any difference to the endgame. We are going to choke off major forms of life on this planet in the next century. So what we have here is really something of a philosophical musing.

            Voting is the means by which the public is distracted from the realities of power and its exercise.

            by Anne Elk on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:57:36 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  So, not surprisingly, I was wrong. (0+ / 0-)

            Petroleum and coal contribute about equally to CO2. Guess I should have relied on Wikipedia rather than my substandard math!

            Voting is the means by which the public is distracted from the realities of power and its exercise.

            by Anne Elk on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 02:18:23 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  A mandated 4 day work week will never happen, (0+ / 0-)

        and even of it did, do you think people would stay at home?  I drive ten times as much on the weekend as I do during the week.  Visiting, running errands, shopping etc.  when I commute during the week, I drive to work and stay there all day and then come home because I'm tired.  

        Plus, what about school children who need their teacher for 5 days a week?  A ten hour school day will not be productive for early learners younger than 10.  

        •  Not necessarily the case (0+ / 0-)

          You still have to do the shopping and errands with a longer work week. Arrangements could be made to reshape the structure of the school day. There are additional benefits besides potential energy conservation to short work weeks.

          And I actually drive less on many days off and I'd suspect many others would as well unless they are lucky enough to live very close to their workplace.

  •  We should stand with Indigenous and First Nations (7+ / 0-)

    in Canada and in the US to oppose this. That is enough, alone, for me.

    But besides that, with the Ogallala Aquifer in harms way, not to mention using eminent domain for a foreign company, and then Climate Change and the overall detriment to the environment:

    I have little respect for anyone who supports it!

    Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell. --Edward Abbey

    by greenbastard on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:20:36 PM PST

  •  Sad, but expected (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lady Libertine, maryabein

    People will always choose money over the environment.  They see gas prices and think "hey, I could save a few bucks a week if those damn hippies would let them build that pipeline!"

    A carbon tax may be an easier lift, and more effective, than fighting new pipelines.  Make oil the costlier alternative and people will think "hey, I could save a few bucks if those damn hippies would let them build that solar array!"

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:22:16 PM PST

    •  No, really, it's the jobs. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eyesbright, Subterranean

      They are quite literally desperate for jobs. It's like the Kochs have been holding a picture of food in front of a starving man.

      People keep characterizing this as hippie-punching. It's not, I don't think. It's a combination of a very bad fundamental misunderstanding of reality, meaning: food and water come from the land and if the land gets screwed up the food and water stop being edible or go away entirely, and the desperate sensation that they're being fed into a meat grinder. Any escape will look like salvation. The Kochs say "Here, jobs!"they'll grab at the jobs.

      Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:26:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Jobs = Money (0+ / 0-)
        It's a combination of a very bad fundamental misunderstanding of reality, meaning: food and water come from the land and if the land gets screwed up the food and water stop being edible or go away entirely, and the desperate sensation that they're being fed into a meat grinder.
        I agree, but people don't think that way.  Most people have no connection to the land and no understanding of where food originates.  Even among those who do understand, higher taxes and prices, or job losses, will nearly always trump environmental harm that manifests years in the future.  If it's stop global warming versus feed three screaming kids, the kids will win every time.

        "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

        by Subterranean on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:03:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry, I'm not communicating well. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Subterranean

          That's the fundamental misunderstanding of reality: that people don't get that food and water come from the land.

           They think that what prevents them from getting adequate food, shelter, clothing is not having a job. Not that there quite literally won't be enough food.

          Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:22:52 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Shocking!!! Americans are so stupid that it hurts (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cpqemp, NoMoreLies, Eyesbright

    my brain. Just another in a long long lists of examples that have driven me to despair. At least we had a good run.

    "The Earth is my country and Science my religion" Christiaan Huygens. The gold standard ended on August 15, 1971, its time we start acting like it. If we can afford full employment killing Germans, we can afford full employment during peace-time.

    by Auburn Parks on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:31:15 PM PST

  •  Why is there so much money to be spent on this (0+ / 0-)

    Dem candidate or that and no money to be spent on the actual harm to our land, water, food, livelihoods, our lives as well as the future generations?

    So Democratic leaders, tell us you are going to fund this fight and get up in front of the cameras, promise us there will be no backroom deals.

    Yeah right call me naïve yeah but just call me.

  •  Are young voters in favor of Keystone? (3+ / 0-)

    What about the youth vote? The WaPo article does not report poll results by age.

    I believe i've seen results suggesting young people opposed to Keystone. They certainly have more at stake than we old folks.

    WaPo selected for analysis data that makes for a certain conclusion, omits data that might lead to a different conclusion.

    That is pure spin.

    •  Fox News Poll says yes, young people ... (0+ / 0-)

      ...slightly against:

      The results also show a deep divide in how much young voters as a whole care about the issue: Forty-five percent of 18- to 29-year-olds said they are “not that concerned” about Keystone, compared with 40 percent who are “very concerned” and 15 percent who are “somewhat concerned.” (Women are more likely than men to care.) A slight majority of young voters said it wouldn’t be in the best interests of the U.S. to approve the pipeline.
      Other polls show that a larger percentage of young people (18-29) want climate change action than any other age cohort. But that doesn't necessarily translate into anti-Keystone XL sentiment. Certainly a large hunk of the activist opposition is made up of young people.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:33:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  One side is allowed to lie, steal, and cheat. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright

    We have one chance. We know that if every eligible voter voted, we would win every election.

    Can we turn out like our lives depend on it? I'm not confident.

    What is so unnerving about the candidacy of Sarah Palin is the degree to which she represents—and her supporters celebrate—the joyful marriage of confidence and ignorance. SAM HARRIS

    by Cpqemp on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:53:34 PM PST

  •  MB: About six years ago I wrote long screeds (3+ / 0-)

    in your diaries about this:

    failed to upend the propaganda
    Well, not just your diary, but it was the point a lot of the time I wrote.

    I said this: If we don't get the making of narratives out of the hands of mass-reach Media, everything needed and desired will either fail or be delayed by years. My sig ran along the lines "until we break the Media Monopoly we keep losing, don't matter what we do." Man, it's still true to this moment. It'll be true ten years from now.

    You know how when you're cleaning the floors, you have to first move the tables and chairs? Success in any endeavor requires sometimes shifting to focus to not-the-main concern, but the first task to getting there. The first task in sane politics is to find ways to crack the monopoly on public narrative. Because if we don't, we'll keep losing no matter what we do.


    Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

    by Jim P on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:54:06 PM PST

    •  Jim, at some point we're going to have to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim P

      get together, those of us who want to work on these deep issues of strategy, infrastructure-building, etc., and, well, start the work. I don't know about you but I've been saying stuff like this for years too, hoping someone with more power, more money, more high-level contacts would listen. Apparently nobody is going to, and it may have to be us that does the work, even though my guess is we really don't have the resources necessary to do it. But if nobody ever starts the work, it certainly won't get done.

      Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:21:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You know, if I'm going to keep hanging around (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SouthernLiberalinMD

        here anymore, maybe something like what you suggest is the way to go.

        The moment is gone, but remember back when Jimmy Carter told the German Press "The United States is Not a Functioning Democracy." That sure didn't big play (if any coverage at all) in the US Press, but later I thought:

        "There's a diary. 'You Say the Internet Will Change Everything; I Say Little that Matters. Prove Me Wrong.'"

        With the challenge: make mass-reach media cover what a former US President said about us.

        Maybe a similar but more current story will appear soon, if it's worth doing.

        The intent being: if I'm wrong, something will have changed, in this case the National focus. If I'm right, then people will have a more refined notion of what exactly could be done with this tool we have for the time-being. And what we can't do.

        I dunno. Maybe a "Free the Press" group. I've given up my "Bloodthirsty Kos Group" idea. I think that would be too massive a group to have.


        Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

        by Jim P on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:58:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  PS: crowd-funding. Get one bloody commercial (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          SouthernLiberalinMD

          on in prime time, and there you go: out of our contained little internet and into the mass of viewers.


          Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

          by Jim P on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:59:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  You're thinking quick and dirty (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jim P

          what can be done right now with tools we have--which I like, actually, a lot. I was thinking long-term building of new structures, but in fact, both need to be done at once.

          Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

          by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 08:05:14 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Journal. Miles. Step. Prairie Fire. (0+ / 0-)

            I'm very distracted these days. But I like the idea of trying to get something started. Nudge me if you don't hear from me soon, and you want to. You've inspired me, I think.


            Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

            by Jim P on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:18:42 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  Gramsci warned in the 1930s from his ... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Jim P

      ...jail cell that having control of the means of cultural reproduction in the hands of the people was as important as having the means of production in the hands of the people. But he lived at time before the techniques of today's mass media had been developed.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 07:37:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  A Russian philosopher visiting the US in the 1920s (0+ / 0-)

        wrote 'Americans are so confused by their advertising they take an elephant for a fly and a fly for an elephant.'

        I think the oft-referenced 'invulnerability of corporate control of mass media' is of this order.

        You must have seen "Century of the Self" BBC 4-part series on the nexus of advertising, politics, psychology, and big business since the days of the First Red Scare.

        https://archive.org/...


        Actual Democrats: the surest, quickest, route to More Democrats. And actually addressing our various emergencies.

        by Jim P on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 12:56:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  'significant' words left out of the poll vote (0+ / 0-)

    choices, fkg liars, or were they just oopsie, incompetant hackers who made that poll?

    very sad to see this...jobs: sure, in clean up when, not if, there is a massive spill.

    Jobs could have been found making railroad cars suitable and repairing and upgrading the roadbed and facilities, and making facilities better able to handle inevitable spills, and jobs could be in readying for the inevitable spills.

    But no...these people were spun.

    This machine kills Fascists.

    by KenBee on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:55:23 PM PST

  •  It's hard to convince someone (0+ / 0-)

    that a job for him to provide for his family today is worth less than an enviromental problem that may not affect even his great grandchildren.

    May be impossible.

    Best Scientist Ever Predicts Bacon Will Be Element 119 On The Periodic Table

    by dov12348 on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:55:34 PM PST

  •  Putting the cart before the horse (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ginny in CO, maryabein, boatsie

    I'm going to suggest that the more fundamental problem is not public opinion about the pipeline. Rather, it is that the public doesn't understand climate change very well -- how it happens and the cause-effect relationship between extraction, burning, CO2 and a cascade of warming effects. The public also does not understand the state of development of alternative energy sources, nor how urgent the situation is.

    I think there is a potential tipping point in awareness and understanding of the mechanisms of global warming. If we can move a sufficient number of people to become informed about the nature of climate change itself, then opposition to projects such as Keystone will be almost automatic. The sentiment we should be encouraging is not just opposition to a pipeline; it's the belief that fossilized carbon needs to be left in the ground.

    We need to be working on several fronts -- legislatures, the media, etc. The project I have chosen for myself is to find venues where I can lead community-level discussion groups about how climate change works and what choices individuals and communities can make to address it. This spring, I'm working on developing a curriculum for a discussion series, which I hope to try out in the fall.

    I think churches might be a particularly attractive arena for holding these discussion groups, because stakeholders in church communities also are stakeholders in preserving the things that climate change would destroy. However, there are certainly other approaches to raise local awareness.

    (I'd love to see feedback in response to this comment.)

    •  I like it very much. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CupaJoe

      Some of the curriculum material is probably developed. 350.org has stuff and I think there is a link upthread to a new source. (Going back to check it when finish the comments.)

      I think there could be another advantage to churches. A lot of people get really discouraged and depressed w climate change info. Having a faith based setting could help with that.

      Are a lot of people looking for info they can trust? How many have tuned out because of the polar differences in superficial mass media info? A church setting might bring some in who trust the denomination.

      Share w Climate Hawks when you get further. Probably could get some fine tuning assistance for different parts.

      "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

      by Ginny in CO on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:26:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks. Several points in response: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ginny in CO, boatsie

        Thanks for your reply and the good points you make.

        I'll try to find a way to bring something useful back to Daily Kos based on the project. That might include information about the curriculum, reports on how the discussion series goes, ideas about making it better, ways to pass the torch, etc. I'm specifically designing the curriculum to be appropriate for a church context, but obviously it can benefit from what others have already developed in other contexts. (Also, I'm not personally a church person; I just think churches are a good place to do the work.)

        How do I share things with Climate Hawks? I've never been clear on how the affiliation groups work here.

        I'm in CO too, and I'm going to visit a local meeting of 350.org folks next week to hear about what they're doing this year and to get their ideas.

        PM me any time if you have more ideas about whom I can connect with in CO.

        •  The Climate series for KXL (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CupaJoe, Meteor Blades, boatsie

          is run by a group of climate groups. Check one of the  KXL series for contacts or go to the top of the page under DAILY KOS and click on Groups. You can locate the group(s) you are interested in to contact, join, etc. Contact is through Kosmail. People to contact is  somewhere in the blurb on what the group is about.  It's been awhile since I've been there.

          I am a Unitarian-Universalist, so an out of the box church person. Our churches are strongly involved in climate issues but could be a place to hold workshops or classes. The church office at the UN has an environmental dept that came up with 2 lists of answers to common, inaccurate talking points. One is very simple, the other a little more complex/scientific. All are one sentence.

          The local 350 group should be good. I get  email from the Denver folks. Today was a notice that Food & Water Watch Denver, is having another screening of Gasland 3/12. Not familiar w that group but 350 here does keep contacts with other env. orgs.  

          I have been dealing with financial and medical issues for several years, so have not been able to keep up or be as involved as I would like to be. Haven't given up and the climate issue is too misunderstood and important not to be doing something. (My ex is Env Eng, MS haz waste, Dad (PhD in P Chem) did R&D in building materials and went environmental in '70's, I'm an RN)

           The report by NAS and the British = should be good. Bookmarked+ saw your comment.  

          "People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed and redeemed; never throw out anyone. " Audrey Hepburn "A Beautiful Woman"

          by Ginny in CO on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:37:33 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  I do have to connect with you (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CupaJoe

          I've been working on designing a curriculum a template as it were that we will be using and adapting depending on venue.

          The first one is in a Yoga Studio. I can send along my 'Storify' ...

          I also have the idea for 350Kiosks which I have designed, portable edu posts kinda like old fashioned hot dog stands eqipped with solar powered tablets where peope can do interactives and find apps and watch video shorts. There would be kinda 'town cryer' impromoto edu moments througout day.

          Placed in malls, plazas, farmers markets, college campuses, whatever .. wherever

          I was thinking about diarying this to get input from community

          RIP Nelson Mandela

          by boatsie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:49:11 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Your second sentence is why I wrote in: (0+ / 0-)

      my post:

      The poll itself suffers, as do so many issue-oriented opinion surveys, not so much from bad questions as incomplete ones. It would, for instance, be useful to know what percentage of that 65 percent think human-caused climate change is happening. And how big a percentage know what tar sands even are. And it would be enlightening to know where they got their information about the tar sands and the pipeline.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:21:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  By accident, posted before I was done... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CupaJoe, boatsie

        ...It's absolutely true that we need to be active along many fronts, and there are lots of people doing that. Keystone XL is just one place climate change activists are putting their energy.  

        Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

        by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:24:24 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  we are starting here with core basiscs (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Meteor Blades

          coming into the event, a questionnaire assessing people's level of literacy as they arrive.

          Most for example don't really know why CO2 and other GHG emissions are significant. They certainly don't know what 350 means

          RIP Nelson Mandela

          by boatsie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:43:23 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, an initial questionnaire will be helpful... (0+ / 0-)

            ...for this kind of outreach.

            For what I'm working on, I think maybe a pre-/post-questionnaire would be appropriate, to evaluate and document changes in understanding, attitudes, motivation, etc.

    •  check out kitchen table kibbutzing and (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CupaJoe

      rememberance has been doing synagogue outreach. we have started work on this in 350 Marin ... i have a list of churches we are going to contact and we have begun sending PR to churches for education about fracking for the upcoming Sacto rally next weekend.

      Plus Climate Reality is going to be talking in churches

      RIP Nelson Mandela

      by boatsie on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:40:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Why does 65% of the public presently support (0+ / 0-)

    the KXL pipeline?

    Because anti-KXL advocates thought that running a issue branding campaign was the thing to do, rather than addressing the EIS process and the presidential permit decisionmaking as a matter of energy, air quality, water pollution and land conservation/environmental protection stewardship.

    Substantial portions of anti-KXL camp have been engaging in a campaign to communicate characterizations of the KXL issue which are not, in fact, true.  This was the whole idea to sell the matter of the KXL pipeline as being a United States export pipeline when the primary purpose of the pipeline is to provide for 830,000 barrles per day of tar sand heavy sour crude foreign import to the United States.  

    This was an attempt at using product branding techniques to try to tar the KXL pipeline in the public's eyes.  Doing so meant that those anti-KXL advocates were being indifferent to the fundamental purpose of the pipeline to supply heavy sour crude from tar sands to gulf coast refineries for processing.

    Engaging in issue/product branding campaigns as communication rather than prosecuting anti-KXL advocacy as an act of conservation and environmental protection stewardship is part of the fundamental pathology of the modern United States environmental movement.    

  •  Gas prices are currently rising which (3+ / 0-)

    helps convince people that the KXL is a good idea. They have no idea that prices will go up as a result. They just hear "oil pipeline" and think, "Oh, good. I need me summa that."

    "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

    by Lily O Lady on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 03:45:09 PM PST

    •  And the other side of that coin (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lily O Lady, maryabein

      is that while they are sensitive to gas prices, most people don't care that much about the environment. They've been experiencing extreme weather, violent storms, for a while now, and for most it's been survivable. It doesn't seem like it will be all that bad. New Orleans is back. The supermarkets are still full of food.

      Also, people can be very fatalistic and denialist about things that have an uncertain chance of happening to them.

  •  Americans are not, in general, stupid. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright, Meteor Blades

    But we are on this one issue:  except for ranchers and farmers--which is not the majority of us--we don't understand that our food and drink depends on the health of the land. We assume the land will always provide food and drink, because with a few exceptions in our history (the Dust Bowl) it always has. We can't conceive of that supply of food not being there.

    Therefore, the only thing that matters is that we have enough money to buy the food. A nation of grocers, indeed.

    Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:10:18 PM PST

  •  Keystone XL (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright

    What innocent people (typically republican who don't care what is right, only following party instructions) is that this heavy-poluting tar oil will be refined on the gulf coast and then sold on the world market to the highest bidder.
    If the US is not the high bidder, well, too bad.

  •  Koch purchasing power (0+ / 0-)

    Once the Kochs have bought it, they own it. The Pottery Barn rule will eventually get them on this, but since they have spent exobitantly to get their minions to say exactly this, that will remain the meme, until it isn't, and facts, like pollution in Bejing air, are not so longer clear.

  •  I'm for Keystone if it's the name of a train (0+ / 0-)

    High speed rail-- also, stop urban sprawl.  People should build up not out and then they can walk to work and the store and to restaurants, which they can afford because they don't have to buy gas.

  •  Understandable (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright

    Americans are no longer interested in things like facts and logic. They've been emotionally conditioned by corporate news and bombed to death with slogans. Billionaires like the Koch Brothers can saturate every form of media from FOX News to radio to the newspapers to the internet and the ads on youtube and facebook. They've bought the idea that these tar sands are going to do something to help them ...they've been promised cheaper gas and jobs and reassured that there is a minimal risk. Of course the truth is the oil is already sold to China and India, there won't be very many jobs and, regardless of risk assessments paid for the oil barons, the consequences of those risks are considerable. It is a very difficult and daunting task to get the facts to stand out in the bubble of chatter that is maintained for the very purpose of keeping those pesky little facts suppressed. Those same people being polled will have a different opinion should the pipeline spill this nasty stuff into our water table. Then those same people will be saying, "this was a terrible idea. Why did government let this happen to us?" and the same predators who caused this will use that emotional development to their advantage as well. They always do.

  •  from thinkprogress: pipeline thru New Eng!!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SouthernLiberalinMD, Eyesbright

    http://thinkprogress.org/...

    While all eyes in America were turned to President Obama’s looming decision on the Keystone XL pipeline, Canadian regulators on Thursday approved their own, smaller version — a pipeline that would for the first time directly connect Alberta’s tar sands to Montreal....
    ...the controversial tar sands oil can now be pumped almost to the New England border....The National Resources Defense Council says that Portland connection has been targeted by the tar sands industry as a way for getting the oil into the United States via New England.

    I am tired of laughing at the irony of their stupidity.

    by stagemom on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:27:37 PM PST

    •  There are some very, very irate Canadians (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      stagemom

      about this.  "Line 9," as it's known, runs right through the heart of Toronto.

      They don't win until we quit fighting!

      by Eyesbright on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:44:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And the huge increase in oil-carrying railcars (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        stagemom, Meteor Blades

        through Toronto was already an extremely serious concern.

        Oil shipments by rail have increased dramatically in Canada over the past five years, from 500 carloads in 2009 to an estimated 140,000 in 2013...
        “Crude oil has been transported over the past couple years right through the heart of one of the most densely populated areas in the entire country, without any consultation, any public notices,”
        Remember that huge explosion last year that destroyed the town of Lac-Megantic and killed 47 people?  Those railcars traveled through Toronto.

        http://www.thestar.com/...

        They don't win until we quit fighting!

        by Eyesbright on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:15:53 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Somebody needs to tell that Florida woman... (0+ / 0-)

    ...that oil usage is NOT inevitable.  Whatever will be spent on building the pipeline why can we not instead spend it on solar and wind farms?

  •  The Enbridge Flanagan South Pipeline (0+ / 0-)

    is well under construction along their existing natural gas pipeline right of way. They currently bring tar sand to refineries near Chicago and St. Louis. The Flanagan South line is 36 inch (same as Keystone) and runs from Flanagan, IL to the terminal in Cushing, OK - the terminal Keystone is to connect to. When I talked to the man building it, pretty sure he said the gas pipeline will be converted to tar sand, so there will be two thirty six inch pipelines full of tar sand running trough the woods and over the Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri and Arkansas Rivers.

    Do not understand how Enbridge gets (nearly) no attention.

    •  La, La, La, La, La, La.... n/t (0+ / 0-)

      America, where a rising tide lifts all boats! Unless you don't have a boat...uh...then it lifts all who can swim! Er, uh...um...and if you can't swim? SHAME ON YOU!

      by Back In Blue on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 08:45:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It doesn't get much because it didn't require... (0+ / 0-)

      ...a presidential permit to cross international boundaries and is, as you say, "well under construction." No practical way to stop it now short of doing things that will put felonies on your record. The focus is Keystone because there is still a chance to stop it.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:17:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  From an Environmental Perspective (0+ / 0-)

        if Enbridge Flanagan South is a go, why give a shit about Keystone XL? They both have horrible land and water resource exposures, and both have the same carbon footprint. With an Enbridge end-around Keystone,  Keystone protests are similar to airport security. More theater than effectively changing outcomes.

  •  "Harm the environment" (3+ / 0-)

    is what I do when I spit out a piece of gum.  What these people evidently haven't had explained to them is we may be talking survival of the species.

    A media that reports issues fairly and intelligently, and that holds power accountable, is an inherently liberal institution.

    by Dinclusin on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:31:07 PM PST

    •  It's been explained to them over and over (3+ / 0-)

      they are constitutionally incapable of hearing it.
      I had someone on here the other day, someone I respect, say something about how environmentalists put water and land before people. I responded: "no water, no people." That basic fact seems impossible for the majority of Americans to register, I think because it's happened so comparatively little to us. If we starve, it's almost always because there's not enough money,  not because there's not enough food. They can't wrap their heads around it.

      Sure once I was young and impulsive, I wore every conceivable pin. Even went to socialist meetings, learned all the old union hymns. Ah, but I've grown older and wiser. And that's why I'm turning you in. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u52Oz-54VYw

      by SouthernLiberalinMD on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:34:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It 's the Economics (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright

    People seem to think that the U.S. will be the end consumer. If we point out that other countries (such as China) will be bidding up the price, the U.S. May not get the oil, and that the U.S. will be footing the cleanup costs for the spills, then people won't be so enthusiastic.

  •  i remember the alaska pipeline back in the 1970s (6+ / 0-)

    when it was being touted the same way keystone is.

    it was going to make us energy independent . . . create thousands & thousands of good paying jobs, for years & years . . . be environmentally safe . . .

    & the public was stuck with the bill.

    this is the same movie that we've all seen before.

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. ~ J.K. Galbraith

    by bluezen on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 04:43:30 PM PST

  •  Keystone Consequences (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eyesbright, Back In Blue, catilinus

    Once they decided to go in they aren't going to stop. They will stop at nothing to poison the land and water, deride and subvert any voter or group opposed an ignore any regulations. I'm just a voter in another part of the country. I junked my car and take public transportation, so I don't need your oil. But I'll let the politicians know right now: I'll spend no money for any of your state exports, none for your businesses and avoid your dirty states and petition against every initiative you put forward through my representatives. I'll not support bad behavior.

  •  all i can say (0+ / 0-)

    is that i believe many of those who favor the pipeline don't have all the facts in front of them.  they would if the pipeline went through their backyards though.  this is just evidence that educating the public there is no benefit to the pipeline for america while putting our environment at risk. americans don't understand that oil production and use is no longer a national asset but that oil for the most part, no matter where it comes from,  is placed in one big pot and sold that way. once the pipeline is built there will be few jobs and no real revenue returning to taxpayers. it is a win win for canada and a lose lose proposition for us.

  •  maybe 360 dot org has been too effective. (0+ / 0-)

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:49:31 PM PST

  •  Cross a Bunch of Red States (0+ / 0-)

    Of course we love it, as a whole nation. Unless you are Lakota. Or live in eastern MT. Or downstream from where the pipeline will cross the Missouri River. South of that, the shtstream is just more of the same. Cleanups after pipe accidents means local jobs. What's not to like?

    Um, no, I don't support it.

    We will never have the elite, smart people on our side. - Rick Santorum

    by easong on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 07:33:54 PM PST

  •  I hate to say it (0+ / 0-)

    Regardless if the pipeline is built or not, the tar sands will be developed, I am afraid to say.  The only scenario that I see where the tar sands aren't developed is if the current Harper administration is voted out in the next general election, which I believe is scheduled for 2016 baring a no-confidence vote in the Harper administration, or the call for a snap election.  Stephen Harper, the current Canadian Prime Minister is from Calgary (his district or "riding" in Canadian-speak is Calgary Southwest), which is like Texas when it comes to thinking of oil exploration.

    On a slightly related note, it is March.  This means gas prices start going up rather quickly.  I fully expect within the next week to her conservatives complain that the reason for this is that Obama hasn't approved the Keystone XL pipeline yet.  What they seem to ignore is that gas prices go up at this time of year anyway, and the cost for gas in Canada, where this is produced, is currently CAN$1.30/l or about US$4.17/US Gal.

    •  But do the Liberals, NDP or Progressive... (0+ / 0-)

      ...Conservatives oppose developing the tar sands?

      Stopping the extraction and burning of fossil fuels is a multi-faceted fight. Coal, Canadian tar sands, U.S. tar sands, shale oil like that in the Bakken and Marcellus formations, oil shale like that in the Green River Formation, oil on and off-shore must all be blocked from development or shut down over time. And the only way to make that happen without massive dislocation is to develop alternative sources, and push efficiency, conservation and more mass transit to reduce demand. All of this at the same time. We have a gargantuan task because we have a gargantuan problem. Keystone XL is just a skirmish. But it's an important one.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:12:58 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Gov't has told people (0+ / 0-)

    for 40 years, ever since the lines at the gas stations, that we need energy dependence from the Saudis, the Husseins, the Shahs, the Gadaffis, and the Chavezes.

    You can't expect folks to discard that conditioning with a year or two of debate.

    Folks don't believe it will all be exported to other countries, and it would be better to endure the environmental degradation than endure having to compromise with the oil dictators, IMO.

    “The answer must be, I think, that beauty and grace are performed whether or not we will or sense them. The least we can do is try to be there.” ― Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

    by 6412093 on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 10:17:58 PM PST

  •  This is a beautiful meme: (0+ / 0-)
    The economy and the environment are, in fact, permanently intertwined. A healthy economy depends on a healthy environment. Can't have one without the other.
    It needs to go viral.
  •  Keystone XL (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BeninSC

    Hello, fellow Kossacks.  Have been reading here for months, but only just now signed up.  This is a test to see if I show up.

    The polling on Keystone may not be skewed, because I think a slight majority of Americans are very largely uninformed.  I think we must accept, at this point, that mainstream media is not going to report the facts in any seen or unseen future.  We must keep pushing the facts to the forefront on the net, as it is (my favorite line from "The Aviator"), 'the way of the future.'   With that said, I think our most important battle is the control of the internet (net neutrality).  
    Keystone can be stopped, even after it is started-- as with anything else-- as long as we can communicate and organize.  
    Don't ever let them distract us away from access to this global system of communication and information.        

  •  I think you left out national security (0+ / 0-)

    as a reason to support keystone.  So we are not always beholden to the Russians, Iranians, and so on, If we produce more oil and natural gas, the world-wide price goes down and those regimes are weakened.

  •  Geopolitics has trumped Climate Change ... (0+ / 0-)

    when it comes to the Keystone XL pipeline.
    With the completion of the Keystone XL phase of the massive pipeline system that is/has been built between Canada and the United States, control over the 'spigot' has been put in the hands of the United States, and not China. The ramifications of that outcome are huge when it comes to National Security and Economics for America.
    One only has to look at the geopolitics that are being played out by Russia in Ukraine and Crimea. The EU's eyes have been opened wide to their energy vulnerabilities by receiving such a large percentage of their natural gas from Russia. Russia controls the 'spigot', and has threatened to shut it off. As a case in point, a mad scramble is underway to develop and supply the EU with natural gas from the Leviathan gas field off the coast of Israel.
    Israel is working to secure a place at the energy table in the Middle East, both in terms of its own energy needs, and also in terms of the foreign currency flowing into their country. The Leviathan gas Field will give Israel a voice it's never had before.
    The worldwide fossil fuel industry dynamics are in flux today. These are the kinds of situations that can spin out of control, if governments don't keep their heads screwed on straight.


    I travel back in time to get a running start on the future.

    by glb3 on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:56:42 AM PST

    •  China would have preferred to have built ... (0+ / 0-)

      the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline system through Alberta and on to Kitimat, British Columbia, thus bypassing the United State's control of the 'spigot'.
      China, through its government controlled oil companies, has made a substantial investment in Canada's oil sands resources.
      The Keystone pipeline system not only carries synthetic crude oil and diluted bitumen from the oil sands of Canada, it also carries light crude oil from the Bakken region in Montana and North Dakota. Both American and Canadian fossil fuels are being pumped together in this pipeline.


      I travel back in time to get a running start on the future.

      by glb3 on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:20:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Laura Dabose in Palm City, FL, (0+ / 0-)

    is quoted as saying "We ... use a ot of oil ...."  The onlu oil the US will get from KXL is any that spills.  Everything that makes it through the pipeline goes to China.  Anyone who does not know that is in a fantasy world.

  •  What do you expect with the unemployment rate? (0+ / 0-)

    People are desperate for any job, any length of time, any money. I live in fracking country - oil pays good and often has some bennies even!

    Life ain't like a box of chocolates. You pretty much do know what you're gonna get.

    by Nodin on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 01:22:58 PM PST

  •  The Age of Stupid... (0+ / 0-)

    Sigh. Watch the Pete Postlewaithe (RIP) film.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site