Meanwhile, environmental groups have decried Wednesday's House vote as further evidence that Congress has been bought by Big Oil. Oil Change International calculated that supporters of the bill had taken a combined $56 million from the fossil fuel industry, and that individual representatives in support of the bill had on average received six times from oil industry interests than pipeline opponents. Oil Change International highlighted the following findings:

Continue Reading...

Continue Reading...

Continue Reading...

“I pastored the First Baptist Church out here in Polk for three and a half years,” Myron Stafford said. His distinct Southern drawl marked him as an outsider, but everything about him -- from his salt-and-pepper temples to his jeans and Western shirt -- made Stafford seem familiar to Terry Van Housen, a cattle feed yard operator in Stromsburg, Nebraska. Stromsburg isn’t far from Polk, where Stafford said he had filled in for the local minister, delivering Sunday sermons. Still, Van Housen couldn’t place him, so Stafford reminded Terry of a wedding he had performed recently, for Robbie Glasser’s son. Then he ticked off recent funerals he had presided over.

“I did three last year,” Stafford began. “I did Don’s funeral.”

“Don Hanquist?” Van Housen jumped in.

“Yeah. I did Mr. Recknor’s funeral.”

Continue Reading...

It's now been almost two weeks since ExxonMobil's Pegasus pipeline spill put at least 500,000 gallons of tar sands crude and contaminated water into the Arkansas community of Mayflower. Many of the evacuated families still haven't been able to return to their homes.

Sierra Club organizer Glen Hooks, who grew up about 20 miles southeast of Mayflower, in Gravel Ridge, attended a meeting for the displaced families at Mayflower High School: "I had to really stare down some ExxonMobil goons who told me to leave because it was a private meeting. I politely explained that it was a meeting in a public building about a public subject with numerous public officials in attendance, and that I was planning to stay."

Continue Reading...

Which, if you think about it, may be both good news and bad news. Yes, those of us fighting the pipeline have mobilized record numbers of activists: the largest civil disobedience action in 30 years and 40,000 people on the mall in February for the biggest climate rally in American history. Right now, we’re aiming to get a million people to send in public comments about the “environmental review” the State Department is conducting on the feasibility and advisability of building the pipeline.  And there’s good reason to put pressure on.  After all, it’s the same State Department that, as on a previous round of reviews, hired “experts” who had once worked as consultants for TransCanada, the pipeline’s builder.

Continue Reading...

This means that any journalists or observers wishing to survey the tar sands disaster and cleanup efforts must ask the Pegasus pipeline owner for permission. Via Horn:

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette revealed that the FAA site noted earlier today that "only relief aircraft operations under direction of Tom Suhrhoff" were allowed within the designated no fly zone.

Suhrhoff is not an FAA employee: he works for ExxonMobil as an "Aviation Advisor" and formerly worked as a U.S. Army pilot for 24 years, according to his LinkedIn page.

Continue Reading...

There is a lot more to the story that's important to understand. Here are six crucial things.

1. Not Your Average Crude

InsideClimate News reported shortly after the spill that an Exxon official confirmed the pipeline was "transporting a heavy form of crude from the Canadian tar sands region." Specifically, it has been identified as Wabasca Heavy, Lisa Song writes, "which is a type of diluted bitumen, or dilbit, from Alberta's tar sands region" although you won't hear any Exxon folks calling it tar sands.

Continue Reading...

This weekend, the Orwellian-named Exxon Pegasus pipeline spilled thousands of barrels of oil into a residential neighborhood in Mayflower, Ark. Twenty-two families were evacuated from their homes, and cleanup, days later, continues. Check out this appalling video of crude oil leaking into the streets of this everyday American community:

The oil is the same heavy crude from tar sands that oil companies behind the Keystone XL pipeline want to extract. In fact, the only difference between the Pegasus pipeline that leaked and the proposed Keystone XL? The proposed Keystone XL is longer --- over 300 miles longer than the pipeline that leaked in Arkansas on Friday. That means the Keystone XL pipeline is even more likely to leak. Not exactly a comforting prospect.

Continue Reading...

ERM also authored a report that argued that the 2002 BP Caspian pipeline was environmentally and economically sound --  as the firm has also determined with the Keystone XL project. Horn notes that the predictions about the Caspian pipeline were dramatically wrong -- the project failed to deliver on jobs and the pipeline has been the site of explosions and oil spills. Via DeSmog Blog:

Continue Reading...

For a market that’s yet to be determined, this much ballyhooed project would transport hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil daily from Canadian tar sands compounds to the U.S. Gulf Coast for refining. What we do know is that the pipeline would dramatically increase the volume of climate change-causing greenhouse gas emissions, erasing what little progress North America has made in reducing its carbon footprint.

The State Department — which has final say in whether Keystone XL gets built — recently admitted as much in a highly publicized (and heavily criticized) preliminary draft of its environmental impact study. State acknowledged the climate-change risks but then argued that rejecting the project wouldn’t reduce the amount of emissions flowing into our atmosphere because Canada would still burn the tar sands and pipeline the oil elsewhere.

Continue Reading...

On Thursday Mother Jones reported that the State Department not only didn't mention these connections, but took pains to hide them:

Continue Reading...

But Obama did not rule out a decision to approve the $7 billion pipeline, according to participants.

Obama told Republicans at the Capitol that he's still weighing a decision on the pipeline, which would carry oil from western Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast.

Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., said Obama appeared "conflicted" on the pipeline, saying that many of the promised jobs would be temporary and that much of the oil produced likely would be exported.

But Terry said Obama also indicated that dire environmental consequences predicted by pipeline opponents were exaggerated.

"He said there were no permanent jobs, and that the oil will be put on ships and exported and that the only ones who are going to get wealthy are the Canadians," Terry said.

A White House spokesman said Wednesday no decision on the pipeline has been made.

Continue Reading...

The Environmental Impact Statement, as Salon noted on its release, angered environmentalists for its assessment that the project was sound and would have limited negative consequences. As DeSmog Blog's Steve Horn noted Tuesday, however, "Unmentioned by State: the study was contracted out to firms with tar sands extraction clientele, as revealed by InsideClimate News."

InsideClimate News reported that two firms, EnSys Energy and ICF International provided the State Department that basis for their claims:

Continue Reading...

In an essay titled, “I’m with the tree huggers,” Grunwald wrote:

Continue Reading...

The report makes no recommendations for the president's anticipated decision on whether or not to approve the project, which will carry crude oil from Alberta’s tar sands to the Gulf Coast, while -- according to opponents -- producing high levels of carbon emissions, disturbing communities and adding to the coffers of oil magnates such as the Koch brothers. Friday's lengthy report suggests environmental objections have been overestimated by the project's critics. Via the New York Times:

Continue Reading...

It is striking how tar sands and the Keystone XL pipeline have brought people together around concern for our water and climate. In Canada, communities such as the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation and the Beaver Lake Cree are fighting to protect their health, waters, and lands from the leaking dams of toxic waste and the destruction of strip-mining for tar sands. In British Columbia, over 100 First Nations have taken a strong stand against tar sands pipelines crossing their land and waters. In Nebraska, ranchers such as Randy Thompson -- who was arrested with me at a White House protest this week -- are saying no to the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. Water and climate walk hand in hand with threats as big as the dirty energy path of tar sands. A dirty energy future means trading our water for tar sands, and that is not a choice any of us want to make.

Continue Reading...

The "Climate Forward" rally, bottom-lined by environmental group 350.org, focused on protesting the Keystone XL pipeline extension, which would carry crude oil from Alberta’s tar sands to the Gulf Coast, while — according to opponents — producing lethal levels of carbon emissions, uprooting communities and lining the pockets of oil magnates the Koch brothers. Meanwhile, the president, who will decide on whether to permit the controversial pipeline in the coming months, spent his President's Day weekend with men set to richly benefit from the pipeline. Via HuffPo:

Continue Reading...

"I urge this Congress to get together, pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago," Obama said. "But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy."

In his last few major policy speeches, the president has emphasized the importance of taking action to combat climate change. But in the past he's been a bit more waffling on the subject. Here's a rundown of how he's framed the debate since taking office:

Continue Reading...

Sometimes, what starts out as a minor skirmish can wind up determining the outcome of a war -- and that seems to be the case when it comes to the mounting battle over the Keystone XL pipeline. If given the go-ahead by President Obama, it will daily carry more than 700,000 barrels of tar-sands oil to those Gulf Coast refineries, providing a desperately needed boost to the Canadian energy industry. If Obama says no, the Canadians (and their American backers) will encounter possibly insuperable difficulties in exporting their heavy crude oil, discouraging further investment and putting the industry’s future in doubt.

Continue Reading...