0
0
Tomorrow, July 2nd, is the deadline for public comments on the Keystone XL pipeline that could bring 900,000 barrels of tar sands to American refineries each day. Tar sands are the dirtiest fuel we use, creating 3 times the greenhouse gases as conventional oil, contaminating entire rivers and watersheds from leaking toxic tailings lakes and devastating an area of Canada the size of Florida.
Last August, the State Department approved the permit for the pipeline, but they opened up the process to receive comments from the public. From the perspective of the State Department, this pipeline is in the public interest, bringing in oil and jobs. However, they fail to fully account for the massive impact that tar sands oil has on the climate, the pollution created by refining tar sands into gasoline and the danger the pipeline poses to landowners and communities along the pipeline route.
The good news is that public opposition is rallying to stop the pipeline. A week ago, 50 members of the House of Representatives sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, urging the State Department not to rush the permit through. At a public hearing at the State Department on Tuesday, over 80 people showed up to provide comment. Although Brian Duggan, the moderator of the hearing, noted that “the oil industry got up real early this morning, so their names are the first 20 on my list,” he alternated between speakers from the oil industry and groups opposed to the pipeline.
According to Sarah Murphy, who attended the hearing, approximately two-thirds to three quarters of the people attending the hearing opposed the pipeline. “At one point lobbyist from a trucking group testified and in his eyes I saw nothing but giant dollar signs,” she said. “From what I witnessed at the hearing today, its obvious that the dirty energy lobbyists care about only one thing- money.”
Please take five minutes to submit a comment to the State Department, urging them to stop the Keystone XL pipeline. They are required to read every comment, and we need to show them that the American public opposes this project. For ideas on what to include in your comments check out dirtyoilsands.org and Pubic Citizen in Texas, where most of the refineries would be located.
0
0
We must stand together to demand a healthy and just world. Join our Regional Action List.
Here’s the comment that I submitted:
===================================
To Whom it may concern:
I emphatically urge The Department of State to reject the Keystone XL Pipeline Project. The top reason to reject such a proposal is that our country should not be investing in or promoting further dirty technologies, such as energy production based on oil sands. This method of energy production destroys the land from which the oil is extracted and pollutes the air when it is burned. It also puts our lands at risk due to the occurrence of future leaks and spills along the pipeline.
We need to focus on sustainable industries for energy production. As this report cites, the pipeline will run though the states which have the highest capacity for energy from wind. This should be the focus of our energy production, and not a side interest as part of a pipeline to pass the dirtiest fuel through more than a 1,000 miles of our country.
Please do not dedicate the time and effort of our country to such a backward looking and non-sustainable technology. To be a leader in the world we must look forward into other energy solutions with far less environmental impact.
Sincerely,
Garrett Wilkin
Here’s the comment I left, feel free to use it for ideas on your own comment!
–
Tar sands are one of the most destructive and inefficient energy sources ever seen, and I find it highly irresponsible and reckless to promote their further development and consumption through building the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Considering the net energy, or EROEI (Energy Return on Energy Invested) of tar sands compared to other energy sources makes another strong case against this project. Tar sands have an EROEI below 2 or 3, while wind, solar, geothermal, biomass, and other renewable sources have EROEI ratios over 10. This shows just how wasteful and unsustainable tar sands are as a source of energy.
Furthermore, the carbon impact per watt of tar-sands-based energy is monumental–3 times more than conventional fuels. If tar sands are allowed to continue development on a large scale, they will profoundly exacerbate the climate crisis and eventually contribute to the largest migration of environmental refugees ever seen, along with wars for resources and chaos on an unprecedented scale.
Please consider the well-being of your children and of generations to come, and realize that much more than money or economics is on the table with this decision.