Opponents of the Keystone XL oil pipeline resumed their criticism of State Department plans to extend the oil pipeline as leaks prompted a one-week shutdown.
TransCanada needs to extend the massive pipeline in order to get crude extracted from the controversial Canadian oil sands to refineries in the Southern U.S., but the Environmental Protection Agency said Monday, it is still dissatisfied with the State Department’s supplemental environmental review, issued in April
USA Today reports that, in the last month alone, two leaks “in the existing one-year-old pipeline prompted the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) to demand that the owner — Calgary-based TransCanada — take corrective action. The company shut the pipeline May 29 and after making repairs, the agency Saturday approved its reopening, which followed on Sunday.”
According to the National Response Center, the May 29th spill was one of at least 12, including the May 7th spill of more than 400 barrels (some 16,800 gallons) in North Dakota, during the Keystone I pipeline’s first year of operation.
Thankfully, the EPA does not accept the State Department’s argument that the Keystone XL pipeline will have little impact on global greenhouse gas emissions, saying that a full environmental impact review must include an estimate of the “social cost of carbon” associated with increased emissions, and consideration of emissions in Alberta from the production of the bitumen.
News that the Canadian Government has been covering up data with regard to tar sand emissions doesn’t help either:
The federal government has acknowledged that it deliberately excluded data indicating a 20 percent increase in pollution from Canada’s oilsands industry in 2009 from a recent 567-page report on climate change that it was required to submit to the United Nations.
Copyright - David Childs: A graphic showing the horrific contrast of Boreal forest turned into open-pit mines for oil extraction in Alberta's tar sands
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.