Pipeline decision no place for politics
Published: January 27, 2012
Font size: [A] [A] [A]
President Obama has rejected construction of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to carry oil from tar sands in Alberta, Canada, to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, but the issue is far from dead.
As part of their agreement in December to extend the payroll tax cut for two months, House Republicans insisted on a pipeline decision by Obama within 60 days.
That contrived timetable left the president with no choice but rejection because federal law precludes approval without specific environmental approvals. Trans-Canada, the pipeline company, and the Environmental Protection Agency both have said that work can’t be completed until 2013.
That means the project is not dead. The year will provide time for specific assessment of the environmental and economic factors behind the pipeline dispute.
The basic plan calls for the pipeline to carry the crude across six states to U.S. refineries at Port Arthur, Texas.
Advocates contend that pipeline construction and operation will create jobs while the availability of the Canadian crude will improve U.S. energy security.
Environmentalists say that tar sand oil extraction is far more energy intensive and damaging to the environment than conventional crude extraction, and that the pipeline will jeopardize the Ogallala aquifer beneath the Great Plains.
Several studies have shown the job impact to be overstated by the industry. And the companies that own the oil have contracts to ship most of the finished fuels to South America and Europe, rather than to keep them in the United States. And the environmental questions will be addressed in the impending review.
The immediate impact of the president’s decision will be political rather than environmental or economic. Ultimately, the pipeline decision should be made based on science and economics rather than lobbying and politics.
