TransCanada promises it would create 20,000 jobs while a study from Cornell University says XL would bring only 2,500 to 4,650 temporary jobs – and would eventually reduce employment.
Studies commissioned by the State Department as to the environmental effect see no evidence of environmental impact, but that’s not reliable because the firm that did the report has connections with TransCanada. The New York Times recommended against the Pipeline because even by State Department calculations it will add to climate change problems. What actually makes the Pipeline so dangerous for the environment is largely the tar sands source. Producing crude oil from tar sands generates three times the global warming pollution of conventional crude because refining low grade tar requires vast amounts of water and energy. While Canada is taking steps to make the process cleaner, and while the environmental effect of tar sands petroleum continues whether the U.S. approves or not, a “yes” to this project further opens the spigot on a climate-change process instead of moving full speed toward developing alternative energy sources to give us earthlings a livable future.
And my phone call? Who’s spending money to promote the Pipeline? The petroleum industry. They get government subsidies even as they earn record profits – and yet they want more access to petroleum sources. They pay nothing for the carbon waste they give our atmosphere.
So my call to Secretary Kerry in this “comment period” will urge, “Say NO to Keystone XL. Remember Obama’s call to become ‘the generation that finally frees America from the tyranny of oil.’" And it’s bipartisan – President Bush warned of our “addiction to oil” !!