Stop the Keystone XL - FACTS - LINKS - INFO - MORE

del.icio.us Digg   FacebookTwitter  reddit  StumbleUpon

Background

The proposed Keystone XL pipeline would consist of approximately 1,711 miles of new 36-inch-diameter pipeline, with approximately 327 miles of pipeline in Canada and 1,384 miles in the U.S. TransCanada filed an application for a Presidential Permit with the U.S. Department of State to build and operate the Keystone XL Project. The proposed Project would have the capacity to transport 700,000 barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil to delivery points in Oklahoma and southeastern Texas.

On August 26, 2011, the U.S. Department of State released a final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) on the proposed Keystone XL pipeline saying the pipeline would have "no significant impact" on the environment. According to the U.S. administration, they are saying President Obama now has three months to determine whether the controversial project is in the national interest of America. 

Our concerns with this FEIS are similar to the concerns of a previous pipeline project called Keystone (with no “XL” attached to it, sometimes called Keystone 1) and its final EIS that was done in 2008. The basic concern was the EIS was incomplete, and didn’t thoroughly address all the issues. Keystone XL fails to take seriously the potential damage to American Indian Tribes and their Tribal members in the States of Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. These damages could threaten, among other things, water aquifers, water ways, cultural sites, agricultural lands, animal life, public drinking water sources and other resources vital to the Tribal peoples of the region in which the pipeline is proposed to be constructed.  Lack of adequate consultation has been a consistent concern expressed by Tribal members of all the affected Tribal Nations who to this day have not been thoroughly informed of the potential effects of this pipeline.

With over 12 spills caused by the Keystone 1 pipeline, which runs through eastern North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Kansas with links to Missouri and Illinois, it is critical that the State Department take the potential environmental and cultural resource impacts seriously. The FEIS is not even requiring TransCanada, the company that hopes to build Keystone XL, to submit an emergency response plan before final approval. In spite of the reported spills on Keystone I, the XL EIS predicts 1.78 to 2.51 spills, of any size, per year.

Tribal Nations deserve and have a right to be thoroughly informed and have a truthful account of the damage Keystone XL can cause. The toxic corrosive crude oil that would flow through the Keystone XL pipeline comes from the tar sands in northern Alberta, Canada. The tar sands are located in the homelands of the Cree, Dene and Métis communities. The pipeline will cross hundreds of miles of indigenous territory, including Lakota territory, and violate treaty rights under the Fort Laramie Treaties of 1851 and 1868 as well as human rights under the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. 

U.S executive approval is needed before the pipeline can be laid in place. The State Department has announced the schedule for a series of public input meetings in States along the route of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline. Written comments will be accepted by the State Department until October 9th, 2011.

To learn more about the Keystone I spills, check out the Keystone XL infographic below, created by the Huffington Post, an online newspaper. Click here to read the related article.

Let’s unite with one voice to protect our sacred Mother Earth!

Energy Security: Tar Sands will not Reduce Dependence on Foreign Oil

• Keystone XL is an export pipeline. According to presentations to investors, Gulf Coast refiners plan to refine the cheap Canadian crude supplied by the pipeline into diesel and other products for export to Europe and Latin America. Proceeds from these exports are earned tax-free. Much of the fuel refined from the pipeline’s heavy crude oil will never reach U.S. drivers’ tanks. LINK
• Reducing demand for oil is the best way to improve our energy security. U.S. demand for oil has been declining since 2007.  New fuel-efficiency standards mean that this trend will continue once the economy gets back on track. In fact, the Energy Department report on Keystone XL found that decreasing demand through fuel efficiency is the only way to reduce mid-east oil imports with or without the pipeline. LINK

More info:

• “Exporting Energy Security: Keystone XL Exposed”, Oil Change International

Gas prices: Keystone XL will increase gas prices for Americans—Especially Farmers

• By draining Midwestern refineries of cheap Canadian crude into export-oriented refineries in the Gulf Coast, Keystone XL will increase the cost of gas for Americans.
• TransCanada’s 2008 Permit Application states “Existing markets for Canadian heavy crude, principally PADD II [U.S. Midwest], are currently oversupplied, resulting in price discounting for Canadian heavy crude oil. Access to the USGC [U.S. Gulf Coast] via the Keystone XL Pipeline is expected to strengthen Canadian crude oil pricing in [the Midwest] by removing this oversupply. This is expected to increase the price of heavy crude to the equivalent cost of imported crude. The resultant increase in the price of heavy crude is estimated to provide an increase in annual revenue to the Canadian producing industry in 2013 of US $2 billion to US $3.9 billion.” LINK 
• Independent analysis of these figures found this would increase per-gallon prices by 20 cents/gallon in the Midwest. LINK 
• According to an independent analysis U.S. farmers, who spent $12.4 billion on fuel in 2009 could see expenses rise to $15 billion or higher in 2012 or 2013 if the pipeline goes through. At least $500 million of the added expense would come from the Canadian market manipulation. LINK

More information:

• “Tar Sands Oil Means High Gas Prices” Corporate Ethics International (PDF)
• “Pipeline Profiteering” National Wildlife Federation  

Jobs: TransCanada’s jobs projections are vastly inflated.

• In 2008, TransCanada’s Presidential Permit application for Keystone XL to the State Department indicated “a peak workforce of approximately 3,500 to 4,200 construction personnel” to build the pipeline.
• Jobs estimates above those listed in its application draw from a 2011 report commissioned by TransCanada that estimates 20,000 “person-years” of employment based on a non-public forecast model using undisclosed inputs provided by TransCanada. LINK (PDF) 
• According to TransCanada’s own data, just 11% of the construction jobs on the Keystone I pipeline in South Dakota were filled by South Dakotans–most of them for temporary, low-paying manual labor. LINK (PDF) 
• Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) and the Transport Workers Union (TWU) both oppose the pipeline. Their August 2011 statement: “We need jobs, but not ones based on increasing our reliance on Tar Sands oil. There is no shortage of water and sewage pipelines that need to be fixed or replaced, bridges and tunnels that are in need of emergency repair, transportation infrastructure that needs to be renewed and developed. Many jobs could also be created in energy conservation, upgrading the grid, maintaining and expanding public transportation—jobs that can help us reduce air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and improve energy efficiency.”  LINK

More Information:

• “Trans Canada’s Exaggerated Jobs Claims for Keystone XL” National Wildlife Federation 

Safety: A rupture in the Keystone XL pipeline could cause a BP style oil spill in America’s heartland, over the source of fresh drinking water for 20 million people. NASA’s top climate scientist says that fully developing the tar sands in Canada would mean “essentially game over” for the climate.

• The U.S. Pipeline Safety Administration has not yet conducted an in depth analysis of the safety of diluted bitumen (raw tar sands) pipeline, despite unique safety concerns posed by its more corrosive properties. LINK (PDF)
• TransCanada predicted that the Keystone I pipeline would see one spill in 7 years. In fact, there have been 12 spills in 1 year. The company was ordered to dig up 10 sections of pipe after government-ordered tests indicated that defective steel may have been used. Keystone XL will use steel from the same Indian manufacturer. LINK
• Keystone XL will cross through America’s agricultural heartland, the Missouri and Niobrara Rivers, the Ogallala aquifer, sage grouse habitat, walleye fisheries and more.
• The agency was not adequately accounting for threats to wildlife, increased pollution in distressed communities where the crude may be refined, or increases in carbon emissions that would exacerbate climate change, and a variety of other issues.

More Information:

• “Tar Sands Pipeline Safety Risks”, National Wildlife Federation, NRDC, Others. 
• “On Shore Oil Disasters”, National Wildlife Federation 
• “Analysis of Frequency, Magnitude and Consequence of Worst-Case Spills From the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline” John Stansbury, Ph.D., P.E. (PDF)
• “Pipeline “Safety Conditions” are Smoke and Mirrors”, NRDC 

Climate Change: Keystone XL is the fuse to North America’s biggest carbon bomb.

• In a study funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, a group of retired four-star generals and admirals concluded that climate change, if not addressed, will be the greatest threat to national security. LINK
• The State Department Environmental Impact Statement fails to adequately analyze lifecycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused by the pipeline. Extraction and refinement of oil sands are more GHG-intensive compared to conventional oil. The EIS estimates that the additional annual GHG emissions from the proposed pipeline could range from an additional “12-23 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent… (roughly the equivalent of annual emissions from 2 to 4 coal-fired power plants)” over conventional crude oil from the Middle East. [8] The EPA believes that the methodology used by the State Department is inaccurate and could underestimate GHG emissions by as much as 20 percent.[9] Given that the expected lifetime of the Keystone XL pipeline is fifty years, the EPA notes that the project could yield an extra 1.15 billion tons of GHGs using the quantitative estimates in the EIS.[10]

The statements underscored grave concerns over the impacts tar sands development are having on downstream First Nations in Canada. With the U.S. supporting the construction of pipelines transporting crude oil from the Canadian tar sands, and knowing the environmental and human rights affects; if the U.S. approves the Keystone XL, it would be complicit in international human rights violations.

There are concerns of independent studies that have confirmed toxins in the Athabasca River and Delta one of the largest freshwater deltas in the world. Native peoples in Fort Chipewyan, Alberta, Canada are concerned that this may be linked to unusually high rates of cancer through the consumption of contaminated fish and meat.

To date, 5 legal cases have been launched over violations to treaty rights by tar sands projects. In BC, Canada over 80 Indigenous – First Nations are saying no to the proposed Enbridge pipeline, another proposed pipeline from the tar sands planning to transport tar sands oil to the Pacific coast to go to China.

George Poitras message to President Obama on Keystone XL Pipeline

August 29th, 2011

Mr. President Obama:

I live in the tarsands. I, and generations before me, have seen the devastation of our lands, water, air, animals, fish, and more recently our people's health, in worse cases the loss of young lives to rare and aggressive cancers. Prominent scientists have said our cancers are potentially linked to petroleum products. We have never said that with certainty.

We live in the Peace-Athabasca Delta, one of the largest freshwaters deltas in the world. We are a UNESCO designated world heritage site. We live on the boundary of the Wood Buffalo National Park, Canada's largest national park.

We know now through the science of Dr. David Schindler that this is ALL at risk because of the tarsands production in the past 40 years. A testament that both the Albertan and Canadian governments have virtually done nothing to protect our waters, land, air, its citizens, etc. The fact that this means our environment and peoples health is so negatively impacted in 40 years of only 3% of the total deposit being mined, is scary to say the least. What is even more sad President Obama is the fact that my generation which is your generation, will not be able to hand down to our children and children's children, and future generations, what our ancestors were able to hand down to us. That is sad President Obama. All our leaders have ever said was that we want the ability to hand to our future generations a healthy environment for a healthy living.

Your approval President Obama, of the Keystone XL Pipeline, will only compound an already dismal situation for our people who have the most at stake from this out-of-control development. Your approval will mean with CERTAINTY that we will continue to see our waters poisoned, our lands contaminated, our skies polluted, our fish deformed, and our people die unnecessarily. Your approval will guarantee the continued daily repeated infringments on our Constitutionally protected Treaty Rights to hunt, fish, and trap. Or, President Obama, your non-approval will mean a chance for my people to survive but more important a non-approval will mean that perhaps the governments of Alberta and Canada and the oil companies will take notice and begin to clean up the way they have been mining the tarsands.

I watched your election with hope. I wore your t-shirt that said "yes we can" on your election day while I was at my job in Canada. You stood for hope not only for Americans but for citizens all over Mother Earth. Your record on what you stood for on tackling climate change could be made with your decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline, the choice is yours alone, and I know that you know from one marginalized person to another who have seen our lands and peoples annihilated, that the choice to approve this pipeline is not in anyone's best interest.

My hope for a Canadian solution to tackling environmental issues in Canada, we just buried two days ago, Mr. Jack Layton. Not only are we missing an incredible man in himself, but we are missing out on a leader who could one day have been our Prime Minister. You are still among us, and many of us still hold onto that hope we had during your elections, on your election day, your inauguration and now in your term as President.

On behalf of my community of Fort Chipewyan, of the Cree, Dene, and Metis, we appeal to you. Its a sad day that we who live in the tarsands have little to no weight on these decisions, that you yield more weight than I do on a decision that will have impacts on my people and our lands for generations to come.
We appeal to you for the right decision!

Thank you.
George Poitras,
Former Chief, Mikisew Cree First Nation
Fort Chipewyan, Alberta, Canada