Take 10 "Keystone XL": US House approves oil pipeline once again

© http://ift.tt/1BSUqAq

Keystone pipeline protestors.

White House continues veto threat after tenth vote since 2011 on connecting Canadian tar sands to Texas refineries

The House of Representatives has overwhelmingly passed a bill authorizing the Keystone XL pipeline to bring tar sands oil from Canada to the US, despite a renewed pledge by the White House to veto the legislation.

Hours before the House vote, Nebraska's highest court tossed out a lawsuit challenging the pipeline's route, an obstacle the White House said it needed removed to make a decision.

Keystone XL has been one of the biggest areas of conflict between President Barack Obama and a Congress where Republicans took complete control this week for the first time since his election.

© www.theguardian.com

Keystone XL pipeline route map.

The pipeline would move tar sands oil from Canada 1,179 miles (1,900km) south to refineries on the Gulf of Mexico coast. Supporters say it would create jobs and ease American dependence on Middle East oil. Critics argue production of the oil is environmentally harmful and that much of the Canadian crude would be exported with little or no impact on America's drive to reduce oil imports, which have already been falling because of record US oil production.

The House on Friday approved the measure 266-152, with 28 Democrats voting in support. It was one of the first pieces of legislation considered by the Republican-controlled Congress and the tenth vote the House had taken since July 2011 to advance the $8bn project.

"We shouldn't be debating it, we should be building it," said House majority leader Kevin McCarthy, who noted that more than 2,000 days had passed since the pipeline was first proposed in 2008. The Senate has a test vote on Monday with enough support to pass an identical bill.

The White House veto threat was based partly on the outstanding Nebraska case. Obama said he needed the state court ruling before deciding whether the cross-border pipeline was in the national interest.

Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell, following the court's decision, renewed a call for Obama to reconsider his promise to veto the measure. "Today's ruling provides the perfect opportunity for the president to change his unproductive posture on this jobs project and reverse his veto threat," McConnell said. "The president now has every reason to sign it."

A White House spokesman said the court's decision would have no effect on the president's plan to veto the bill. "Regardless of the Nebraska ruling today, the House bill still conflicts with longstanding executive branch procedures regarding the authority of the president and prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could bear on US national interests, and if presented to the president, he will veto the bill," said deputy press secretary Eric Schultz.

In the face of a veto threat, Democrats called the bill a waste of time. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House energy and commerce committee, said building the pipeline would increase reliance on Canadian tar sands oil and reverse the strides to reduce the pollution blamed for global warming.

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Comment:

© carbusters.org

Who owns the U.S. Congress? Big Business.

The Calgary-based oil patch and New Brunswick's Irving Oil Ltd., operators of Canada's largest refinery and 900 service stations in eastern Canada and New England, besides extensive Canadian holdings ranging from timber to tissues and shipbuilding to radio stations, are billionaires from the poorest region of the country who supply 60 percent of the gasoline in the greater Boston area. They are the fifth-largest private landholder in the U.S., with tracts sufficient to cover four-fifths of Delaware. Their fortune has been calculated at more than $10 billion.

Due to the U.S. stall out, apparently Canada is considering end-run plans "B and C" for its 168 billion proven barrels. "B" takes the crude to the Canadian coast in British Columbia (opposition from aboriginal groups running on this one), and "C" takes it to the East Coast (almost 5000 km) via Energy East and onward to India, gaining Canada more profit than a deal with the U.S and approval as early as 2016. However, environmental interests in Quebec are coming to the fore.

Pipelines are never foolproof. Eco hazards will occur at the expense of the environment and the public (who will inevitably pick up the tab for shoddy construction and its ramifications as in all pipelines, not to mention the sudden and timely demise of legitimate whistleblowers trying to prevent such occurrences). In the end, the public pays whether it is at the pump or to rectify disasters. What'll it be?