- GOP hopes taking shutdown off the table with budget deal will pay dividends
- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
Keystone XL’s judgment day looms for Obama
Energy freedom or environmentalism
President Obama’s looming decision whether to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, environmentalists argue, will define his legacy on climate change.
With pressure mounting from the oil and gas industry and congressional Republicans to approve the massive project, which would bring fuel from Canada’s oil sands through the U.S. en route to Gulf Coast refineries, the environmental movement has unleashed its own public pressure on the president.
Thousands of Keystone opponents rallied outside the White House on Sunday, and similar protests — including one scheduled for Presidents Day — are expected in the coming months.
With Mr. Obama no longer concerned with securing re-election, environmentalists are urging him to take drastic steps to fight climate change.
“Keystone is the pure test for the president, the first really simple, pure test where we’ll find out whether he’s capable of leaving some carbon in the ground,” environmental activist Bill McKibben, one of the leading Keystone critics, said at a news conference Monday morning in Washington. “It’ll be pretty darned clear when he makes the decision on Keystone whether or not he’s paying much attention to climate” change issues.
Last year, Mr. Obama delayed a decision on the project, claiming more time was needed to study its potential impact on the environment. TransCanada, the company proposing the project, in the meantime has adjusted its planned route to avoid sensitive areas such as Nebraska’s water aquifer.
Activists such as Mr. McKibben, however, say the route remains problematic.
They also argue that if Mr. Obama approves the pipeline, he will render moot the positive steps taken to fight climate change, such as the implementation of new fuel economy standards and major spending on “green” energy technology.
Though the cancellation of Keystone would limit U.S. access to Canadian oil sands, it would have no impact on climate change if Canada sells the oil to Asian markets instead. However, the environmentalists at Monday’s conference said a U.S. cancellation would boost their movement in Canada, too.
But Mr. Obama is facing equally strong pressure from the American Petroleum Institute and other oil and gas groups, which are lobbying the president to approve the pipeline as part an overall plan to breathe life into the economy. Just hours after Mr. Obama’s election victory over Republican challenger Mitt Romney was secured, API President Jack Gerard urged the president to “approve the Keystone pipeline and put thousands of Americans to work immediately.”
Mr. Obama has faced similar calls from the Republican-led House, and those calls now carry more weight in light of projections from the International Energy Agency showing that North America is on course to be energy self-sufficient within a decade.
Environmentalists want the U.S. to break its reliance on foreign oil, but prefer to see that independence come from increased use of wind, solar and other forms of “green power.” They say Mr. Obama’s decision on the pipeline will reverberate far beyond the project itself and will define the American energy landscape for years to come.
The tide, they argue, is turning against fossil fuels and toward renewable sources. That trend makes it likely that a project on the scale of Keystone will be much less palatable to the public by 2016, meaning Mr. Obama may hold the power to kill it once and for all by rejecting it during his second term.
“The window for these sorts of projects is beginning to close. I’m confident that the president will see that in the coming months,” said Anthony Swift, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- House pushes through two-year Ryan-Murray budget deal
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- Jane Fonda Foundation fails to make single contribution in 5 years: report
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- White House improvises again on patchy Obamacare rollout
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Obama takes 'selfie' at Mandela's funeral service
- CARSON: Why did the founders give us the Second Amendment?
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Born in 1930 in rural Missouri, Charles Vandegriffe, Sr., brings his time and place to the Communities.
Columns from Voices around the World talking about the events, people, politics and social issues that concern us wherever, and whoever, we are.
Chef Mary Moran discusses the food we eat, where it comes from and what it does for us.
An informed and often humorous take on the world of advertising, public relations and social media. 100% Pure. Not from concentrate.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow