Follow this blog:
RSS

Congress may bypass Obama on Keystone XL pipeline

By | January 11, 2012, 6:53 PM PST

(Image source: TransCanada)

(Image source: TransCanada)

Political one-upmanship is on the rise in Washington DC. Congressional Republicans are planning an attempt to circumvent President Obama to hasten the approval of TransCanada’s controversial Keystone XL pipeline.

Republicans last month used Keystone XL as leverage to pass economic stimulus, which President Obama signed into law. Obama is now compelled to make a decision on the pipeline, which crosses international boundaries, by February 21. The State Department was expected to spend several years deliberating its approval.

The stage is set for a showdown. The Administration has questioned whether Congress’s 60-day deadline could run afoul of environmental laws, and the GOP is drafting legislation that would exert Congress’s authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations if the White House denies TransCanada a permit.

The project’s approval is a political flashpoint in Washington, with the Republican Party favoring its approval, and the Democratic Party standing largely against it. Republican Presidential candidates have rallied around the cause, and influential campaign supporters have a substantial financial stake in the pipeline.

Keystone XL would transport up to 900,000 barrels of crude oil per day from Canada’s Athabasca Oil Sands into the United States to refineries and the Gulf Coast. Potential environmental dangers and massive greenhouse gas emissions have made pipeline the bête noire of some climate scientists and environmentalists.

NASA scientist James Hansen said that tapping the oil sands would be “essentially game over” for achieving a stable climate. The pipeline’s proposed paths could pass through sensitive waterways and wetlands. Proponents maintain that the climate risks are being overstated, and point to the abundance of pipelines that are already in existence.

Advocates contend that the pipeline means as much as 20,000 jobs, lower gas prices, and would secure the U.S. a steady supply of oil from a friendly neighbor. Oil from the pipeline will be sold on the international market. The US’s largest export in 2011 was fuel.

Related on SmartPlanet:

(Image source: TransCanada)

(Image source: TransCanada)

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

David Worthington

About David Worthington

David Worthington is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

David Worthington

David Worthington

Contributing Editor

David Worthington has written for BetaNews, eWeek, PC World, Technologizer and ZDNet. Formerly, he was a senior editor at SD Times. He holds a degree from Temple University. He is based in New York.

Follow him on Twitter.

David Worthington

David Worthington

David does not have financial holdings that would influence how or what he covers. Occasionally he consults for other companies; should David cover a topic in which a client is involved, he will disclose this fact in his writing. His views do not represent those of ScaleOut Software.

He writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
5
Comments

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
0 Votes
+ -
Simple solution to pipeline
1) Why are we sending the 'oil' to the coast to export?

2) Why not build a series of refineries in North Dakota and keep the oil in the US and Canada?
Posted by Hal_F_Witte
12th Jan 2012
0 Votes
+ -
refining
Refineries could be built anywhere feasible and somewhat close to the line. On the illustration, it extends to the enormous refining center already existing, as well as ports. My question is, why don't the Republicans bypass Obama on more serious issues, like his war on Americans in the NDAA and threats to impose martial law in order to have his bills passed?
Posted by MagnetBoy
13th Jan 2012
0 Votes
+ -
More Oil?
Yes the Gulf needs more oil! That last batch didn't destroy 'em (can you smell that). Just send it to the Great Lakes, it's a whole lot closer and can still be shipped out to sea. That way if some thing goes wrong Canada can help clean it up. I know money is important, but so is are future.
Posted by cudahan
13th Jan 2012
0 Votes
+ -
And I can lift 1000 pounds over my head...
That's right. I can lift 100 lbs over my head ten times. That's not the same thing as lifting 1000 lbs though, now is it?

Why do journalists miss this EVERY TIME about Keystone? Nobody credible is claiming 20,000 jobs. Keystone claims 20,000 job-years, not jobs. That's a maximum 10,000 jobs for two years. Temporary jobs. Two years, then nothing but potential disaster for as long as oil flows.

All so China can buy cheaper gas made from Canadian oil.
Posted by doctordawg
13th Jan 2012
0 Votes
+ -
click on the link
on the jobs claim. you'll be happy.
Posted by David Worthington
16th Jan 2012
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!