Carbon is irrelevant. If you tune in to some part of the “debate”, and the participants are going on about Eevill CO2 and Saving the Planet, turn it off and go elsewhere. It simply means all of those people are liars and/or too ignorant to pound sand.
If the pipeline is not built, another will be, from the tar sands deposits to the Canadian West Coast, completely outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Government (much to the frustration of the IRS and the other TLAs). It will be cheaper than Keystone-XL; not only will it be shorter, it will be cheaper per linear measure because it will be built under Canadian regulations, which focus on (gasp! choke!) pipeline safety, rather than maximizing saliva generation when kissing environmentalist ass. The oil will be pumped to Vancouver, where it will be loaded on tankers and taken (mostly) to China, where it will be burned to provide power to industry.
The oil will be produced, whether Keystone-XL is built or not.
The oil will be burned, whether Keystone-XL is built or not.
The carbon will enter the atmosphere, whether Keystone-XL is built or not.
So in this particular case, both “anthropogenic global warming” and environmental degradation at the production zone are irrelevant. The carbon dioxide is gonna get into the atmosphere, and the tar sands deposits are gonna get mined, whether Keystone-XL is built or blocked. There are some (minor) issues regarding environmental impact of the pipeline, and those might be worth debate, but Saving the Earth is not an issue in this context, and anybody who starts bloviating, passionately or otherwise, about Global Warming and CO2 emissions is too stupidly self-centered to realize what’s going on and/or deliberately trying to confuse the issue. Shut ‘em out.
10 comments
Comments feed for this article
27 August 2011 at 10:32 pm
Murgatroyd
Dammit, you’re using facts and logic. No fair! RAAAAACIST!!!!!
2 September 2011 at 7:19 am
daddy
Ric,
It is just like the story last week in the ADN Anchorage Daily News announcing an Oil Deal between Russia and Exxon to drill in the Russian Arctic. There was no mention whatever of all the standard qualms that appear in every ADN story that mentions drilling in the Alaskan Arctic: AGW, Polar Ice Melt, Greenhouse Gasses, Threatened Polar Bears, Endangered Walruses, Beleaguered Beluga’s.
Amazing how all that Enviro stuff drops through the cracks the instant it’s happening anywhere else.
2 September 2011 at 7:41 pm
PCachu
On the one hand, it could be just another symptom of Lefty-Green spinelessness, syncing up nicely with the Left’s Christian/Muslim hypocrisy; they know the Rooskies won’t even think twice before plowing them under if they make any sort of motion to obstruct. Good luck parading your martyrs around when no one will tell you where the bodies are.
On the other, there’s the actual origins of organized hard-Leftism in the West, which numerous ex-KGB types have long since revealed was little more than a fifth-column program to undermine everything non-Soviet in the first place. Gotta dance with the feller what brung ya, after all.
So, you know. Choices.
2 September 2011 at 7:10 am
Instapundit » Blog Archive » VIDEO: So why are those tar sands evil, exactly? Because of Buusshh! And Halliburton! UPDATE: …
[...] UPDATE: Ric Locke: Keystone XL Pipeline Has Nothing To Do With Greenhouse Emissions: [...]
2 September 2011 at 8:24 am
etranger
pertinent and timely treatsie on this very subject at http://www.blacktomflint.ca/BlogEngine.NET/default.aspx
2 September 2011 at 9:46 am
Dave
The proposed West Coast terminal is at Kitimat, hundreds of miles north of Vancouver.
2 September 2011 at 12:05 pm
JJ
Oh well then. That changes everything.
2 September 2011 at 2:15 pm
Barry does something right - overrules EPA - VolNation
[...] be constructed somewhere and the oil will be sold. Why not take advantage of this opportunity? Fun Fact about Keystone-XL Ric's Rulez Posted via VolNation [...]
2 September 2011 at 9:37 pm
The oil from tar sands debate…in the US | pindanpost
[...] Ric Locke: Keystone XL Pipeline Has Nothing To Do With Greenhouse Emissions: If the pipeline is not built, another will be, from the tar sands deposits to the Canadian West [...]
14 September 2011 at 5:14 pm
Sugel
AP – Nebraskans will have a chance to weigh in on the proposed Keystone XL pipeline route at two meetings scheduled in September..