Like a good neighbor, Canada is there—offering America tens of thousands of jobs, protection against soaring gas prices and up to 700,000 barrels of crude oil a day for Oklahoma and Gulf Coast refineries to process—if America accepts TransCanada’s proposal to build the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta’s tar sands to the Gulf Coast.
Let’s say your neighbor invites you over to her holiday party and you respond: “No way, you’re an animal killer. Last year, you served meatballs at your party and I’m against animal cruelty.” Don’t expect your neighbor to ever talk to you again.
Likewise, Canada has offered America an invitation to create jobs and slash her dependence on Middle Eastern oil. The U.S. State Department released in-depth economic and environmental reports stating that it would be in America’s “national interest” to accept Canada’s offer. Yet, the Obama administration ignored the State Department and snubbed our northern neighbor by delaying the project on the basis of alleged environmental concerns.
Practically speaking, Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2012 is around the corner and President Obama’s key contingents like the Sierra Club, the Friends of the Earth, the EPA and Occupy Wall Street protesters believe that humans should irrationally worship the earth rather than responsibly exploit it for their benefit and survival.
Environmental groups oppose Keystone XL in large part because extracting oil from tar sands expends more energy and water and releases significantly more greenhouse gas emissions than other methods of extracting crude oil.
This month, Occupy Wall Street greenies shouted their desire to “Burn that mother [the City of New York] down!” Meanwhile, 8,000 tree huggers formed an “O-shaped hug” around the White House to protest Keystone XL. Basically, radical environmentalists want to save the earth by burning down a highly populated city like New York while preventing Keystone XL from passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas with negligible environmental impact and maximal human benefit.
Keystone XL poses virtually no threat to the environment. U.S. Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow for energy and the environment Michael A. Levi told the Associated Press: “A lot of people have been convinced that this is the cutting edge of the climate change fight. In the end this is the equivalent to half a percent of U.S. emissions.”