guardian.co.uk,
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent, Wednesday 18 January 2012
![]() |
John Boehner, surrounded by other House Republicans, decries the state department's announcement that the US will not proceed with the controversial Keystone Pipeline. Photograph: Jim Lo Scalzo/EPA |
Barack
Obama rejected the controversial Keystone tar sands pipeline on Wednesday,
making good on a promise not to give in to a Republican ultimatum on the
project.
The
announcement from the state department – which was expected – was hailed by environmentalists
as a victory.
But it sets
up an election-year confrontation over the pipeline, which was to carry
carbon-heavy crude from the tar sands of Alberta across the American heartland
to refineries on the Texas coast.
However,
TransCanada, the Canadian company which was seeking to build the pipeline, will
be allowed to re-apply for permission to go ahead with the project.
"The
Department's denial of the permit application does not preclude any subsequent
permit application or applications for similar projects," the state
department said in a statement said.
Obama, in
his statement, pinned the blame for the decision on the Republicans for trying
to push the administration to an earlier deadline. "The rushed and
arbitrary deadline insisted on by congressional Republicans prevented a full
assessment of the pipeline's impact, he said. "This announcement is not a
judgment on the merits of the pipeline, but the arbitrary nature of a deadline
that prevented the state department from gathering the information necessary to
approve the project and protect the American people."
He said
officials would continue to explore new pipeline routes
Environmental
groups immediately hailed the decision as David versus Goliath victory for an
unlikely coalition between national activists and Nebraska landowners opposed to the pipeline's route across an ecologically sensitive area known as the Sand
Hills.
Industry
groups – and Republicans – said the decision showed Obama did not care about
jobs. There was also disappointment from the Canadian government, which had
pushed hard for the pipeline.
As news
spread on Wednesday of a forthcoming announcement, Bill McKibben, the
environmentalist who galvanised opposition to the pipeline, said:
"Assuming that what we're hearing is true, this isn't just the right call,
it's the brave call. The knock on Barack Obama from many quarters has been that
he's too conciliatory. But here, in the face of a naked threat from Big Oil to
exact 'huge political consequences' he's stood up strong."
Damon
Moglen, the climate campaigner of Friends of the Earth, cast the decision as an
epic victory. When the project was first proposed, in August 2008, "No one
thought we could win," he said
Industry
groups said Obama was squandering a chance to create jobs through pipeline
construction, and warned he would rue his decision come election day.
"This
political decision offers hard evidence that creating jobs is not a high
priority for this administration," said Tom Donohue, president of the
Chamber of Commerce, which has pushed hard for the pipeline.
Mitt
Romney, the Republican frontrunner, said the decision showed a "lack of
seriousness" about bringing down unemployment, and that Obama was
pandering to his political base.
Republicans
in Congress echoed the jobs argument, and said they would try and put forward
new legislation to push the project forward.
"President
Obama is about to destroy tens of thousands of American jobs," a spokesman
for Republican house speaker John Boehner said.
Canadian
prime minister Stephen Harper has also pushed hard for the pipeline, telling
the CBC earlier this week that the administration's earlier delays were made
for "very bad political reasons".
In an
extraordinary rant this month, the natural resources minister, Joe Oliver,lashed out at opponents of the pipeline as foreign radicals and jet-setting
celebrities.
However,
administration officials argued that Republicans would have to take some of the
blame for the cancellation of the project.
The White
House had warned repeatedly that it would be forced to turn down the nearly
1,700 mile pipeline, after Congress voted last month to give the administration
a tight 60-day deadline to render its decision.
White House
spokesman Jay Carney made it clear on Tuesday that Obama would not be stampeded
into approving the project. "There was an attempt to short-circut the
review process in a way that does not allow the kind of careful consideration
of all the competing criteria here that needs to be done," he said.
"It's a fallacy to suggest that the president would sign into law
something when there isn't even an alternate route identified in Nebraska,"
he said.
In an
official statement, the state department said: "The Department of State
recommended to President Obama that the presidential permit for the proposed
Keystone XL Pipeline be denied and, that at this time, the TransCanada Keystone
XL Pipeline be determined not to serve the national interest."
The
statement said officials had not had enough time for an adequate review of the
project, given the 21 February deadline set by Congress. The State Department
has final authority over the pipeline because it crosses international border
with Canada.
The state
department had earlier delayed a decision for up to a year, saying it needed to
review additional routes through Nebraska.
That
decision, which the state department attributed to intense grassroots
opposition from Nebraska, was a political gift to Obama, saving him from making
a decision on a project which had been cast as a choice between jobs or the
environment.
The state department
said at the time that the review, including a search for alternate routes
across Nebraska, would likely delay a final decision until 2013.
TransCanada
had begun to work with officials in Nebraska on finding a new path around the
Sand Hills, adding about 100 additional miles to the route. Officials had
indicated earlier they were close to agreeing on a new route.
But
activists in Nebraska and Washington warned that they would be as ready to
fight off a new tar sands pipeline. "If they do reapply, TransCanada will
face the same valid public concerns and fierce opposition as the first
time," said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, a campaigner for the Natural Resources
Defence Council in Washington. "If they do reapply, TransCanada will face
the same valid public concerns and fierce opposition as the first time."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.