A deeper dive: State's environmental review of Keystone XL tar sands pipeline shows it is not in the nation's interest | Anthony Swift's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/a_deeper_dive_states_environm

President Obama acknowledges Keystone XL not a job creator and that tar sands pipeline decision rests on climate impacts | Elizabeth Shope's Blog | Switchboard, from NRDC

Elizabeth Shope, Advocate, Washington, D.C.: This blog was jointly written with Danielle Droitsch, Senior Attorney and Canada Project Director at NRDC. In an interview last week with the New York Times, President Obama outlined in remarkable detail how the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would...

http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/eshope/president_obama_acknowledges_

145 Former Obama Campaign Staffers Urge Him To Reject Keystone XL

(Credit: AP)

More than 100 former Obama campaign workers are urging the president to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, in a move that comes just days after 22 former Obama campaigners were arrested while peacefully protesting the pipeline in Chicago.

In a letter released Thursday, 145 members of Obama's 2008 and 2012 campaigns called on the president to "make the right decision" on the pipeline:

Mr. President, we are just a few of the millions of young people across the country who are frightened at the prospect of runaway climate change. One of the reasons we came to work for you in the first place is because we trust you understand how big this challenge is.

You already know all the reasons we can't afford this pipeline - that it will lock in gigatons of carbon pollution over the next four decades and that it could spill into our nation's most valuable water sources - we're just asking you to think of us when you make up your mind. Dozens of supporters across the country told us they were casting their ballot for someone they could count on to make the tough calls when it came to our security and our health care and our climate. They voted for you, Mr. President, because we told them you'd be on the right side of history when you had to make these calls. Because we knew you'd do the right thing and stop this pipeline.

Public pushback against Keystone XL - which Obama is expected to decide on by this winter - has picked up over the past few months, following the State Department's release of the project's environmental impact statement. On Thursday, the 145 signatories joined billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer as he unveiled a social media campaign against Keystone XL that aims to garner support from Obama's supporters. (Full disclosure: Steyer is a member of the Board of Directors at the Center for American Progress.) Also on Thursday, a group of nurses and environmental activists marched across the Golden Gate Bridge in hopes of highlighting the health impacts of the pipeline, which run from air pollution, to the risk of contaminated water and illness from spills, to the increased risk of disease spread in a warming world.

The renewed push against Keystone XL comes as recent reports and events shed light on the pipeline's disputed safety and the environmental impacts of tar sands mining. If Keystone XL is built, TransCanada won't be using the latest technology in spill detection for the pipeline; it would have to be spilling oil at a rate of 12,000 barrels a day before its spill detectors would sound an alarm. A report from Alberta's Energy Resources Conservation Board found TransCanada failed to clean up the "vast and expanding" toxic waste ponds leftover from tar sands mining, which kill about 7,000 ducks and geese every year. And a massive toxic waste spill from an oil and gas mining site in Alberta covered more than 1,000 acres in early June, causing "every plant and tree" to die.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/06/20/2181171/obamas-former-camp

John Kerry Says 'The Science Is Screaming At Us' But Would Approving Keystone Destroy His Climate Credibility?

Secretary of State John Kerry delivered another set of powerful remarks on climate change last night. But all his poignant words will come to nought - indeed, they'll come back to haunt him - if he makes the wrong decision on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

How precisely could Kerry lobby other countries to join an international climate treaty (and move away from fossil fuels) - perhaps his primary goal as Secretary - after enabling the accelerated exploitation of one of the dirtiest sources of fossil fuels in the world?

I had thought that Obama's strong post-reelection words on climate, coupled with the choice of climate hawk Kerry as Secretary of State, might be a double signal that the administration was prepared to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. But last week, the White House started sending signals "the president is inclined to approve the Keystone XL pipeline."

Keystone is a gateway to a huge pool of carbon-intensive fuel most of which must be left in the ground - along with most of the world's coal and unconventional oil and gas - if humanity is to avoid multiple devastating impacts that may be beyond adaptation. That can't happen without some sort of international agreement (or multi-lateral or bilateral agreements). And such an agreement is not possible without the U.S. taking a leadership role, since we are the richest country and the biggest cumulative polluter.

Kerry certainly understands the risks posed by climate inaction. Yesterday at the National Geographic Society's Ross Sea Conservation Reception, he said:

I have seen this fragile ecosystem change before our very eyes, whether it's a problem of acidification, a problem of pollution and development, a problem of ice melt and potential ecosystem collapse, to the rise of the sea levels, which is happening in various parts of the world....

The entire system is interdependent, and we toy with that at our peril....

So climate change is coming back in a sense as a serious international issue because people are experiencing it firsthand. The science is screaming at us, literally, demanding that people in positions of public responsibility at least exercise the so-called "precautionary principle" to balance the equities and not knowing completely the outcomes at least understand what is happening and take steps to prevent potential disaster.

... I'm here to tell you that, proudly, President Obama has put this agenda back on the front burner where it belongs, that he has in his Inauguration Address and in his State of the Union Address and in the policies he's working on now said we are going to try to exercise leadership because of its imperatives.

[Well, figuratively, not literally....]

But I'm not sure if Kerry has thought through the international implications of approving Keystone. The United States has already undermined its standing to cajole other countries into climate commitments by expanding oil and gas drilling as well as coal exports. But none of those were Kerry's decision, whereas Keystone is.

Yes, the U.S. has a serious shot at hitting Obama's Copenhagen pledge of a 17% cut in CO2 emissions from 2005 levels - if the President embraces strong emissions reductions from existing power plants. But let's not pretend that target is either especially hard to hit or scientifically meaningful (see "Developed Nations Must Cut Emissions In Half By 2020, Says New Study").

That is to say, the fact Kerry can go to the other big emitters and commit to meeting Obama's pledge is a necessary minimum condition to achieve a climate agreement - but it is not sufficient. He needs some moral standing, he needs to be able to demonstrate to the world the U.S. understands that far deeper cuts are needed post-2020 and that means not sticking new spigots into huge, dirty carbon pools like the tar sands.

Kerry needs to show that his words are more than words, that he actually hears the screams from the science - and from generations yet unborn. Kerry must recommend to Obama that Keystone be killed. And Obama must agree - and no, Kerry will not gain anything if Obama were to over-rule him. Quite the reverse: That would be a vote of no-confidence in his Secretary of State on climate issues and make of Kerry a paper tiger.

Kerry starts as Secretary with clean hands on climate. But approving Keystone would be like dipping his hands into the dirtiest, stickiest tar imaginable - they could never be cleaned again.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/03/19/1743291/john-kerry-science

NY Times Editorial Makes The Climate Case Against Keystone

The March 11 editorial in the New York Times says the overriding reason President Obama should reject the Keystone XL pipeline is climate change.

http://theenergycollective.com/josephromm/197221/climate-case-against-

USA Today On Keystone XL Rally: 'Tens Of Thousands Demand Action On Climate Change'

So that was a heck of a rally. I welcome readers who attended to share their thoughts and pics.

If you missed it, you can get details from USA Today's story "Tens of thousands demand action on climate change." Or from the Sierra Club news release, "More Than 35,000 Strong March on Washington for Climate Action."

And then there's always the Climate Progress twitter feed - my first mass tweeting from an iPhone.

I loved the combination of passion and knowledge that was driving the day. I had the chance to talk to a bunch of the speakers and was impressed by the strength of their commitment on climate in general and Keystone XL in particular.

Van Jones made clear that all of President Obama's other accomplishments would be wiped away if he approves Keystone, since future generations are going to judge all of us on the basis of the actions we take on climate.

I was very impressed with the celebrities who came, that they had substance to go with the style. How great to have Rosario Dawson explain that it is called "tar sands" and not "oil sands." And in chatting with her afterwards, it's clear she also understands the spectrum of clean energy solutions.

And Evangeline Lilly (aka Kate Austen from Lost) was there as a Canadian to apologize to all the Americans in the audience for her country's ceaseless efforts to send the dirtiest of fuels our way. I have seen every episode of Lost but lost my nerve to tell her how much I enjoyed her show except for the last five minutes, that is. It's not like she was one of the writers.... But I digress.

I had a long talk with Tom Steyer, the billionaire hedge-fund manager who helped lead the "No on Prop 23″ campaign to save California's climate law in 2010. He is also on the board of CAP. He is full throttle that we have to act - and act now - if we are to avert catastrophe. He said to the crowd that he has spent a lot of time reviewing investments and Keystone is a bad investment for this country.

It is good to see a movement with passion from the top all the way down to the roots.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/02/17/1605901/usa-today-on-keyst