* Environment groups ask for more climate, safety analysis
* Comment period on scope of review closes Monday
* Industry: review should focus on Nebraska only
WASHINGTON, July 30 - Environmental groups demanded the U.S. State Department conduct a new, thorough analysis of the risks of transporting oil sands crude through TransCanada Corp's proposed Keystone XL pipeline as a Wisconsin oil spill renewed concerns about pipeline safety.
The Canada-to-Texas project has become a potent political symbol ahead of the Nov. 6 presidential election, with Republicans using its delay to criticize President Barack Obama's energy policies, and environmental groups pushing to try to stop a project they see as too risky to the climate and clean water.
The latest criticism comes as the State Department is preparing to undertake a new environmental review of the project, with the public comment period on the scope of the review set to close on Monday.
Environmentalists said the department has so far failed to properly weigh the climate change consequences of developing energy-intensive oil sands and the impact of oil sands crude on pipelines.
"This will be the test of whether the State Department is serious about climate change," said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org and a key organizer of the anti-Keystone movement.
Pipeline safety came into renewed focus after Enbridge's 318,000 barrel per day Line 14, which carries Canadian crude to refiners in the Midwest, was shut Friday after spilling more than 1,000 barrels of crude oil in Wisconsin.
TransCanada first submitted its Keystone XL plans for U.S. government study and approval in 2008. President Barack Obama rejected the initial plan for the project in January because he said more study was needed for a revision for the pipeline's route to skirt a sensitive ecological area in Nebraska.
TransCanada re-applied in May for the project's approval. The southern portion of the pipeline, which does not require State Department approval, received the final permit needed for construction on Friday.
Green groups submitted more than 400,000 comments to the State Department in support of a more robust review, said Anthony Swift, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Environmentalists argue that oil sands crude is more corrosive than traditional crude oil.
"It is time the State Department look into growing evidence that tar sands pipelines are more likely to leak and tar sands spills are far more devastating than conventional oil spills," Swift said.
Industry groups dispute claims that oil sands crude is damaging to pipelines and say Canadian oil sands will be developed with or without Keystone.
The American Petroleum Institute said on Monday that the State Department should confine its review to the new route planned for Nebraska.
"The rest of the project has already received a thorough environmental assessment ... Every day of delay is a delay on getting Americans back to work, and America leading on energy," said Cindy Schild, API's refining issues manager.
The State Department's prior analyses found the pipeline would not have significant impact on the environment, but after protests from Nebraska lawmakers, ranchers and environmentalists the department late last year said additional study of the pipeline's route was necessary.
Republican lawmakers have tried to legislate a faster approval for the pipeline, which they said would create much-needed construction jobs. They have argued that the State Department's latest study should not hold up the project during Nebraska's review of the new route.
Republicans have pointed to the planned takeover of Canadian oil firm Nexen Inc by China's state oil company CNOOC as evidence that the United States needs to approve the pipeline and more aggressively expand its oil production.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our journalism free and accessible to all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Contribute as little as $2 to keep our news free for all.
Can't afford to donate? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.
Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.