Game Changer: EPA Asserts Tar Sands Pipeline Environmental Analysis Is Inadequate

This post was co-written by Lena Moffitt, Washington Representative for the Sierra Club Dirty Fuels Campaign.

This week the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) blasted the State Department's draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline - asserting that the EIS is "woefully deficient" because "the Draft EIS does not provide the scope or detail of analysis necessary to fully inform decision makers and the public, and we recommend that additional information and analysis be provided."

The Keystone XL is a massive pipeline designed to carry tar sands oil from Canada into the U.S., and we've long called its EIS inadequate. Now our nation's environmental watchdog is putting its weight and expertise behind that assessment.

EPA is charged with protecting Americans' health and safety, and its concerns about this pipeline underscore and validate what Americans are saying across the country.

EPA is demanding more than 30 additional pieces of information needed based on grave concerns such as "the Draft EIS does not fully identify and address the potential for disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects on minority, low-income and Tribal populations."
 
EPA also raises serious concerns about the threats tar sands pose to the health and safety of American communities, which underscores the need to proceed with caution when it comes to making a decision of this magnitude about the country's energy future.  

And given what we've witnessed in the Gulf of Mexico, where rubbers stamps for the oil industry were all too common, we welcome this call for a more thorough and rigorous approach to the proposed Keystone XL pipeline.

Here's just a partial list of what EPA is asking of the State Department, given the woefully deficient consideration of these environmental and human impacts:

- A broader assessment of the need for this pipeline, including a "robust analysis of options for meeting national energy and climate policy objectives";  
- A more thorough investigation into the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the project, including a consideration of Canadian tar sands development (which EPA asserts is an action clearly connected to building the pipeline and must be considered);  
- A lifecycle assessment of "well-to-wheel" (greenhouse gas) emissions generated from tar sands;  
- A better understanding of mitigation measures that could be taken to decrease the emissions from tar sands developments;  
- An assessment of the air quality impacts of refining tar sands, and a more in-depth look at the environmental justice ramifications of these air quality concerns;
- A much more thorough emergency response plan, including a consideration of the specific impacts to water bodies or a leak or spill of the chemical dilutent needed to transport heavy tar sands oil;  
- A consideration of the safety waiver [the Department of Transportation] is considering granting to TransCanada, with special attention paid to the sulfur content of the fuel and how this would impact the thinner steel which would be used if the waiver were granted;
- A complete assessment of all the project's impacts to wetlands;  
- A consideration of the impacts of Canadian tar sands developments on migratory birds.

That list alone underscores the high risk and hefty cost of pursuing toxic tar sands oil at the expense of America's clean energy future.

We applaud EPA's scrutiny.

All of the additional analysis requested by EPA must be prepared to allow for a robust consideration of the impacts of this pipeline, and whether or not is it in our nation's interest.

And because of an executive order, these requests from EPA mean that the Keystone XL plan cannot go through until the Department of State can deliver completed analysis addressing all of these points.

We have said all along, an open and honest dialogue about our energy future leads to the conclusion that we should say no to this filthy project. Instead, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should say yes to clean energy, yes to clean air, and yes to an oil-free future.

 

Comments

[Merimee Moffitt]

03:55 PM on 07/23/2010

Very straightforward and nicely done, Ms. Moffitt. I like giving Secretary of State Hillary Clinton the go ahead, and that you and she can be on the same page! Tar Sands projects and pipe lines are getting some good negative press, and thank you for spreading the word. Save our Rocky Mountain States and the beautiful sun and wind-filled southwest! We need clean energy for our future generations, and wet lands, habitats for wildlife and human life, and intact mountains and deserts. Si se puede! We have plenty of folks out here in the territories ready to go to work for clean energy solutions!!

[Merimee Moffitt]

03:51 PM on 07/23/2010

Very straightforward and nicely done, Ms. Moffitt. I like giving Secretary of Hillary Clinton the go ahead, and that you and she can be on the same page! Tar Sands projects and pipleines are getting some good negative press, and thank you for spreading the word. Save our Rocky Mountain States and the beautiful sun and wind-filled southwest! We need clean energy for our future generations, and wet lands, habitats for wildlife and human life, and intact mountains and deserts. Si se puede! We have plenty of folks out here in the territories ready to go to work for clean energy solutions!!

[Victoria Blue]

10:18 PM on 07/22/2010

There is dancing in many streets and roads tonight in the midwest about the EPA's request! For people outside of Nebraska, however, its a good guess that unless you're a fan of Willa Cather's books you have never heard of the sandhills or have any idea what they are like. Well, they're not photogenic so you have to experienced their stark and haunting beauty firsthand, I found this entry on web from a guy who had made it his mission to play the top 100 golf courses in the world, Number 11 is in the sandhills in Nebraska, His description of the experience is worthwhile reading for the curious: http://top100golf.blogspot.com/2006/07/sand-hills-golf-club.html

[Victoria Blue]

02:47 PM on 07/22/2010

Found a new posting that overlays maps of the sandhills, aquifer and pipeline:
http://omaha.com/article/20100722/NEWS01/707229847/1115

[BlackRabbit]

02:14 PM on 07/22/2010

It seems that the EPA is concerned with pollution not just within the U.S., but within Canada as well. Please explain why the EPA would do this when their mandate is "protecting Americans' health and safety." They are clearly expanding their mandate beyond U.S. borders.

[Victoria Blue]

01:59 PM on 07/22/2010

I's forget my head if wasn't attached. Check out the path of the Central Flyway or North American bird migration: http://www.birdnature.com/allflyways.html

And a sampling of the importance of the Nebraska sandhills portion of that Central Flyway:
http://www.nebraskaflyway.com/

Be sure to check out the Rain Water Basins, too.

[Victoria Blue]

01:29 PM on 07/22/2010

Ok, did it for you:

Map of the Nebraska Sandhills:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_Nebraska_Sand_Hills.svg

Map of the Ogallala Aquifer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ogallala_saturated_thickness_1997-sattk97-v2.svg

Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline Route:
http://www.transcanada.com/images/content/Pipeline_Projects/KeystoneXL_Map_hd.jpg

[Victoria Blue]

01:14 PM on 07/22/2010

I've been following proposal to build this pipeline for awhile now as it directly affects an area of the country I live in. In order to get a good handle of what this pipeline can possibly contaminate, you need to take a look at maps of the Ogallala Aquifer, the Nebraska Sand Hills, and the proposed route of the Transcanada Keystone XL pipeline. In short, they want to run a pipeline carrying the dirtiest oil soluable through some of the most fragile ecosystem in the world and over the world's largest underground reservoir of fresh water which supplies some 30% of the USA food stuffs. DUH! Anybody who ain't afraid of this thing just ain't thinking. The stakes are too high. Thank all that is holy for the EPA!