State Department sees no environmental red flags on Keystone route
March 1st, 2013
05:41 PM ET
2 years ago

State Department sees no environmental red flags on Keystone route

(CNNMoney) - The State Department said Friday that the Keystone pipeline expansion should have no significant effect on the environment along its proposed route, but stopped short of saying whether or not the controversial pipeline should be approved.

If the company behind the pipeline, TransCanada, follows all the rules, its "construction and normal operation" of the pipeline should pose no major risks, the State Department said in its draft environmental impact statement. That statement is now open for a 45-day public comment period, after which the Obama administration will make its decision about the pipeline.

FULL STORY

Filed under: Energy • State Department
soundoff (19 Responses)
  1. just sayin

    egads... you mean the environmental leftist loonies will be egging obama and chaining themselves to the whitehouse fence now? just when you thought the circus had left town.

    naaaaahhhhh.... obama will axe it don't worry. jobs and higher oil production is the last thing he is interested in. he doesn't have to run for re-election again so what does he care? all the other democrats though... they might have a real problem.

    March 1, 2013 05:51 pm at 5:51 pm |
  2. jkane sfl the gop national disgrace party will be swept out like the trash they are in2014 ?

    The gop toads will probably try to block it at the last minite
    to cause more unemployment and try to blame president Obama ,but the brain dead gop trash should know that we are on to their obstruction and they will pay in 2014 mid terms with another gop train wreck ,make sure your signed up to vote people .

    March 1, 2013 05:57 pm at 5:57 pm |
  3. Sniffit

    "you mean the environmental leftist loonies will be egging obama and chaining themselves to the whitehouse fence now?"

    Hey, genius, all people wanted was for it to follow the correct path and procedures through the approval process and get the scrutiny it deserved so that we could have some level of confidence that it would not have massive negative effects on the environment. Those procedures set the timeline for approval. The GOP/Teatrolls demanded that it be approved more quickly and without the full review process and were warned REPEATEDLY that any attempt to shorten that review process and force it through quicker would result in denial, beacuse those tasked with reviewing it would not have enough time to review it properly. Instead of accepting this and allowing it to follow the correct course through the regulations, the GOP jammed through legislation and forced the denial they warned would take place. Why would they do that? Well, to manufacture a talking opint and rile up easily-manipulated partisans like yourself. End result is that they delayed it even more than if they left it alone.

    This, of course, is setting aside all the arguments against the project that show the GOP/Teatrolls are lying about the economic effects it will have, including their nonsense about it magically reducing the price of gas. It's actually likelly to increase it.

    March 1, 2013 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  4. Sniffit

    "He said he would cut $3 for every $1 in taxes. Where are the $1.8 trillion in cuts?"

    Ask Congress. He can't do it until they pass legislation that does it and ive him the opoprtunity to sign it into law. The GOP/Teatrolls refuse.

    As for "the American people are finally waking up to what he really is" or whatever yuo blathered....is that why polls consitently show the majority preferring his plans over the GOP's by quite a wide margin?

    March 1, 2013 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
  5. Tommy G

    Why do we need more jobs? Everybody has resigned themselves to the fact that 8% unemployment is the new norm in the Obama economy. Welcome to European style socialism people. Enjoy it while it lasts because it never lasts for long. Eventually you run out of others people money to spend. (thank you Margaret Thatcher for those timeless words of wisdom)

    March 1, 2013 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
  6. rs

    Fortunately, the State Department isn't the body that does Environmental Impact. That will possibly fall to the EPA, and the landowners over whose property the pipeline passes- most likely the states, and the Bureau of Land Management. Meanwhile who will reimburse private landowners? Will that be the oil company? Will they buy it or seize it?

    Strictly speaking, the President of the United States should turn down the pipeline bid. It is redundant as the oil can quite easily move by rail (and does already) supporting railroad jobs and income. More importantly though, this oil in no way benefits the U.S.. It is going to the Gulf for shipping abroad.

    Dumb plan, bad environmentally, short term jobs vs. existing jobs.

    March 1, 2013 07:10 pm at 7:10 pm |
  7. wade

    Pf course they do. Anything to hurt America that is Obama's way!

    March 1, 2013 07:10 pm at 7:10 pm |
  8. Ind.

    Democrats will now scream "the sky is falling".

    March 1, 2013 07:45 pm at 7:45 pm |
  9. Concerned citizen

    "just sayin": how many jobs will be here, how much of this oil is going to USA, instead of China? Let them build refinery in Canada, and sell the oil to China from Canada, not from here!

    March 1, 2013 08:48 pm at 8:48 pm |
  10. GI Joe

    but if it is built and leaks, he will be blamed. Wait and see.

    March 1, 2013 08:59 pm at 8:59 pm |
  11. Thomas

    Why not high speed rail ?

    Why not build something theta won't be obsolete ten years after completion ?

    Solar , Wind , Natural Gas.

    March 1, 2013 11:10 pm at 11:10 pm |
  12. g

    it will be exported to china –it just passes threw the usa to get there–like canada you will pay at the pump to cover the cost

    March 2, 2013 08:20 am at 8:20 am |
  13. Marie MD

    What can go wrong by having oil flowing throw our heartland and fingers crossed that they are no leaks!
    Oil that will be sold in the world market. Not one drop is coming to the US.

    March 2, 2013 08:58 am at 8:58 am |
  14. WiredweirdinSF

    There never was. As you pay more and more for your tank of gas depleting your paycheck that is already shrinking from the cost of increased taxes and Obozocare, just remember that this was just a political ploy by the most incompetent, inept, corrupt, lying, union toady president we have ever had to get the environmentalist vote.

    March 2, 2013 09:15 am at 9:15 am |
  15. Donna

    It is now the "Obama Pipeline". Prove to the American people you don't care about jobs and expanding our access to oil and veto it. Prove to us further you are a far left radical environmental loon that could care less if thousands of job are lost.

    March 2, 2013 09:34 am at 9:34 am |
  16. sifto

    ditto just sayin...jkane–the repubs are the ones who have been promoting for the pipeline for months...

    March 2, 2013 09:43 am at 9:43 am |
  17. GI Joe

    Oil from tar sands is NOT even the type of oil used in the US. It will be shipped to foreign countries for sale, making more money for Canada and putting all the risk on our countries environment.

    Just like the two Shell drilling rigs that went awry in Alaska and are now high-tailing it to China to try to avoid prosecution and law-suits by the U.S. government. Look it up if you don't believe me - I looked it up.

    March 2, 2013 09:47 am at 9:47 am |
  18. tea party member

    Build the pipeline we need the jobs.

    March 2, 2013 10:17 am at 10:17 am |
  19. w l jones

    A lot of people see but a few knows . Said enough.

    March 2, 2013 10:49 am at 10:49 am |