The Keystone Abomination: Trump Will Learn It's Easier To Sign Some Exec Actions Than To Carry Them Out

"President Trump will live to regret the actions he's taken today"-
Michael Brune, Executive Director, The Sierra Club.

The misfit and stooge occupying the White House, Donald J.Trump, has naturally neglected the difficult parts of the job of chief executive to do showy, signing photo ops.

After all, it's a lot easier to just put pen to paper in front of clicking cameras to fuck people out of their Medicaid benefits, rights to clean water, or reproductive choice - than to man up and to the heavy lifting needed to get this nation back on track. But for Trump, the consummate showman, it's all about carny barking and show.

No surprise then that Trump also has signed a document clearing the way to government approval of the Keystone XL pipeline as well as for another called the Dakota Access pipeline in North Dakota. What he will learn, however, is that millions of citizens are not prepared to just sit by and let those actually manifest - not with a planet that can ill afford any more of that crap coming out of the ground.

Proposed by a Canadian firm (Trans Canada), the Keystone pipeline would carry 800,000 barrels a day from the Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast. Republicans and some Democrats argued that the project would create jobs and expand energy resources, while environmentalists said it would encourage a form of oil extraction that produces more gases that warm the planet than normal petroleum

As noted in an earlier blog: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/11/bill-mckibbens-prediction-of-nightmare.html

Climate scientist Bill McKibben has developed models disclosing mathematical limits showing we have roughly 550 gigatons (gT) left of carbon we can deposit anthropogenically into the atmosphere before earthly Hell is unleashed. That “hell” includes the runaway greenhouse effect, to turn our planet into an endlessly burning pile of ash and refuse. Give a current 30 gT/year deposition rate - and assuming we don't add to it, don't increase its rate - that leaves us roughly 18 years- give or take a fraction, before we end up in a likely runaway greenhouse world. It's a world no one or their offspring would want to inhabit.

McKibben,  as early as 2011, noted the major contributor to push us into this hothouse hell is none other than implementation of the Keystone XL pipeline because of the concentrated carbon it will unleash over years. To remind readers, this pipeline will deliver tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to Gulf Coast refineries for export to an international market. The pipeline would have an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day and would leave a carbon footprint equivalent to building more than seven new coal-fired plants. By the time it reaches full capacity the enhanced carbon deposition will be nearly 3 gT/yr. In other words accelerating the timeline to reach the 550 gT maximum carbon load the planet can bear.

Despite misleading claims of “benefits” by TransCanada, the downsides of this ill-conceived project remain the same and include:

1)  Building a future of dirty energy,  hastening our pace toward an uninhabitable world. The fact is the Keystone XL is a massively detrimental dirty energy project that would open a major export artery for toxic tar sands oil across the U.S. for at least 50 years. In that interval, massive spills and contamination of our water supply (already threatened by fracking) will accelerate cancers and other endemic health problems.

2)  It’s an unnecessary risk. The U.S. itself doesn’t need this crap oil especially since we’ve reduced our oil consumption by nearly two billion barrels per day over the past five years. This stat will continue to improve with the growing number of electric and hybrid cars.

3) Water pollution: A planned Keystone XL pipeline would pass through Nebraska’s Sandhills region, endangering the Ogallala Aquifer, which forms the drinking water for millions as well the water source for one third of American agriculture. In other words, a massive tar sands oil spill could pollute not only the water but crops used for food consumption. During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day. Ninety percent of this polluted water is dumped into large human-made pools, known as tailing ponds, after it’s used. These ponds are home to toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, which has worked its way into neighboring clean water supplies.


4) Higher gas and food prices: TransCanada has admitted one of its goals is to raise oil prices in 12 midwestern U.S. states thereby increasing revenue to the Canadian oil industry by $2b to $4b. Meanwhile, U.S. farmers, who’ve already spent $12.4 b on fuel (in 2009) could see expenses rise to $15b  if the pipeline goes through,  a cost which will surely be passed on to Americans as higher food prices.

5) Increased respiratory disease and cancer: The pollutants released by mining and refining tar sands will incept acid rain, smog and haze as well as other effects associated with lung disease and cancer. The solid or semi-solid waste, embedded in the toxic sludge, will unleash astronomic rates of kidney, breast, colon, pancreatic and liver cancers by the ingestion of the water soiled by the tailing ponds.

6) Climate disaster: Any future tar sands development – say via Keystone XL- will mean “game over” for the planet according to NASA climate scientist James Hanson. I already noted earlier how much extra load of carbon will be added and how it impinges the 550 gT critical threshold.

All of this ought to inspire furious opposition, the same sort as transpired when  Obama had contemplated bringing it forth. The same goes for the Dakota Access pipeline which threatens the water sources on Indian lands and has seen thousands - even Army vets- motivated to protest. That is bound to occur again, as the battle lines have formed thanks to Trump's stodgy, stumpy fingers signing these criminal orders.

Trump has also signed an order that begins to unravel Mr. Obama’s  (ACA) health care program, reversed his policies on abortion and housing and ordered a freeze of any pending regulations left behind by the outgoing administration.  The cumulative effect of these barbaric signings is not difficult to parse and will include: increased cancers from lowered clean water testing and protections, increased incidence of all forms of cancer as well as water-borne diseases like cryptosporidium, much greater medical  burden thereby imposed on citizens who will now face these diseases without medical insurance. This on top of increased frequency of abortions due to less access to birth control.  His climate depredations including signing approval for Keystone XL, will lead to a world no human will be able to inhabit within very few years.

Does Trump give a damn? Nope, only about his poll ratings or whether he really won the popular vote. His ego rules all and he cares not a whit about millions becoming ill or pregnant when they can't afford the costs. As long as he does the bidding of knaves and fools that's all that matters. This is Trump World, and welcome to it.

The Trump team, to promote these pipelines, is pushing the "new jobs" bunkum on the dumb Trumpies who believed the Donald was their deliverance. But not so fast. A 2014 State Dept. review of Keystone showed that nearly all the projected jobs (maximum 42,100 or barely enough to satisfy the needs of a town like Pueblo, CO) nearly all would fill only one position for ONE year. In other words, they'd be gone, as in vamonosed at the end of a year. Big deal, all temp jobs! A grand total of 35 permanent employees would be needed once  the pipeline commences service. This is about half the staff needed for your average mid-level department store. Yeah, the pay will be much better, but the health costs will also be a lot higher - and one wonders if that pay will cover all the pancreatic and liver cancers when they appear. Especially for people who will no longer have the ACA to lean on.

The hype that costs will go down is also bullshit. A study out of Cornell, cited by Hayes, shows that consumers in the Midwest alone could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel if the Keystone is approved.

And we haven't even covered the calamity that can follow from a massive leak that can lead to widespread water contamination.  For more about this, and what can happen see:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/25/487357502/canadian-oil-spill-threatens-drinking-water


In the wake of a potential rupture leading to a crude spill of this tar sands crap,  this is a clarion call for all out protests. These may even necessitate occupying the locations for pipeline construction to prevent enormous environmental transgressions that will undermine citizen well being. Once that water is contaminated  - as the previous link shows - it will be the devil's own job getting it back to its original potable condition.

.

Keystone Stopped For Now - But Why Are So Many Dumb Americans For It?

"Every dollar that we spend today in developing and using more fossil fuels, is another dollar spent in digging the graves of our grandchildren. I don't want to dig that grave anymore" - Sen. Tom Harkin, on the Senate floor in debate over the Keystone XL pipeline

As the news was revealed recently  that the Keystone XL pipeline approval fell one vote short, one wonders just how much longer it will be before this Canadian abomination materializes. How many Dems will hold out before turning whore, and how long can Obama sustain a spine and use veto power - especially come January? These are questions that keep me up at night, and should also keep you up too,  given how the approval of this monstrosity would allow likely deposition -via spills- of some of the most polluted effluent as well as sky high CO2 emissions. If you think the emergency snow event in Buffalo has been a disaster, wait until even bigger and more prolonged polar vortices are formed (as a result of global warming), and the icy air encounters warm lakes!

What is even more incredible to me is how the Democrats could have wasted so much precious lame duck time dealing with this issue (all to try to secure the Senate seat of Mary Landrieu - which is hopeless, imho) when they could have instead been approving Loretta Lynch, Obama's choice for Attorney General. Do they really believe her chances will be better when the Reepos have a 54 vote majority? As Rachel Maddow put it, she'd like to know what they're smoking. I would too, since it sounds a lot more powerful than what's on offer her in Colorado.

Back to the Keystone: Another gripe I have is how many Americans have consumed the bullshit that this pipeline will actually provide any benefit. According to current polls, cited on Chris Hayes' 'All In', some 59 percent of Americans (the 'Dumbo' brigade)  approve of the Keystone XL, and only 31% are against it. Which means the majority have swallowed the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

These bozos have no clue, not one,  that virtually no benefits redound to our nation's favor- and the few paltry benefits that do, are grossly exaggerated. The pipeline is essentially Trans Canada's and to be put in using OUR land (which will also be at dire risk for spills) and piped to the Gulf where it will be offloaded to tankers and sold ELSE WHERE - not here in the U.S. Most likely to places like China and India. Hence, the crappola that it "lowers energy costs" and "promotes energy independence" is blatant bull pockey. Only a halfwit or ignoramus would buy that! So, it looks like 59% of 'Muricans are halfwits or ignoramuses.

What about the jobs hype? As reported by Chris Hayes, a State Dept. review showed that nearly all the projected jobs (maximum 42,100 or barely enough to satisfy the needs of a town like Pueblo, CO) nearly all would fill only one position for ONE year. In other words, they'd be gone, as in vamonosed at the end of a year. Big deal, all temp jobs! A grand total of 35 permanent employees would be needed once  the pipeline commences service. This is about half the staff needed for your average mid-level department store. Yeah, the pay will be much better, but the health costs will also be a lot higher - and one wonders if that pay will cover all the pancreatic and liver cancers when they appear.

The hype that costs will go down is also bullshit. A study out of Cornell, cited by Hayes, shows that consumers in the Midwest alone could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel if the Keystone is approved.

Obama last week hit the nail on the head when he stated:

"Understand what this project is. It is providing the ability for Canada to pump their oil and send it through our land, down to the Gulf where it will be sold everywhere else."

So, in non-euphemistic terms, one is led to ask why so many Americans (the 59 % for) are willing to bend over and allow their nation to be so egregiously used.  Do they really want our country to be reduced to being a "bitch" for the Canadians? On the future promise of thirty five permanent jobs? Come on! Seems that they do! I can understand the Repukes' stand on this - but 59 percent of the people? Give me a freaking break! And as Chris noted, the biggest beneficiaries of the pipeline would be the fossil fuel companies who are increasingly spooked by plummeting oil prices. Thus, it's evident the approval of Keystone assures them of a way to jack the costs up again, and when dumbo 'Muricans howl it will be too late.

Idiot John Boehner, of course, has warned Obama not to use his veto against it, which is exactly why he must.

Boehner bloviated in a recent appearance aired on Hayes' show:

"A pipeline veto would send the signal that this President has no interest in listening to the American people. Vetoing an overwhelming popular bill would be a clear indication that he doesn't care about the American people's priorities. It would be the equivalent of calling the American people 'stupid'"

Sorry to have to bust your nuts, Johnno, but the American people in favor of it ARE stupid! If they haven't read about the consequences, and don't know enough of who is really benefiting, then why the hell should Obama follow the 'stupid' sector and allow this nutso pipeline to pass?

We the opponents, then, are the ones that need to be listened to, since we know  - based on all the facts available- that it is sheer madness to assume the development of new sources of carbon-intensive tar sands oil. This is when we know we can only burn about one fifth of all the known reserves of existing sources and hope to keep the planet from frying in the runaway greenhouse..

A Bad Omen Emerges From Senate Dems : Voting for Keystone Pipeline to Try To Save Landrieu

The idea that a minor political gain can create an opportunity for environmental catastrophe is one that now must be reckoned in by Democratic voters, as they behold Senate Dems prepared to cave in on the Keystone XL pipeline in order to (hope) Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu can retain her seat as that state election moves to a runoff. This was announced this morning on CBS Early Show as we learn - incredibly - that a number of Senate Democrats have "changed their minds" on the pipeline and the reason appears to be to toss their female D-counterpart a bone in the hopes she can keep her seat. (Louisiana is a huge oil and gas state as I can attest, having worked two plus years in New Orleans for an oil company in the late 60s).

But if this is what we can expect from the Dems as the Reepos assume a majority in the Senate next year, then we are all for the high jump. We can likely expect them to turn on a dollar on a number of key votes (maybe even the "Ryan Budget"), giving the Repukes the filibuster- proof majorities they need to even survive Obama vetoes. Sickening is the word that comes to mind, but again, why I left the Democrats to become an independent. (Back in 2002-03 when Tom Daschle's Senate Dems gave in to Bush on almost everything- from wars to budget -busting tax cuts.)

Why is this a misbegotten move?  As noted in an earlier blog: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/11/bill-mckibbens-prediction-of-nightmare.html

Climate scientist Bill McKibben has developed models disclosing mathematical limits showing we have roughly 550 gigatons (gT) left of carbon we can deposit anthropogenically into the atmosphere before earthly hell is unleashed. That “hell” includes the runaway greenhouse effect, to turn our planet into an endlessly burning pile of ash and refuse. Given a current 30 gT/year deposition rate - and assuming we don't add to it, don't increase its rate - that leaves us roughly 18 years- give or take a fraction, before we end up in a likely runaway greenhouse world. It's a world no one or their offspring would want to inhabit.

Prof. McKibben,  in his November, 2012 appearance on Chris Hayes’ 'UP', noted the major contributor to push us into this hothouse hell is none other than implementation of the Keystone XL pipeline because of the concentrated carbon (from tar sands oil) it will unleash over years. To remind readers, this pipeline will deliver tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to Gulf Coast refineries for export to an international market. The pipeline would have an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day and would leave a carbon footprint equivalent to building more than seven new coal-fired plants. By the time it reaches full capacity the enhanced carbon deposition will be nearly 3 gT/yr. In other words accelerating the timeline to reach the 550 gT maximum carbon load the planet can bear.

Despite misleading claims of “benefits” by TransCanada, the downsides of this ill-conceived project remain the same and include:

1)  Building a future of dirty energy,  hastening our pace toward an uninhabitable world. The fact is the Keystone XL is a massively detrimental dirty energy project that would open a major export artery for toxic tar sands oil across the U.S. for at least 50 years. In that interval, massive spills and contamination of our water supply (already threatened by fracking) will accelerate cancers and other endemic health problems.

2)  It’s an unnecessary risk. The U.S. itself doesn’t need this crap oil especially since we’ve reduced our oil consumption by nearly two billion barrels per day over the past five years. This stat will continue to improve with the growing number of electric and hybrid cars.

3) Water pollution: A planned Keystone XL pipeline would pass through Nebraska’s Sandhills region, endangering the Ogallala Aquifer, which forms the drinking water for millions as well the water source for one third of American agriculture. In other words, a massive tar sands oil spill could pollute not only the water but crops used for food consumption. During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day. Ninety percent of this polluted water is dumped into large human-made pools, known as tailing ponds, after it’s used. These ponds are home to toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, which has worked its way into neighboring clean water supplies.

4)Higher gas and food prices: TransCanada has admitted one of its goals is to raise oil prices in 12 midwestern U.S. states thereby increasing revenue to the Canadian oil industry by $2b to $4b. Meanwhile, U.S. farmers, who’ve already spent $12.4 b/ yr on fuel, could see expenses rise to $15b  if the pipeline goes through,  a cost which will surely be passed on to Americans as higher food prices.

5) Increased respiratory disease and cancer: The pollutants released by mining and refining tar sands will incept acid rain, smog and haze as well as other effects associated with lung disease and cancer. The solid or semi-solid waste, embedded in the toxic sludge, will unleash astronomic rates of kidney, breast, colon, pancreatic and liver cancers by the ingestion of the water soiled by the tailing ponds.

6) Climate disaster: Any future tar sands development – say via Keystone XL- will mean “game over” for the planet according to NASA climate scientist James Hanson. I already noted earlier how much extra load of carbon will be added and how it impinges the 550 gT critical threshold.

To his credit Obama has so far nixed this odious deal, which will only bring jobs for the very few (maybe 21,000 if that) and major hellacious environmental costs that would be a hundred times greater than the Exxon Valdez disaster if major leaks occur. Now, Obama must use his full authority (which no repug can stop) to kill this project once and for all, i.e. if the Senate vote falls short of the filibuster proof majority of 60 votes.

Just WHO is pushing this abomination on us? Giant oil corporations invested in Canada's tar sands and who have, as Bill Moyers stated in an April, 2012 appearance in on Bill Maher's Real Time, already contributed more than $47 million of campaign donations to Repukes and lobbying money to try to make it so. They are hoping that Americans will be too dumb or dense to see the hidden (and not so hidden) costs that will be extracted.

But evidently the Senate Dems don't see it that way. According to the CBS account:

"Louisiana is an oil and gas state and pipeline is very popular there. So Democratic leaders thought that giving Mary Landrieu something that she has been demanding might boost her chances back at home."

In other words, fuck the planet to (try to) preserve a Senatorial seat for the Dems. What kind of malignant political calculus is that? It's one that only a compromised political party - by too much corporate cash infusion- could dream up.  Even now the Repukes in the House are grabbing the language advantage for their own version of the bill by calling it the "Cassidy Keystone Solution" after Landrieu's opponent.

Make no mistake that this is serious. Approving this abomination (especially in a blatantly cynical political move)  will speed this planet toward an earthly hell partly captured in the initial scenes of the scifi flick 'Interstellar' and will be a threshold from which there is no turning back.

At that point the polar vortex, connected to instability of the Arctic ice cap from global warming, will be the least of your worries.

Raise the Minimum Wage in Return for Approving Keystone XL? A Bad Deal

John Thune on 'Morning Joe' two weeks ago tossed around the possible idea (with other guests, errr......political poltroons) of having a "deal" in which a raise in the minimum wage (to $10.15 an hour) might be effected in return for the Dems allowing the Keystone XL pipeline to go through. (Let's forget for the moment the hike in the minimum wage DID technically pass at the last Senate vote by 54-46, but the Reepos phoned in a "filibuster" because the 60 majority wasn't attained.)

Thune, in his monologue, insisted that unless the economy is expanding we can't afford a minimum wage hike. The Keystone - by providing some 50,000 odd jobs- would presumably allow such expansion, which is why this compromise deal is being knocked around by the pols. Thune added that we can't simply raise the minimum wage by itself if the jobs aren't there and companies aren't experiencing demand for their goods.

What he doesn't get is that there is little demand because people aren't being paid the income that allows them to spend, given their other obligations (mortgages, rents, utilities, groceries etc). Even now, 6 years after the financial collapse, 14.5 percent of families are food-challenged. They are having difficulty paying for food in the richest nation on Earth..  Hence, merely approving the Keystone will not in itself be adequate to generate aggregate demand across the board to expand the economy.

Beyond all that, approval of the Keystone would add monumental extra costs to the health and environment: more cancers, more illnesses from polluted air- water. In addition, the added carbon deposition - especially from tar sands oil - would be too much to halt the worst effects of global warming,

Bill McKibben in an appearance on Chris Hayes’ UP in 2011, noted the major contributor to push us into this hothouse hell is none other than implementation of the Keystone XL pipeline because of the concentrated carbon it will unleash over years. To remind readers, this pipeline will deliver tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to Gulf Coast refineries for export to an international market. The pipeline would have an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day and would leave a carbon footprint equivalent to building more than seven new coal-fired plants. By the time it reaches full capacity the enhanced carbon deposition will be nearly 3 gT/yr. In other words accelerating the timeline to reach the 550 gT maximum carbon load the planet can bear.

All of this discloses that no deal should be made and the minimum wage ought to be increased based on its own value of increasing aggregate demand.  It makes no sense to approve Keystone and get 50,000 more jobs but then impose recurring costs that effectively are fifty times higher than any economic benefits.

Despite misleading claims of “benefits” by TransCanada, the downsides of this ill-conceived project remain the same and include:

1)  Building a future of dirty energy,  hastening our pace toward an uninhabitable world. The fact is the Keystone XL is a massively detrimental dirty energy project that would open a major export artery for toxic tar sands oil across the U.S. for at least 50 years. In that interval, massive spills and contamination of our water supply (already threatened by fracking) will accelerate cancers and other endemic health problems.

2)  It’s an unnecessary risk. The U.S. itself doesn’t need this crap oil especially since we’ve reduced our oil consumption by nearly two billion barrels per day over the past five years. This stat will continue to improve with the growing number of electric and hybrid cars.

3) Water pollution: A planned Keystone XL pipeline would pass through Nebraska’s Sandhills region, endangering the Ogallala Aquifer, which forms the drinking water for millions as well the water source for one third of American agriculture. In other words, a massive tar sands oil spill could pollute not only the water but crops used for food consumption. During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumesidesumaen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day.

Higher gas and food prices: TransCanada has admitted one of its goals is to raise oil prices in 12 midwestern U.S. states thereby increasing revenue to the Canadian oil industry by $2b to $4b. Meanwhile, U.S. farmers, who’ve already spent $12.4 b on fuel (in 2009) could see expenses rise to $15b  if the pipeline goes through,  a cost which will surely be passed on to Americans as higher food prices.

5) Increased respiratory disease and cancer: The pollutants released by mining and refining tar sands will incept acid rain, smog and haze as well as other effects associated with lung disease and cancer. The solid or semi-solid waste, embedded in the toxic sludge, will unleash astronomic rates of kidney, breast, colon, pancreatic and liver cancers by the ingestion of the water soiled by the tailing ponds.

6) Climate disaster: Any future tar sands development – say via Keystone XL- will mean “game over” for the planet according to NASA climate scientist James Hanson. I already noted earlier how much extra load of carbon will be added and how it impinges the 550 gT critical threshold.


There should be no connection at all between raising the minimum wage and the Keystone XL pipeline. The latter is a horrific idea that neither the planet or the nation can afford while the former is long past due and would spark an increase in aggregate demand because it would give millions of workers the income to spend - which is what our GDP and economy is all about.  All the research done regarding effects of raising the minimum wage - except those coming from right wing think tanks - show it to be a boon for the economy - and with only minimal cost effects for most employers.

It is the right thing to do and the human thing. And besides, if we refuse to provide this increase in income we can't complain as ever more families have to go on food stamps to survive! It's either more food stamp beneficiaries or higher minimum wage. Take your pick!

The Keystone XL Pipeline Must Still Be Stopped!

The primary problem with resorting to rhetoric alone when it comes to warning of the costs of climate change, is that at some point you will be called upon to not only talk the talk, but walk the walk. In the case of President Obama, despite his inspiring declarations (at his Inaugural and the SOTU) on halting the climate catastrophe before us, the time has now come for single-handed action on his part. That means nixing the Keystone XL pipeline - all the critics and naysayers be damned.

As noted in an earlier blog: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/11/bill-mckibbens-prediction-of-nightmare.html

Climate scientist Bill McKibben has developed models disclosing mathematical limits showing we have roughly 550 gigatons (gT) left of carbon we can deposit anthropogenically into the atmosphere before earthly Hell is unleashed. That “hell” includes the runaway greenhouse effect, to turn our planet into an endlessly burning pile of ash and refuse. Give a current 30 gT/year deposition rate - and assuming we don't add to it, don't increase its rate - that leaves us roughly 18 years- give or take a fraction, before we end up in a likely runaway greenhouse world. It's a world no one or their offspring would want to inhabit.

Prof. McKibben in his November appearance on Chris Hayes’ UP', noted the major contributor to push us into this hothouse hell is none other than implementation of the Keystone XL pipeline because of the concentrated carbon it will unleash over years. To remind readers, this pipeline will deliver tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada to Gulf Coast refineries for export to an international market. The pipeline would have an initial capacity of 830,000 barrels per day and would leave a carbon footprint equivalent to building more than seven new coal-fired plants. By the time it reaches full capacity the enhanced carbon deposition will be nearly 3 gT/yr. In other words accelerating the timeline to reach the 550 gT maximum carbon load the planet can bear.


Despite misleading claims of “benefits” by TransCanada, the downsides of this ill-conceived project remain the same and include:

1)  Building a future of dirty energy,  hastening our pace toward an uninhabitable world. The fact is the Keystone XL is a massively detrimental dirty energy project that would open a major export artery for toxic tar sands oil across the U.S. for at least 50 years. In that interval, massive spills and contamination of our water supply (already threatened by fracking) will accelerate cancers and other endemic health problems.

2)  It’s an unnecessary risk. The U.S. itself doesn’t need this crap oil especially since we’ve reduced our oil consumption by nearly two billion barrels per day over the past five years. This stat will continue to improve with the growing number of electric and hybrid cars.

3) Water pollution: A planned Keystone XL pipeline would pass through Nebraska’s Sandhills region, endangering the Ogallala Aquifer, which forms the drinking water for millions as well the water source for one third of American agriculture. In other words, a massive tar sands oil spill could pollute not only the water but crops used for food consumption. During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day. Ninety percent of this polluted water is dumped into large human-made pools, known as tailing ponds, after it’s used. These ponds are home to toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, which has worked its way into neighboring clean water supplies.


4) Higher gas and food prices: TransCanada has admitted one of its goals is to raise oil prices in 12 midwestern U.S. states thereby increasing revenue to the Canadian oil industry by $2b to $4b. Meanwhile, U.S. farmers, who’ve already spent $12.4 b on fuel (in 2009) could see expenses rise to $15b  if the pipeline goes through,  a cost which will surely be passed on to Americans as higher food prices.

5) Increased respiratory disease and cancer: The pollutants released by mining and refining tar sands will incept acid rain, smog and haze as well as other effects associated with lung disease and cancer. The solid or semi-solid waste, embedded in the toxic sludge, will unleash astronomic rates of kidney, breast, colon, pancreatic and liver cancers by the ingestion of the water soiled by the tailing ponds.

6) Climate disaster: Any future tar sands development – say via Keystone XL- will mean “game over” for the planet according to NASA climate scientist James Hanson. I already noted earlier how much extra load of carbon will be added and how it impinges the 550 gT critical threshold.

To his credit Obama has so far nixed this odious deal, which will only bring jobs for the very few (maybe 21,000 if that) and major hellacious environmental costs that would be a hundred times greater than the Exxon Valdez disaster if major leaks occur. Now, Obama must use his full authority (which no repug can stop) to kill this project once and for all.

Just WHO is pushing this abomination on us? Giant oil corporations invested in Canada's tar sands and who have, as Bill Moyers stated last April in on Bill Maher's Real Time, already contributed more than $47 million of campaign donations to Repukes and lobbying money to try to make it so. They are hoping that Americans will be too dumb or dense to see the hidden (and not so hidden) costs that will be extracted.

If Obama’s recent rhetoric on climate change and global warming mean anything, then he has no other option than to kill the Keystone pipeline once and for all.

Still, It's up to all of us to do everything we can to urge President Obama to reject Keystone XL. To do your part, readers,  Will you pick up the phone today, and make a quick call to the White House?

Be polite, but be firm: NO Keystone XL deal!

Rick Santorum's Plan To Destroy the Country

This is the character who whined on a Sunday talk show that he'd have "vomited" to hear the words of JFK in 1960, when he addressed a convocation of Protestant ministers in Houston, that he would not be beholden or obliged to any prelate and regarded the separation of Church and State as "absolute". So for that, little Ricky wants to puke! Well, let him, since JFK was exactly correct.

There is no place for religion to exist under any formal banner in government, either as a special department or as employed by high powered officials to push their agendas, including taking marching orders from padres, popes or bishops. Does this mean religious people aren't entitled to enter the public square and debate, present their views? Of course not! But it does mean that those views aren't to be granted any special protected status by government. They have to compete openly in the marketplace of ideas and devil take the hindmost.

But Rick's heinous plans should he get in, such as universal intra-vaginal ultra sounds for all women of child-bearing age who insist on an abortion after being raped, are merely one aspect of his agenda. (Bearing in mind the need for the abortion likely arose after Santorum and a Reep congress made all contraceptives so expensive that virtually no woman other than a one percenter could afford them).

Rick's other plans were laid out in detail in the WSJ yesterday ('My Economic Agenda', p. A15) and it behooves me to share the most extreme parts with blog readers. Just be sure before you read you've already had your breakfast.

The plans are laid out as bullet points, and removed of political BS and Goop-speak, embrace the following:

1) The full approvial of the Keystone Pipeline ....for "jobs". Well I already discussed the terrible downsides of this in an earlier blog:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/01/keystone-xl-pipeline-scam-be-glad-obama.html

The fact is that the jobs Santorum speaks of would be for the very few (maybe 21,000 if that) and major hellacious environmental costs that would be a hundred times greater than the Exxon Valdez disaster if major leaks of this crappy tar sands-based stuff leached out to the surrounding environment.

This pipeline will also wend through drought-prone regions some of which are still suffering, and the water costs will be enormous. During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day.

There'll also be no assurance there won't be mature ruptures, despoiling the landscape (see map in earlier blog link) and spewing toxins far and wide. We already know TransCanada attempted to cut corners by seeking a safety waiver to build the pipeline with thinner-than-normal steel and to pump oil at higher-than-normal pressures. Thanks to the pressure exerted by Friends of the Earth and allies, the company withdrew its safety waiver application in August 2010. We also have NO assurance, none ...nada...that this pipeline if it ever does come through won't also have pressure-wall thickness issues.

As the toxins insinuate into local water supplies look for breast and kidney cancer rates to soar.

2) Santorum will ensure the Environmental Protection Agency is totally gutted - cutting $100 million of regulations that currently protect against mercury poisoning our air (from coal-fired power plants), even as other asthma -causing effluents are allowed to soar to exponential concentrations. Kids across the country better be well stocked with inhalers and other apparatus to ward off attacks.

Food and water regs will also likely be sliced, so don't be surprised to find all sorts of hideous diseases or maladies popping up...from E Coli outbreaks, to salmonella to cryptosporidium (which sickened 400,000 in a Milwaukee outbreak in 1994), to Listeria. Cancer rates will also be on a tear as each reg is abandoned, and lung diseases will go through the stratosphere.

3) Santorum plans only two tax rates: 10% and 28%. He claims that "in order to help families, I will triple the personal deduction for children". In fact, this is a ruse to get parents to accept many more kids and stop using birth control, which of course he plans to place on the highest drug tier in terms of costs. Santorum reasons that families will accept this tradeoff, and thereby do without the costly contraceptives if they're given compensation for the extra kids that will inevitably result. Not stated is that this triple indemnification will likely have to repealed after a year because his tax rates will be so low they will add more than another $5 trillion in deficits.

4) Leading to this next step where Santorum promises "$5 trillion in spending cuts over five years". These will likely be cuts to all the social programs, including Medicaid (which he will likely try to farm out to the states) Medicare, stopping the doc fix and making access cuts and Social Security(changing the COLA). He also makes it plain he wants to "cut the non-defense work force by 10%"

That means he wishes to add another 2 million unemployed to the rolls, and who knows if these folks will be able to get other jobs.

5) This leads to his next noted step to "reform entitlements". According to Rick:

"I plan to cut entitlement programs by 10 percent across the board"

In addition: he plans to "freeze their costs for four years, and block grant them to the states"

In other words, folks on Social Security and Medicare will expect to see their share of premium costs soar (i.e. if program costs are frozen and health inflation continues as expected, beneficiaries will have to pick up the tab). As for Social Security, with a less generous COLA and higher Medicare premiums (maybe $225-250 a month) it will essentially amount to a de facto cut to benefits.

Meanwhile, "block grants" means Santorum allows about $10 million per state, and that amount has to be divvied among all the Medicaid population for benefits. In Colo. this is nearly 1/2 million needy people, so we are talking about $20 benefit per person on average. Obviously this is much too low to get any care so that the entry thresholds will have to be made more rigorous to weed out most current beneficiaries, e.g. income less than $200 a month and 2 dependents, or what ever.

6) Repeal and replace "Obamacare": so look for your young adult kids to have to buy and pay for their own insurance which under Obama's Affordable Health Care plan they simply got under parents' policies. Also, if Santorum succeeds, look for insurance companies to go back to defining "pre-existing conditions" in order to cull the numbers in need as well as services.

7) Halve the corporate tax rate: Santorum insists he will drop it to 17.5% from its current 35%. But as I noted in a previous blog,

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/02/another-reason-corporations-merit-no.html

According to a special report in TIME (Feb. 20, p. 16), no corp. actually PAYS 35%. Rather, the effective corporate tax rate is now 12½ %.

This means if Santorum gets his wish, the effective rate will likely go down to 6% or less. In effect, granting corps. even vaster stories of money with which to ply our congress critters in lobbying efforts, not to mention to purchase "free speech" via super PACS.

Ah yes, Rick Santorum's economic agenda...one that only a Satan could love!

The Keystone XL Pipeline Scam: Be Glad Obama Scuttled It!

In a number of op-eds in today's papers (WSJ, Denver Post) President Barack Obama was ridiculed for not allowing himself to fall for the "Keystone XL" pipeline scam of bringing "energy and jobs" to 'Murica. Okay, in fairness let me rephrase that: for not allowing this pipeline to go through which would bring an abundance of energy and jobs to the nation without much of any environmental cost.

To his credit Obama nixed this odious deal, which will only bring jobs for the very few (maybe 21,000 if that) and major hellacious environmental costs that would be a hundred times greater than the Exxon Valdez disaster if major leaks of this crappy tar sands-based stuff leached out to the surrounding environs, or - god-forbid- the damned thing burst in one or more places.

Make no mistake, this stuff isn't called "tar sands oil" for nothing. It's god-awful nasty stuff and already there've been some small leaks that have sent this crud into small streams and lakes in Michigan, but no where near the scale of a major pipeline rupture. In addition, this isn't the high benefit EROEI ('Energy returned on energy invested') oil we've been using since the 1970s or so, with EROEI's of at least 8 or 9, but rather low grade stuff of maybe EROEI 1.3, very optimistically.

During the tar sands oil extraction process, vast amounts of water are needed to separate the extracted product, bitumen, from sand, silt, and clay. It takes three barrels of water to extract each single barrel of oil. At this rate, tar sands operations use roughly 400 million gallons of water a day. Ninety percent of this polluted water is dumped into large human-made pools, known as tailing ponds, after it’s used. These ponds are home to toxic sludge, full of harmful substances like cyanide and ammonia, which has worked its way into neighboring clean water supplies.

And when you add in the energy that would be required to mount major clean up operations - all the machines and oil-intensive devices that would have to be used, than that EROEI of 1.3 would rapidly descend to maybe 0.5 if that. In other words, having to use a gallon of oil to obtain a half gallon of energy benefit.

Are we overly worried here about such clean ups and possible ruptures? I don't think so. We already know TransCanada attempted to cut corners by seeking a safety waiver to build the pipeline with thinner-than-normal steel and to pump oil at higher-than-normal pressures. Thanks to the pressure exerted by Friends of the Earth and allies, the company withdrew its safety waiver application in August 2010. We also have NO assurance, none ...nada...that this pipeline if it ever does come through won't also have pressure-wall thickness issues.

In summer 2010, a million gallons of tar sands oil poured into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan from a pipeline run by another Canadian company, Enbridge. The spill exposed residents to toxic chemicals, coated wildlife and has caused long-term damage to the local economy and ecosystem.
In his criticism of Obama in today's Denver Post ('Obama's Zigs and Zags', p. 5B), Llewellyn King assures that he (King): "spoke with Canadian Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver shortly before Obama's first decision to delay the pipeline. Oliver said that if the decision wasn't favorable, Canada would build a pipeline across the Rockies to British Columbia and export it to China."

Well, let them go ahead! For one thing, anyone who's been to that region of Canada knows its mainly populated by Grizzlies and some ducks, and moose, but relatively few humans. Hence, the potential for impacts on human communities and health are not so great as the planned pipeline through the States (check out the map) which would conceivably affect up to 50 million people and their communities. So, we are talking chalk and cheese here.

King goes on to assert Obama's latest decision has "infuriated Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government which now says it will no longer rely entirely on the U.S. for its hydrocarbon sales."

Uh....let's not forget Harper is another conservative nimrod and douchebag and so is his government. So his being exercised at Obama or the U.S. is no biggie, and easily something we can all live with. What Americans need to do is to ask themselves what they want: additional energy at a possible astronomical cost to their health and welfare ....with polluted water, estuaries, and tens of thousands of new cancer cases per year...or a better environment and LESS energy use by themselves! It's a Hobson's choice but there it is!

And just WHO is pushing this thing on us? Giant oil corporations invested in Canada's tar sands and who have, as Bill Moyers stated last night on Bill Maher's Real Time, already contributed more than $47 million of campaign donations to Repukes and lobbying money to try to make it so. They are hoping that Americans will be too dumb or dense to see the hidden (and not so hidden) costs that will be extracted.

As for the abominable Repukes, they simply want to force a totally artificial deadline on Obama in return for cutting a deal on his proposed payroll tax cut as well as the prevention of cuts in payments to Medicare docs. If this Keystone XL pipeline is the price to be paid for those deals then it is a price too high, and hopefully Mr. Obama and the Dems will not give in. Let the Repukes, the conservative Harper government in Canada along with TransCanada and U.S. oil interests seeking to make a buck all go straight to Hell.