Obama Rejects Keystone Pipeline, Saying It Will “Not Serve the National”

Democrats and unions who supported the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline blasted President Barack Obama after he announced Thursday he was rejecting the project following a seven-year federal review.

The Obama administration’s decision Friday to kill the pipeline project – in part over concerns about “dirtier crude oil” from Canada – throws the spotlight on the new Liberal government and how it will balance energy development and environmental protection leading into an worldwide climate change summit in Paris at the end of the month.

The pipeline was widely opposed by several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and 350.org, which considered the Keystone XL Pipeline as a step backwards for climate change and would only encourage consumers to continue to rely on fossil fuels. Johnny Isakson called the decision wrong for America, and said the project “would create American jobs, ensure America’s energy security and reinforce relations with our largest trading partner.” Sen.

TransCanada first applied for Keystone permits 2,604 days ago in September 2008 – shortly before Obama was elected. “After dragging his feet for years on the Keystone pipeline, the president missed an opportunity to strengthen America’s energy security”, Sen.

“There are 10 more projects at the Department of State and we need timely decisions on these projects”.

And Dakota Rural Action vice chair John Harter says he’s deeply grateful for the rejection of the Keystone XL Pipeline.

Mr. Obama is correct that constructing the pipeline wouldn’t necessarily have lowered gas prices or increased U.S.jobs. It’s an important driver of economic growth and even President Obama’s State Department says it will create over 42,000 jobs.

In the president’s speech, he said the oil pipeline would not make a meaningful long-term contribution to the economy.

President Obama took seven years to make this decision. “I think that his (Pres. Obama’s) main point that the pipeline wasn’t going to help economically at all, is false”.

However, he also questioned the decision, stating that the decision contradicts the stated goal of Obama’s opposition, which was to avoid contributing to so-called anthropogenic climate change. “Public opposition to Energy East and other tar sands pipelines gets stronger by the day and any reasonable climate plan is doomed to failure if the booming emissions from the tar sands aren’t reigned in”, said Mike Hudema, climate and energy campaigner with Greenpeace Canada. “What they don’t recognize is that if there is oil to be sold, it will be sold, perhaps to a few country that cares less about the environment”.

A prominent environmentalist in our region agrees but many Republicans say the move is a bad one for the American people.