The Western Organization of Resource Councils reminds me that the State Department is taking public comment on the revised Keystone XL Environmental Impact Statement until June 6. That's Monday!
- It's certainly not good enough to justify condemning private land for an unsafe pipeline that isn't needed.
- It fails to demonstrate the pipeline is really needed or in the national interest.
- It fails to consider the risks specific to pipelines carrying tar sands or carefully assess the potential for contamination of land and water.
When TransCanada proposed the first Keystone pipeline, Keystone 1, the company estimated that it would leak about once every seven to eleven years. The Keystone I pipeline has had eleven [or is it twelve now?] leaks and spills in one year, yet this Supplemental EIS has no Emergency Response Plan describing what TransCanada will do when there is a leak or spill [e-mail, WORC, 2011.06.01].
Congresswoman Noem may say yes to everything, but after all the leaks and eminent domain and corporate baloney, Keystone XL deserves a resounding no. Tell Uncle Sam we need clean water and farm land much more than we need Keystone XL!