Why Would Government
Ignore Impact on Climate?
Two days after the release of the report, investigative [4]historian Eric Zuesse[4] wrote: "The study does discuss "Climate Change Impacts on the Proposed Project, ' but not the proposed project's impacts on climate change. It finds that climate change will have no significant impact upon either the construction, or the operation, of the Pipeline."
The State Department's environmental impact statement, executive summary section ES.5.5, tiptoes up to the critical question of tar sands oil development:
"Finally, climate change considerations--which are influenced by GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions--could affect the construction and operation of the proposed Project. GHG and climate change issues were the subject of many comments
received during the public scoping process for the proposed Project."
But there the analysis stops, like a shell game in which none of the shells conceal a pea.
The State Department statement (section E.S.5.5.2) concludes "that approval or denial of the proposes [Keystone] Project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area."
In other words, even if there were a pea under one of the shells, there's nothing to be done about it.
The State Department's analysis finds that there will be little impact on air quality or noise (sections 3.12 and 4.12) from the construction or operation of the pipeline. Even better (section 4.14), the "impact of climate change effects" on the construction and operation of the proposed Project itself" are virtually nil.
As the summary section (4.16) puts it:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
