Massive tar sands oil pipeline no longer sure bet for Big Oil; pivotal Obama administration decision nears

The Keystone XL pipeline, proposed by TransCanada to transport tar sands oil from Canada to Houston, faces significant opposition from U.S. lawmakers, grassroots organizers, and federal agencies. The EPA gave the State Department's draft Environmental Impact Statement a failing grade for omitting global warming impacts. Concerns include the potential contamination of the Ogallala Aquifer in Nebraska and the higher carbon emissions associated with tar sands oil compared to conventional oil. The document highlights controversies surrounding Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's perceived bias and her ties to TransCanada's lead lobbyist, Paul Elliott.

• The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued its lowest rating for the State Department's draft Environmental Impact Statement on the Keystone XL project, specifically noting the "complete omission of global warming impacts."
• Opposition to the pipeline has solidified in the U.S. Congress, with 51 members of the House of Representatives and 13 senators expressing strong concerns regarding environmental impacts.
• Grassroots resistance is focused on specific regional risks, such as the potential for oil spills to contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides drinking and agricultural water for 80 percent of Nebraskans.
• The document argues that tar sands oil is more damaging than conventional oil, stating it emits more climate-warming emissions and toxic air pollutants, and that the pipeline would result in emissions equivalent to adding over six million new cars to U.S. roads.
• The transparency of the review process has been questioned due to the relationship between Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Paul Elliott, TransCanada's lead lobbyist and a former campaign aide to Clinton, particularly after the State Department denied a FOIA request for their correspondence.
• In Canada, indigenous First Nations have organized against the tar sands extraction industry, citing the poisoning of water resources and the endangerment of their way of life.

APA

Moore, A. (2011). Massive tar sands oil pipeline no longer sure bet for Big Oil; pivotal Obama administration decision nears. Friends of the Earth. https://foe.org/news/2011-01-massive-tar-sands-oil-pipeline-no-longer-sure-bet-fo/

Chicago

Moore, Alex. Massive tar sands oil pipeline no longer sure bet for Big Oil; pivotal Obama administration decision nears. Friends of the Earth, 2011. https://foe.org/news/2011-01-massive-tar-sands-oil-pipeline-no-longer-sure-bet-fo/.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Moore |first1=Alex |title=Massive tar sands oil pipeline no longer sure bet for Big Oil; pivotal Obama administration decision nears |publisher=Friends of the Earth |date=20 January 2011 |url=https://foe.org/news/2011-01-massive-tar-sands-oil-pipeline-no-longer-sure-bet-fo/ |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{moore2011massive, author = {Moore, Alex}, title = {{Massive tar sands oil pipeline no longer sure bet for Big Oil; pivotal Obama administration decision nears}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth}, year = {2011}, month = jan, url = {https://foe.org/news/2011-01-massive-tar-sands-oil-pipeline-no-longer-sure-bet-fo/}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }