Keystone XL Rallies

Last night rallies opposing the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline were held throughout the country. The pipeline, if all phases of the project are completed, will run from Hardisty, Alberta to Port Arthur, Texas and transport daily 830,000 gallons of heavy crude oil extracted from bitumen deposits in Canada. At least 100 spills are projected over the lifetime of the pipeline.

The rallies were called because the State Department released its final environmental impact statement (EIS) on Keystone on Friday (when news meant to be buried is usually released) and it was interpreted by most of the mainstream press to signal an approval of the pipeline by the Obama administration.

Secretary of State John Kerry is slated to make the call since Keystone crosses an international border, and then three months after that Obama will make the final decision; the Wall Street Journal reports that a final decision could come as early as this June.

The reason why the final EIS is being seen as a green light for the project is its conclusion that the dirty oil, absent Keystone, will find its way to market anyway by means of rail. Here's how Coral Davenport of the New York Times put it in this past Saturday's frontpage story:

The State Department released a report on Friday concluding that the Keystone XL pipeline would not substantially worsen carbon pollution, leaving an opening for President Obama to approve the politically divisive project. 

The department’s long-awaited environmental impact statement appears to indicate that the project could pass the criteria Mr. Obama set forth in a speech last summer when he said he would approve the 1,700-mile pipeline if it would not “significantly exacerbate” the problem of greenhouse gas emissions. Although the pipeline would carry 830,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to the Gulf Coast, the report appears to indicate that if it were not built, carbon-heavy oil would still be extracted at the same rate from pristine Alberta forest and transported to refineries by rail instead.

Bill McKibben of 350.org and others pushed back on this reading, saying that ample evidence exists in the EIS to justify Obama blocking the project. This from a story, "Pipeline Opponents’ Hopes Now Rest Largely on Kerry," that appeared the same day by Sarah Wheaton and Coral Davenport:

Still, opponents of the pipeline found some encouragement in the report, in passages that subtly vindicated their warnings.

“This report today reflects some grudging movement,” said Bill McKibben of 350.org, a group that has made opposition to the pipeline its signature issue. 

Activists pointed to a line in the report contending that the “total direct and indirect emissions associated with the proposed project would contribute to cumulative global greenhouse gas emissions.” 

In a conference call with reporters, Mr. McKibben said, “This report gives President Obama everything he needs in order to block this project.”

I had RSVP'd to attend the rally last night at the Federal Building downtown. But in a display of weakness, which is a recurrent pattern with me when it comes to attending political gatherings, I opted instead to get some takeout food and go home. After an unusually mild January, the weather has turned cold again, dipping down into the mid-30s; plus, I was feeling a little sleep-deprived from listening to the street revelry following Seattle's Super Bowl victory on Sunday night.

Anyhow, I'm sure I was not the only one to no-show; an ill omen, I would think. Without a huge display of popular opposition, it is a safe bet that Obama will approve Keystone XL. Signs point in that diecrtion. A couple key Democrat Senate seats (oil politicians Begich of Alaska and Landrieu of Louisiana) and possibly control of the Senate apparently hang in the balance of a green light.

The danger of approving Keystone is more existential for Democrats. What is remarkable about the anti-Keystone campaign is the extent to which all the big, mainstream environmental organizations -- NRDC, Sierra Club, FOE, League of Conservation Voters -- are on board and actively mobilizing their memberships. If Obama goes ahead and approves the pipeline he will be doing so based upon the tried-and-true reasoning that all these people -- vital Democratic constituents -- will fall back into line with the next election. Why? Because they have nowhere else to turn. This has been the pattern for decades, not only for conservationists but for labor unionists as well.

But we are now entering into different territory. Planetary crisis is a reality of which people are mindful. Labor is dying, and so too apparently are the days when go-along-to-get-along rules at the big enviro groups.

Next steps? Massive direct action coupled with a third-party political movement.

****

UPDATE: Here is a link to some Monday rally photos.