Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Advisor

Environmentalist want oil from Iran not Canada

Canada is the dirty old man.



Is anyone more hypocritical than a professional environmentalist? In case  anyone needs a hint, see this month’s exhibit: As North American environmental  activists throw all of their energy and resources into blocking Canada from  selling its oil to the United States, they have haven’t made a peep over Iran  increasing its own oil exports.

And one would think they’d care, as the environmentalists’ entire rationale  for opposing Keystone is that if a pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is  built, more carbon will be put into the atmosphere. But their problem here — and  often — is that the facts don’t support their claims.

Professional environmentalists don’t seem to mind that if this pipeline is  not built to the gulf, it could be built to China, where the oil will be used  anyway — and with less oversight by a government unconcerned with carbon  emissions and hostile to American interests. President Barack Obama’s Department  of State even agreed, saying earlier this month that  the fuel would be used whether or not Keystone is built.


Nor did professional environmentalists seem to care that the State Department’s final report pointed out  that the building or scuttling of the project won’t impact how much oil is  burned by our own gulf refineries — oil imports will simply come from other,  less friendly countries: “When this demand is not met by heavy  Canadian supplies in the model results, it is met by heavy crude from  Latin America and the Middle East.

Nor are professional environmentalists much bothered that Canada is an  ally of the United States, and it’s oil would create American jobs while posing minimal danger to the  environment; while Iran is a sworn enemy of the United States, and it’s oil  exports are refilling Iranian coffers while threatening security for the U.S.  and her allies.

For the past five years, environmentalists have spent millions to  block the pipeline through lobbying, activism, research and P.R. campaigns.  For the past five months, environmentalists have sustained a Washington, D.C. campaign, “Oh No  Canada,” calling our northern neighbors “the dirty old man of the climate  world.”

Read more:

1 Reply
Veteran Advisor

Re: Environmentalist want oil from Iran not Canada

Never heard that one. Everything I have read says that the big concern is that transcanada has a strong history of building shoddy pipelines with many deficient welds leading to large and expensive leaks.

Keystone I, a pipeline moving primarily tar sands from Alberta to the Midwest and Oklahoma, was TransCanada’s first crude oil pipeline. TransCanada pitched it as a state-of-the-art pipeline which would “meet or exceed world-class safety and environmental standards.” In its environmental risks assessment, the company forecast that Keystone I would leak no more than 1.4 times a decade and noted that it had agreed to 51 special conditions that would increase its safety.

When construction on the project began in 2008, reality began to sharply diverge from TransCanada’s rhetoric. As the Keystone I was being built, a pipeline inspector working for a TransCanada contractor, was alarmed by what he saw – cheap steel prone to cracking, bad welds, sloppy concrete jobs, poorly spaced rebar, and fudged pressure testing. When he reported these issues to TransCanada, he was ignored and ultimately fired.

"Keystone I started having problems as soon as it commenced operations in 2010. In its first year, the pipeline leaked 14 times, with the largest spill exceeding 21,000 gallons. Federal pipeline regulators were forced to intervene, issuing a Corrective Action Order (CAO) temporarily shutting the pipeline down as an imminent threat to life, safety and the environment. Keystone I became the newest pipeline in U.S. history to receive such an order – the previous contender was a 25 year old pipeline."