|
A recent
scientific study
has shown that, contrary to claims by the Canadian government and industry,
tar sands oil production is polluting the Athabasca River with "a highly
toxic brew of heavy metals." The study highlights just one of the dangers of
this method of oil production, and also calls into question the credibility
of those who support the project and claim it carries little risk.
The Guardian
magazine recently ranked Alberta tar sands oil development as one of the ten
most ecologically damaging projects on the planet. Producing a barrel of
this oil takes four tons of earth, contaminates 2-4 barrels of freshwater,
and releases three times as much global warming pollution as conventional
oil sources. Ultimately, The Guardian says "if proposed expansion
proceeds, it will result in the loss of vast tracts of boreal forest and
peat bogs of a territory the size of England."
The Department
of State took
public comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
through July 2.
Over 200 people attended the
three public hearings held in Nebraska in May, at Fairbury, York, and
Atkinson. At the hearings, Nebraska Wildlife Federation joined dozens of
other Nebraskans in raising important objections to the pipeline and its
possible impacts on the Ogallala Aquifer and other groundwater, Nebraska
rivers and wetlands, the fragile Sandhills soils, remnant native prairies,
greenhouse gases and the destruction of boreal forests in Canada.
The
Environmental Protection Agency sent a comment letter to the State
Department, saying the State Department's analysis was inadequate
The US
Department of State must complete the environmental review of the project,
and once that is complete, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will then make
a decision about whether the project is in the National Interest of the USA.
Sign our
petition to Secretary of State Clinton, President Obama, and Governor
Heineman on the Keystone XL pipeline
here. |
