评论
打印
JUDY WOODRUFF:And we turn to this weekend's protests and the big debate over the extension of an oil pipeline from Canada into the United States.
As the U.S. tries to navigate between clean energy and economic growth, as well as energy dependence vs. drilling, the president's upcoming decision is increasingly seen as a crucial test by all sides.
Thousands of people marched on the National Mall in Washington yesterday, braving a cold winter wind to take part in what organizers called the biggest climate rally in U.S. history. They called for President Obama to reject the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline.
PEG KAMENS, Protester: The reason I came here today is because I feel like President Obama is convincible. And I feel like, if we make a statement with our numbers and our passion, that he will get the message.
JUDY WOODRUFF:The Keystone project is designed to move crude oil, hundreds of thousands of barrels a day that would be extracted from the oil sands of Northern Alberta in Western Canada. The oil would be transported across several U.S. states to refineries and ports in Texas.
The company behind the 1,700-mile pipeline, TransCanada, has altered the route to largely bypass a water deposit in Nebraska. But protest organizers insisted the pipeline still threatens land it crosses and will mean even greater carbon pollution.
BILL MCKIBBEN, 350.Org: The president needs to think about what his legacy is going to be. Fifty years from now, no one is going to care about the fiscal cliff. They're going to ask, the Arctic melted in 2012, and then what did you do? And this is the chance to do the right thing.
JUDY WOODRUFF:The Keystone project has been pending for more than four years. In 2011, the president called for further study. But supporters of the multibillion-dollar pipeline have argued it will create thousands of jobs and reduce reliance on oil from the Middle East.
Last month, 44 Republicans in the U.S. Senate joined by nine Democrats called for the president to approve Keystone. Mr. Obama has given no direct signal about his intentions. But in his State of the Union address last week, he promised action on the broader climate issue.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.
But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change.
JUDY WOODRUFF:To that end, the administration is also mulling tougher rules to curb emissions from coal-fired plants in a push toward cleaner energy.
As for Keystone, the State Department oversees cross-border pipelines and could release its recommendation as early as March.
We have our own debate on the pending decision and the many issues at stake. Bob Deans is with the NRDC. That's the Natural Resources Defense Council, one of many groups organizing yesterday's protests. And Scott Segal is a lobbyist and partner with firm of Bracewell & Giuliani. The firm represents a number of energy companies pushing for the Keystone extension.
Gentlemen, welcome to you both.
SCOTT SEGAL, Bracewell & Giuliani: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF:So, Bob Deans, let me start with you. What is the main harm done if this pipeline extension happens?
BOB DEANS, Natural Resources Defense Council: Well, the main idea here is to take some of the dirtiest oil on the planet, pipe it through the breadbasket of America so it can be sent overseas out of the Gulf of Mexico.
It's not about American jobs. It's about profits for big oil companies. It's a bad idea. It needs to be denied.
JUDY WOODRUFF:But if it's going through a pipeline, what's the concern?
BOB DEANS:Well, we have had a lot of disasters with pipelines, of course.
The Kalamazoo River, 30 miles of that river was destroyed two years ago by a pipeline incident using these kinds of tar sands crude. It's bad stuff. And these accidents do put this heartland at risk. And the thousands, hundreds of thousands of jobs -- we have a quarter of a million farms and ranches in those great Plains states that your map just showed. Those are the real jobs in that region.
We need to protect them, not put them at risk.
JUDY WOODRUFF:And you're saying they would be harmed by ...
BOB DEANS:They would certainly be put at risk by having this tar sands crude going through there.
But even more importantly, Judy, we talked about climate change. This tar sands crude requires three to four times the carbon inputs to produce that conventional crude oil does. It's a disaster for climate change. We need to turn it down.
JUDY WOODRUFF:And, so, Scott Segal, he's raising a number of concerns having to do with the oil itself and the impact of the kind of work that would be done to get it out of those tar sands. What do you say in response?
SCOTT SEGAL:Well, I'm afraid I disagree with most of the discussion that's gone on so far.
First of all, if we are truly concerned about carbon, it seems to me building a state-of-the-art pipeline which is the most efficient way to get -- to move oil around is the best approach. To move that oil to the west and send it to China on tankers that are fueled by diesel, it leaves a much greater carbon footprint.
In addition, that oil will make it to the United States, whether there's a Keystone pipeline or not. And in the event it makes it to the United States, it will come by other forms of transportation which are far less energy-efficient, thus deepening that footprint.
