Fortunately for Viking residents and the area’s wildlife, it appears that this accident was contained before it became a full-blown disaster like the one in Arkansas: even so, around 600 gallons of oil are estimated to have contaminated the area. The line that burst goes by the boring-by-design name “Line 2,” but the adjoining “Alberta Clipper” pipeline is also a crucial element of this story. DeSmogBlog has more:

The Viking pump station also receives oil from the Alberta Clipper (aka Line 67 pipeline) that carries heavy crude oil and tar sands bitumen from the Alberta tar sands region south from Hardisty to Superior, Wisconsin and refineries in the midwestern United States. It is unclear whether the product that spilled was tar sands-derived diluted bitumen.

Animal rehabilitation workers clean oil from a goose’s wings after the 2010 Enbridge spill (Photo: US Fish & Wildlife Service/MI DNRE)

The Alberta Clipper is already enormous — carrying nearly 20 million gallons daily to Midwest refineries — but it’s currently under review for a truly giant expansion that would double its capacity and make it the biggest tar sands pipeline in the United States. That’s right — bigger than Keystone 1, Keystone XL, or the Northeast pipeline, capable of pumping 37 million gallons of tar sands oil every day through the Great Lakes region.

You may be asking yourself, “Enbridge, huh? Why is that name so familiar?” Let’s just say this isn’t the company’s first brush with fame: while producing our report Importing Disaster, we discovered that Enbridge was responsible for more than 800 spills in the US and Canada between 1999 and 2010, totaling almost seven million gallons of oil. The biggest of these, of course, was the Kalamazoo River disaster in 2010, when a pipeline linked to the Alberta Clipper burst and sent over a million gallons of tar sands coursing through the community of Marshall, Michigan. That cleanup effort has taken almost three years and nearly a billion dollars, but the Environmental Protection Agency says that it’s still not finished and recently told Enbridge to get back to work to dredge more oil out of the river.

As NWF’s Beth Wallace has detailed, Enbridge isn’t particularly interested in improving its safety record:

Rather than focus on safety and cleanup, Enbridge is recklessly moving ahead with plans to expand their pipeline network in the Great Lakes region and the Northeast, and to double down on high carbon fuel that is proving nearly impossible to clean from Michigan’s waters.

With this latest leak on their resume, it’s fair to ask what more the company can do to earn anything but a slap on the wrist. A good first step would be for the US State Department (the agency in charge of the Alberta Clipper permit) to broaden their study to Enbridge’s entire Great Lakes pipeline system, because expanding Alberta Clipper means that whole system will be exposed to a massive increase in oil volumes — and with it, an even higher chance of disaster.

Hundreds of species were imperiled the last time an Enbridge pipeline burst in the Great Lakes, and we can’t afford a repeat. Speak up for wildlife threatened by Enbridge’s Midwest expansion plans — tell the State Department to stop Alberta Clipper!

Learn more about the Enbridge pipeline boom at NWF.org.

fails to reflect the full environmental impacts of the proposed pipeline. We strongly encourage the State Department to reevaluate the SEIS and its assessment of the proposed pipeline’s impacts on climate change, our natural resources, our economy, and low-income and minority communities.

This is no surprise to anyone who follows this blog (I know you’re out there) and it echoes official comments from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), released yesterday, that cast serious doubt on the State Department’s analysis and the future of the project. EPA concluded that State had failed to meaningfully consider multiple factors, foremost among them the climate impacts and spill risks posed by the 1,700 mile tar sands pipeline.

It’s hard to ignore 50,000 protesters in your front yard — and dozens of members of Congress were obviously paying attention (Photo: Josh Lopez/350.org)

>>>Read the full letter from Congress here

A Million Voices Against KXL

It’s not just agencies and members of Congress who think the tar sands pipeline is a bad idea. Capping off the outpouring of opposition, National Wildlife Federation and other groups just delivered over a million comments from the public, telling the Obama Administration “reject the pipeline!” NWF’s Robyn Carmichael has more — and as she puts it, the comments “came from Americans from all across the country and all walks of life, but they carried one common message: that this risky and unnecessary project puts our wildlife, water, land, and communities in jeopardy.”

Thank you to the tens of thousands of NWF members (and many others) who have spoken up for people and wildlife during this rollercoaster campaign. The public comment period for the environmental review is over, but there will be more opportunities to help so stay tuned!

Your donations make a big difference in our efforts to protect wildlife from habitat loss and the effects of global warming.

To learn more about Keystone XL and how you can help, visit NWF.org/tarsands

Coming on Earth Day, it’s welcome news that the agency is trying to protect Americans and wildlife from a huge mistake.

A blue heron covered in tar sands oil from the Kalamazoo River pipeline disaster (Photo: Michigan DEQ)

This isn’t a new position for EPA — at several key points during the Keystone XL saga, officials have made it clear that their colleagues at the State Department need to go back to the drawing board. Partly, this is due to the fact that State isn’t used to leading big environmental studies; it’s only a quirk of the system that put them in charge of Keystone. But with a decision this important, with so much riding on a thorough analysis, we can’t afford growing pains.

Americans speak out

In addition to the environmental review, the government is also conducting something called a “National Interest Determination,” which will help decide whether or not Keystone is a good idea, based not just on environmental factors but also on things like diplomacy, energy security, and jobs (or lack thereof). Americans are already letting the White House know what they think: on Tuesday, a coalition of conservation groups, indigenous peoples, public health advocates and landowners along the pipeline route will deliver over a million comments from the public opposing construction of this risky project.

As NWF’s Jim Murphy put it in the Los Angeles Times:

“The Environmental Protection Agency’s letter shows that despite multiple tries, the State Department is incapable of doing a proper analysis of the climate, wildlife, clean water, safety and other impacts of this disastrous and unneeded project. President Obama has more than enough information to determine the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline is not in America’s national interest and he should reject it.”

President Obama gets to make the ultimate decision, but John Kerry (the U.S. Secretary of State) is a long-time champion against climate change, and could still sway his agency’s ultimate recognition. A million anti-Keystone comments, plus a timely assist from EPA, could tilt the balance in our favor.

Your donations make a big difference in our efforts to protect wildlife from habitat loss and the effects of global warming.

To learn more about Keystone XL and how you can help, visit NWF.org/tarsands

Endangered Whooping Cranes – like this adult with its chick – are one of many species threatened by tar sands pipelines. (US Fish & Wildlife Service)

National Wildlife Federation board member David Carruth, an Arkansas resident who has spent the last few weeks assisting in the response to the disastrous Pegasus pipeline spill, will be speaking at a press conference to highlight the dangers of tar sands for wildlife and public health. And David, along with Nebraska Wildlife Federation president Duane Hovorka, will testify at the hearing. adding their voices to the hundreds of attendees telling the State Department to deny the pipeline.

You can watch a live stream of the event here, and I’ll be back with a recap of the hearing later this week so stay tuned. If you haven’t already sent a message to the White House, NOW IS THE TIME! The public comment period closes on Monday, April 22 so tell the President and Secretary Kerry “NO KXL!”

Speak up for people and wildlife at risk from tar sands — Tell the White House to say NO! to Keystone XL.

Activists carry a 500-foot inflated “pipeline” at the head of the crowd (Photo: Avelino Maestas/NWF)

Often, inside the Beltway, it can be hard to separate the noise and chatter out from what what Americans really care about, and Keystone XL definitely falls into that category. The oil industry has spent years fabricating a series of myths around the pipeline: that it will boost U.S. energy security, for example, or take a big bite out of the unemployment rate, or that it’s an environmentally safe project. None of those are true, of course, but they somehow gave Congress the idea that Keystone would be a great idea, and put President Obama in between a rock (Big Oil and their bottomless wallets) and a hard place (the coalition of conservationists, tribes, and landowners who oppose the pipeline).

Photo: Peter LaFontaine/NWF

Last week we told you why we think President Obama will make the right call and stand strong against tar sands, but it’s crucial that we don’t turn the volume down yet. Already, groups are planning another rally for Presidents Day (February 18th) so keep an eye out for more information soon…Because who knows? Maybe your voice will be the one that scraps this project once and for all. Even better, the NFL season will be over by then so I won’t have to choose between pizza celery and keeping the world safe for people and wildlife.

Stand up against tar sands! Tell President Obama to say “NO!” to the Keystone XL pipeline.

(Photo: Todd Benson)

Here are some of the biggest myths about KXL, and the facts behind this massive threat to our wildlife and the planet’s future.

MYTH #1: Keystone is a jobs juggernaut.

FACT: On their website, TransCanada asserts that Keystone XL will create 20,000 construction and manufacturing jobs, and 118,000 “spin-off” jobs. Pro-Keystone politicians have consistently parroted these claims, but TransCanada’s job numbers are complete fabrications: The Washington Post fact-checkers gave these claims two “Pinocchios” and, according to the Cornell University Global Labor Institute, “The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. is not substantiated” and “KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at all in putting Americans back to work.” In fact, the State Department’s own study, which many pipeline opponents felt was tilted pro-industry, suggests that far fewer jobs will be created and most of them will be temporary and non-local.

MYTH #2: Keystone XL will improve America’s energy security.

FACT: The Keystone XL pipeline is designed for one thing—to send oil from Canada to the Texas Gulf coast, and from there to overseas markets. According to retired Brigadier General Steven M. Anderson (the US Army’s senior logistician in Iraq from 2006-2007), the pipeline “would set back our renewable energy efforts for at least two decades, much to our enemies’ delight. It would ensure we maintain our oil addiction and delay making the tough decisions regarding energy production, management and conservation that we need to start making today.” And as Anderson makes clear, “Canadian oil won’t replace imports from hostile countries because Texas refiners are serving global demand rather than domestic need.”

MYTH #3: Keystone XL is safe.

US Fish & Wildlife officers work to rescue birds after a massive 2010 tar sands pipeline rupture in Michigan (photo: USFWS-Midwest Region)

MYTH #4: The government review process for Keystone XL has been fair and thorough.

FACT: Perhaps most troubling, we still do not know whether the US State Department’s new assessment (in process now) will include consideration of climate impacts – the single biggest reason to stop this pipeline. And in the first go-round, State (the agency responsible for vetting the project) conducted a sham review during its analysis of TransCanada’s original proposal. State’s activities were tainted by a conflict of interest in favor of the project and they failed to assess pipeline safety issues with any rigor, inadequately consulted numerous Tribal nations, and neglected to protect Americans from eminent domain threats made by TransCanada. This included preferential treatment for TransCanada’s chief lobbyist (a former aide to State Department Secretary Clinton), as well as outsourcing much of the review process to a company who counts TransCanada as a major client.

MYTH #5: Keystone XL will reduce our energy prices.

FACT: According to its own secret documents submitted to the Canadian government, TransCanada expects the pipeline to increase gas prices in the Midwest by up to 15 cents per gallon. Currently, a surplus of gas in the region means that our prices stay stable. If the pipeline is built oil companies will be able to send their product to the Gulf coast for export, which will reduce this surplus and drive up costs for Midwestern consumers.

MYTH #6: Canadian tar sands will be developed anyway, even if we don’t build the pipeline.

FACT: Right now, Canada’s oil companies are stuck with two buyers: Canada and the United States. Keystone XL is by far the easiest route for the industry to send crude oil through the US to international ports (and access to lucrative foreign markets), which would drive further investment in the tar sands region. It’s a bit like the line from “Field of Dreams” — If you build it, they will come. The Canadian government has made a lot of noise about bypassing the US entirely in favor of the proposed “Northern Gateway” pipeline that would stretch from Alberta to Canada’s west coast, but its chances are shaky due to strong opposition in British Columbia and from native communities along its path. Any western route may face decades of litigation, by which point the tar sands may be obsolete as clean energy technology matures. Other pipelines are being proposed in the US, but they face the same level of opposition as Keystone.

Keystone XL threatens iconic species like the Sandhill crane (photo: Richard Hurd)

MYTH #7: The pipeline poses no risk to the Ogallala aquifer.

FACT: The Ogallala – a vast underground reservoir – is one of the world’s most important sources of freshwater for drinking and irrigation. In Nebraska, TransCanada’s proposed route cuts directly across the aquifer and through fragile ecosystems geologically similar to the Sandhills region, threatening the livelihoods of local farmers and ranchers, wildlife and millions of people who depend upon the Ogallala. Tar sands oil contains high concentrations of benzene and other carcinogens, which raises the potential for widespread water contamination.

MYTH #8: Keystone XL will generate billions in tax revenue for American federal, state, and local governments.

FACT: TransCanada claims that KXL would generate nearly $6 billion in property and other taxes, but the Cornell study repeatedly shoots down TransCanada’s economic claims, saying that “What is being offered by the proponents is advocacy to build support for KXL, rather than serious research aimed to inform public debate and responsible decision making.” Like their jobs figures, this tax revenue estimate seems to have materialized out of thin air, especially when you realize that the original Keystone pipeline has fallen far short of projections for tax revenue.

Decision Time

Regardless of who wins the election in November, tar sands and other forms of “extreme energy” like deepwater drilling and natural gas “fracking” will continue to dominate the conversation. But in our rush to feed our appetite for cheap power, it’s essential that we don’t lose sight of sustainable answers like strong automobile gas standards, energy efficiency, and next-generation technologies like solar and offshore wind — the real answers to many of the problems that Big Oil has dumped in our laps. Keystone XL would come with an enormous price tag for our health and North America’s wildlife, would have a devastating impact on Earth’s climate, and would do next to nothing for our energy security or fiscal problems. It’s an easy decision.

Speak up to protect wildlife and our communities from the threat of tar sands oil! Tell your elected officials to stop the Keystone XL pipeline and halt Big Oil’s plans to keep us hooked on the world’s dirtiest fuel.

Learn more at NWF.org/tarsands

The Proposed Alternative

The proposed route changes for the Keystone XL pipeline, as announced Sept. 5, 2012.

NWF’s Statement

Joe Mendelson, National Wildlife Federation climate and energy policy director, said:

“The reason TransCanada needs to keep rerouting the Keystone XL map is because it’s just a bad idea. Each new map amounts to a catalog of which property owners will suffer, and what habitat will be placed at risk. The best approach is to ditch Keystone XL entirely and embrace clean energy solutions that don’t spill or explode.”

For more information, visit NWF’s Keystone XL page.

Same Problems, Same Risks

Jane Kleeb with Bold Nebraska says,

“The new route still risks our land, water and property rights. The new route still crosses high water tables, sandy soil which leads to higher vulnerability of contamination and still crosses the Ogallala Aquifer, the lifeblood of Nebraska’s economy.”

Let’s get rid of this project once and for all. 

Let the U.S. State Department know you want to protect people and wildlife from this dangerous tar sands pipeline!

With a new permit application, Keystone remains very much a threat, and Congress is debating a measure that would force construction of the dangerous project. But you can help: Speak up now to protect people and wildlife at risk, and prove to Big Oil that their money can’t buy our votes.

Graphic: Peter LaFontaine/National Wildlife Federation

Speak up now to protect people and wildlife at risk from tar sands and the Keystone XL pipeline.

Syncrude Aurora Oil Sands Mine, Canada. (Photo: Peter Essick)

“After delaying the $7 billion project past the November 2012 election, Obama was compelled by Congress to decide by February 21 on whether to approve the pipeline that would sharply boost the flow of oil from Canada’s oil sands.

“Should Obama reject the pipeline, Senate Republicans would look at a bill that would force the go-ahead for work to begin.”

It’s the same story in the House, where Keystone XL backers like Rep. Lee Terry are threatening to push “any and all legislative options.” The message, in plain English: We want the President to make a decision. Unless he disagrees with us. In which case, we’ll make our own decision.

Are Big Oil Profits Shaping Policy?

Now, this news really doesn’t come as a surprise–Obama’s political opponents have used Keystone XL as a cudgel for months now — but it makes it painfully clear, once again, who’s calling the shots in this town. As National Wildlife Federation’s Jeremy Symons puts it:

We have to remember this is about one thing: Big Oil’s profits. These Congressmen are tripping over themselves in the race for campaign contributions, and they know where the money is.

So what’s the going rate for a pro-polluter agenda in Congress? Big Oil’s friends in the House–among them Speaker John Boehner — have reaped over $12 million from the oil & gas industry in just the last 2 years. And according to OpenSecrets.org, the six senators behind the new Keystone bill have accepted more than $3 million in campaign contributions from the oil & gas industry.

Speaker John Boehner seems to have a lot in common with Big Oil honcho Jack Gerard lately. (Photos: Gage Skidmore/Energy Tomorrow)

You can help! Speak up now and tell Obama to stand strong against Big Oil >>