Photo: Emma Cassidy/tarsandsaction

• It’s the most extreme KXL legislation the House has voted on. That’s really saying something, considering the half-dozen other terrible bills that have popped up over the last couple years. Not only would it remove the decision from the President’s hands, but it would override the authority and oversight responsibilities of the US State Department, the Department of the Interior, and the Army Corps of Engineers. The Environmental Protection Agency, which has an important role to play in the State Department review, would also be ignored.
• It relies upon outdated science. Imagine if your doctor wrote you a prescription based on your medical chart from years ago — inconceivable, right? But that’s essentially what Rep. Terry wants to do for Keystone. The State Department issued an analysis in 2011 for the first Keystone XL application, but TransCanada (the pipeline builder) revised its route and submitted an application for a new project in 2012. Despite this, H.R. 3 would use the 2011 analysis to fulfill legal requirements.
• Just in case there was any doubt about its anti-environment intentions, Rep. Terry’s bill would force all legal challenges to go through one of the country’s most conservative courts, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
• It’s essentially an earmark, which is to say a favor for a specific company (TransCanada). But it would also set a dangerous precedent for other tar sands pipelines that the industry is pushing around the U.S. — in the Great Lakes watershed, the farm belt, Gulf coast, and even New England.

Regardless of your opinion of the pipeline itself (and let’s not forget just how dangerous KXL is for wildlife and our climate) this bill is a massive overreach by Big Oil’s allies in Congress. The White House, by law, is supposed to oversee international pipelines, and while we’ve had our disagreements about how well they’ve conducted their review, at least it’s given citizens the opportunity to weigh in. In April, over a million public comments were submitted in opposition to the project — but Rep. Terry’s bill would throw those comments into the proverbial paper shredder and put a big rubber stamp on TransCanada’s application.

As Larry Schweiger, NWF’s president and CEO, put it:

This bill puts the interests of a foreign energy company ahead of more than 1 million Americans who have expressed concern for our nation’s wildlife, energy security and public health. It is a bad bill that caters to polluters, not people.

Given how anti-environmental the House of Representatives has become, we expect this bill to pass, but there are still a number of key Congressmen and women who could vote either way — and how they vote sends an important message about their conservation values. Your voice can help! Call or email your representative and tell them to vote NO on H.R. 3, the Northern Route Approval Act.

To learn more about the threats posed to wildlife and public health by pipelines like Keystone XL, visit NWF.org/tarsands.

Mt. Wonalancet, NH, not far from the route of the Portland-Montreal Pipeline (photo: Chris Schoenboem)

Fighting back against Big Oil

Fortunately, New Englanders aren’t known to let themselves get trampled on. Local conservation groups, public health experts and many others has been fighting back against Exxon, bringing widespread attention to the project — enough that we have the support of nearly the entire Congressional delegation from those three states (Senator Ayotte, we’re still waiting on ya). We even managed to get 1,500 people to a rally in Portland back in frigid January, the biggest gathering of any kind in 25 years. Suffice to say, New Englanders care, and we don’t want this dangerous substance pumped through our rivers and forests, threatening species like moose and black bears and contributing to climate change.

The problem is, the US State Department (which is tasked with overseeing the pipeline) doesn’t necessarily notice anything amiss and hasn’t the told the company it can’t proceed without a new permit. The State Department needs to make it clear: if Exxon wants to bring poisonous, climate-wrecking tar sands across Northern New England, the impacts are going to be given a hard look and approval is going to needed. It’s a common sense requirement, just making sure we know the threats and the particulars before giving the green light to Exxon, but State hasn’t gotten involved yet because the company hasn’t made a formal proposal.

And that’s the catch-22: unless the State Department tells them to formalize their plans, Exxon might never get around to filing the paperwork — and they’ve already told regional officials they don’t have to. They’re more than happy to act like the cartoon cat burping up feathers, shrugging its shoulders when you ask what happened to Tweety Bird. But this is real life, and New Englanders want to protect their region and wildlife from spills and climate change.  All risk and no reward does not interest New Hampshire, or Vermont or Maine for that matter.

Mr. Smith (and a bunch more) goes to Washington

New England and DC — culture-wise — may sometimes feel like oil and water, but when actual oil and actual water are in the mix, it’s worth a trip to the nation’s capitol. On Monday, a group from Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont came down to Washington, DC to tell their stories to State Department officials in person. It wasn’t your usual DC lobby trip: Fishermen, retired oil industry lawyers, and a handful of conservationists all made the rounds of Capitol Hill, meeting with agencies and Congressional offices with a simple request: Can someone PLEASE make sure this tar sands plan is carefully reviewed?

Our hometown lobby team at the State Department (photo: Peter LaFontaine/NWF)

Pushing toxic, spill-prone tar sands through Exxon’s pipeline across Maine is an all-risk, no-reward proposition. The health of Maine people, our economy, and our way of life, depend on clean water for drinking, tourism, our fishing industry, and recreation. - Lisa Pohlmann, Natural Resources Council of Maine

We plan to keep the heat on Exxon and the State Department, and our group also got a chance to sit down with (deep breath…) the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, to talk about updating our nation’s safety standards for tar sands projects like the Northeast pipeline and Keystone XL. After Mayflower — and Kalamazoo, before that — we can’t trust the industry to operate safely, or even to tell us what they have planned for our back yards.

It can be hard to tell with federal agencies, but I think State got the message.

Tell the US State Department to protect New England’s wildlife and communities from this dangerous and polluting project. Say “NO!” to the Portland-Montreal tar sands pipeline.

Majorities of senators–including Senators King and Collins–voted to support key Clean Air Act provisions allowing the Environmental Protection Agency to limit the amount of industrial carbon and mercury pollution fouling our skies.

Congress shouldn’t use the budget to cut important public health protections against air pollution, and Maine Senator Angus King and Senator Susan Collins both deserve our thanks for opposing these amendments.

Thank Senator King for Climate Votes

Tell Senator King “Thank you for voting in-line with your concern about climate change by supporting the Clean Air Act!” on Facebook.

 Send him a tweet saying Thanks @SenAngusKing for your support of climate & @EPAgov during budget votes.”

Sen. King’s votes were clearly in line with his stated concerns about climate change and support for the Clean Air Act.

Thank Senator Collins for Her Climate Vote

  Tell Senator Collins “Thank you for putting Maine’s interests ahead of party politics by voting against the last attack on the Clean Air Act” by leaving a comment on one of her Facebook posts.

 Send her a tweet saying “Thanks @SenatorCollins for your support of climate & @EPAgov during budget votes. Pls step up on #KXL tar sands pipeline.”

Sen. Collins deserves special recognition because she put Maine’s interests ahead of party politics by voting against this attack on the Clean Air Act. She was the only Republican to cross party lines and support these common-sense clean air rules.

Congress Must Champion Clean Air

Polls show super-majorities of the American people support action on air pollution. Two-thirds of voters say elected officials should take steps now to reduce the impact of climate change on future generations, according to a Zogby post-election poll last November.

We need members of Congress to step up and champion clean air standards instead of looking for ways to undermine these vital clean air protections. Congress should protect the health and well-being of the people they represent, not the economic bottom line of big polluters.

As the Environmental Protection Agency works to finalize landmark limits on industrial carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act, the message is clear: The American people support climate action. Let’s get this done.

NTSB Photo – Ruptured Enbridge tar sands pipeline, Line 6B

Big Oil is trying to keep this project under the radar and avoid a scrutinizing presidential permitting process. A presidential permit is required for any project that crosses the American border and since the Exxon & Enbridge pipeline would cross into Canada, the permit requires that the administration assess the project and allow for public discussion (think Keystone XL).

Exxon & Enbridge Pipeline Project Under Scrutiny

Legislators from Vermont, Maine, & New Hampshire are joining tens of thousands of Northeast residents in speaking out against this proposed project. Out of the 12 northeast congressional members in the pipeline right of way states (VT, ME, NH), only Senator Kelly Ayotte from New Hampshire has yet to stand with her community in opposing the project. Members are sending letter after letter after letter urging Secretary Kerry to require a new presidential permit for the proposed Exxon & Enbridge pipeline project.

When Senators Susan Collins and Angus King of Maine were visited by the tar sands lobby (including the pipeline director for the American Petroleum Institute) a few short weeks ago, the lobby were told to be prepared for lengthy and appropriate government scrutiny over the project.

King told the group that reversing the flow of the Portland-Montreal Pipe Line “is presidential-permit-worthy. And it’s up to the petroleum industry to convince me otherwise.”

Collins, in a prepared statement Tuesday, recalled that the pipeline officials “were not definitive in response to my questions” about exactly what they were up to.

“Should the company decide to seek approval for this new use,” Collins added, “I would expect that appropriate environmental impact reviews would be completed.”

Moose photo by Rick Libbey

Protecting Moose from Dirty Tar Sands

The Exxon & Enbridge pipeline project runs through important moose habitat in New England. If this dangerous project is not stopped, toxic tar sands oil would threaten the waterways where moose live–and would fuel more tar sands operations in Canada that are destroying the boreal forests and polluting fresh water.

Speak up against the risks that the Northeast tar sands pipeline poses to wildlife and our communities>>>

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

Although many students are also ramping up for exams and summer internships, all across the country student activists hosted earth day events and actions to honor this planet and bring more people into the fight to protect it. In Michigan it looks like it was also a nice opportunity to spend some time outside, appreciating nature and good friends:

Photo from Connor Meston, MSU student.

And of course, Earth Day isn’t the only day students are hosting awesome events and taking action to make our world a more sustainable one. Most of these students are engaged in campaigns that work every day to undertake important sustainability goals on campus, like ending the sale of bottled water, transitioning to renewable energy, and divesting from fossil fuels. Stand in solidarity with these students by taking action today too! Take a minute to prevent oil spills in the Great Lakes by voicing your opposition to Enbridge’s tar sands pipelines. 

Bike billboards are circulating in DC to show that over 1 million comments were generated against Keystone XL. Photo: League of Conservation Voters

KXL Opponents Make Voices Heard

Following the close of the 45-day public comment period on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) of the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline, more than one million comments—including  nearly 100,000 from National Wildlife Federation supporters—were delivered to the U.S. State Department. These messages 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, and President Obama and Secretary Kerry should reject it.

This impressive total follows hundreds of opponents that testified—including ranchers, farmers and landowners who would be directly impacted by the pipeline—at the State Department’s lone public hearing last week in Grand Island, Nebraska, despite a spring storm that brought sleet and snow. And earlier this year, more than 40,000 people descended on our nation’s capital to call for bold action by President Obama to tackle the climate crisis and reject Keystone XL.

The EPA Weighs In

Echoing these same serious concerns, yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its own comments on the DEIS, giving the project a score of 2—meaning “insufficient” – and rating the environmental impact of Keystone XL as “environmentally objectionable.” In a letter to the State Department, the EPA urged State to conduct a more thorough analysis of oil spill risks and alternative pipeline routes, as well as greenhouse gas emissions that will result from increased tar sands production.

Oiled duck from Mayflower Ark. oil spill. Photo by Lauren Ray.

Just earlier this month, the pipeline rupture in Arkansas that spilled at least 210,000 gallons of tar sands oil—forcing evacuations, and leaving wildlife coated in toxic oil and struggling to survive—raised new concerns about pipeline safety and the risks associated with transporting corrosive tar sands oil. The Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would carry almost nine times as much tar sands oil per day as the pipeline that burst in Arkansas.

What’s Next

Now, the State Department will incorporate comments from the public and federal agencies and release their final environmental report this summer, at which point President Obama will have 90 days to determine whether or not Keystone XL is in the national interest.

While momentum is on our side, the fight doesn’t stop here. Keep an eye out for upcoming opportunities to speak up against the Keystone XL pipeline this summer, as well as more ways you can take action to protect wildlife from dangerous tar sands oil.

Tweet it! 45 days, 1 million comments, 1 movement. The message #NoKXL couldn’t be clearer to @barackobama: Reject #KeystoneXL!

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

South Haven, Michigan – Lake Michigan by Mic Stolz

Web of Pipelines Put Wildlife, Communities at Risk

Despite major issues with pipeline safety regulations and safety regulators telling Enbridge their pipelines are not safe, Enbridge has been allowed to max out pipelines running in, around and through the Great Lakes, so they can increase profit and eventually feed international markets with tar sands. Some of the pipelines being pushed to their limits are 60 years old and run under the Great Lakes for miles!

New and existing tar sands pipelines threaten the Great Lakes. These Lakes are the economic backbone for surrounding states and the freshwater drinking source for millions.

However, Enbridge has finally hit a roadblock that requires public input for one of their lines crossing the U.S. and Canada border – known as Alberta Clipper or Line 67. Enbridge is required to obtain a presidential permit because they plan to greatly increase the amount of tar sands being imported. This permit opens up a door for public comment, which finally gives concerned citizens opportunity to have a voice and to become involved.

Stop Reckless Tar Sands Pipeline Expansion

Now is the time to stand up against these plans and tell the State Department that you strongly oppose Enbridge being allowed to expand their pipelines, which will bring the Great Lakes larger spills and more pollution from refining!

It is critical that we tell the State Department that we value our resources and communities over oil profits. The increased import of tar sands crude is not to benefit the Midwest or the U.S. – Enbridge has already started to pump tar sands south for export and has plans to do the same out east. This means that we are assuming an increased risk of much larger spills, pollution from refining and aiding in the development in Canada’s tar sands region – one of the biggest threats to our global climate.

Straits of Mackinac and location of Enbridge Line 5 – a 60 year old tar sands pipeline running below the surface of the water for almost 5 miles.

Tell the U.S. State Department you value the safety of wildlife, our resources and our communities over oil profits!