Posted 3 months ago on Feb. 4, 2013, 1:35 p.m. EST by TrevorMnemonic
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Wow really Nature? The pipeline should be approved?
The corporate takeover is almost complete.
I am absolutely shocked by this outrageous article from Nature suggesting the keystone pipeline should be approved because as the article put it " the pipeline is not going to determine whether the Canadian tar sands are developed or not."
This article also says "By approving Keystone, Obama can bolster his credibility within industry and among conservatives.... and somehow reset the climate discussion." - because playing into big oils plan is somehow resetting the climate discussion?
Article also says "“Driving down the cost of low-carbon energy might even unlock political solutions.” - which is more bullshit because Transcanada has even said the pipeline can used to increase American energy costs by up to 4 billion per year, more specifically in the midwest, due to redirecting from midwest refineries to the coast. ALSO THIS DIRTY OIL IS FOR EXPORT. It is not for the USA.
This article is a neocon dream. Whoever owns Nature has sold out.
James Hansen was right when he said the keystone xl is "game over for climate change"
Here is something the Nature article above does not mention - "Canada’s tar sands, deposits of sand saturated with bitumen, contain twice the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by global oil use in our entire history. If we were to fully exploit this new oil source, and continue to burn our conventional oil, gas and coal supplies, concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere eventually would reach levels higher than in the Pliocene era, more than 2.5 million years ago, when sea level was at least 50 feet higher than it is now. That level of heat-trapping gases would assure that the disintegration of the ice sheets would accelerate out of control. Sea levels would rise and destroy coastal cities. Global temperatures would become intolerable. Twenty to 50 percent of the planet’s species would be driven to extinction. Civilization would be at risk."
read more from Hansen here - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/opinion/game-over-for-the-climate.html?_r=0