Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

Hillary Clinton comes out against Keystone XL pipeline

 

Clinton’s decision further worsens the prospects for the TransCanada Corp. project, a top Stephen Harper priority.

 

 

WASHINGTON—Breaking her cautious silence, leading Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton came out Tuesday against the Keystone XL oil pipeline proposal.

 

Clinton’s decision further worsens the prospects for the TransCanada Corp. project that has long been a top economic and diplomatic priority for Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

 

Caught in a delicate spot between Democratic environmentalists who oppose Keystone XL and Democratic unions that support it, Clinton had insisted she would not say anything about the pipeline until she was elected. But she faced damaging public pressure from both sides: from chief rival Bernie Sanders and from Republicans who cited her evasions as reflective of her personality.

 

Clinton did not quite endorse the environmentalists’ argument that the pipeline would contribute to climate change. Instead, speaking in response to a question at a town hall event in Iowa, she called it “a distraction” from other “important work we have to do to combat climate change.”

 

“Therefore, I oppose it,” she said. “And I oppose it because I don’t think it’s in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change.”

 

TransCanada spokesman Davis Sheremata said pipelines are a safer and more environmentally efficient way to move oil than transporting it by train. And he said Keystone XL would allow the U.S. to get oil from Canada rather than Iran and Venezuela, “where American values of freedom and democracy are not shared.”

 

Justin Trudeau’s Liberals support Keystone. Thomas Mulcair’s NDP is opposed.

 

The $8-billion (U.S.) pipeline would carry hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil per day from the Alberta oilsands and the shale fields of North Dakota and Montana down to Nebraska, where it would connect with existing pipelines running down to refineries in Texas.

 

The State Department, which Clinton led as secretary of state between 2009 and 2013, concluded in 2014 that Keystone XL was unlikely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions, since oil from the high-emissions oilsands would get to market with or without the new pipeline. But it cautioned that this might not be true if oil prices dropped. They have.

 

Every major Democratic candidate is now on record against Keystone XL. President Barack Obama, who has promised to make a decision before the end of his presidency, has offered only criticism of the project in 2015.

 

TransCanada’s hopes appear to lie with Republicans: every major Republican candidate supports Keystone XL. If Obama rejects the proposal, TransCanada could apply again when he leaves office.

 

“Hillary Clinton finally says what we already knew. She favors environmental extremists over U.S. jobs,” Republican candidate Jeb Bush wrote on Twitter.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton broke her longstanding silence on the Keystone XL pipeline Tuesday, telling voters at a campaign stop in Iowa that she opposes the project, which has been assailed by environmentalists.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton broke her longstanding silence on the Keystone XL pipeline Tuesday, telling voters at a campaign stop in Iowa that she opposes the project, which has been assailed by environmentalists.

FM
Originally Posted by cain:

Jeb is being silly. So never mind the environment as long as there are jobs who cares about the environment?

 

I vote to shut down the pipeline.

 

That pipeline will proceed regardless. This is just election talk.

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:

If this is so then we need to know were Trump stands.

Her position is unacceptable.

Her position is quite sound. We all see the damage sixteen inch pipes containing water can do when broken. Think what would happen if a 36 inch one breaks and the liquid inside is oil! This pipeline traverses sensitive marsh lands and there is no way of guarding its entire length from terrorists. A break in a remote area would take days to remedy meanwhile the entire column of oil between that break and the two substations on each side of the break then flows into the environment. There is no need for it given the US can supply its own oil to the region.

FM
Originally Posted by yuji22:
Originally Posted by cain:

Jeb is being silly. So never mind the environment as long as there are jobs who cares about the environment?

 

I vote to shut down the pipeline.

 

That pipeline will proceed regardless. This is just election talk.

It aint happening with a democrat and a democrat is on the way to the white house since the republicans are cannibalizing their candidates of worth.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×