Before the Keystone Pipeline bill made it to a vote in the U.S. Senate there were some amendments which shed light on the mindset of the proponents of the construction. Remember, this pipeline is for the transportation of foreign oil (Canadian) through (not to) the United States to foreign markets. S.Amdt 155 came up for a vote, its sponsor Senator Corey Booker (D-NJ) spoke in favor saying,
“Mr. President, I want to say that amendment No. 155 is a very important amendment. It is common sense. It is practical. The National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA as it is known, is one of the most emulated statutes in the world. It is something that many people see as valuable in other countries because NEPA, in fact, by many is referred to as the modern-day environmental Magna Carta. NEPA regulations require agencies to supplement already-issued environmental impact statements when significant new circumstances or information is found to exist relating to the environmental impact of a project. The pending Keystone bill, however–and quite surprisingly–would deem the final environmental impact statement issued last January to fully satisfy this NEPA requirement going ahead. This would remove the obligation from permitting agencies to supplement any environmental impact statements if significant new circumstances or information is discovered.”
Here’s a loophole through which one could drive an oil tanker. In every other instance the regulatory agencies are required to consider new evidence and new circumstances when overseeing the environmental impact of any proposal – but not this one. Not Keystone Pipeline. No, once the “final” impact statement is filed – that’s it. No more adjustments. Even if the construction called for a route change which might put a local drinking water source in peril? Even if the construction caused peripheral damages, unforeseen in the initial plans…. Senator Dean Heller (R-NV) was one of the 56 members of the Senate to vote “No” on this amendment. [rc 46]
S. Amdt 141 was simplicity itself, delay the effective date until the White House had determined that the construction of the Canadian pipeline would have no negative impacts. Again, Senator Heller voted, “No.” [rc 47]
S. Amdt 178 was also fairly simple. “To ensure that products derived from tar sands are treated as crude oil for purposes of the Federal excise tax on petroleum.” Here’s a lovely catch.
Return, for a moment, back to 2010 when there was a pipeline spill in Michigan, some of which was from Canadian tar sands. Enter the Tar Sands Tax Loophole:
Five months later, the Internal Revenue Service quietly ruled that a significant portion of the type of Canadian crude flowing through that Michigan pipeline was exempt from the per-barrel tax created for that spill-liability fund. The loophole for oil sands fuel, which also forms the bulk of the crude set to run on the Keystone XL pipeline, remains in effect today despite congressional proposals to close it. [EE]
Now it’s clear – Senator Heller voted against having TransCanadian pay taxes into the spill-liability fund to pay for clean up in the case of a pipeline break or failure. A vote against this amendment was quite simply a vote in favor of having anyone – anywhere – pay to clean up the oil spill EXCEPT the pipeline company responsible for the problem. [rc 48] Nothing sends such a Valentine to the Koch Brothers and the Canadian oil companies as this. And then he voted in favor of the unamended bill. [rc 49]
In short, Senator Heller’s bought into the various and sundry convenient prevarications associated with the Keystone debate.
It will NOT be a long term “job creator,” because most of the jobs, about 3,500 will be short term construction. The construction jobs would be beneficial, but only about 35-40 long term jobs would be created. The pipeline does transverse a section of a major aquifer, and that’s reason enough in an agricultural region (read: breadbasket) to think very carefully about pipeline spills. While it’s one thing to support a foreign pipeline transporting foreign oil to the world markets – it’s another to exempt the pipeline and oil producers from paying into the Spill Liability Fund.
The Fund can provide up to $1 billion for any one oil pollution incident, including up to $500 million for the initiation of natural resource damage assessments and claims in connection with any single incident. The main uses of Fund expenditures are: State access for removal actions; Payments to Federal, state, and Indian tribe trustees to carry out natural resource damage assessments and restorations; Payment of claims for uncompensated removal costs and damages; and Research and development and other specific appropriations.
Recall, the next time Senator Heller bemoans the “tax payer bailouts,” that he just voted to put the U.S. taxpayer on the hook for any clean up costs associated with the Keystone project.