Quantcast

Michael Brune: The End Game Begins

Energy

Surprising nobody, President Obama has quietly followed through on his promise to veto the bill from Congress that would have authorized construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. It's only the third veto of his presidency, and it means the way is now clear for the president to make a final decision about whether Keystone XL, and the toxic tar-sands oil it would pump across America's heartland, are in the national interest.

Why did Congress force the president to waste perfectly good ink reasserting his authority to make this decision? Certainly not because they were looking out for the best interests of the American people, who would be accepting all of the many risks associated with Keystone without seeing any appreciable benefits. The more people learn about the project, the more they think it's a bad idea. A poll just released by the League of Conservation Voters found that after hearing arguments both for and against the pipeline, a majority of voters believe President Obama should reject it.

What's more, nearly two-in-three voters (63 percent) say that if President Obama decides the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the nation's best interests, then Congress should accept the decision and move on to other issues facing the country, rather than trying to force the administration to issue a permit.

Seems like good advice. Yet tar-sands supporters in Congress will find it hard to tune out the fossil fuel interests that want to see Canada's oil sands mined to the utmost. After all, the biggest foreign lease holder in Canada's oil sands is none other than the Koch brothers. And they didn't become among the wealthiest people on the planet by taking "no" for an answer graciously.

But we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. For now, it's up to President Obama to do the right thing—for America, for Americans and for our planet.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

President Obama Vetoes Keystone XL Pipeline Bill

Teens Sue Government for Failing to Address Climate Change for Future Generations

Climate Denier’s Funding from Fossil Fuel Industry Exposed at a Staggering $1.25 Million

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

New pine trees grow from the forest floor along the North Fork of the Flathead River on the western boundary of Glacier National Park on Sept. 16, 2019 near West Glacier, Montana. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

By Alex Kirby

New forests are an apparently promising way to tackle global heating: the trees absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from human activities. But there's a snag, because permanently lower river flows can be an unintended consequence.

Read More
Household actions lead to changes in collective behavior and are an essential part of social movements. Pixabay / Pexels

By Greg McDermid, Joule A Bergerson, Sheri Madigan

Hidden among all of the troubling environmental headlines from 2019 — and let's face it, there were plenty — was one encouraging sign: the world is waking up to the reality of climate change.

So now what?

Read More
Sponsored
Logging state in the U.S. is seen representing some of the consequences humans will face in the absence of concrete action to stop deforestation, pollution and the climate crisis. Mark Newman / Lonely Planet Images / Getty Images

Talk is cheap, says the acting executive secretary of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, who begged governments around the world to make sure that 2020 is not another year of conferences and empty promises, but instead is the year to take decisive action to stop the mass extinction of wildlife and the destruction of habitat-sustaining ecosystems, as The Guardian reported.

Read More
The people of Kiribati have been under pressure to relocate due to sea level rise. A young woman wades through the salty sea water that flooded her way home on Sept. 29, 2015. Jonas Gratzer / LightRocket via Getty Images

Refugees fleeing the impending effects of the climate crisis cannot be forced to return home, according to a new decision by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, as CNN reported. The new decision could open up a massive wave of legal claims by displaced people around the world.

Read More
The first day of the Strike WEF march on Davos on Jan. 18, 2020 near Davos, Switzerland. The activists want climate justice and think the WEF is for the world's richest and political elite only. Kristian Buus / In Pictures via Getty Images

By Ashutosh Pandey

Teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg is returning to the Swiss ski resort of Davos for the 2020 World Economic Forum with a strong and clear message: put an end to the fossil fuel "madness."

Read More