“The State Department concluded in its final environmental assessment issued Friday that the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would be unlikely to alter global greenhouse gas emissions, but officials cautioned that they were still weighing whether or not the project would meet the test of President Obama’s broader climate strategy.
Though the report acknowledged that tapping the Canadian oil sands for the pipeline would produce more greenhouse gases, the assessment also said that blocking the project would not prevent development of those resources.”
Read more from The Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/state-to-release-keystones-final-environmental-impact-statement-friday/2014/01/31/3a9bb25c-8a83-11e3-a5bd-844629433ba3_story.html
7 Facts That Weren’t In The New State Department Report On Keystone XL: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/31/3231991/keystone-national/
Cenk Uygur, Jimmy Dore, and John Iadarola of The Young Turks discuss the report on the Keystone XL pipelines environmental impact, and the corrupt consultants who were tasked with delivering the report to the State Department.
Follow Cenk on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cenkuygur
Follow Jimmy on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jimmy_dore
Follow John on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/jiadarola
**********
The Largest Online News Show in the World. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian. LIVE STREAMING weekdays 6-8pm ET.
Young Turk (n), 1. Young progressive or insurgent member of an institution, movement, or political party. 2. Young person who rebels against authority or societal expectations. (American Heritage Dictionary)
Download audio and video of the full two hour show on-demand + the members-only post game show by becoming a member at http://tytnetwork.com/member-options/. Your membership supports the day to day operations and is vital for our continued success and growth.
Comments
You’ve taken the quote from the report out of context. The quote displayed at :48 is stating that the denial of the XL project is unlikely to have an impact on energy demands. The conclusion is common sense as compared to say an increase in automotive efficiency would be because a small reduction in the oil supply would fail to curb demand for the product. Your show conflating these two concepts is not only disingenuous but it makes the show difficult to watch. I understand that it is difficult to deliver analysis in today’s fast paced environment, but please try harder.