Gov. Peter Shumlin (VT) Opposes Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline

News — the tar sands action team September 5, 2011 at 10:29 am
Great news – after outreach from David Stember and other members of 350 Vermont, Governor Peter Shumlin has written a letter opposing the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. Here’s an excerpt from the letter:
I oppose the proposed Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline project…We need to find sources that will mitigate the impacts of climate change as much as 
possible for Vermont and the United States.
Our nation must come together to find local, clean, renewable energy to reduce our carbon footprint and spur the economy. Due to the number of major environmental and public health hazards possible in the Keystone XL Pipeline project, the cost of building an oil pipeline across many of our nations most economically and environmentally important aquifers, natural lands and wetlands is too great at this time.
350 Vermont was an important part of part one of the Tar Sands Action, bringing a busload of Vermonters just after their state was hit by the global warming-fueled Hurricane Irene. Their resolve and continued organizing to keep the pressure on the President is an inspiration as we move to phase two of the action. To sign up for part two of the Tar Sands Action, click here: http://www.tarsandsaction.org/next-steps To read the entire letter, click below: State of Vermont OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR September 2, 2011 David Stember 350 Vermont www.350VT.org Dear David, Thank you for contacting me regarding the TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline project. I oppose the proposed Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline project, which would deliver up to 900,000 barrels per day of diluted bitumen tar sands oil from Alberta, Canada over 2,000 miles to refineries on the United States Gulf Coast. As Governor, I understand that any form of power generation will have some environmental impacts. We need to find sources that will mitigate the impacts of climate change as much as possible for Vermont and the United States. The Keystone XL Pipeline project would utilize tar sand oil which generates significantly higher greenhouse gas emissions from a lifecycle perspective than conventional oil. I have concerns regarding the inadequacies of the Department of State’s (DOS) failure to adequately consider the project’s climate change impacts in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), along with the DOS’s inadequate collaboration with the Department of Energy and Department of Transportation to weigh all impacts of the project. Until the State Department adequately evaluates the pipeline’s lifecycle environmental impact I do not support any implementation of the project or any possibility of expansion. Any proposal to revive the Trailbreaker project and reverse flows through Vermont to facilitate tar sands oil production would be exposed to vigorous, open public process. North America must use its fossil fuel resources responsibly. Our nation must come together to find local, clean, renewable energy to reduce our carbon footprint and spur the economy. Due to the number of major environmental and public health hazards possible in the Keystone XL Pipeline project, the cost of building an oil pipeline across many of our nations most economically and environmentally important aquifers, natural lands and wetlands is too great at this time. Sincerely, Peter Shumlin, Governor
  1. Thank you, Governor and those Vermonters who are giving time and effort to support this monumental action during a time of crisis in your state. May God`s Compassionate Provision be with you during restoration.

  2. Chris says:

    Thanks so much. We need to make sure that President Obama will stand up against bir oil before it’s too late.

  3. Adack says:

    Hawai’ian HONOR Vermont Govenor for BEing PONO ….

  4. Harvard says:

    What about that President Morales of Bolivia who designated and enforced a “day without cars,” as people walked and rode bikes to get around. Maybe our leader could learn from this man who walks the walk, literally.

  5. Kevin Proops says:

    It’d be nice if the world was as simple as many of you believe it was. Reality is that the Athabasca Tar Sands oil will be produced and marketed – to the US and/or to China. It takes more energy to move the oil to China, so stopping the pipeline will actually increase global CO2 emissions. If you want to control CO2, worry about reducing demand for coal and oil. This is the wrong battle to fight.

    • Tyler Hess says:

      To respond, as a participant:

      1. You make unfounded assumptions in believing that the tar sands “will be produced.” The XL pipeline was chosen because TransCanada’s westward pipeline to Asia has been stalled. Louder indigenous opposition has occurred, and cost prohibitive limits reached. This pipeline has not been approved in any regard yet either. And Canadian opposition is growing.

      2. Delaying the pipeline will prevent CO2 emission increases. As the second largest pool of carbon on EARTH, we must prevent (as long and effectively as possible) these sands from being exploited. Your pessimism is not only illogical, but morally vacuous.

      • Going4teal says:

        You are so right Tyler Hess–also WA and CA don’t want that stuff in their state that’s why the XL had to cut across the depth of this country, through the depressed states to do what it wants to do; and shame on those states’ leaders who have no imagination to attract green energy manufacturing/businesses. Heck, every home/apartment/building would install solar panels if it was cheap enough–and the question is, why isn’t it? The materials are here, the talents are here, the intelligence, the will–so why is green energy not happening? It is obvious. There are jobs in retro-fitting homes with green tech., building on green technology, softwares for the new tech., designers, new engineering, etc.; where green goes other industries will follow. Building of the highways were originally meant for military use, look where it is now. The money is there–it didn’t go up in a puff of smoke–there is no logical reason for any recession. The money is always there–in the hands of the few, at the pains of many.

    • Going4teal says:

      And it takes 40 times more of combined energy and resource to process the tar sands–defend this project when it runs under your backyard and we’ll see where you stand then. Also, please note that the bulk will not be sold for US consumption but another country. The short term job this generates is nothing compare to the volume of long term jobs the various Green industries could generate. This re’tar’d me blind project and other old form of fossil technology should be put to rest and replaced with the new.

  6. Eva Wojcik says:

    I think I want to move to Vermont…no joke.

You must be logged in to post a comment.


(c) 2014 Tar Sands Action | powered by WordPress