Tar Sands Action in front of the White House/Josh Lopez
From Aug. 20 through Sept. 3, a total of 1,252 people were arrested outside the White House in a campaign aimed at convincing President Obama to deny a permit for the extension of the Keystone pipeline (Keystone XL). Cumulatively, these arrests were the largest act of civil disobedience in the history of the American environmental movement.
The White House is the target of this campaign because the authority to deny or approve the permit rests entirely within the executive branch. Congress isn't involved in this one. The State Department is the specific agency responsible, but like all departments in the executive branch the State Department ultimately answers to the president.
Protests are designed to draw attention, so one of the measures of a protest is always how much media coverage it generates. On that metric, the arrests were a huge success. As of this writing, Google News shows 1,894 items on Keystone XL, including many dozens on the protests themselves. The action therefore seems to have guaranteed that this is an issue which will not pass unnoticed.
Whether the protests will achieve the ultimate goal of stopping the extension of the pipeline is a different story. In an interview with "energyNow!" television last week, Energy Secretary Stephen Chu indicated that he is in favor of granting the permit. Since cabinet secretaries do not often voice public opinions contrary to administration policy, this is likely the position where the Obama administration currently resides. Here is a rough transcript of the interview:
Interviewer: Let me turn to the big debate in Washington right now, which is over the Keystone XL pipeline. This is to bring oil sands, crude, from Alberta, Canada to the gulf coast of the United States for refining. Is that oil critical to the national energy picture of the United States?
Secretary Chu: Well, let me just say first that the decision the State Department made was a State Department decision. It's certainly true that having Canada as a supplier for our oil is much more comforting than having other countries supply our oil. And so I know there's been concerns about this, but you know both the technologies that are used to extract tar sands oil—which are improving dramatically—and so I think that can go forward. But I think, in the end, what we need to do is diversify our supply of oil. Right now, our transportation needs come almost exclusively from oil.
Interviewer: Well, you did bring up the fact that it is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who is going to have to approve the pipeline or not. But you, as one of the eight members of the cabinet will be advising her. Do you think it should be built?
Secretary Chu: Well, I think it's one of those decisions where you're going to have to trade off a reliable supply. You also have to note that the companies that are extracting these tar sands are making great strides in improving the environmental impact of the extraction of the soil and will continue to do so, and they should be encouraged and pressed to do so. But in the end, it's one of those things that it's not perfect, it's a tradeoff. Meanwhile I, as Secretary of Energy, am going to focus on batteries for electric vehicles, biofuels, energy efficiency. [Emphasis added]
Comments such as these make the outlook for stopping the pipeline grim, especially when coupled with the recent administration decision to scuttle new smog regulations.
Despite this, opponents of the pipeline continue their activism. Today, Tar Sands Action, an umbrella organization created by a coalition of environmental groups to oppose Keystone XL, announced "phase two" of their campaign. This will consist of five weeks of community meetings and visits to Organizing for America campaign offices, leading up to some undisclosed major event on Oct. 7.
The State Department is expected to announce the administration's decision by the end of the year.