On the recordJuly 26, 2011
My amendment before us today asks a simple question: Why should America shoulder new environmental risks to help power the economy of China? Many Members have come to the floor today to document the considerable ecological and public health threats posed by the development of the TransCanada Keystone XL pipeline. In addition to producing 40 percent more life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil, the recent Exxon pipeline spill in Montana's Yellowstone River serves as a stark reminder of the very real risks posed by these kinds of pipeline projects. However, in discounting these facts, the proponents of Keystone XL assert that, without the new pipeline, Canada's dirty tar sands oil will be shipped to China and to other overseas markets. This simply isn't true. Without access to a major new shipping terminal and refining hub on the gulf coast, Canada's tar sands will remain stranded on the North American continent. Indeed, Keystone XL is essential to the economic expansion of Canadian tar sands because it opens up new trade routes to the East. Current pipeline infrastructure carries tar sands oil to the Midwest but no further. By 2015, existing markets will no longer be sufficient to absorb this increased tar sands production. So the Keystone XL pipeline will provide that new market to China for this oil.…
Source
govinfo.gov




