Douglas A. Grandt P. O. Box 1582 El Dorado, CA 95623 March 13, 2013 U.S.

Department of State Attn: Genevieve Walker, NEPA Coordinator 2201 C Street NW, Room 2726 Washington, D.C. 20520 Re: Keystone XL Pipeline Supplementary Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) Dear Ms. Walker, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Keystone XL. This is a very important issue.
Keystone XL pipeline has no redeeming value Keystone XL will bring essentially no benefit to the U.S. Keystone XL will bring liabilities. Keystone XL will lock us in to 50-years of a bad decision. Who will pay the piper? Keystone XL will leak diluted bitumen which is worse than crude oil when it is spilled. Keystone XL will abuse and pervert “eminent domain” for TransCanada’s benefit. Keystone XL will abuse and pervert “eminent domain” for excavators’ benefit. Keystone XL will abuse and pervert “eminent domain” for refiners’ benefit. Tarsands bitumen has no redeeming value CO2 emissions will exceed past fossil fuel emissions. CO2 emissions will accelerate climate tipping points. CO2 emissions will exacerbate flooding & drought. CO2 emissions will strengthen hurricanes and rains. CO2 emissions will decrease available potable water. CO2 emissions will increase heat-waves and wildfires. CO2 emissions will be “game over for the climate.” Tarsands extraction has no redeeming value Extraction destroys the habitats of people and animals. Extraction destroys ecosystem, livelihood and culture. Extraction destroys the boreal forest carbon sink. Tarsands processing has no redeeming value Processing leaves toxic water on the landscape. Processed toxic ponds attract migrating birds. Processed toxic waters seep and leak into rivers. Processed toxic water causes mutations in fish. Processed toxic water destroys food sources. Processed toxic water causes people to die of cancer. For all the reasons enumerated by countless others who have expressed objections to the Keystone XL Pipeline in 45-day comments as well as in peer-reviewed research and media (published by scientists as well as environmentalists, legislators and lay people of conscience), I believe that the Keystone XL pipeline and the tarsand diluted bitumen that it is proposed to transport have no redeeming value and degrade U.S. national security.

Ms. Genevieve Walker March 13, 2013 Page 2 of 3
As a former petroleum engineer with Humble Oil & Refining Co., I believe the tarsands bitumen has no redeeming value to global markets as the CO2 emissions from the burning of the synthetic so-called “oil” will hasten the time when human suffering and social disruption become untenable, and increase the likelihood of our and other species’ slide into the unrelenting throes of extinction. Every person of conscience who is informed on the science should be working to reduce CO2 emissions as quickly as possible, rather than expanding the carbon-based fuel infrastructure. The responsible counter measure to the tarsands excavation is the shutting down and dismantling of refinery capacity, starting with the refineries that would process the tarsands bitumen at the proposed destinations of the Keystone XL pipeline. Accommodating the incremental 800,000 to one million barrels per day of feedstock the Keystone XL pipeline would deliver says that there is excess refining capacity. Dropping below minimum-required feedstock, those refineries would be shut down. Refineries cannot function below about 70% of capacity -- they demand to be fed. With a steadily rising carbon pollution tax, refinery production will decline -- this is the goal. Once the intended tarsands refineries are turned off, others must follow, retiring all fuel refineries one by one over the next few decades and replaced in an organized fashion with investments in wind, solar, 4th generation nuclear, and successful ARPA-E prospects. Again, this is the goal. It is irresponsible to argue that Keystone XL and the tarsands from any national source have any redeeming value. Respected scientist concur we must abandon burning carbon fuels, ASAP. Barry Saxifrage wrote an excellent assessment of the SEIS in his March 7, 2013, commentary in the Vancouver Observer. While I disagree with the continued development of Canadian tarsands and prefer the remaining bitumen remain in the ground, Mr. Saxifrage make some good points that counter U.S. jobs and energy independence/availability arguments made by proponents. The following four points are extracted from Mr. Saxifrage’s assessment:

Keystone XL pipeline not needed: US State Dept. report.
Source: Few or no jobs: Keystone XL's permanent jobs would provide "negligible socioeconomic impacts." Building Keystone XL would create 35 permanent US jobs -- plus 3,900 jobs for one or two years during construction. ... No change to oil development in Canada: "denial of the proposed Project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands." "If the Department was to deny the Presidential Permit for the proposed Project … production and transportation of WCSB and Bakken crude oil would remain unchanged." No change in heavy oil for Gulf Coast refineries: The "denial of the proposed Project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the … amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area." No impact on USA oil supply: First, America doesn't need to import any more oil because "the increase in U.S. production of crude oil and the reduced U.S. demand for transportation fuels will likely reduce the demand for total U.S. crude oil imports." And secondly, not building Keystone XL "would not substantially influence the … overall volume of crude oil transported to the United States or refined in the United States."

Ms. Genevieve Walker March 13, 2013 Page 3 of 3
As cigarettes are a nicotine delivery device, Keystone XL is a carbon-fuel delivery device. We must begin in earnest replacing all forms of our carbon-fuel infrastructure -- oil, gas, coal, tarsands, pipelines, rail tanker transport, refineries -- with carbon-free energy technology.
We are all at impacted, from those at the bottom of the food chain to the most powerful among us. Ocean acidification and climate change already impact plankton, pika, people and behemoths.

International Barrister Polly Higgins has launched the campaigns and which could motivate those with powerful influence to break from business-as-usual -- institutional expectation and economic paradigms -- to make change. We need President Obama and Secretary Kerry to lead as Charles Grant did. Setting precedent with the pipeline, they need to use this decision as a launching pad for subsequent initiatives to: • • • • call on industry captains within the energy sector to join in bold and courageous, moral action, to begin scheduling the retirement and dismantling of the out-dated fossil fuel infrastructure, to begin shifting investments from carbon energy infrastructure to carbon-free technology, and to compel Congress to enact a revenue-neutral carbon fee with rebates to all citizens.

Simply put, what I ask of all our leaders is: Clean energy! Carbon-free! Carbon fee Rebate to me Retire the refineries

For our progeny -- for humanity. Please launch the new beginning for energy. The first step is to deny Keystone XL pipeline. Sincerely yours,

cc: President Barack Obama John Kerry, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, CEO & Chairman, ExxonMobil Al Gore, Founder & Chairman, The Climate Reality Project Maggie Fox, President & CEO, The Climate Reality Project Steven Liebo, Professor of International History & Politics, Russell Sage University Polly Higgins, Barrister and Prime Mover of Ecocide, the Missing 5th Crime Against Peace

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful