Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the most senior member from the Northeast on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, reiterated his continued opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline project during House debate on H.R. 3, the Northern Route Approval Act.  Citing severe environmental threats, and environmental and judicial review under assault, Nadler spoke out against the bill on the House floor.

“Any rational person would recognize that we must focus on developing renewable energy sources, and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels,” said Nadler.  “And, yet, this bill mandates the approval of a pipeline that will allow Canada to deliver 830,000 barrels per day of tar sand oil to Gulf Coast refineries.  Tar sand oil is difficult to extract.  The process is destructive and toxic.  Producing tar sand oil results in at least 14% more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil.  For those of us concerned about climate change, the Keystone Pipeline is a non-starter.  We cannot allow such a gigantic and irreversible step backward in the fight against global warming.”

Below is the full text of Nadler’s statement, as prepared:

“Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Northern Route Approval Act (HR 3), which would deem the Keystone XL Pipeline approved. 

“Mr. Chairman, the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) just measured almost 400ppm of atmospheric carbon dioxide, well beyond the 350ppm many scientists warn is the level we must not cross to avoid severe climate impacts.  Any rational person would recognize that we must focus on developing renewable energy sources, and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels.  And, yet, this bill mandates the approval of a pipeline that will allow Canada to deliver 830,000 barrels per day of tar sand oil to Gulf Coast refineries.  Tar sand oil is difficult to extract.  The process is destructive and toxic.  Producing tar sand oil results in at least 14% more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional oil.  For those of us concerned about climate change, the Keystone Pipeline is a non-starter.  We cannot allow such a gigantic and irreversible step backward in the fight against global warming.

“But HR 3 goes well beyond the merits of the pipeline itself.  This bill sets a dangerous precedent, undercutting our environmental laws and short circuiting the review process.  It deems the pipeline approved by Congressional mandate.  It locks in the administrative record as of a date certain, eliminates the requirement for a Presidential Permit normally required for cross-border pipelines, and it mandates the issuance of permits not just for construction of the pipeline, but for operation and maintenance as well.  Or in other words, in perpetuity.

“HR 3 also manages to undermine a citizen’s fair access to judicial review.  The bill appears to grant the right of judicial review by giving the D.C. Circuit jurisdiction to hear any challenge to the adequacy of the EIS, but the bill also states that the EIS ‘shall be considered to satisfy all requirements’ of NEPA. So, the court is told what to find.

“The bill also states as a matter of law that section 404 of the Clean Water Act, section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, the Mineral Leasing Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and the Endangered Species Act are all satisfied.  So, the fix is in before you ever get to court.  I’m not sure what would be left for a court to review.

“This bill is an unprecedented step in the wrong direction.  I urge my colleagues to vote against it.”

 ###