The approval of Keystone XL by Nebraska Governor Dave Heinemen has caused a lot of media excitement, as did the State Department’s latest environmental assessment. A consequence of “positive” developments in the approval saga is renewed opposition to the pipeline, such as the editorial in the New York Times arguing President Obama should say no. One of the reasons for opposition to pipelines from Alberta is concern over the environmental impacts of the oil sands, such as GHG emissions from development.

In a quiet Nebraska town, tucked away off of Nebraska Highway 8 about 40 miles southwest of Beatrice, Neb., a large development with giant, metal tubes arching out of and into the ground is surrounded by a chain-link fence, every inch topped with razor wire.

To hear the other side, you’d think the Keystone XL pipeline project would be nearly 1,200 miles of all pain, no gain for the United States.

Rapid City Journal
By State Rep. Don Kopp

To: U.S. State Department
RE: The Keystone Pipeline

If pipe not approved, could be 'thorn' in relations.

For the past two weeks, I’ve traveled throughout Tennessee’s Fourth Congressional District meeting with constituents and discussing issues important to our community. These district work periods provide an excellent opportunity to talk with and learn from the people who are at the forefront of creating jobs, teaching our children and caring for our seniors.

U.S. voters are holding steady in their support for building the Keystone XL oil pipeline from western Canada to Texas, according to a new survey conducted this week. They are also more confident than ever it can be built without hurting the environment.

But that’s not a bad thing, according to a new study from the energy analysts at IHS CERA.

Controversy over the 1,700-mile-long Keystone XL Pipeline continues, as the U.S. State Department considers whether to approve a portion of the pipeline between Alberta and Oklahoma that would cut through far eastern Montana.