Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

wtmusic

(39,166 posts)
Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:06 AM Jan 2013

2 Reports on Oil Sands Paint a Dire Picture



"Opponents of the Keystone XL pipeline and the heavy Canadian crude oil that it would carry released two reports on Thursday asserting that the environmental impacts of the project are worse than previously estimated, and urged the Obama administration to veto it.

One report, from the anti-petroleum group Oil Change International, finds that existing studies of emissions from mining, transporting and refining the oil from oil sands formations in Alberta fails to account for the impact of petroleum coke, or petcoke. The study states that because petcoke is considered a refinery byproduct, its emissions are not included in calculation of the climate impact of exploiting Canadian oil sands.

The study says that the petcoke produced from oil moving through the 1,700-mile Keystone XL pipeline would be equivalent to the coal burned at five conventional power plants."

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/17/2-reports-on-oil-sands-paint-a-dire-picture/
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»2 Reports on Oil Sands Pa...