IHS CERA's new environmental assessment of the Keystone XL pipeline and pipeline -
related oil sands development sends a pretty clear message to President Obama as he decides whether to approve the full project's construction: There's not a climate rationale for rejecting the pipeline — and along with it, tens of thousands of U.S. jobs, economic uplift and greater energy security.
Not exact matches
Additional escalation of the mining impact occurs as conventional
oil mining is supplanted by tar
sands development, with mining and land disturbance from the latter producing land use -
related greenhouse gas emissions as much as 23 times greater than conventional
oil production per unit area [152], but with substantial variability and uncertainty [152]--[153].
Are EC's concerns specifically
related to the nature of the contaminants in the
oil sands development vs the other polluted rivers which may be contaminated different things?