Next week will begin public meetings regarding the Keystone XL Pipeline, which will be a pipeline connecting Alberta, Canada with Gulf Coast refineries.

As I’m sure you can expect, the freaks are going to come out of the woodworks.  The left is already giving them their talking points:

From the Climate Change® appeals -

While protecting the climate will ultimately require legislation and treaties, in the meantime it is essential to prevent the use of “extreme energy” fuels like the Alberta tar sands oil that will rapidly make climate change far worse.

To enviro-guilting™  -

Our water, our health, our environment and the natural beauty of a 1,700-mile swath of America need you.

To calls for law-breaking -

Now is the time for nonviolent civil disobedience to persuade President Obama to exercise his option to block the construction of the Keystone XL oil tar sands pipeline.

The left is in a tizzy over this.   And of course they would be because, as is the case with anything that is in anyway beneficial to our way of life, the left is programmed to be opposed.

The truth is, the Keystone Pipeline is a very good thing.  As Steve Maley pointed out some time ago:

The new line would increase the export capacity of the Keystone Pipeline (placed in service 2008) by 700,000 barrels of Canadian oil-sands oil per day.

What’s more, even Barack Obama’s own State Department, not known as being a bastion of conservative ideology, has agreed that the pipeline is safe, smart, and important to our country’s energy future.

From the State Department’s Environmental Impact Statement (emphasis mine):

“In consultation with PHMSA, DOS determined that incorporation of the Special Conditions would result in a Project that would have a degree of safety greater than any typically constructed domestic oil pipeline system under current regulations and a degree of safety along the entire length of the pipeline system that would be similar to that required in high consequence areas as defined in the regulations.” …

Also:

“As a result of these considerations, DOS does not regard the No Action Alternative to be preferable to the proposed Project. If the proposed Project is not implemented, Canadian producers would seek alternative transportation systems to move oil to markets other than the U.S.  Several projects have been proposed to transport crude oil out of using pipelines to Canadian ports.  Whether or not the proposed Project is implemented, Canadian producers would seek alternative transportation systems to move oil to markets other than the U.S.  Several projects have been proposed to transport crude oil out of the oil sands area of Alberta using pipelines to Canadian ports. …”

So the State Department of arguably the most environmentally coo-coo president of all time, a president who is more than happy to shut down the entire coal industry and regulate the air we exhale, thinks this project is safe and a-ok.

That should tell you something about just how out of touch you have to be to think this would be harmful.

Maley also noted a handful of the benefits that environmentalists either aren’t thinking about or just don’t care about:

Opponents of the Keystone XL project might think they’re saving the environment by blocking the line. Not so.

• Without the line, Canadians will sell the oil to the Chinese, who will export the oil in tankers.
• Without the line, American imports will necessarily increase. More tankers.
• Unlike tanker spills, pipeline spills are of limited volume and limited environmental impact. Pipelines are the most efficient and cleanest way to move volumes of oil.

But just in case you need more convincing, here’s some more benefits courtesy of the Consumer Energy Alliance:

• Will create over 20,000 high wage manufacturing and construction jobs
• Will contribute over $20 billion to the U.S. economy
• Will deliver over 700,000 barrels of American and Canadian crude to refineries in the Gulf Coast to help America with the over 19 million barrels of oil a day that we consume

Follow @Ben_Howe