But, barring a more in-depth veto statement, it's possibly not the best big-picture move.
I suggested a couple of weeks ago that Obama should make such a statement, pledging to pass a similar bill if it were tied to a carbon tariff and carbon tax.
Today's announcement story explains why:
Last year, an 11-volume environmental impact review by the State Department concluded that oil extracted from the Canadian oil sands produced about 17 percent more carbon pollution than conventionally extracted oil.
There's the justification for a carbon tariff, which would require a domestic carbon tax.
The AP notes that Obama's veto was without fanfare. Well, per my angle, it should have had some fanfare indeed.
The AP notes that Obama's veto was without fanfare. Well, per my angle, it should have had some fanfare indeed.
That said, as I also noted in that previous blog post, the
State Department has said that Alberta tar sands oil will be sold — and
delivered — somewhere, somehow, with or without the current pipeline. Work is
underway to build an all-Canada pipeline to Quebec; work is struggling to send another
pipeline west to British Columbia. And tar sands oil is already coming into the
U.S. by rail, claims of some environmentalists to the contrary notwithstanding,
as well as by more circuitous pipeline routes.
Beyond that, environmentalists with brains know not to pin too much hope on Obama.
His "all of the above" hydrocarbons strategy has bent, folded, spindled and mutilated the Endangered Species Act, as with the dunes sagebrush lizard.
And, at the same time his administration expanded protection in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it announced plenty of drilling leases in the Arctic Ocean, as Greenpeace notes.
And, note the "no fanfare" in the AP story link.
And, note the "no fanfare" in the AP story link.
In other words, President Obama can often be an "on the one hand" environmentalist.
And, as I noted in my link from my previous blog post, he's also not a "big picture" president. Of course, that's neoliberal incrementalism in general.
No comments:
Post a Comment