Letter to State Dept 14-02-19 KXL

8/13/2019 Letter to State Dept 14-02-19 KXL

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/letter-to-state-dept-14-02-19-kxl 1/3

Douglas A. GrandtPO Box 6603

Lincoln, NE 68506

February 19, 2014

Bureau of Energy Resources, Room 4843 Attn: Keystone XL Public Comments

U.S. Department of State2201 C Street NWWashington, DC 20520

Re: TransCanada permit application for the Keystone XL pipeline

Dear John Kerry and Barack Obama:

This morning, I watched the video and read the text of Secretary Kerry’s February 16 speechin Jakarta (http://bit.ly/Kerry16Feb). It is a decisive and inspirational statement on climate.

Today, I would like to suggest that the FSEIS is constructed using logic and data that arefundamentally flawed in at least two sections (Section 1.4 Marketing Analysis and Section

4.14 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change) and the supporting appendices (Appendix Cand Appendix U) in ways that run counter to and undermine the intentions of Secretary Kerryand President Obama.

As a point of reference, the fundamental basis forEnSys WORLD model is Department of Energy forecast that projects continued increases inglobal fossil fuel production and combustion. Thegraph provided by Oil Change International (http://priceofoil.org) illustrates the huge disparitybetween what science demands and the forecastupon which the FSEIS is predicated.

When John Kerry and Barack Obama understandthe significance of the divergence from what isdemanded, they will surely agree that the FSEISand its conclusions that support the constructionof Keystone XL (and extraction of the tarsandsthat Keystone XL would convey to U.S. refineries)must be denounced.

Three days ago in Jakarta, Secretary Kerry put out to the world a clear call to action:

Serious analysts understand that the costs of doing nothing far outweigh the costs of

investing in solutions now. You do not need a degree in economics or a graduate degreein business in order to understand that the cost of flooding, the cost of drought, the cost offamine, the cost of health care, the cost of addressing this challenge is simply far less –the costs of addressing this challenge are far less than the costs of doing nothing. Justlook at the most recent analysis done by the World Bank, which estimates that by 2050,losses – excuse me one second – losses from flood damage in Asian ports – fishing ports,shipping ports – the losses in those ports alone could exceed $1 trillion annually unlesswe make big changes to the infrastructure of those ports.

of 3

http://bit.ly/OIL17Feb

http://priceofoil.org/



http://bit.ly/Kerry16Feb














Finally, if we truly want to prevent the worst consequences of climate change fromhappening, we do not have time to have a debate about whose responsibility this is. Theanswer is pretty simple: It’s everyone’s responsibility. Now certainly some countries – andI will say this very clearly, some countries, including the United States, contribute more tothe problem and therefore we have an obligation to contribute more to the solution. I

agree with that. But, ultimately, every nation on Earth has a responsibility to do its part ifwe have any hope of leaving our future generations the safe and healthy planet that theydeserve.

Whether or not Keystone XL would transport Canadian dilbit to U.S. refineries, and whetheror not the development and extraction of tarsands would thereby be insignificantly impacted,Keystone XL would contribute to neither Secretary Kerry’s vision nor U.S. National Interest.

Further into his speech, Secretary Kerry continued with a more urgent tone and moral appeal:

It is time for the world to approach this problem with the cooperation, the urgency, and thecommitment that a challenge of this scale warrants. It’s absolutely true that industrialized

countries – yes, industrialized countries that produce most of the emissions – have a hugeresponsibility to be able to reduce emissions, but I’m telling you that doesn’t mean thatother nations have a free pass. They don’t have a right to go out and repeat the mistakesof the past. It’s not enough for one country or even a few countries to reduce theiremissions when other countries continue to fill the atmosphere with carbon pollution asthey see fit. At the end of the day, emissions coming from anywhere in the world threatenthe future for people everywhere in the world, because those emissions go up and thenthey move with the wind and they drop with the rain and the weather, and they keep goingaround and around and they threaten all of us.

Now, as I’ve already acknowledged, I am the first one to recognize the responsibility thatthe United States has, because we have contributed to this problem. We’re one of the

number – we’re the number two emitter of greenhouse gas emissions. The number one isnow China. The fact is that I recognize the responsibility that we have to erase the badhabits that we have, which we adopted, frankly, before we understood the consequences.Nobody set out to make this happen. This is the consequence of the industrial revolutionand the transformation of the world, and many of the advances that we made that havechanged the world for the better came from these steps. But now we do know theattendant consequences that are linked to these actions.

President Obama has taken the moral challenge head on. Over the past five years, theUnited States has done more to reduce the threat of climate change – domestically andwith the help of our international partners – than in the 20 years before President Obamacame to office.

Thanks to President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the United States is well on our way tomeeting the international commitments to seriously cut our greenhouse gas emissions by2020, and that’s because we’re going straight to the largest sources of pollution. We’retargeting emissions from transportation – cars trucks, rail, et cetera – and from powersources, which account together for more than 60 percent of the dangerous greenhousegases that we release.

Douglas GrandtFebruary 19, 2014

of 3



Secretary Kerry then made a personal commitment to enforce a new heightened priority:

And as Secretary of State, I am personally committed to making sure that this work is front

and center in all of our diplomatic efforts. This week I will be instructing all of the chiefs ofour missions at American embassies all over the world to make climate change a toppriority and to use all the tools of diplomacy that they have at their disposal in order tohelp address this threat.

Secretary Kerry’s commitment was underscored by his reference to future “costs of survival”:

Coal and oil are currently cheap ways to power a society, at least in the near term. But Iurge governments to measure the full cost to that coal and that oil, measure the impactsof what will happen as we go down the road. You cannot simply factor in the immediatecosts of energy needs. You have to factor in the long-term cost of carbon pollution. Andthey have to factor in the cost of survival.

Secretary Kerry finally admonished all of us, all around the world, to “speak out” and “makeclimate change an issue that no public official can ignore.” By extension, I interpret this toapply equally to the staff at the Department of State and the contractors they employ:

Today I call on all of you in Indonesia and concerned citizens around the world to demandthe resolve that is necessary from your leaders. Speak out. Make climate change an issuethat no public official can ignore for another day. Make a transition towards cleanenergy the only plan that you are willing to accept.

Secretary Kerry made clear his simple vision and standards with that last sentence.

I have spent dozens of hours studying Sections 1.4 and 4.14 as well as Appendices C and U

since February 2 and cannot see how the basic logic and assumptions align with SecretaryKerry’s vision and standards.

The FSEIS uses data, forecasts, and faulty assumptions and logic that are not aligned withforestalling CO2 emissions and the resulting devastating changes in climate.

There is nothing in the FSEIS that proves Keystone XL is positively in the National Interest.

Sincerely yours,

Doug Grandt

Douglas GrandtFebruary 19, 2014

of 3

Letter to State Dept 14-02-19 KXL

Documents

Transcript of Letter to State Dept 14-02-19 KXL