In calce a questo post la lettera mandata ad Obama da parte delle maggiori associazioni ambientaliste d'America contro l'oleodotto Keystone XL Pipeline. A differenza che in Italia queste associazioni hanno molto potere e la gente "normale" li supporta anche economicamente. Il loro messaggio e' semplice e chiaro: La responsabilita' e' l'onore di vietare questo progetto sono tuoi caro Obama, e noi non ci aspettiamo niente di meno.
Qui invece un commento di un lavoratore della Exxon Mobil sugli oleodotti:
"I've worked on pipelines, and there is no such thing as a pipe that doesn't leak. When millions of gallons of petroleum flow through a pipe it causes corrosion and after many years the pipe will leak as a result. As far as I know, the Keystone XL pipeline runs through the Ogalala Aquifer, which is the Midwest's supply of water and lifeline. The carbon emissions from tar sands are more harmful than most other fossil fuels. The long term harm Keystone XL would cause is not worth the temporary jobs it would create. It's a big step backwards. The only winner here is Exxon Mobil and its shareholders. You won't see any of my personal testimony posted here show up on any commercials like the dozens of commercials Exxon Mobil creates to get support for this pipeline. Think for yourselves and don't eat up corporate propaganda."
Anche il New York Times si e' espresso contro questo progetto, a causa delle possibilita' di perdite in ambienti pristini e a causa delle enormi produzioni di CO2 associate alla produzione di petrolio dalle Tar Sands. Dovrebbero essere distrutti 740,000 acri di foresta boreale, ricca di biodiversita'.
Ecco la lettera:
Dear President Obama,
Many of the organizations we head do not engage in civil disobedience; some do. Regardless, speaking as individuals, we want to let you know that there is not an inch of daylight between our policy position on the Keystone Pipeline and those of the very civil protesters being arrested daily outside the White House.
This is a terrible project - many of the country's leading climate scientists have explained why in their letter last month to you. It risks many of our national treasures to leaks and spills. And it reduces incentives to make the transition to job-creating clean fuels.
You have a clear shot to deny the permit, without any interference from Congress. It's perhaps the biggest climate test you face between now and the election.
If you block it, you will trigger a surge of enthusiasm from the green base that supported you so strongly in the last election. We expect nothing less.
Fred Krupp, Environmental Defense Fund
Michael Brune, Sierra Club
Frances Beinecke, Natural Resources Defense Council
Phil Radford, Greenpeace
Larry Schweiger, National Wildlife Federation Erich Pica, Friends of the Earth
Rebecca Tarbotton, Rainforest Action Network
May Boeve, 350.org
Gene Karpinski, League of Conservation Voters
Margie Alt, Environment America