It’s Game Over for Keystone XL opponents ‘Game Over’ Claims

Even Dr. James Hansen doesn’t  believe Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions

Video follows below

At today’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Keystone XL, Chairman Robert Menendez (D-NJ) asked well-known climate scientist James Hansen to clarify what he meant when he made his famous “game over” comment, which has been used widely by Keystone XL opponents to justify their erroneous claims.  Of course, “game over” has been the main rallying cry for the Sierra Club’s Michael Brune who sat next to Hansen at today’s hearing.  In response to Senator Menendez’s question, Hansen explained,

I’m glad you asked me that question because my comment continues to be misinterpreted […] It has been clear that conventional oil and gas are limited. We’re probably close to peak-oil for conventional oil. The science was clear that we cannot burn all the coal, we’re going to have to phase that out and that’s a solvable problem because coal is used mainly for electricity production and we can generate electricity in other ways including nuclear power, which is carbon-free. Then there is this other huge source of carbon, unconventional fossil fuels and my statement was that if we are going to now open up that other source of unconventional fossil fuels, that’s what tar sands are: the first big step into that unconventional fossil fuels.  But the science tells us we can’t do that. We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels. The science is crystal clear on that and the world is just ignoring the science. The scientists are saying ‘wait you can’t do that,’ and that’s what I was saying. This is game over if you don’t understand; we have to leave that extremely large amount of carbon in the ground.”

So not even James Hansen, the very person Keystone XL opponents quote incessantly, believes that Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.
But that’s not all.  Senator Menendez followed up on Hansen’s clarification, offering yet another blow to Keystone XL opponents.  As he explained,

“So I now have the greater definition.  I just personally don’t think that the approval or disapproval of the pipeline is a decline in global leadership, nor do I believe that the specific approval or disapproval is necessarily game over. I understand what you’re saying, there is a broader context which is whether you have access to this fuel and you start down that road. I just wanted to refine this as it relates to the question before the committee, which is the question of approval of the pipeline.”

Of note, this question came after the State Department, numerous energy and climate experts, and Obama administration officials disputed activists’ claims.  Looks like it’s officially “game over” for opponents’ “game over” claims.

Watch:

About these ads
This entry was posted in Climate News, Energy, petroleum. Bookmark the permalink.

113 Responses to It’s Game Over for Keystone XL opponents ‘Game Over’ Claims

  1. Lance Wallace says:

    Would have been better if Hansen himself had said it, rather than Menendez doing it for him. I was hoping the video might catch Hansen nodding or something but it stayed locked on Menendez. However, like others trying to read the tea leaves, I am wondering if it is possible that Democrat Menendez has an inkling as to the likely recommendation and is thus downplaying the importance of Keystone?

  2. The first quote block appeared to me as a double down on “game over”.

    This is game over if you don’t understand; we have to leave that extremely large amount of carbon in the ground.”

    It is the second quoteblock that was (cough) approval of KeystoneXL will not necessarily be “game over.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0 ‘Never mind.’

  3. davidmhoffer says:

    We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels.

    I’m not certain how that differs from “game over”?

  4. Keystone XL is more and more irrelevant. Railways will be moving the oil … right through the center of your cities and towns.

  5. DirkH says:

    “We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels.”

    Shouldn’t impress pro abortion Democrats.
    Only kidding. I know they don’t use logic.

  6. Jimbo says:

    Who thinks Canada can’t sell its tar sands oil to Asian countries? Hansen is a citizen of the USA not of Canada. Hansen is finally going to come smacking head first with fossil fuel reality, people want and need cheap energy, no matter if they are going to fry their grandchildren. That’s the reality.

  7. DirkH says:

    sunshinehours1 says:
    March 13, 2014 at 3:35 pm
    “Keystone XL is more and more irrelevant. Railways will be moving the oil … right through the center of your cities and towns.”

    Well, relevant for Railroad Tycoon Warren Buffet, and for the consumer. Rail transport is twice as expensive in this case, as transport via pipeline.

  8. Grant A. Brown says:

    The point here seems to be that Keystone itself does not spell “game over,” but rather tapping into all of the unconventional oil and gas in the world would spell game over, and Keystone is the first step down that path.

  9. Bobby Davis says:

    When is it going to be game over for James Hansen? None to soon for me. I’ve had enough of his B.S..

  10. wws says:

    He doesn’t even seem aware of the fact that the only difference between “conventional” fossil fuels and “unconventional” is the technology used to produce them – the fuels themselves are the same. It’s like saying that “news” is only worthwhile if it’s printed on good old fashioned paper, and is dangerous if it shows up on one a’ these newfangled electronic thingamajigs.

    He also missed the memo that the “peak oil” scare officially collapsed about 3 – 4 years ago.

  11. Jimbo says:

    What does GAME OVER mean? I don’t know but let’s see what Think Progress ‘thinks’.

    2011 – Think Progress
    The Canadian tar sands are substantially dirtier than conventional oil as the chart above shows (longer analysis here). They may contain enough carbon-intensive fuel to make stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide at non-catastrophic levels all but impossible.
    http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/06/05/236978/james-hansen-keystone-pipeline-tar-sands-climate/

    Now that’s stating the obvious. Why didn’t they mention temperature instead of concentrations?

    Panic over, 16+ years of a global surface temperature standstill in the face of ever rising co2 concentrations, it really is game over. It was GAME OVER over when co2 concentrations in geological time was 800ppm, 1,000ppm, 2,000ppm, 3,000ppm and even more! These people are a bunch of deceivers and jokers of the highest order. They make me sick.

  12. albertalad says:

    After the Florida special election – democrats have enough trouble with Obamacare – the curse that keeps on giving. Hansen is smart enough to know the writing is on the wall. They’re all just going through the motions now.

  13. parisparamus says:

    Am I stupid, or is there no money quote in that video or this post. What does “game over” mean per the global moroning crowd? And what did Hansen say to upset that? Can someone verify my stupidity (or disprove it), please?

    By the way, the global moroning folk want “game over” to mean that if KXL would represent 0.33% of oil pipelines in North America, so I don’t understand how this cuts big either way.

  14. parisparamus says:

    Correction: By the way, the global moroning folk want “game over” to mean that if KXL is built, the end of the world will follow. But KXL would only represent 0.33% of oil pipelines in North America, so I don’t understand how this cuts big either way. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/372896/keystone-xl-would-swell-us-pipeline-coverage-0033-percent-deroy-murdock

  15. Otter (ClimateOtter on Twitter) says:

    He looks tired. I think he should take a long vacation… best place would be a monastery where they take a vow of silence.

  16. Jimbo says:

    What has been the scientific skill of the astronomer and physicist Dr. James Hansen? Today he wants to disown his earlier speculations. You decide on the air-conditioner tampering astronomer. If he was right about soot and non-co2 greenhouse gases then he is going against the consensus up to 2000 and 2003.

    James Hansen et. al. – PNAS – 4 November 2003
    Abstract
    Soot climate forcing via snow and ice albedos
    Plausible estimates for the effect of soot on snow and ice albedos (1.5% in the Arctic and 3% in Northern Hemisphere land areas) yield a climate forcing of +0.3 W/m2 in the Northern Hemisphere. The “efficacy” of this forcing is ~2, i.e., for a given forcing it is twice as effective as CO2 in altering global surface air temperature. This indirect soot forcing may have contributed to global warming of the past century, including the trend toward early springs in the Northern Hemisphere, thinning Arctic sea ice, and melting land ice and permafrost……
    http://www.pnas.org/content/101/2/423.abstract

    FAIL?

    James Hansen et. al. – PNAS – August 15, 2000
    Abstract
    Global warming in the twenty-first century: An alternative scenario
    A common view is that the current global warming rate will continue or accelerate. But we argue that rapid warming in recent decades has been driven mainly by non-CO2 greenhouse gases (GHGs), such as chlorofluorocarbons, CH4, and N2O, not by the products of fossil fuel burning, CO2 and aerosols, the positive and negative climate forcings of which are partially offsetting. The growth rate of non-CO2 GHGs has declined in the past decade……
    http://www.pnas.org/content/97/18/9875.long

    FAIL?

    Abstract
    Hansen and Matsushima 1967
    The atmosphere and surface temperature of Venus: A dust insulation model.
    http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha05400j.html

    EXTRA FAIL.

    Why should any sane person listen to a person that argued that the world’s oceans would end up in the atmosphere? This man has been one of the most dangerous people this world has ever known.

  17. clark says:

    So if I understand this correctly, Mann said it was game over if this oil came out of the ground and his opposition was to keep that from happening. But, it has become clear over the past few years that the oil will be put on the market no matter what. I think that is Obama’s way out of this. He says, “If not building the pipeline would keep the oil in the ground, I would oppose it, but since there is nothing we can do to stop it, I believe it should be delivered Americans in as safe and economically as possible”.

  18. gbaikie says:

    -Grant A. Brown says:
    March 13, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    The point here seems to be that Keystone itself does not spell “game over,” but rather tapping into all of the unconventional oil and gas in the world would spell game over, and Keystone is the first step down that path.-

    So game over is a good thing?

    I would say mining the vast amount unconventional natural gas in the ocean is a game changer.
    But realize that conventional ways to mine oil and gas will continue for centuries- but they will be comparatively less significant.

  19. fhhaynie says:

    When it comes to deciding between protecting our grandchildren from a possible degree rise in global temperature some time in the distant future and meeting our present day energy needs, most of us favor the latter. Smart politicians recognize that and will vote accordingly. “Game over”.

  20. Steven Kopits says:

    Hansen is saying that the pipeline provides access to a large volume of unconventional oil; he seems to be against the pipeline for that purpose. Menendez seems to be backing away from that view. He seems to be leaning towards approval, at least in the video.

    According to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), oil sands (ie, unconventional) production was 2.15 mbpd in 2013, forecast to rise to 5.5 mbpd by 2030. Current global oil production is 90 mbpd; 2030 oil production is variably estimated at 95-107 mbpd, depending on the source. Thus, Canadian unconventional production today–without Keystone XL–amounts to 2.4% of global oil production; and in 2030 is forecast to provide 5.1-5.7% of global oil supply.

    Thus, the most at stake in Canada at present is about 3.3% of global production in 2030, as that 2.4 mbpd is already being produced, and therefore would be unaffected whether Keystone is built or not.

    In any event, the numbers are not particularly material, either today or in 2030. For a bit of context, in the four years since Feb. 2010, production from just the US Bakken, Eagle Ford and Permian plays has increased by 2.5 mbpd, compared to a forecast increase of 3.2 mbpd from Canadian oil sands between now and 2030.

    It’s hard to see what the big deal is.

  21. Jimbo says:

    What can I say? Why should any sane person listen to a man suffering from the Messiah Syndrome?

    DR JAMES HANSEN
    “…it gets warmer and warmer then the oceans begin to evaporate and water vapor is a very strong green house gas, even more powerful than carbon dioxide. So you can get to a situation where, it just, the oceans will begin to boil and the planet becomes, uhh, so hot that the ocean ends up in the atmosphere, and that happened to Venus…”

    That’s Hansen going against the consensus again. What can I say?

    “Some thresholds that all would consider dangerous have no support in the literature as having a non-negligible chance of occurring. For instance, a “runaway greenhouse effect” —analogous to Venus–appears to have virtually no chance of being induced by anthropogenic activities…..”
    IPCC
    http://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session31/inf3.pdf

    “There is no possibility of such runaway greenhouse conditions occurring on the Earth.”
    Sir John Houghton – [Former IPCC author, helped set up the IPCC]
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/68/6/R02

    Pull out the popcorn and listen to the loon.

  22. Gunga Din says:

    I sure hope it’s “Game Over” so we can get back to reality.

  23. Hans Erren says:

    Given the fact that, according to Tol, global warming is net beneficial for the 60 years, we “will be screwing our children and grandchildren” if we don’t use our fossil fuels.

    Because if we don’t use readily available fossil fuels , then energy prices will rise, and so the complete cost of living, in particular for the poor.

  24. Jimbo says:

    James Hansen looks like Homer Simpson. Know I know why.

  25. Gamecock says:

    It was game over in January 2012 when Obama said, “No.”

    All else is intrigue.

  26. Chad Wozniak says:

    @albertalad -
    According to Forbes, most of the ads for the campaign in Florida during the last two weeks had to do with global warming – Sink a believer, Jolly a skeptic. I suppose we can hope that this entered into Jolly’s victory as well. And one would think that if global warming alarmism can be tied to Obamacare, that will help drag down the AGWers.

  27. ConfusedPhoton says:

    The increasingly irrelevent Jim Hansen, the nursing home awaits!

  28. tally says:

    Tar Sands oil is super expensive to pull out of the ground (lift cost) and “refine” so it is usable. It costs about $85 bucks a barrel. We currently, and for the foreseeable future, have access to much cheaper oil. Tar sand will become viable as other sources run out and technology catches up. This will occur long after most of us are around to care. Many an investor in the tar sands has been handed his hat. Shell lost a couple $billion and I have been personally shown deals at ..20 – .25 cents on the dollar from what was originally paid……Still to expensive!

  29. Chad Wozniak says:

    @Gamecock – Game just might not be over despite Obama and Kerry, the way Democrats like Landrieu, Menendez and Manchin might be coming around to support it. Veto-proof majority in Congress? I don’t think that’s impossible. Democrats don’t want to dig themselves any deeper than they already are.

  30. Jimbo says:

    I find it a funny coincidence that cold countries like Canada and Russia couldn’t give a XXL about global yawning. Cold also kills and they know about cold. Heck, even warm India doesn’t give an XL for anything else.

  31. albertalad says:

    tally says:
    Man – there is no such thing as tar sands. Tar is a man made product. We do NOT mine tar. Never have.

  32. Dave in Canmore says:

    Agree with Jimbo. Why is someone with such a well-published track record of prediction failure listened to in the highest halls?

    At what point do people go “oh yeah, nothing this guy predicted is happenening, maybe he doesn’t understand things very well. Lets find someone else.”

  33. albertalad says:

    I’d like to add for tally’s benefit – 85% of all OIL SANDS produce a barrel for as low a $25.00 a barrel on all our in situ sites.

  34. Jimbo says:

    Sheesh, I’m now like Homer Simpson. :-) I meant to say the following.

    “James Hansen looks like Homer Simpson. Now I know why.”

  35. david(Mk2) says:

    The clue here is that The AGW/CC Bogeyman must always remain behind you for him to exist…..

  36. Latitude says:

    oh well, just ship all of the oil and coal to China…..that’ll fix it

  37. John Whitman says:

    March 13, 2014

    Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Keystone XL

    Hansen said,

    [. . .]

    “This is game over if you don’t understand; we have to leave that extremely large amount of carbon in the ground.”

    [. . .]

    But where has proof been written down that it is ‘game over’ and show us the data that proves it?

    Statement of Patrick Moore, Ph.D. Before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Subcommittee on Oversight

    February 25, 2014

    ‘Natural Resource Adaptation: Protecting ecosystems and economies’

    “Chairman Whitehouse, Ranking Member Inhofe, and members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify at today’s hearing.

    [. . .]

    There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years. If there were such a proof it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.”

    [. . ]

    Hansen saying game over is simply misleading and an exaggeration that is unsupported. He is merely stating an ‘a priori’ premise that he arrived at via an ideological bias.

    John

  38. David Ball says:

    Just wait until they find out how big the oil sands in Saskatchewan are.

    Those against fossil fuels are welcome to stop using them.

    You cannot see Hansen’s clown shoes under the desk.

  39. garymount says:

    First he says “peak”, then he says “extremely large quantity”. Well, which is it?

  40. Pathway says:

    The only thing screwing our children is 100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities, ie medicare and social security.

  41. Patrick says:

    “Jimbo says:

    March 13, 2014 at 4:13 pm

    DR JAMES HANSEN
    “…it gets warmer and warmer then the oceans begin to evaporate and water vapor is a very strong green house gas, even more powerful than carbon dioxide. So you can get to a situation where, it just, the oceans will begin to boil and the planet becomes, uhh, so hot that the ocean ends up in the atmosphere, and that happened to Venus…”

    If Hansen really did say this then, IMO, renders his comments about non-Earth atmospheres etc worthless! The guy is clearly smart, but this makes him look as idiotic as Gore.

  42. garymount says:

    It will never be game over because, if global warming truly manifests itself, we will take action gladly, all of us. I would personally gladly switch from burning the fossil fuel natural gas to burning wood to heat my home in winter, spring and fall.

  43. Col Mosby says:

    Let’s see now…. Hansen and colleagues first demand that nuclear power be used in place of “useless” renewables, and now no longer opposes the pipeline. I wonder how long before the greenie weenies come to the realization that Hansen is a “denier” and traitor to the cause?
    When he demands that Obama , rather than himself, be handcuffed at the White House, they
    may finally see the light. At last. Then Greenpeace will immediately make him a non-person. etc. etc.

  44. Jimbo says:

    Here is what some people thought of the astronomer in charge.

    Astronauts Join Skeptics of Global Warming
    http://www.newsmax.com/Murdock/NASA-astronauts-global-warming/2012/05/16/id/439252/

    James Hansen’s Former NASA Supervisor Declares Himself a Skeptic – Says Hansen ‘Embarrassed NASA’, ‘Was Never Muzzled’, & Models ‘Useless’
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/27/james-hansens-former-nasa-supervisor-declares-himself-a-skeptic-says-hansen-embarrassed-nasa-was-never-muzzled/

    Dr. James Hansen never risked his life to go to the Moon and neither did I. However, I have never frightened people with fairy tales. Hansen should really think about his grandchildren, they will hang their heads in shame for having a crazy grandpappy in their gene pool.

  45. Jimbo says:

    Patrick says:
    March 13, 2014 at 4:57 pm

    “Jimbo says:

    March 13, 2014 at 4:13 pm

    DR JAMES HANSEN
    “…it gets warmer and warmer then the oceans begin to evaporate and water vapor is a very strong green house gas, even more powerful than carbon dioxide. So you can get to a situation where, it just, the oceans will begin to boil and the planet becomes, uhh, so hot that the ocean ends up in the atmosphere, and that happened to Venus…”

    If Hansen really did say this then, IMO, renders his comments about non-Earth atmospheres etc worthless! The guy is clearly smart, but this makes him look as idiotic as Gore.

    Watch the video I posted.

  46. Pat Frank says:

    Hansen: “We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren [if we] use those unconventional fossil fuels. The science is crystal clear on that…

    This is the crux of his thinking, but the science is no better than murky on that. Consensus greenhouse thinking is that all the extra kinetic energy produced by industrial CO2 ends up as sensible heat in the atmosphere and the oceans, as though the climate had no other channels of response. It is an utterly half-cocked idea.

  47. Randle Dewees says:

    “the nursing home awaits!”

    Don’t gloat – it awaits you too

  48. goldminor says:

    So is Obama going to declare war on Canada, or something? At Hansen,s recommendation?

  49. Martin 457 says:

    As I understand, the oil sands are leaking into the environment already. The cleaning of this area wouldn’t happen if they can’t sell the oil to help pay for the clean-up crew.

    I live in Nebraska where there are other legal issues and a major aquifer in the way of this. Not like I wish to see more pipelines running through here but, at least this one does some good.

    My grandkids could benefit from this actually.

  50. Phil says:

    @ Jimbo on March 13, 2014 at 3:49 pm

    Thanks for the link to Joe Romm’s piece at think progress (i). If you look at the chart at the top of the page, tar sands and heavy oil are grouped together. We are currently importing about 9% of our oil from Venezuela. According to this source,

    …the two countries with the largest known deposits of heavy crude and bituminous sands [are] Canada and Venezuela.

    Yet, one does not hear a peep about our imports of Venezuelan oil. Indeed, an argument could be made that, for similar oils, importing it from Canada using a pipeline would have a smaller carbon footprint than importing it from Venezuela for transportation reasons.

  51. Greg White says:

    Honest question; if Hansen is advocating nuclear energy as a solution to “global warming” this tells me that he is not a “no growth, lower energy, regressive” environmentalist. Is there a chance he fully understands the non-science of CAGW, but is using it as a tool to promote nuclear to the die-hard 60/70′s generation environmentalists? I feel that is what “Pandora’s Promise” is doing.

  52. Pamela Gray says:

    Ahhhh. The Gnostic Gospel of Climate Change. Only those who “understand” will be saved. Got it.

  53. David L. Hagen says:

    Hansen makes a perceptive comment:

    . We’re probably close to peak-oil for conventional oil. . . .we have to leave that extremely large amount of carbon in the ground.”

    And yet no solution to provide replacement fuel in time.
    Consequently he appears seeking to shut down our economy.

  54. Fred Blackstone says:

    Only the WUWT lemmings could interpret Hansen’s position as pro pipeline

  55. joshuah says:

    Game Over is what happens after you fail to collect any tipping Points.

  56. Box of Rocks says:

    ‘It’ was “game over” when an oracle of omaha bought into a pipeline company needs the KXL to be built…..

  57. jjs says:

    The way I read his comments is that if we tap into our natural resources it is game over for the environmental movement. They will have lost because they we will never turn back and never listen to them again. They know they are wrong about Co2 but still feel progress of the human race is evil and need to stop it by controlling energy. By agreeing with nuclear he is putting something on the table as a head fake knowing it will be tied up in legal for years.

    He knows there is no peak oil but he also knows he can’t say that since that is one of the last cards they hold in the propaganda wars. I am convinced that they hate humans, human progress and they hate not being in control of us.

  58. So, James Hansen wants man-made “peak oil” to happen right now. This to keep all that CO2 from being released where the plants can get to it and grow faster. But, in addition, oil (petroleum) is use to make plastics.

  59. John Whitman says:

    Hansen theory was demonstrated wrong by climate observations.

    Listening to him being coy with ‘games’ verbiage make him duplicitous. His has been for some time.

    John

  60. I might be suggested that if 58 commenters can’t make head nor tail of what Hansen said, then the best that can be said is that Hansen didn’t say anything at all – just unintelligible rambling, which pretty much sums up his entire career.

  61. Damian says:

    The oil trains are trashing the tracks. They are always down for maintenance. Build the damn pipeline you boneheads.

  62. It would be impossible for life on earth to exist without carbon.

    Carbon is the main component of sugars, proteins, fats,
    DNA, muscle tissue, pretty much everything in your body.

    Carbon is the basis of organic molecules (carbohydrates,
    proteins, nucleic acids, and lipids). We, as humans, consume
    these organic molecules to create energy (ATP) necessary for
    bodily functions. Thus, carbon is the fundamental element that
    allows us to live.

    Carbon dioxide is the gas which is used to transport the
    carbon between living organisms in this process, CO2 is
    a rare but essential gas in this respect, and Hansen,
    Gore, Mann et al, are ludicrous fools in attempting to
    demonize the gas which is of course responsible for
    their own continuing miserable lives.

    All of Hansen’s clothes in the above picture are made from
    Carbon compounds, and without them he would be naked,
    unless he were to wear a suit of ceramic tiles or something.

  63. RACookPE1978 says:

    Martin 457 says:
    March 13, 2014 at 5:44 pm

    As I understand, the oil sands are leaking into the environment already. The cleaning of this area wouldn’t happen if they can’t sell the oil to help pay for the clean-up crew.

    I live in Nebraska where there are other legal issues and a major aquifer in the way of this. Not like I wish to see more pipelines running through here but, at least this one does some good.

    My grandkids could benefit from this actually.

    That oil has ALREADY leaked out and is INSIDE the ground leaking still to the ground water.

    Like the Montana and North Dakota coal field found BURNING in exposed beds when Lewis and Clark paddled past back in 1804, that carbon has been released into the environment ever since the coal fields were “founded” millions of years ago. It is ONLY NOW that we are putting that wasted oil and pollution to good use.

    Your grandkids will be far safer with that being used wisely and transported safely underground – rather than sent by overloaded trains above ground right through the middle of EVERY little town and big city between the oil sands and the NY ports … Where they will be emptied into barges and sent downstream on open rivers, then to be re-pumped into above ground storage tanks, then to be pumped into oil tankers in the middle of NY harbors to go overseas …

    By the way, all those excess union jobs on the trains, in the transfer yards, on the barges, in the next transfer yards, and on those ports would be threatened by pumping oil safely underground directly to the non-union southern ports ….

    Think THAT has anything to do with the forces sending money and political encouragement to the protesters ans POLITICIANS opposing this?

  64. R. Shearer says:

    Tar actually has been mined by people for various uses for hundreds of years, just maybe not on a large scale for fuel use in internal combustion engines. http://www.sjvgeology.org/history/tarpits_hist.html

    But today however, Suncor does it profitably on an industrial scale. http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=SU+Profile

  65. ChasMartel says:

    I interpreted the dear Mr Hansen’s words differently than Anthony did. I heard them the same way I suspect Mr. Blackstone heard them to mean. Does that make me a non-lemming? Ad Hominem! It’s all the the alarmists got left!

    Query me this. What’s the difference between an atom of carbon emitted by the burning on a liter of methane from a natural gas well produced in the Eagle Ford field in south Texas and an atom of carbon produced from the burning of “unconventional” fossil fuels? These people are intellectually pathetic.

  66. Don B says:

    Even though Warren Buffett’s railroad profits from hauling oil, he said on a recent CNBC interview that he would vote in favor of Keystone XL. And he is an Obama supporter.

  67. gnomish says:

    Hansen: “We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren”
    the grandchildren prince charles wants to come back as a virus to annihilate?
    the grandchildren suzuki refers to as maggots?
    those grandchildren?

  68. Gamecock says:

    Chad Wozniak says:
    March 13, 2014 at 4:27 pm

    @Gamecock – Game just might not be over despite Obama and Kerry, the way Democrats like Landrieu, Menendez and Manchin might be coming around to support it. Veto-proof majority in Congress? I don’t think that’s impossible. Democrats don’t want to dig themselves any deeper than they already are.

    ================================

    Obama will be President until January, 2017. Nothing changes til then.

  69. John Whitman says:

    gnomish says:
    March 13, 2014 at 7:49 pm

    Hansen: “We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren”
    the grandchildren prince charles wants to come back as a virus to annihilate?
    the grandchildren suzuki refers to as maggots?
    those grandchildren?

    - – - – - – - –

    gnomish,

    Pity the grandchildren of those who have no intellectual integrity.

    They will live in their grandparent’s looming shadow.

    To break free of their grandparent’s intellectual legacy handicaps them.

    John

  70. Max Hugoson says:

    Isn’t the emotional flatness of a true expert, a wonder to admire. Why, I think I stopped using language in this LOADED, EMOTIONALLY LADEN, LUDICROUS manner, when I was…what…about 13 years old? Oh that would be when I joined the Civil Air Patrol, and learned Military drill and ceremonies and had my first introduction to regimented civility, and objective communication standards. I’m sure Hansen has had…oh wait, never mind. I’ve seen his bio. No Military service. AH! Now I understand, they evidently don’t promote civility of language and non-emotional communication at institutions of “higher learning”. Ah yes, hence came the hippies and “war protesters”. SILLY ME!

  71. Chad Wozniak says:

    @Gamecock -
    I didn’t say likely – just not impossible. But in any event, we’re stuck with der Fuehrer till 1/20/17, as you say – unless Congress somehow, after the 2014 elections (assuming his Hitlerness doesn’t cancel them) can find it in itself to impeach him. This lawsuit from the House of Representatives to compel him to obey the law is a pathetic exercise in rank stinking cowardice if ever there was. They could at least have shaken things up a little by introducing articles of impeachment. He’s certainly done enough to warrant that.

  72. Martin 457 says:

    RACookPE1978 says;

    Oh no. The pipeline isn’t going anywhere near NY. It goes south from here. Multiple refineries between here and the gulf of Mexico. I do agree with the rest though.

  73. Canman says:

    Science editor-in-cheif, Marcia McNutt just endorsed Keystone. In his book, Energy for Future Presidents, Richard Muller says one of the main issues is energy security and that means having enough liquid fuel for transportation. I hope Hansen’s toning down of his hysterics means sanity will return to Washington.

  74. Mac the Knife says:

    Chad Wozniak says:
    March 13, 2014 at 8:17 pm
    This lawsuit from the House of Representatives to compel him to obey the law is a pathetic exercise in rank stinking cowardice if ever there was. They could at least have shaken things up a little by introducing articles of impeachment. He’s certainly done enough to warrant that.

    Chad,
    I agree with much of what you said. First things first, though. We need to focus on making the largest conservative gains in local, state, and federal offices possible in the coming November 2014 elections. Starting Articles of Impeachment now against Our Dear Capon would only allow him to play the martyr and claim racism… and that would rally his supporters in the main stream media! For the short term, better to let the continuing quagmire of ObamaKare suck all who supported it down into their self made maelstrom, as we come into the Nov 14 elections.

    In the mean while, I’m again working with local grassroots groups in the south Seattle area to elect the best conservative candidates we can get at local and state levels. I strongly urge you and similarly minded folks to do the same. It’s essential that we do more than just ‘talk’ about our concerns on blogs. We have achieved a tenuous conservative control of the Washington State House and hope to expand conservative gains again this year. If we can make it happen here on The Left Coast, it can happen anywhere, with hard work.
    Mac

  75. Martin 457 says:

    I’m sorry for the radical left wing link.

  76. hunter says:

    The leaders of the opposition to the KXL are acting very cynical.
    I do have a question:
    Why run that picture of Homer Simpson with the post?
    That is really unfair to Dr. Hansen.

  77. Mac the Knife says:

    I’d like to extend a personal Thank You! to our Alberta neighbors, for having the courage to continue cleaning up the biggest oil spill on the planet, even in the face of Hansen’s et.al.Luddite attacks! Bravo!!

    And the fact that you are making a profit from this horrific environmental disaster warms the cockles of my Scottish ancestors hearts!!!! That’s the kind of ‘sustainability’ I can really support.
    Keep up the excellent environmental work, Alberta! You’re preparing a much cleaner and safer environment for all children on Planet Earth.
    Mac

  78. jai mitchell says:

    James Hansen said, (in your quote)

    “. But the science tells us we can’t do that. We’re screwing our children and our grandchildren and all the young people in future generations if we think we can use those unconventional fossil fuels. The science is crystal clear on that and the world is just ignoring the science.”

    so how does that mean, as you quote later, So not even James Hansen . . . believes that Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.

    answer. . .it doesn’t!

    in fact, earlier in his opening statement he said,

    If we build this expensive pipeline, it will facilitate the extraction of much more than if we don’t build it. As soon as you put a price on carbon that is significant and rising, one of the first things that falls off the table is tar sands, and Canada knows that, that is why they are so desperate to get the United States to approve this. “If we don’t approve it, a lot of that tar sands won’t be developed.

    Here is the link to the clip
    http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4487094/hansen-xl

    not sure if the embed works.

  79. pat says:

    Big Mining, Big Oil, Big Money – all with the CAGW program:

    Vale, Braskem to enter cap-and-trade simulation in Brazil
    SAO PAULO, March 13 (Reuters) – Some of the largest Latin American corporations including mining company Vale and financial conglomerate Itau Unibanco, will take part in a nine-month simulation of a cap-and-trade system in Brazil starting on Friday…
    https://www.pointcarbon.com/news/reutersnews/1.4497500

    Braskem is the largets petrochemical company in Latin America!

    Braskem: Manifesto on Climate Change
    We must Mature to be Green
    The main cause of climate change around the world, greenhouse gases (GHGs) represent a threat to life and are currently an immense environmental problem. According to International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) data, the global temperature has increased by more than 0.7oC since the beginning of the industrial era.
    The consequences of this trend, such as water shortages and increased problems relating to health, hunger, etc., could have serious impacts on life on this planet, especially humankind…
    Click here to read the Braskem Manifesto on Climate Change.
    (MANIFESTO BEGINS WITH)
    Being Green is a matter of Maturity
    Maturity is being aware of one’s responsibilities…
    http://www.braskem.com.br/site.aspx/braskem-manifesto-Climate-Change

  80. Mac the Knife says:

    hunter says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:17 pm
    Why run that picture of Homer Simpson with the post?
    That is really unfair to Dr. Hansen.

    hunter,
    Being mistaken for Dr. Hansen is an insult to Homer J. Simpson!
    D’OH!

  81. rogerknights says:

    Don B says:
    March 13, 2014 at 7:41 pm

    Even though Warren Buffett’s railroad profits from hauling oil, he said on a recent CNBC interview that he would vote in favor of Keystone XL. And he is an Obama supporter.

    This could be a “tell” that Obama will give it the green light.

  82. jdgalt says:

    If it does turn out that we’re anywhere near “peak oil” today — and that’s pretty much discredited, or why did “The Oil Drum” blog close down — that just means we’d better start building SPS or other permanent solutions to energy shortages.

    For Man to return to a pre-industrial economy — or even to allow very much of the world to remain that way — is a lot more unacceptable than any other conceivable doom. Sooner or later the few remaining die-hard greens who can’t accept that fact are going to need to be treated as the traitors to our species they are.

  83. Chad Wozniak says:

    @Mac the Knife -
    I would agree that the MSM would come out in full ass-kissing frenzy if Congress were to challenge his Hitlerness before the elections. You may well be right that this would help him, although with the public now better able to see and feel firsthand more of what he is doing, and the obviously increasing reliance on the web for news, as opposed to the MSM dinosaurs, it still seems thinkable to go ahead with a move to impeach – especially if folks like Dr. Ben Carson, Tim Scott and Allen West joined the effort (can’t cry racism there).

    My biggest concern is that der Fuehrer will be able to manipulate the election much as he did in 2012 by wholesale attacks on and interference with opponents and outright voter fraud (like the Black Panther intimidation and the 30,000 to 0 vote in a nonexistent precinct, in Pennsylvania) – and I really do think he would not be above attempting to cancel the elections. There are quite a few of his acolytes who would love to see him declare himself president for life, just as Chavez did in Venezuela, and I am certain he has studied intensely how Chavez amassed his power.

    It will help, sadly, if this winter continues as rough as it has been into April and May and we have a poor summer – that will further soften the quicksand upon which the alarmists’ case rests – but at an awful human cost that no one (except people like Holdren, methinks) would want.

  84. JJ says:

    “Even Dr. James Hansen doesn’t believe Keystone XL itself will significantly increase greenhouse gas emissions.”

    That doesn’t follow from what Hansen is quoted as having said. He’s an idiot. Let him have full credit for it.

  85. Mac the Knife says:

    Martin 457 says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:15 pm
    I’m sorry for the radical left wing link.

    Martin 457,
    No apology needed. We all need to ‘look the pig in the eye’ now and then! I found the rabid comments there enlightening. Excerpt follows from ‘Frank’:
    Frank
    March 12, 2012 at 3:41 am
    He better re-think his position because this pipeline is not going to happen. If our corrupt government thinks it can pull this off, they also better re-think their position. This pipeline will create the first real revolution in this country, guaranteed. For those of you that are morally against it, prepare yourself for a battle.

    That poor Frank fellow sounds on the verge of violence, don’t you think? As a peace loving man, I’ve also found the following maxim to be instructive: If you open the door to violence, don’t complain if it gets too rough for you! I doubt that Frank has met that type of determined ‘morality’ yet, but it is time he did.

    Poor Frank is a bit confused on his US history as well it seems… We had a bit of a revolutionary scrum with the Kings Men (and hired Hessian mercs) a couple of centuries back. That (poor Frank) was the definitive ‘first’ real revolution in the US of A. Guaranteed.

    Thanks for the link, Martin! The article was instructive and the ignorant comments were revealing.
    Mac

  86. jai mitchell says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:28 pm
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Your comment is irrelevant. Huge Rail terminal facilities are under construction, several other pipeline projects are in the works, most of Keystone is already built, the oil will flow whether KXL is approved by Obama or not. Right now, part of our problem in Canada is to get the railway companies to deliver our last years bumper crop of grain to port to go to countries in need of food instead of other products (like oil). Get your priorities right. Building Keystone takes pressure off other infrastructure.

  87. $27 per barrel. Is what the Tar Sands Oil costs. From Wikipedia: “Since Great Canadian Oil Sands (now Suncor) started operation of its mine in 1967, bitumen has been extracted on a commercial scale from the Athabasca Oil Sands by surface mining. In the Athabasca sands there are very large amounts of bitumen covered by little overburden, making surface mining the most efficient method of extracting it. The overburden consists of water-laden muskeg (peat bog) over top of clay and barren sand. The oil sands themselves are typically 40 to 60 metres (130 to 200 ft) deep, sitting on top of flat limestone rock. Originally, the sands were mined with draglines and bucket-wheel excavators and moved to the processing plants by conveyor belts. In recent years, companies such as Syncrude and Suncor have switched to much cheaper shovel-and-truck operations using the biggest power shovels (100 or more tons) and dump trucks (400 tons) in the world.[27] This has held production costs to around US$27 per barrel of synthetic crude oil despite rising energy and labour costs.[28]“

  88. Paul Pierett says:

    Nuclear is the direct and indirect cause of thousands of deaths since the first Atomic Bomb nuclear would be his answer to CO2. The USA had Three-Mile Island, the Russians had Chernobyl and Japan had its disaster and their stuff is still washing up on our shores and killing wildlife till this day.

    At the present accident rate, I don’t see his logic. Green energy plants are closing up and China is shutting down most of theirs. Dr. Watts has a great page on the wind energy.

    Most unfortunate to have him as a star witness.

  89. Karl Blair says:

    I would very much like to know at what point will cheats and liars like Hansen et al have devalued their opinion so much that they will be ignored by all. Just how much fakery and foolery can they get away with?

  90. Robertv says:

    This is what ‘Game Over’ looks like for most people.

    Annual household energy bills could rise by more than £600 within seven years so power companies can keep the lights on.

    In a new forecast, consumer champion Which? has predicted energy companies will need to spend £118bn on new infrastructure between now and 2020.

    This would include building new power stations, replacing grids and building wind farms as part of a drive to sustain Britain’s power supply and cut down on carbon emissions.

    Which? believes this cost will inevitably be passed on to consumers, and that households and businesses will foot the bill.

    This would mean that the average bill would exceed £2,000 a year even if wholesale costs of gas and electricity remain stable – an annual rise of £640 per household.

    http://news.sky.com/story/1225709/annual-energy-bills-to-rocket-by-2020

  91. somersetsteve says:

    The best legacy we can leave for the worlds future generations is economic development across the globe. Prosperous economies are better for the environment….poor economies are bad news for the environment. Prosperous economies lead to better education, better health and lower birth rates . The key to prosperity is cheap, reliable energy. With current technologies that means a big role for fossil fuels. Burn them lean, mean and clean but burn them . Deliberately emasculating current ‘First World’ economies via loony energy policies will slow down global demand and thus slow down global economic growth…..thats both a shocking legacy for the Worlds future generations and seriously bad news for the environment. Being pro fossil fuel is therefore pro planet, pro people and pro a better life for all…the extra CO2 in the atmos and its miniscule impact on global temps. is of little consequence compared to that…..

  92. Paul Coppin says:

    Nero fiddles while Rome burns… Our local Cdn natural gass supplier, the largest in these parts, has just put in a rate increease request to government for approval, amounting to a 40% hike for the average homeowner.in southern Ontario. Gas bills of $1000pa are expected to rise to $1400. The provincial govt here has already predicted (ie will permit) electricity rates to rise by 42% by 2016. The impact of these changes will be catastrophic for a large segment of the society here and will complete depress the economy. There is no capcity in the economic structure to absorb energy hikes of this scale, and of course, the largest hit group will be the middle class and the aging baby boomers. The children will never be able to leave home as we will soon be looking at 3-4 income families in order to keep a roof over one’s head and support the tax cost to pay for those who can’t.
    There will be no need for carbon taxes to shrink the econmy and standard of living back to the early 1800s level. Unaffordable energy for most of the northern hemisphere will do it all. Those living in the sub-tropics better get ready, the population density is going grow beyond comfort sooner than you think.

  93. urederra says:

    Well, Hansen’s models seem to work both ways, predicting an ice age in the seventies or a fire age in the nineties, depending on the modeler´s mood. So, who cares?

  94. hunter says:

    Paul Pierett,
    Lumping atomic bombs with nuclear power, and implying three mile island was like Chernobyl is deceptive on your part. Was your intent to deceive?

  95. RACookPE1978 says:

    Martin 457 says:
    March 13, 2014 at 8:36 pm (replying to RACookPE1978)

    Oh no. The pipeline isn’t going anywhere near NY. It goes south from here. Multiple refineries between here and the gulf of Mexico.

    True. The Keystone pipeline WILL go north – south, connecting to already-existing pipelines both north and south of the new connection.

    What I was perhaps not clear on is that – until the KXL connection north-south through the middle of the country completes – the oil sands crude product must go BY Buffet’s TRAINS either east or west to ports to be stored and trans-shipped to refineries on the south coast (TX, LA, AL, etc.) or on the west coast, or overseas.

    So, until the KXL completes, the Canadian oil is flowing through union-paid ports and train-stations on the east and west coasts.

  96. C.M. Carmichael says:

    If you were having a discussion regarding apples, and someone gave a prepared speech on spagetti, you would dismiss it as off topic. When they are having a discussion about the transport of Canadian oil, Dr. Hansen continues to discuss “tar”, it is not the same, and a scientist who cannot tell the difference is not very bright.

  97. Does anyone know how much stock in Railway companies the foundations that support the fight against the Keystone XL hold?

  98. Gary Pearse says:

    Grant A. Brown says:
    March 13, 2014 at 3:42 pm

    “The point here seems to be that Keystone itself does not spell “game over,” but rather tapping into all of the unconventional oil and gas in the world would spell game over, and Keystone is the first step down that path.”

    This is the trouble with what I will grace as “debate” on the issue. It is far from the first step. SunCor has been producing it since 1967. Oh and fracking began in a Kansas gas field in 1947. Prior to hyrdraulic fracturing (fracking), a more destructive tech was used: torpedoing which was down hole blasting with nitroglycerine. This technique was first used in 1864! Fracking is much more benign and precise.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_oil_sands#Oil_sands_production

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_%28petroleum%29

    I can see why companies saw the need for such secrecy that is no longer possible. Imagine where we would be in terms of transportation or even living if that darn fracking was widely known over the last 150 years!!

  99. RobertC says:

    “Game over”, it’s hard to play with a broken hockey stick.

  100. Grant says:

    Goldminor at 5:40
    “So is Obama going to declare war on Canada, or something? At Hansen,s recommendation?”

    Be careful, we can move amongst you undetected; better think about that, eh.

  101. James Ard says:

    I was happy that Senator Johnson brought up Patrick Moore in the hearing. But I would have liked for one Senator to ask Hanson if he had indeed tampered with the air conditioner back in ’88. It’s time to play hard ball with these people.

  102. Looks like it’s officially “game over” for opponents’ “game over” claims.
    ————–

    It was “game over” when Putin order Russian troops in the Ukraine.

    It looks to me like history is in the process of “repeating itself”.

    And I cite the Alaskan pipeline and the Yom Kippur War as the “history” …. and the Keystone pipeline and the Ukraine invasion as the “repeating”, …. with the latter effectively achieving the same results as the former did.

  103. Robert W Turner says:

    Why is congress even listening to this senile man in the first place?

  104. Keith Sketchley says:

    Hansen’s attempted explanation of his remarks does not make sense, not tht he does anyway.

  105. mikegeo says:

    There’s been an interesting development in Canada this past week in respect of train hauled commercial traffic. Wheat and other agricultural commodities have been at record harvest levels and have not been getting to port through trains opting for other loads – like oil and fuels. The govt is fining the railways up to $100,000 per day if they dont haul the agricultural commodities as they had promised and were directed to do.
    I suspect higher CO2 levels have led to fertilization of the crops as one factor. So, given the train accidents hauling fossil fuels, the food stuffs not going to markets, the greenies have done it once more. Block pipelines, potentially hurt the farmers and the consumers with lack of agricultural shipments, and create dangerous fuel hauling with trains. None of this had to happen if they hadn’t interfered. As has been said by others – when are the greenies going to start telling the truth, and when are they to be held accountable.

  106. Walter Allensworth says:

    Is that Hansen the convicted felon?

  107. Col Mosby says:

    The carbonophobics seldom make sense , but their opposition to Keystone was a new low in logical thinking for folks who seldom follow or provide logical arguments. I never understood why they thought the public was stupid enough to buy into this argument, and always believed that this would discredit them eventually. Looks like eventually has finally arrived.

  108. Mike G says:

    Stupdi Answer!!!! Building the pipelie will not result in more fossil fuels being extracted and used. It only determines where those particular barrels of oil end up going and who gets the economic benefit from it. If we don’t build THIS pipeline then the oil goes over seas. Regardless it will be extracted.

  109. Perry says:

    But, but, but, —— there isn’t enough carbon in the ground, Jimmy, to raise global temperatures by more than 1.2 degrees Celsius Jimmy!!!!

    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/08/Earth-is-safe-from-global-warming-say-the-men-who-put-man-on-the-moon

  110. Perry says:

    Whoops, wrong Jimmy!!!!

  111. Chad Wozniak says:

    @mikegeo -
    You point out a particularly heinous side effect of the refusal of those worms, Kerry and Obama, to approve the Keystone – yet another slap in the face to America’s closet and truest friend. Your government in Canada is being out in an impossible position thanks to these reprobates and their pandering to the eco-Nazis here in the US.

    As an American, I feel obligated to apologize for the insult and the physical harm being done to Canada and to our Canadian friends by these criminally negligent and malicious individuals.

Comments are closed.