Lieberman: America ‘Probably’ Needs Keystone XL, Although It Means ‘Higher Pollution’

Appearing on Fox News, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) equivocated on the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, which Republican senators are pushing with new legislation to grant immediate approval to the foreign oil company TransCanada. Lieberman, who co-sponsored climate legislation with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) in 2003, 2005, and 2007, recognized that tar sands crude is a “higher pollution kind of fuel.” He then said the Keystone XL pipeline is “probably one way” to get fuel “in a way that doesn’t destroy our environment”:

Though this is a higher pollution kind of fuel that comes from this area of Canada, the question is, are we going to get to use it in America or is it going to be sold to China? I want it to come to America but I want it to come in way where the pipeline is built so it doesn’t have bad environmental consequences throughout this country. I support what the president did because there is a little more time necessary for the environmental reviews to be done. But I hope it doesn’t take long, because we need fuel from wherever we can get it here in the United States in a way that doesn’t destroy our environment, and this is probably one way.

Watch it:

Expansion of tar sands development in Canada in line with the 50-year lifespan of the Keystone XL pipeline would guarantee environment-destroying global warming. The purpose of the pipeline is to ship Canadian tar sands crude to Gulf Coast refineries for tax-free export to foreign markets. The Keystone XL pipeline means higher pollution for America and higher profits for foreign oil companies.

Comments are closed.