Yesterday's Man -- Again

                                                 http://news.nationalpost.com/

There is a lot of florid rhetoric coming from supporters of the Keystone Pipeline these days --  both north and south of the border. But, Tom Walkom writes, Keystone isn't as important as its shills claim it is:

The truth is that even if Keystone fails, a pipeline from the tar sands to tidewater will be built. The Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats disagree on many things. But all agree that the so-called Energy East pipeline — from Alberta to New Brunswick — should go ahead.

Similarly, a world with no Keystone will not much affect carbon emissions. As long as there is some method of getting Alberta heavy crude to markets — by train, truck or pipeline — tarsands production will go on.

The United States has found energy reserves in North Dakota, so Alberta bitumen is no longer the prize  it once was. And, if Alberta oil finds its way to the Atlantic, it will make its way to world markets.

The truth is that Keystone is an idea whose time has passed. And its chief shill has proved -- once again -- that he is yesterday's man.

It's Not Inevitable

Stephen Harper has said that the Keystone XL pipeline is "inevitable."  He bases his conclusion on a simplistic analysis: We've got the bitumen. You need it." The first part of that proposition is true. The second part isn't. But the most important truth is that, when it comes to selling Keystone, Harper has been his own enemy.

The prime minister came to Mexico intent on selling Keystone to Barack Obama. The president reminded him, however, that he has kicked the tires and has doubts about what Harper is selling:

"Stephen and I, during a break after lunch, discussed a shared interest in working together around dealing with greenhouse gas emissions. And this is something that we have to deal with."

"Stephen" has done nothing about greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, during his tenure, they have gotten worse. And, like Jim Flaherty's deficit projections, Canadian emissions are always grossly off target. That's the problem:

"I said previously that how Keystone impacted greenhouse gas emissions would affect our decision. But frankly, it has to affect all of our decisions at this stage because the science is irrefutable," Obama said.

He said increasing "severe weather patterns" has "consequences for our businesses, for our jobs, for our families, for safety and security."

"It has the potential of displacing people in ways that we cannot currently fully anticipate and will be extraordinarily costly. So I welcome the work that we can do together with Canada," Obama added.

Harper has never worked together with anyone to reduce emissions. The only notable thing he has done is to withdraw from the Kyoto protocol. He has personally fanned opposition to the pipeline.

Obama has no reason to buy Keystone. He knows what Harper doesn't. It's not inevitable.

He'll Huff And He'll Puff

Lawrence Martin wondered yesterday what could have possessed Stephen Harper to tell Barack Obama that Canada would not accept a "no" on the Keystone Pipeline:

One possibility is that it was just Stephen Harper – who’s rarely prepared to take no for an answer from anyone – being Stephen Harper.

Another possibility is that Mr. Harper knew that his long-time parliamentary secretary Dean Del Mastro was about to be hit with charges on alleged campaign spending violations. The ever-political PM may have wanted to make big splashy news on the same day in order to overshadow the negative story.

Another is that Mr. Harper senses that Mr. Obama is no longer quite as popular in Canada, making the Prime Minister less hesitant to take him on. Enough bilateral sugarcoating – let’s hit back.

Or maybe, Martin suggests, Harper is playing the long game, and sees Keystone as a 21st century analogue to the St. Lawrence Seaway:

But think again of the St. Lawrence Seaway – it took the better part of three decades to get an agreement with Washington to move ahead with the project.

When Mr. Harper said he wouldn’t take no for answer, perhaps he was thinking down the line to getting Keystone done with a more compatible White House occupant.

The problem with the Seaway analogy is the difference in context. It was not built in the wake of a warming planet. And, therefore, Mr. Harper would do well to remember what happened to the wolf who huffed and puffed and threatened to blow the house down. He could wind up being boiled in his own bitumen.