Brooks: Obama Keystone XL Decision ‘an Anti-Environmental, Anti-Science Move’

Friday on PBS’s “NewsHour,” New York Times columnist David Brooks reacted to President Barack Obama’s decision announced earlier in the day that he does not support the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, a pipeline that would link  Canadian oil sands in Alberta to refineries in the United States via a distribution center in Cushing, OK.

Brooks suggested that since oil prices were already low, the impact may be negligible. However, he also questioned the decision, stating that the decision contradicts the stated purpose of Obama’s opposition, which was to avoid contributing to so-called anthropogenic climate change.

“Well, first of all, it could be mythical. With oil prices so low, they might never build it anyway,” Brooks said. “So, it really doesn’t matter at some level. But pretending it matters, I do think it’s an anti-environmental, anti-science move. His State Department and many other experts decided, if the oil is going to come out of the sands, it’s a lot cleaner to have it go through the pipeline than to put on trains or trucks and send it over to China through ships that way. And, so, if the oil comes out of the sands, which it’s going to do if it makes economic sense, we might as well do it in the cleanest way possible. So, to me, this is just a political decision to placate some people who he’s offended with some of his other decisions.”

Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.