Is this not the evidence we need to push the keystone Pipeline through?

Thanks for the link, it's a shame that the children here will not go to it, and read it.

Pragmatic evidence does not matter to corporate interests.

Something not covered that I find curious in the article is this; If steel pipes are highly susceptible to corrosion effects from the sun, along with ordinary ambient environmental corrosion affects, why didn't they make the pipeline out of 2-3"thick plastic pipes with flexible joints to allow for expansion/contraction of the various temperatures throughout the length of the proposed pipeline....

Using the cheapest steel pipe where the welds are stronger than the pipe itself makes no practical sense unless you never intended on making the pipeline stable or resistant to metal fatigue while deliberately ignoring known manufacturing defects in the pipes alone.

For all practical purposes, it would appear that transcanada wants to poison the land it's pipeline is located on, (for reasons/excuses I can't even begin to imagine why) it's not like America will ever see a drop of refined end product when the entire design of a pipeline is to transport the unrefined product to a warm-water port for year-round export to the world.

After all, it's not like America has any plans to become a manufacturing juggernaut anytime soon that would require massive amounts of refined tar-sands end products for "industry".

0bama will approve it closer to election time when he needs votes