The Environmental Protection Agency’s draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the proposed $2.7 trillion Keystone XL pipeline includes no mention of “ecological” recycling.
The EIS is one of two major environmental impact reports released this week, with the other being the US Department of Energy’s (DOE) final environmental assessment of the project.
Both EISs will likely be released before the end of the year.
The EPA’s draft EIS (PDF) was released to the public this week.
It lays out a plan for using “natural, renewable energy sources” to replace the country’s reliance on fossil fuels and “recycle” the countrys “carbon footprint.”
In an interview with Reuters, Eisner said, “The EISA is not about eco-friendly ways to recycle.
It’s about building a system that does not require new power plants and refineries and new coal plants and new oil refineries, that does no new fossil fuel development, and that does zero new energy extraction.”
But in the draft EISA, which was leaked to Reuters, the EPA stated that “the EIS will support efforts to mitigate climate change through the development of an alternative energy system that is more environmentally sustainable and does not rely on fossil fuel generation.”
“We have the opportunity to take a clean, renewable approach to energy use in the US, but we also have to take the actions to minimize greenhouse gas emissions and our carbon footprint,” EisNER said.
“The goal is to provide incentives for people to use renewable energy and to have a better quality of life.”
The draft Eis says that the EPA’s goal for its environmental impact statement (Eis) is “to be the environmental guide for the development and use of the Trans-Pecos Pipeline.”
It also states that “The project will address energy consumption, carbon emissions, air quality, water quality, land use, and climate change, and will address other issues such as the economic benefits of the pipeline and its potential impacts on our communities.”
EisNER did not respond to a request for comment.
In the draft Environmental Review, the EIS says that “we will be looking at the impact of the Keystone XL Pipeline on the environment, including its impact on climate change.
The pipeline’s proposed route will have significant impacts on wildlife, water resources, and wetlands, as well as the environment and people living near it.
The environmental impact statements for the pipeline’s route will also have important impacts on ecosystems, wildlife, and people.”
The EPA is currently in the process of finalizing the final environmental impact assessment (EI) of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal.
The TPP has been a long-time source of controversy and controversy over environmental and climate justice issues, and has received considerable media attention over the last several months.
Critics of the TPP say that the trade deal will make it easier for companies to dump carbon emissions into the atmosphere.
The Environmental Protection Protection Agency is currently developing a final environmental review of the controversial Trans-Canada tar sands oil pipeline.
The trade agreement will likely include provisions for exporting fossil fuels, and could result in significant environmental impacts.
According to a Reuters article last week, environmental groups have called for the EPA to “immediately” publish its final environmental EIS on the pipeline project, which could include a “carbon tax” on greenhouse gas and carbon emissions.
The proposed Trans Pacific Partnership would create a global energy trading system where countries like the US and Canada would set a minimum price for a basket of commodities, which would be used to determine whether or not a country is “a climate and energy leader.”
In addition, the trade agreement could make it much more difficult for countries like Mexico to implement measures to reduce emissions.
Critics say that environmental protections will be undermined by the proposed trade agreement, which will likely create a “climate-based tax” that could result the United States being forced to pay more for carbon pollution than other countries.
Critics also say that it is highly unlikely that the United Kingdom, which is one the largest emitters of greenhouse gases in the world, would be able to comply with the TPP without significant changes to its environmental laws.