State releases its final EIS, which supports moving ahead with the pipeline. The department “does not regard the No Action Alternative to be preferable to the proposed Project,” it states. Among its key findings:
-Construction of the pipeline would not affect fossil fuel demand – which it noted is expected to grow substantially over the next 10 years – meaning its absence would not contribute to the president’s “green energy” agenda, which involves compelling consumers to seek alternatives to fossil fuels;
-The “No Action Alternative” would lead to increased American imports of oil from nations that “are not secure and reliable sources of crude oil, including the Middle East, Africa, Mexico, and South America”;
-If unable to import oil through the Keystone pipeline, Canadian producers would simply seek other customers using alternative methods of transportation.