Blog

One thing is already clear tonight: the movement to stand up against Big Oil, dirty tar sands, and disastrous pipeline projects is strong, determined, and beautiful.

When the State Department’s long-awaited Final Environmental Impact Statement into the controversial Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline was published last week, it was met with dismay from the environmental community.

Slowly the science is catching up with fracking. Nearly every month a new scientific paper is published warning of the serious ecological or health harm caused by the controversial process.

After spending $ 5 billion on a fruitless and damaging Arctic drilling campaign, Shell has admitted defeat by suspending its plans to drill in the Arctic this summer.

Instead of the rousing call to action on the greatest challenge of our generation that it could have been, what this speech will be remembered for is the President's defense of disastrous energy policy that is doomed to fail.

A game of political musical chairs has set off a transition that will hand Big Oil the keys to the influential Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. What's worse, the whole thing could have been avoided.

As the debate on fracking heats up in the UK, politicians are keen to point out that the process is safe. The influential Conservative MP Peter Lilley appeared on TV the other night and arrogantly dismissed any concerns with fracking. “Any problems with the environment, safety and health can be satisfactorily managed”, he told the audience.

Ten years from now we could be seeing over four times more crude oil transported by rail throughout the US and Canada, some 4.5 million barrels per day. Are we comfortable with that?

As the European Commission continues to deliberate as to whether to adopt its landmark climate change legislation, called the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD), there is increasing evidence that planned pipelines in North America could turn Europe into a significant market for the Canadian tar sands.