US Chamber assails NY Times over oil pipeline

Do they not want the ten of thousands of jobs directly and indirectly created from the pipeline? Would they rather have the U.S. be less energy secure? Do they want to be on the side of anti-growth, anti-energy protesters?

It sure looks that way to me.

The State Department is weighing the proposed $7 billion project that could greatly expand U.S. imports from Alberta’s oil sands projects.

The new Times editorial calls for State Department rejection of the project, citing the greenhouse gas emissions from energy-intensive oil sands production and tearing up Canadian boreal forests that are carbon sinks.

“It should acknowledge the environmental risk of the pipeline and the larger damage caused by tar sands production and block the Keystone XL,” the Times stated.

The editorial creates a split over the pipeline among the country's most prominent daily newspapers. The Wall Street Journal backs the project, and The Washington Post’s editorial board does too.

Environmentalists launched two weeks of civil disobedience near the White House Saturday aimed at pressuring President Obama to block the project (see our weekend coverage here and here).

U.S. Park Police arrested 110 activists over the weekend, and protest organizers say another 52 were arrested Monday.