...
It looks like the administration is just trying to shore up its liberal base at a time when they have precious few crumbs to toss Democratic voters. The White House can get absolutely nothing of consequence passed in Congress, so there's really nothing left except executive orders and agency level decisions.
Personally, I can't take the environmentalist movement too seriously on Keystone. If you really believe it's almost game over on climate, then simply opposing oil sands and pipeline development won't cut it. You have to seriously be pushing the construction of massive solar and wind generating facilities across this country (of course you should also enthusiastically support nuclear, but that's a separate matter). If solar is to work, you need hundreds of power plants on the scale of the 1000 MW Blythe project being developed today in California, both solar thermal and PV, but especially thermal, and you need them built today. I know environmentalist groups support their construction, but let's be honest - environmentalists are much more passionate about blocking the development of Keystone and oil sands then they are about the development of new solar plants. And I think that's because, in the end, as much as they support clean energy - they favor
energy conservation (and as a corollary, a low growth technologically steady-state society) much more. I think that's a fundamentally wrong-headed and *moralistic* orientation on their part. But then, I also think growth is essential for the working class, especially once it has attained power.
I agree with Hugo Chavez when he says (in response to strong 4.5% quarterly growth last year): “Well, steady growth once again started within our economy! Let’s push on everyone! Workers in the vanguard! We shall overcome!"
Imagine if he said: "Well, no energy development, zero-growth, less industry, and fewer consumer goods for everyone". I'm pretty sure he'd not have lasted 13 years in office through multiple elections, a coup, and continual imperialist interference.