Over the top on Keystone: Gimme a balanced break!

The Huffington Post just published a story about a report that said the energy supplied to the US by the proposed Keystone Pipeline would cause nthe same CO2 emissons as 51 new power plants.  That was just about the sum total of the report, even though the Huffington story kept puffing along by recappng how awful the oilsands are, etc, etc.

I saw red and wrote a rant, which is this:

Huffington...I usually love your stuff, but please give me a factual, balanced break! 

There are more than 1,500 coal-fired power plants in the US right now, so let's keep the 51 number in perspective. 

The emissions from just the oil takers that would be required to replace the Keystone supply if it had to come from Venezuela instead would be 50% of the oilsands emissions to generate that level of supply, and that doesn't include the emissions in Venezuela to generate the supply in the first place. 

There are several states in the US whose coal-fired electrical generation GHG output far exceeds the oilsands' output.

West Virginia's three largest coal-fired power plants produce the same CO2 as Alberta's 9 largest oilsands plants, and two of those EACH produce more than Alberta's largest oilsands operation (2006 figs for US, 2010 for Alberta).

In fact, West Virginia's 20 power plants produce 75% as much GHG as Alberta's 155 largest emitters (and believe me, on the scale of large emissions, when you get down as far as 155 in Alberta, you're into complete peanuts in terms of annual emissions.

And finally, the six largest emitting power plants in the US beat Alberta's 155 largest emitters hands-down! 

So go ahead, have at it, Huffington. Make your arguments against Keystone, but for heaven's sake stop acting like Republicans talking to Fox News about Obama's platform! 

Take a look in your own darn back yard before you let your environmental rage loose on people who don't deserve it as much as your own neighbors.