NY Times On Keystone XL: Pipelines Are A Hot Potato That Canada Should Handle

From this morning's NY Times:

Supporters of the pipeline have argued that this is oil from a friendly country and that Canada will sell it anyway. We hope Mr. Obama will see the flaw in this argument. Saying no to the pipeline will not stop Canada from developing the tar sands, but it will force the construction of new pipelines through Canada itself. And that will require Canadians to play a larger role in deciding whether a massive expansion of tar sands development is prudent. At the very least, saying no to the Keystone XL will slow down plans to triple tar sands production from just under two million barrels a day now to six million barrels a day by 2030.

Of course with greater responsibility comes a greater risk of screwing up, and I suspect these decisions, if it comes down to Canadians to make them, will test national unity in a way it has not been tested since the early 1990s.

Nevertheless, I can't fault the logic of the piece.