Now that the U.S. House has voted to lift the 40-year old ban on crude oil exports, it’s up to President Obama and the Senate to stop this dangerous proposal — a big boost for the oil companies at the expense of the climate and our health.

The need for urgent action to curb global warming pollution is clear. Following the hottest year ever recorded, 2015 is on pace to set a new record. People across the state of Colorado are feeling the impacts of a changing climate; whether it’s the farmer in Northern Colorado having to change their planting season due to unprecedented precipitation, the ski shop owner experiencing shorter ski seasons every year, or the homeowner in Lyons still rebuilding after the floods in 2012. These are the type of extreme weather events scientists say will become more frequent and severe as the planet warms.

To avoid the worst impacts of a changing climate, we must end our dependence on fossil fuels and chart a course to 100 percent pollution-free, renewable energy. Nationally, that means supporting President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which places the first-ever limits on carbon pollution from power plants. It means renewing tax incentives for wind, solar, and other forms of clean energy. And it means supporting the U.S. as it leads other major countries toward an international agreement to curb greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.

It does not mean lifting the ban on exporting U.S. crude oil overseas.

If the oil companies have a larger distribution market for oil produced in the U.S., they will drill more. Estimates vary, but some from the General Accounting Office are as high as 3.3 million more barrels per day for the next 20 years. Even if only a fraction of all this extra oil is burned, global warming pollution could still increase 22 million metric tons per year, the same amount of pollution produced by five average-sized coal power plants.

Transporting this oil is another matter. If it were conveyed by rail, the extra oil would require enough trains to span the country from Los Angeles to Boston seven times. And pipelines carry their own risks. Either way, shipping more oil across the country would cause even more pollution and put more American communities at risk from devastating spills.

Lifting the ban would worsen global warming but strengthen profits for the oil companies, who are already among the most profitable in the world. An Energy Information Administration study shows their revenue could jump an additional $25 billion by 2025 without the ban in place. That’s a big reason these corporations are spending millions on lobbying and third-party studies supporting repeal of the ban.

Increasing oil production will have negative impacts on our wildlife, further degrading more than a million square acres of wildlife habitat and threaten at-risk species. It will also adversely affect the experiences of millions of American hunters, anglers and other outdoor enthusiasts, as well as the local jobs that support these activities.

In the short term, lifting the ban will line the pockets of Exxon and other major oil companies and threaten our health. In the long term, it will make it even harder to solve the climate crisis. We need enough senators, including Sen. Bennet, and the president to continue to stand against lifting the export oil ban, and to vote not for the immediate gains of a few, but for the safety and security of our climate for all.

Kim Stevens is the campaign director for Environment Colorado. David Ellenberger is the National Wildlife Federation’s Rocky Mountain regional outreach coordinator.