Concerns on Building the Keystone Pipeline

Thesis Statement: In the U.S, the Keystone XL Pipeline is doing more harm than good.

The Keystone XL is a controversial oil pipeline extension that would travel from Alberta, Canada, to the United States Gulf Coast. The Keystone XL should not be built because of the damage it would cause to the environment. The oil would be found within tar sands that contain bitumen. The process of extracting the crude oil uses a lot of energy and causes a large amount of greenhouse gases. Many citizens, in Canada and the United States, are outraged because it can be detrimental to the surrounding land and wildlife. TransCanada, the company building the oil pipeline, has to receive permission from the United States government to begin construction. If the United States does not have the pipeline built and chooses to not use Canada’s oil, then TransCanada will have the pipeline built elsewhere and exported to other countries. There has been a divide between those in favor of the Keystone XL and those who are not. The Keystone XL would be able to provide the United States with a reliable source of oil, but it would also take the risk of faults in the oil pipeline and ruining parts of America’s resourceful soil. The Keystone XL will cause a negative effect on the environment and damage resourceful land; therefore, the oil pipeline should not be constructed.

One of the most controversial issues faced nowadays is the way we deal with the transport of oil. One of the proposed methods is The Keystone XL Pipeline. Although there are some pros associated with building the pipeline, the risk outweighs the benefits by far. Building the Keystone XL pipeline would negatively affect the environment, jeopardize the public health and is to no benefit to the American people.

The extraction of the bitumen rich tar sands usually entails heating the oil while in the ground so that it may be pumped up to the surface which can be dangerous and cause harm to the surrounding area. The refining of the oil can be even more dangerous to the environment because the tar sands requires a special process of refining that would create copious amounts of greenhouse gases. Many opposing the pipeline also believe that the pipeline would not be as safe as supporters say it would be. Looking at the Keystone 1 Pipeline, the “previous pipeline was said to be safe but leaked much more than anyone anticipated. ‘In its first year, the pipeline leaked 14 times, with the largest spill exceeding 21,000 gallons’” (Swift). TransCanada claimed that the first pipeline would be safe and that it would not leak for many years, yet the pipe still leaked and caused major damage to the surrounding area. This left those affected, as well as other concerned Americans, to wonder why they should trust the company with building another pipeline and why the company’s promises should be trusted again. Environmentalists and those against the Keystone XL Pipeline “also object

The Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project has brought forth many conflicting arguments, thus resulting in some parties being for it and some against it. I believe however, the risks are far greater than the rewards. The controversies surrounding the oil pipeline have brought up significant reports regarding environmental safety and concern with also safety and concern of the public. Due to the fact that presently, there is one operational pipeline running from Alberta to the Pacific Coast, I believe the introduction of a new pipeline would have disastrous consequences if something were to happen whether being an oil spill or a fire. The NEB (National Energy Board) failed to mention significant situations in which this pipeline could significantly

You wake up one day but everything seems odd. Its freezing cold in your house and you wonder what happened to the heat. You go to the kitchen and try to find something to eat and there is no food anywhere. Suddenly you hear scattering and banging in your parents bathroom.Your mom is looking for medicine because she is extremely sick but there is no medicine that she can find to help her. Do you know why, it’s because this is how our future will look like if we have nothing efficient enough to transport the oil that we use in almost everything to us.Therefore we believe the U.S should build the Keystone Pipeline XL because doing so will provide more jobs and increase tax revenue, oil is extremely essential for daily life and the keystone will help to transport our oil easier and safer.

“In a few decades, the relationship between the environment, resources, and conflict may seem almost as obvious as the connection we see today between human rights, democracy, and peace (Nobel Peace Prize Medalist Maathai 2004).” A Canadian oil company that goes by TransCanada hopes to build an oil pipeline that would extend an enormous 1,200 miles onto an already gargantuan 2,600 mile long pipeline. Keystone XL represents just under a third of the entire Keystone project, and every other piece of pipe has been built and laid out. In fact, TransCanada 's pipeline system is already shipping hundreds of thousands of barrels of crude oil from the Canadian oil sands across the U.S. border -- and into Illinois (Diamond). The current proposal would take the pipeline on a journey all the way through to Texas. Extracting crude oil from oil sands would be enormously problematic for the environment as it causes the pumping of about 17% more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than standard crude oil extraction. Tar sand oil has levels of carbon dioxide emissions that are three to four times higher than those of conventional oil, due to more energy-intensive removal and refining processes (Friends of the Earth). The construction of the Keystone XL pipeline would stimulate employment, the effects would be temporary and the whole scheme would produce a negative long term outcome. The construction of the Keystone XL pipeline has caused

TransCanada, when asked about possible benefits of construction, stated on their website that, “Keystone XL is the definition of shovel-ready infrastructure project”. TransCanada went on to say that over 9000 hard-working Americans could be put directly to work with good-paying jobs because of the construction of the KeyStone XL Pipeline. Furthermore, while the pipeline is being created, it was estimated by TransCanada that “Over Seven million hours of labor and more than 13,000 new jobs for American workers will be created”. TransCanada goes on further, stating that “Pipelines are safe and environmentally favorable” and that they are committed to minimizing its environmental impact along the proposed route. But, TransCanada is only making these tantalizing promises in order to keep currently neutral noses out of the matter in an effort to reduce the number of naysayers of the project. In truth, the creation of the XL Pipeline is terrible damaging the environment while also hurting the proposed workers of the project.

The next major environmental issue of the pipeline is the indigenous populations. “Northern Alberta’s, where the tar sands oil comes from, people are coming under attack because of their operation of the tar sands in their livelihoods and cultural traditions.”5 Other people affected by this project are the people who live in communities downstream from the tailing ponds, “they have seen spikes in rates of rare cancers, renal failure, lupus, and hyperthyroidism.” “In the lakeside village of Fort Chipewyan, for example, one hundred of the town’s one thousand-two hundred residents have died from cancer.”5 So not only will this pipeline affect the people living around it but it will also affect the people working on it and living around the tailing ponds, wherever those may be located. With it traversing six U.S. states that means a lot of people could get sick and even die from a project that has so many issues with it before it’s even began to be used for its intended purpose.

With an increasing global population and ever industrializing society 's, environmental concern is rarely given priority over economic incentive. But what people fail to realize is that our environmental failures, and relative apathy about it set up a plethora of problems for future generations to deal with. One of the most important decisions president Obama will face in the next year will be whether or not to approve the building of the Keystone XL pipeline, a massively sized, and massively controversial oil pipeline that would stretch all the way from Alberta Canada, to American oil refineries along the Gulf Of Mexico. Despite the economic incentive present, the building of the Keystone XL pipeline should not happen because of the

The main issues are the risk of oil spills along the pipeline, which would traverse highly sensitive terrain, and 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions from the extraction of oil sands compared to extraction of conventional oil. The potential for oil spills could pollute air and critical water supplies and harm migratory birds and other wildlife. The Ogallala Aquifer spans eight states, providing drinking water for two million people and supports $20 billion in agriculture. Critics say a major leak could ruin drinking water and devastate mid-western US economy. Pipeline industry spokesman have noted that thousands of miles of existing pipelines carrying crude oil have crossed the Ogallala Aquifer for years in Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Portions of the pipeline would cross an active seismic zone that had a 4.3 magnitude earthquake in 2002. TransCanada CEO described the Keystone Pipeline as “routine”, noting they have been building similar pipelines in North America for half a century the that there are 200,000 miles of similar oil pipelines in the US today. The Keystone Pipeline will include 57 improvements above standard requirements demanded by US regulations, making it the “safest pipeline ever

In Bill McKibben’s article, “Why Dakota Is the New Keystone,” McKibben expresses through vivid word choice, aggressive tone, and sentence structure, why the New Keystone pipeline should be in the Dakota’s. He brings together these elements to paint a vivid picture to persuade the reader into believing it too. McKibben uses words that clearly show what he wants the reader to picture and shows how he wants to shape this piece. He illustrates this by stating that there are “shocking images of the National Guard destroying tepees and sweat lodges and arresting elders” (McKibben).

There are many pros that come along with the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The pipeline will have a low cost, safe, and environmentally friendly effect if it gets put in (Energy Transfer, 2016). It also has many economic pros. It will create many new jobs and will also increase demand for those that manufacture steel pipes, pumps, and other materials that will be needed to build this pipeline (Energy Transfer, 2016). The pipeline will also have a great impact on different local services. Local economies will have a direct impact as the use of hotels, restaurants, and other services expand along the route. Local schools, roads, and emergency services be impacted positively as the pipeline will produce an estimated $55 million dollars annually (Energy Transfer, 2016). Nationally, the pipeline will have a great impact as well. The United States will become more energy independent with the addition of this Dakota Access pipeline. With the significant increase in the North Dakota Bakken, there needs to be transportation networks that are reliable

David Morris, a writer specializing in transportation and logistics, gives various examples of past instances in which oil being carried by train has proved harmful to the environment and even fatal to many people involved in the accident. There are also numerous statistical pieces of research included, supporting the concept that railway transport is less safe than using an underground pipeline for the oil. In the Fortune article “Pipelines: The Worst Way to Move Oil, Except For All the Rest”, Morris Presents a short review of the recent events in relation to the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) before suggesting another factor that could pose a threat to the area. The dangers of transporting the oil via railway are addressed, giving another perspective on how the situation could be made far worse for the Industries supporting the project and the environmentalists protesting against its

The environment is a very important thing to take care of and can be very fragile. In the recent years humanity hasn’t been doing much to take care of the earth, and instead is destroying it in the name of progress. One of the harmful things that could really impact the environment is the North Dakota Pipeline. Some facts about the pipeline is that it is owned by Energy Transfer Partners who are the owners of Sunoco. Sunoco has had multiple onshore pipeline leaks and disasters that have devastated many environments. The planned pipeline is going to be 1,134 miles long and will cut through North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois, by doing that it crosses fifty counties in total. Pipelines in general aren’t really the most reliable things