Enbridge: Northern Gateway Pipeline Prabh Sidhu The production of oil is one of Canada’s

Canada is composed of many different regions, each with their own individual characteristic and form of government. There is always a chance of issues potentially rising when provinces have to come together to agree on controversies. One matter arising interprovincial conflict is the Alberta pipeline. Alberta needs to move their stranded oil either to the east or west coast which unfolds many tensions. Going west up brings a major conflict with British Columbia and the coast, where as going east involves passing through multiple provinces each with their own opinion of the pipeline. Most of these provinces also include crossing aboriginal land which is a whole other problem along with the premiers of each province. Reason to believe the pipeline has disadvantages include; the aboriginals protest about their land, the environmental contract with quebec, along with other provinces and transportation, a common dispute. The alberta pipeline causes conflict across the country as it affects its citizens and causes political disagreement. While the pipeline hinders national stability with the aboriginals, and between premiers it does benefit the oil and transportation industry.

To indroduce, "the government of Canada granted approval for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project to proceed with 157 conditions (NEB)." The project includes a lot of infomation for operating. "The project proposes to expand the existing Trans Mountain pipeline system between Edmonton, AB and Burnaby, BC ,and this project includes approximately 987 km of new pipeline ,and there is new and modified facilities such as pump stations and tanks and reactivate 193 km of existing pipeline (NEB)." Moreover, this project increases the capacity of shipping from 300,000 barrels per day to 980,000 barrels per day, which brings a lot of benefits to Canadian economy (NEB). Therefore, the approval of this project not only contains many economic benefits

These factors result in several issues and challenges. These matters have brought a conflict between the various stakeholders in this industry (Oilsandstruth.org, 2015). This discussion aims to identify the primary issues associated with the Canada oil sands and the involved stakeholders. Secondly, the stakeholders’ political view will be established. Finally, the discussion will recommend policies that can be effective in solving the challenges associated with the issues.

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.

Pollution is already a huge ongoing battle in the United States and if constructed the pipeline would send about 800,000 barrels of hazardous oil a day along with tons of greenhouse gases. The US Department of Environmental Protection estimates the greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian oil will be more than 80% greater than oil refined in the US. That is roughly equivalent to the same amount of emissions released by 5.7 million passenger vehicles. Unfortunately, when emissions are passed into the air, the air cannot be cleaned, and since oxygen is a vital component in keeping humans alive, adding an oil pipeline that would put that much emissions into the air is far too dangerous for the public’s health what it’s

Almost 95 million barrels of oil and fuel are produced each day in order to provide energy and fuel to people the world over. A major component of the oil industry is the transportation of oil through various means including oil pipelines. These pipelines are capable of transporting thousands of barrels of oil thousands of miles per day. In the United States one possible pipeline has caused a lot of controversy and discussion on the impact it will have on the United States. The difficulty in deciding if the Keystone XL Pipeline should be built is in whether the possibility of economic growth outweighs the possibility of environmental destruction. In order to make a decision, one must first look into the history of oil pipelines. It is crucial

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

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.

As stated throughout this piece, First Nations people and their land is in danger if the Northern Gateway Pipeline is built. If given a larger amount of money, the Coastal First Nations would be capable of defending their lands and reviewing the Enbridge plans. Unfortunately this has not happened and all we can do is hope for the best.

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.

The question that has arisen from this shift is whether or not the Canadian oil and gas industry inclusive of the upstream, and midstream sectors, has a net positive benefit to Canada. This essay will explore and seek to understand the myriad of issues that this industry faces daily.

“If completed and once processed, transported, burned, it would release 101.4 million metric tons of CO2 each year. Equivalent to the emissions from 29.5 coal plants or 21.4 million cars per year” (Dakota Access Pipeline: Top 3 Pros and Cons). Adding more greenhouse gasses is definitely something we shouldn’t do. This pipeline would worsen our climate once it begins to pump oil. The use of alternative energies could benefit our country through being energy efficient, cost effective, and people friendly. Furthermore, the use of trails to transport crude oil is another concern because explosions can occur, killing people and damaging habitats nearby. “Pipeline supporters cite the 2013 disaster in Quebec, Canada, where a train carrying crude oil derailed and destroyed downtown Lac-Mégantic” (Yan). Many support the use of alternative energy sources that would allow people to keep their lands as well as save the Earth. Help the

The environmental risks that come with such a massive pipeline to transport “tar sands” pose a threat on many levels. As a matter of fact the tar sands they are trying to transport are required to

The origination of this case study begins on one brisk morning back on the 19th of September in 2008 when TransCanada first submitted their application to the U.S. State Department to build the Keystone XL pipeline. The Canadian based energy infrastructure company proposed a 1,179-mile, 36-inch diameter pipeline that would transport crude oil from Canada, through Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Along with transporting oil from producers in Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and North Dakota (Figure 1).

In February 9, 2005, the TransCanada proposed a pipeline system that would be able to transport crude oil from Canada into the United States. The pipeline was given the name the Keystone Pipeline System. Originally, the pipeline was to run from Alberta, Canada to refineries in Illinois. However, in 2008 another proposition was raised in order to extend the pipeline even further to down to Texas. The proposition is known as the Keystone XL. The possible construction of the pipeline is a controversial topic. Entrepreneurs believe that such a pipeline will stimulate the nation's economy and lead to an increase in the amount of jobs. On the other side, environmentalists believe that the pipeline will be detrimental for the environment as the