Keystone Pipeline Project Analysis

The Keystone XL Pipeline Project has many pros and cons just as any project does, but this project has way bigger cons than most projects this country will face today. “The Keystone XL Pipeline is an environmental crime in progress.” “It’s also been called the most destructive project on the planet.” The major issues with the Keystone XL Pipeline are “the dirty tar sands oil, the water waste, indigenous populations, refining tar sands oil and don’t forget the inevitable; pipeline spills.” And these are just some of the environmental issues, not too mention how building this thing from Canada to Texas; 2,100 miles to be exact, is affecting the people and their land, as stated “this isn’t a little tiny pipeline,

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

Keystone XL is a oil pipeline system in Canada and the United States, this system was commissioned in 2010 and now owned by TransCanada Corporation. An increased amount of oil from Canada would mean a decreased dependency on Middle Eastern supplies. According to market principles, if availability of oil is increased, that means lower price for consumers. This will create almost 28,000 more construction jobs. The prospect of the Keystone XL pipeline being approved by the incoming Donald Trump administration will have little effect on Justin Trudeau's plans to get the oil to market. Keystone XL is a controversial issue because the different political parties have different opinions, the Conservatives and the Liberals both agree that yes, Keystone

In June of 2010, a plan to construct a pipeline that would run from Alberta, Canada through the center of the United States, making its way to its final destinations in Nederland, Texas, and Pakota, Illinois were finally commissioned. As an energy management major at the University of Oklahoma, I was intrigued to research the Keystone Pipeline and the plans that hinge alongside it. The plan to construct the pipeline that would connect the two countries certainly began with good intentions, however many people would disagree. When viewing the plans for construction of what became known as the Keystone Pipeline, it’s apparent that there are numerous benefits that result from building the pipeline. On the other hand, some people argue that

Will the Keystone XL Pipeline undercut the United States efforts to be a leader in climate change and environmental initiatives?

Environmental issues are one of the most controversial topics to argue about. Passions flair when two opposing viewpoints clash together to figure out an environmental problem. Two such problems that many are bantering about are the impacts of two things: the Keystone Pipeline XL and fracking. Richard Korman, the senior editor of magazine Engineering News-Record wrote an article on the Keystone dilemma named Building the Keystone XL Pipeline: A Necessary Evil. His prospective audience were those who would benefit greatly from the pipeline, like construction professionals, as he believes that this pipeline should be made. Tackling the fracking issue, David Brooks, a generally right-wing leaning writer for

The main reason President Obama rejected the proposal of Keystone XL was due to environment concerns. As quoted from Salon News “President Obama’s decision to deny permission for construction of the Keystone Pipeline may turn out to be a momentous event in the history of our efforts to protect our planet from environmental disaster.” The construction and use of Keystone XL will greatly risk the environment, and because of this, it should not be built, and Canada

In his speech before the Bloomberg Energy Conference in New York on April, last year, former Canadian Minister on Natural Resources Joe Oliver outlined the significance of the Keystone XL oil pipeline in meeting the growing demands of the United States for an environmentally safe and secure energy source and distribution. He argued that North America’s continued growth as a global superpower depends on how it can meet its energy demands without depending so much on offshore sources such as the Middle East which are mostly in conflict and are therefore unstable. Oliver seems to present a compelling argument in favor of Canada’s energy projects especially when he cites independent third party reports made by the International Energy Agency

The building of the Keystone Pipeline has become a rallying cry for it proponents as well as the opposition. Although the opposing side are able to agree on little else, I believe each see the importance of the outcome of the debate. I have followed the controversy closely for the six years it has been raging. The facts behind the storm point clearly to the problems associated with the project Building the proposed extension of the Keystone Pipeline would transport product that will place vital natural resources at risk in its transport, damage the environment with the mining process used to extract it, result in increased global warming by furthering our nation’s dependency on fossil fuels, and is not in the best interest of the country.

It is not secret that Keystone XL Pipeline has been a controversial issue that last few months, and for good reason. The United States and Canada are already connected by thousands of miles of oil pipelines, but none have risen as big of an issue as the Keystone XL pipeline. There are environmentalists who oppose this project because it would create a conduit to market for petroleum extracted from the Alberta oil sands, an unconventional energy source requiring far more fuel, water and carbon emissions to extract than conventional oil and gas.

Oil is imperative to the endurance of today’s society and plays a major role in the world’s economy. The Keystone XL Pipeline is a crude oil pipeline that is designed to run from “Hardisty, Alberta…to Steele City, Nebraska,” (About The Project). Citizens of Canada and the United States are debating the development of the pipeline. There are two sides to this issue, to either approve or disapprove the Keystone XL Pipeline, and by researching this topic I will form an opinion.

One of the great achievements of mankind is engineering a way to use a resource and generate energy from it. However, sometimes these sources of energy can be harmful to our planet. With this knowledge of the effects of humanity 's way of harnessing power, we continue to consume, produce, burn, and deplete our supply of this material. Most people do not mind how the earth is affected, but there are a percentage of them who are willing to take action against large-scale agencies to stop harmful plans. An example of this is a long lasting protest occurring as we speak.

Over the years, TransCanada has sought the approval of a pipeline that runs from Canada through the Midwest of The United States. Known as The Keystone XL pipeline, it has been plagued by both civilian and Political protests. In 2015, the Obama administration denied TransCanada’s permit application, effectively halting the construction (Rocco, 2017). The project has already completed manufacturing almost all components of the pipeline, which most are being stored in various warehouses across The United States (Rocco, 2017). Arkansas produced 700 miles of the pipe that would have been laid if the project went forward (Rocco, 2017). Earlier this month, newly elected President Donald Trump, signed an executive order that allowed

The ongoing debate regarding the urge to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline Project through Keystone XL Pipeline Project Approval Act has become more interesting as the President of United States, Barack Obama vetoed the act proposed. The Senate tried to override the veto recently; however, such effort end up in failure as their vote failed to achieve two third of the required vote in order to override the veto (“Text”). This project has been the talking of people for years as some wonder the advantage and the disadvantage of this project. Recent poll shows 61% of U.S. citizens want the Keystone XL Pipeline Project Approval Act to be passed. This project requires the approval from the U.S Department of State because the projected pipeline will cross the international border between U.S. and Canada. In addition, according to Molina, the approval of this project means tar sands crude oil will be transported as much as 830,000 barrels per day from Alberta, Canada to southern Nebraska. This project is the extension of the current Keystone pipeline which transport crude oil to Illinois and Oklahoma since 2010 (170). Proponent of this project believe the approval of this project will benefit the citizens. According to Korman, this project will provide the states with safe, secure, and sustainable sources of energy; and enhance the economy growth –