Keystone Pipeline Essay

The Keystone XL pipeline would do little in reducing the United States dependency on Middle Eastern oil, which is actually goal established by president Obama for the sake of national security and economic growth. Another issue is that the out of the 42,000 jobs TransCanada has claimed the new pipeline will create, an analysis done by the State Department disagrees and claims “The proposed Project would generate approximately 50 jobs during operations.” All the harmful effects that the pipeline would have on the environment and the public health is not worth the creation of merely 50 permanent

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

“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

The Keystone XL pipeline also shouldn’t be encouraged because the Keystone XL causes pollution. Firstly, the Keystone XL could cause pollution because it adds to carbon pollution. The Keystone XL will add “1.3 million to 27.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions each year” (Jenkins, pg.1). The Keystone XL increases the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere; potentially aiding in problems such as global warming, due to this, the Keystone XL should not be encouraged. Secondly, the Keystone XL pipeline adds to pollution because the Keystone XL adds to climate pollution. The Keystone XL adds to climate pollution because according to billionaire activist Tom Steyer, “Keystone XL fails his [Barack Obama] climate test” (Koring, pg.1). The Keystone XL failed Obama’s climate tests, changing the weather and potentially melting ice caps and causing floods, due to this; the Keystone XL should not be encouraged. Lastly The Keystone XL pipeline causes

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 Keystone XL Pipeline has divided North America because it is an enormous environmental issue. It has divided us due to our opinions. Many Americans see the potential it could bring to our country and economy, but there are several environmental problems to consider and health issues to think about before deciding which side to take. Not only do those factors matter but also how it could affect the lives of many Americans. There are two sides to this issue, to either approve or disapprove the Keystone Pipeline project, and by researching I will form an opinion.

“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

But, according to Yan (2016) the pipeline can have either a great economic benefit for the United States or it can cause an environmental disaster. The pipeline also is going to run through sacred Native American land and water source (Jensen 2016). This brings in protestors that range from humanist, Native Americans, environmentalist, state residents and even Hollywood celebrities (Yan 2016). According to Jensen (2016), these peaceful protestors are being treated harshly by law enforcement, which makes the pipeline even more controversial. The police are trying to run out the protestors by “using freezing water and concussion grenades” during winter conditions to get them to leave Cannon Ball, ND (Jensen 2016). Law enforcement doesn’t want the area to “swell” with protestors again when it comes spring (Reuters 2017). These protestors just want to be heard, which they were in Obama’s administration, but Trump’s administration wants to continue construction with or without the support of the community. This could be due to Trump’s investment and profit in the pipeline (Mufson 2016). On the another hand, the pipeline can help the economy by making the United States more independent on oil and reducing the use of trains. In some cases, trains that are carrying oil cargo has been derailed and exploding. This would also bring down cost for shipments with

As a way to directly link the unrefined tar-sands oil from Alberta, Canada to the refineries in Texas, there is no doubt that the Keystone XL Pipeline remains a topic of controversy. As with many large projects, there are both positive and negative consequences that result from its construction. While there are potential economic benefits like the creation of infrastructure-related jobs and a potential shift from energy dependence, there are many dangers to the building of the pipeline. The notion of building a pipeline that connects Canada and the United States for economic reasons is neither completely unjustifiable nor unreasonable, but given the current circumstances, in which ecological damage and neglect on the part of TransCanada are likely, I cannot support the building of the Keystone XL pipeline.

Furthermore, Canada will be affected greatly in more ways than one. As stated previously, the project will cost $7 billion. According to Global News, there is strong speculation, concerning Canada losing an abundant amount of money. This is simply because of the most likely possibility that, the United States may easily refine the bitumen, we as Canadians give, and sell it to Canada and all over the world. This being said, Canadians will also encounter job loses. Meaning, for the temporary amount of time, while the Keystone Pipeline is in development, and when we did not have pipelines to transport our natural resource, then Canada will continue to have job opportunities. Though, when the production is completed, Canada will no longer have use for those jobs. As well as, for the reasoning that everything will go directly to the US and then they will need to open up opportunities that will accompany the refining, transporting and much more of the fossil fuels that is now theirs. Nonetheless, the environment of Canada will receive the greatest effects due to the Keystone XL Pipeline. It is said that over 4 million hectares of the Boreal forest is under threat to be cleared for tar access. Already, 15 spills have occurred, the one being in North Dakota in May 2011, and the latest occurring in South Dakota on November 16th this year, spilling an estimated 210,000 gallons of

Due to the evident climate change that is affecting the world and the ones who live in it negatively and the enormous contribution of human impact. The Keystone XL pipeline is not in the national interests of the United States. Cushman’s book strives to weigh what the U.S. stands to gain verses what it likely to lose by investing in the Keystone XL Pipeline. Constructing the pipeline is for instance likely to create thousands of jobs besides contributing billions of dollars to the exchequer. The project is in addition seen as way of satisfying the U.S. energy needs in a way that offers economic and social stability in a number of ways. Since the project also involves the Canadian government, it’s definitely seen as a major boost to the U.S.

This is where the politics come into play with the decision of the pipeline. The State Department estimates a total of 42,100 jobs could be created from the building of the pipeline. However, this number includes “indirect” and “induced” jobs so the actual number is somewhere around 3,900 construction jobs (temporary) directly if the job is done in one year and about 50 permanent jobs. (Pipeline Primer, 2014). The building of the pipeline also has an estimated $3.4 billion contribution to the American economy. These few, often exaggerated by the House Republicans, are part of the advantages and reasons to support building the

A proposed oil pipeline project will have the capacity to transport thounsands of barrels of crude oil to refineries in Oklahoma, Illinois, and the Gulf Coast of Texas. The Keystone XL is a 1,711-mile pipeline delivering Canadian crude oil to United States oil markets. This project is a response to the market demand for heavy crude oil in the Unites States. The pipeline will also be used to transport crude oil to the Cushing tank farm in the Midwest region. Many refineries in the Gulf Coast region provide millions of barrels per day, This region accounts for almost half of U.S. refining capacity. The refineries produce large amounts of refined petroleum product, like gasoline and jet fuel. The negative impacts of

The Keystone XL pipeline is a proposed expansion of the current Keystone pipeline that would cover over 1,700 miles from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf Coast of Texas. The purpose of the pipeline is for the transport of extracted tar sands from Canada to the Gulf Coast refineries and ports for export. The proposed pipeline would cross 1,073 rivers, lakes, streams, and the Ogallala aquifer. The Ogallala aquifer is one of the largest in the world. It provides two million people with drinking water and more than a quarter of America’s agriculture with water for irrigation. There would be a large ecological impact, affecting communities and destroying habitats. Building Keystone XL would add 27.4 million metric tons of carbon pollution to the atmosphere per year, adding to the global climate change dilemma. Aside from the damage as a result of constructing the pipeline, oil spills cause contamination and are costly to cleanup. The company proposing the expansion, TransCanada, has stated that thousands of jobs would be created. In fact the project would only create thirty five permanent jobs with the remainder consisting of temporary or contract work (“Stop Keystone,” n.d.).