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 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.
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.
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 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,
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.
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
“For years, the Keystone pipeline has occupied what I frankly consider an over-inflated role in our political discourse,” said Obama (Article 2, Pg. 2). The Keystone and the Dakota pipeline one of two rejected by government administration. Protest still till this day are being held by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, other Native American tribes, and other supporters, to put a stop to the building of the pipeline which carries crude oil through: North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Illinois.
Since 1532, Native Americans have been subjected to American influence. From engaging in treaties to developing a dependency on the reservations, they have a long history of fighting for political, environmental, and human rights. For instance, the Sac and Fox tribe currently battle the Keystone XL project, a major threat to their right to live peacefully and securely. The lead in this project, TransCanada, a Canadian oil company, plans to insert a 1,661 mile crude oil pipeline that runs from Alberta, Canada to Texas, crossing numerous Indian reservations and threatening their natural resources. While Americans benefit from the additional access to oil, it raises issues of water contamination and disturbance to sacred sites and wildlife habitats. Along with these negative impacts, the tribe also lacks inclusion and representation in this proposal. Therefore, the proposed Keystone XL project is not justified because of its intrusion on the human and land rights of the Sac and Fox tribe, which are
The Keystone Pipeline is a crude oil pipeline that runs from Canada to the United States. The original pipeline goes through most of Canada before crossing over the border into the United States, running its way down into Illinois. The proposed Keystone XL pipeline extension provides a blueprint for the extension to go from the origin point in Alberta through the American prairie states into Nebraska connecting into the original pipeline and adding a new line going from the original pipeline in southern Nebraska into Texas and the Gulf of Mexico. Although the Keystone Pipeline provides a great service for the United States and Canada for the transportation of oil, there are some
The second reason for the immediate approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline is the United States national security risk that results from the dependence on foreign oil, lack of jobs and supply of oil. The United States has been dependent on the unstable Middle East for the past few decades as one of their limited sources of oil. It is a necessity to empower ourselves and relieve the constraints of OPEC off the United States. OPEC, the organization that controls the oil prices and how much oil is produced, has members that are the largest oil producers in the world and most of them reside in the Middle East. OPEC can lower the production of oil, which will result in an increase in oil prices. Everything economically revolves around the price
The US and Canada are currently crisscrossed by thousands of miles of oil and gas pipelines, but none have drawn the attention and political controversy of the Keystone XL pipeline project. The Canadian National Energy Board and the Public Utilities Commissions of Montana and South Dakota all approved the XL project by March of 2010. Unfortunately, the US Environmental Protection Agency rejected the project’s first environmental impact study in July 2010 as inadequate and a second impact study was released in 2011 (Oil-Price.net,