The Alaska Lng Project, A Pipeline

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

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.

Drilling oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) is a serious issue for environmentalists and for the future of the United States. Should the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge be opened to oil drilling? This paper will debate whether or not we should allow Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to be opened to oil drilling. This will also show the impact it has on the environment, and I will show a critical analysis of the current issue of whether or not to drill.

Thesis: The U.S. should stop the production of the North Dakota Access Pipeline because it would break the contract made over a hundred years with the Native Americans, it violates the ninth amendment, and it is not environmentally safe.

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.

The construction of this pipeline has raised a lot of controversy regarding its necessity, but also in the potential impact on the environment. On the list of controversies, it is facing the established route for the pipeline because it runs half-mile near of the Standing Rock Sioux reservation, crossing beneath the Missouri River. The concern is the huge impact this would cause if the pipeline breaks near to the river spilling the crude oil into the river contaminating the drinking water. The other concern is that as this pipe passes very close to the Indian reservation, it also disturbs sacred land. In addition to all this, there is the controversy of the use of eminent domain by the government, to get the land for the construction of the pipeline.

In the 1990s contamination became a large problem with groundwater in the Ogallala aquifer. There are many people who look past the case of the Keystone XL pipeline because some believe that if there was a failure in building the pipeline or a leakage that the oil would contaminate the soil, groundwater, crops, and destroy our economy. “The Canadian company that owns the Keystone, has repeatedly said the XL will be “the safest pipeline ever built on U.S. soil”. What people may not already realize is that there is a large amount of thousands of miles of pipelines that carry crude oil and many refined liquids, that crosses the U.S. and even the Ogallala

I recently read an article in Scientific American (May 2001) titled “the arctic oil & wildlife refuge.” The article addresses the issue of whether or not science has the ability to clarify the potential economic benefits and the ecological risks of drilling into the nation’s last great coastal wilderness preserve. What I began to wonder after reading the article is, if we humans should continue our scientific and technological petroleum endeavors even though we are causing irreversible harm to our earth. My feeling is that we should not drill in Alaska’s Arctic.

The 107th Congress is considering approving energy development in Alaska. Shortages of gasoline, natural gas and the resulting increased prices have opened this debate. The events of September 11,

Is developing the Arctic for oil and natural gas worth the powerful negative impact on the environment and native communities? The article published on September 20th, 2013 by Jennifer Weeks titled, “Future of the Arctic” examines the Arctic and the controversies within it. In the pro/con section of her article, Weeks asks the question, “Should the United States suspend Arctic offshore drilling?” Senator Mark Begich argues that the resources in the Arctic are too great of an opportunity to miss out on. Although Arctic drilling is a controversial topic, many people believe it should continue because of the financial and ethical circumstances; however, evidence to support this is lacking, which leads to the other side of the debate to be in

For the past two years, The Dakota Access Pipeline has ignited fierce debate between environmental activists and energy advocates, spurring polarizing and confusing headlines. Cutting through four states from North Dakota to Illinois, the $3.7 billion project is threatening to affect the lives of many, and promising to bring unparalleled energy to the northcentral United States. But all these threats and promises, protests, and incidental reports on social media cloud the science behind each argument and separate the public from a true understanding of the source of contention: fracking.

Environmental welfare has become one of our most important priorities since the widely-spread awareness of climate change. Recently, there has been a controversial subject arousing from the midwest that is allegedly threatening our environment - the construction of Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). This $3.8 billion, 1,172-mile pipeline project will be crossing four states from North Dakota through Illinois to supply crude oil coming from the oil-rich Bakken area (Yan). DAPL will supposedly create new jobs like construction and maintenance, lower gas prices as we do not have to rely exporting oil from overseas, and boost energy production in our country as we continue to consume more energy resources. However, induced with negative feelings from

On June 25th, 2014, a $3.5 billion project was revealed to the public; a 1,172-mile-long oil pipeline that is intended to pump more money into state and local economies. The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) was supported by a natural gas and propane company known as the Energy Transfer Partners. The pipeline’s construction would be carried out by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The people who preach pro-pipeline continue to hype the bountiful construction job opportunities this gives the people in the surrounding areas; however, many of these communities have different feelings towards this development. The Pipeline stretches from the Bakken oil fields of North Dakota to the oil tank farm near Patoka, Illinois, hitting South Dakota and Iowa

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