The Keystone XL Pipeline Debate

Thesis Statement: In the U.S, the Keystone XL Pipeline is doing more harm than good.

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.

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 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 main issues are the risk of oil spills along the pipeline, which would traverse highly sensitive terrain, and 17% higher greenhouse gas emissions from the extraction of oil sands compared to extraction of conventional oil. The potential for oil spills could pollute air and critical water supplies and harm migratory birds and other wildlife. The Ogallala Aquifer spans eight states, providing drinking water for two million people and supports $20 billion in agriculture. Critics say a major leak could ruin drinking water and devastate mid-western US economy. Pipeline industry spokesman have noted that thousands of miles of existing pipelines carrying crude oil have crossed the Ogallala Aquifer for years in Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Portions of the pipeline would cross an active seismic zone that had a 4.3 magnitude earthquake in 2002. TransCanada CEO described the Keystone Pipeline as “routine”, noting they have been building similar pipelines in North America for half a century the that there are 200,000 miles of similar oil pipelines in the US today. The Keystone Pipeline will include 57 improvements above standard requirements demanded by US regulations, making it the “safest pipeline ever

With recent event the Obama’s Administration has halted the further construction of the North Dakota Access pipeline. This event have sparked the nation into an uprise in protests and public speaking against North Dakota Access. Now thrusted out onto a global stage, the struggle on both sides intensifies either is not going to stand down. The people of Standing Rock Indian Reservation are protesting against North Dakota Access to continue construction of the “North Dakota Access Pipeline”. Additionally the Army Corps of Engineers has denied the permit that allows construction underneath the Mississippi and Missouri River. These events have now escalated to national attention. It is not in the public safety or well being to have further construction or completion of the North Dakota Access Pipeline should it have negative environmental impacts and be harmful to the American people. ("Federal Government Halts Construction Of Part Of North Dakota 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

What are these environmental issues exactly well it has to do with the water in the area nearby the site where they want to build their oil pipeline is the Missouri River and lake Oahe. The rivers and lakes are there main supply of water to the Native American reservation near by The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. This drive has been protesting since April about the dangers of the corruption their water supply. If this water becomes corrupt the water will be contaminated

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

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.

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.

The Keystone Pipeline system was first operational in the year 2010. And since then it has caused much controversy. Of the different phases in the Keystone Pipeline system, phase one, two, and three are complete. Phase four, also known as Keystone XL, has been put off due to the large amount of controversy it has caused. The Keystone XL pipeline segments will be used to allow American crude oil to enter the pipeline system in Montana, on their way to the storage and distribution plants located in Oklahoma. In 2015, the Obama administration rejected the building of Keystone XL, but with the election of Donald Trump as president, an executive order was signed to advance the project. The reason for such controversy with the Keystone XL pipeline is the effects it will have on native people, land located around the proposed pipeline course, and the wild life, as well as the many complexities due to the economic, social and political issues.

Oil is a significant essential in this society because it runs automobiles such as cars, buses, truck etc. Without oil, transportation, business and economic trade wouldn’t be possible. “The Dakota Access Pipeline Project is a $3.78 billion conduit being built from the oil-rich Bakken fields in North Dakota. .transport up to 570,000 barrels a day of crude to refineries and markets in the Gulf and on the East Coast” (Ablow). The Dakota Access Pipeline is funded by Energy Transfer Partners. They believe that will have a huge impact on the economic state of the United States because it will “bring an estimated $156 million in sales and income taxes to state and local governments as well as add 8,000 to 12,000 construction jobs”(Park). With over 10,000 of jobs and $150 million dollars that would bring into this country, The Dakota Access Pipeline is a project that is beneficial to the local and national economy of the country. “In addition, the Dakota Access Pipeline will improve overall safety to the public and environment. It will reduce crude oil shipped by truck and by rail and increase the amount shipped by pipeline” (Energy Transfers). Minimizing the trucks in delivering oil will help to prevent global warming and climate change. After the pipeline was approved by the government, The members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe protested near the construction of The Dakota Access Pipeline. The tribe members are deeply against the project because it would damage their

The Dakota pipeline potentially risks destroying countless miles of land and water, since it will be built underneath