Having depicted a clear presentation of each of the arguments from opponents and supporters, this paper will now examine the strengths and weaknesses of each argument. One argument made my proponents regarding the Keystone XL pipeline is job creation. Proponents argue that the Keystone XL pipeline will create a total of 9,000 direct jobs and 42,000 indirect jobs. However, of these proposed jobs, only 35 permanent jobs are to be created. Proponents defend this small amount of jobs by stating that this clearly show how efficient the Keystone XL pipeline truly is. Opponents to the Keystone XL pipeline argue that this minuscule amount of jobs is simply not worth risking the environment. While advocates of the Keystone XL pipeline portray the …show more content…
A report from the Heritage Foundation only cites 9 scholarly sources. The study offered by the Fraser Institute indicates that there is no evidence that the Keystone XL pipeline will be a huge job creator from the opposing side. However, this study offers 8 scholarly sources.
Both sides pose arguments regarding the environment. Proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline state that the pipeline is environmentally sounds and extremely safe. An argument opponents make is that carbon dioxide emissions from tar sands extraction is equivalent to adding 5.7 million passenger vehicles to the roads annually. The EPA report states that over the course of 50 years, this proposed pipeline would emit 1.37 billion more tons of GHG into the atmosphere. This would contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions. However, the Department of State concluded that the amount of greenhouse gases that would be released would be equivalent to 300,000 passenger vehicles annually. Because the studies these stakeholders used to present their argument came to very different conclusions, with a huge difference in the amount of carbon dioxide emissions, looking at the logic of their arguments aids in determining which side is more accurate. The proponent side offers an extremely low number of equivalent passenger vehicles, while the opposing side offers an extremely high number. However, when looking at the reasoning that the opposing side offers helps understand this side. Opponents to the Keystone
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
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
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
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.
An organization that I admire and would like to work for in the future is Chase Bank. The most admirable quality of this financial institution has to be its leadership during the financial crises of 2008. Through great task delegation and resource management, this company was able to circumvent detrimental events which could have led to bankruptcy. Since, I am interested in working for a financial institution such as Chase Bank and I am following the educational steps that reflect this desire, it would only be appropriate that in the future a joining of interests from Chase Bank and myself would take place. With further education in finance, I see myself developing a strong foundation of knowledge
Thesis Statement: In the U.S, the Keystone XL Pipeline is doing more harm than good.
“The developed of the pipeline estimate 8,000 to 12,000 construction jobs” (Yan). People fail to realize that these jobs are only temporary. Work like this will not last forever. The impact of losing a job is detrimental. Once the pipeline is completed, all those who were employed will lose their jobs and be put back into unemployment. This potentially negatively affects American home life. These temporary jobs are not sufficient for the American economy. While these people are working, they tend to have more money to buy things. When they lose their job, they are no longer be able to afford it. This causes prices to rise due to a number of people buying stuff, but once those people lose their jobs, they will not have enough money and the economy plummets. This is also known as inflation, which is deleterious to our economy. “‘We're not opposed to energy independence. We're not opposed to economic development,’ Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Archambault II said. ‘The problem we have -- and this is a long history of problems that evolved over time -- is where the federal government or corporations take advantage of indigenous lands and indigenous rights.’” (Yan). The government ignores the pleas of protesters and proceed to take land for economic achievement. Although, the Dakota Access Pipeline does not benefit the country in any
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.
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
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 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.
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 Gilded Age for Americans could be perceived as a time of wealth or poverty. Many authors in America during this time shared their opinions. For instance, Marshall Kirkman in The Railway Army, William Graham in What Social Classes Owe to Each Other, And Andrew Carneige in Wealth, all depict that there was an inequality amongst the nation but felt it was necessary in order for the country to succeed. While other authors such as Henry Demarest Llin Wealth Against Commonwealth and Henry George in An Analysis of the Crime of Poverty found that inequality was clearly present and unfair for Americans who were not one of the few with an abundancy of money. All of the authors acknowledge inequality but only few believed it was an issue, all agreed
I would recommend Coach needs to continue to explore new technologies such as social networking websites as a cost effective consumer communication opportunity to increase online and store sales and build brand awareness. As part of Coach’s direct marketing strategy, the growing number of entering to the Coach’s websites provide an opportunity to increase the size of databases of each country’s households.