The Proposal : Keystone Xl Pipeline Approval Act

The Athabasca Delta is a breeding ground for species of birds, which was destroyed to clear the land for oil development. These development practices are a leading factor towards increases in pollution. A scientific panel stated on Tuesday that pollution must be corrected, as there are major debates against the oil sands development. Proponents argue that business through the Oil Sands has made Canada a major player in foreign supplement. Unemployment rates have decreased across Canada and companies generate huge profits. The Alberta Oil Sands provide Canada with a secure source of energy. Throughout the world, Canadian oil reserves are the second largest in the world. Oil mining operations in Canada also help create more trading partnerships with different countries. This is a great way Canada can strengthen relationships and ties with various nation-states. The Oil Sands is a stabilizing force for Canada’s economy, yet it has a tremendous effect on the environment. Corporations are held responsible for their actions, and environmental protection should be their main concern. The procedures that the Oil Sands has taken are not effective, to an extent, where the pace of investment and development in the oil sands

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

Canada ranks among the leading energy producers in the world, through oil production. These oil deposits rank oil sands of Canada as the largest oil deposits in the world after the Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. The only challenge with the oil sand deposits is that oil deposits are seen as unconventional. In effect, tar sands are recognized as one of the dirtiest energy sources in the world (Bailey & Droitsch, 2015). This fact is founded on the production factor; in producing one barrel of tar sands oil, the hazardous emissions are three to five times that of producing the equivalent of conventional oil. The Alberta oil sands are viewed as the single largest economic project in human history. The Canadian government and oil

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.

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

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.

“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

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.

The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) is a pipeline that will carry crude oil from Stanley, North Dakota to Patoka, Illinois crossing under the Mississippi river and Lake Oahe. Who has been disputing against whom, why, and other information about the building of the pipeline and the location of it have been on the news recently. This paper will examine the legality of building the pipeline, it crossing under major water sources, and taking into account tribal opinion/public opinion when constructing something that could harm their land/resources.

The construction of the Keystone XL pipeline encourages the controversy over boosting the American economy or the safety of the environment. The process of building this major pipeline has millions of people in a heated debate. The issue of this pipeline has several environmental researchers and economists in an altercation that when climate change is already a major issue for the nation is trying to sway the construction of the pipeline to be approved or denied. Based on research about the Keystone XL Pipeline, it can be shown that America will face a net negative impact because of the lack of prominent economic gains, presence of environmental effects, and disadvantages of the oil extraction process.

In 2015, the world will face a vast amount of dilemmas; these dilemmas range from how someone is going to get their food to how they are going to cook. But the biggest dilemma of them all, is how they are going to continue to get energy to do everyday tasks. The most efficient resources are those of the nonrenewable variety. These nonrenewable resources include fossil fuels, such as coal, natural gas, and petroleum. Someday these resources will run out and will not be replenished for thousands of years. As of now, an overwhelming majority of the energy used in the world today is non-renewable. We, as civilized people, are so dependent on fossil fuels that we go through extraneous efforts to retrieve these properties. The world needs energy to function and sites that once contained vital resources are on the verge of depletion. It is inevitable that the world looks elsewhere for another resource to absorb the depleting reservoirs. One reservoir capable of withstanding the demand for oil are the tar sands located near Alberta, Canada. These tar sands are the third largest reservoir of crude oil in the world and are conveniently located just north of the United States border (About the Project). There is a wide spread debate on whether or not the crude oil produced from these tar sands should be transported via pipeline. With critical analysis of all point of views, it is without a doubt that the United States should cease their delay on

The other adverse effect of the Canadian oil sands is that pipelines and massive processes of refining oil sands in Canada are a source of pollution that pose a great threat to air, water, and land as well as human health. Additionally, the use of its products like natural gas that is used to run medium-sized turbines that produce electricity releases greenhouse gases. These emissions are mostly produced when steam is injected to reduce the viscosity of the crude and during refining. These further increases to the global warming effect that is already out of hand and it also negates the gains made by society by exposing them to the adverse negative

Oil Drilling has many effects on the environment from the air we breathe to the oceans that inhabit many species. While one of the outcomes of oil drilling is money, it is forgotten that money won’t help repair all of the damage that is done to mother nature. Not only does the outcome of drilling for fossil fuels affect the oceans, rainforest, etc. it also has an effect on local business’ and the health of humans. If people want change, they need to be the