Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Case Study

To indroduce, "the government of Canada granted approval for the Trans Mountain Expansion Project to proceed with 157 conditions (NEB)." The project includes a lot of infomation for operating. "The project proposes to expand the existing Trans Mountain pipeline system between Edmonton, AB and Burnaby, BC ,and this project includes approximately 987 km of new pipeline ,and there is new and modified facilities such as pump stations and tanks and reactivate 193 km of existing pipeline (NEB)." Moreover, this project increases the capacity of shipping from 300,000 barrels per day to 980,000 barrels per day, which brings a lot of benefits to Canadian economy (NEB). Therefore, the approval of this project not only contains many economic benefits

Pollution is already a huge ongoing battle in the United States and if constructed the pipeline would send about 800,000 barrels of hazardous oil a day along with tons of greenhouse gases. The US Department of Environmental Protection estimates the greenhouse gas emissions from the Canadian oil will be more than 80% greater than oil refined in the US. That is roughly equivalent to the same amount of emissions released by 5.7 million passenger vehicles. Unfortunately, when emissions are passed into the air, the air cannot be cleaned, and since oxygen is a vital component in keeping humans alive, adding an oil pipeline that would put that much emissions into the air is far too dangerous for the public’s health what it’s

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

“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

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 Northern Gateway Project is a major pipeline proposed to carry crude oil from the Alberta Oil Sands to Kitimat British Columbia. It will provide temporary jobs for 62,700 people for 10 years and will leave 1,150 long-term jobs after the pipeline is built. Although this is a positive

The next major environmental issue of the pipeline is the indigenous populations. “Northern Alberta’s, where the tar sands oil comes from, people are coming under attack because of their operation of the tar sands in their livelihoods and cultural traditions.”5 Other people affected by this project are the people who live in communities downstream from the tailing ponds, “they have seen spikes in rates of rare cancers, renal failure, lupus, and hyperthyroidism.” “In the lakeside village of Fort Chipewyan, for example, one hundred of the town’s one thousand-two hundred residents have died from cancer.”5 So not only will this pipeline affect the people living around it but it will also affect the people working on it and living around the tailing ponds, wherever those may be located. With it traversing six U.S. states that means a lot of people could get sick and even die from a project that has so many issues with it before it’s even began to be used for its intended purpose.

The question that has arisen from this shift is whether or not the Canadian oil and gas industry inclusive of the upstream, and midstream sectors, has a net positive benefit to Canada. This essay will explore and seek to understand the myriad of issues that this industry faces daily.

Canada is benefitting because we are selling and exporting a lot of oil to the USA. The Keystone Pipeline positively helping the US economy and is boosting it. It provides cheap and affordable heating and helps out US and Canadian residents. The Keystone Pipeline is a cheaper and more effective way of transporting oil than transporting it through trucks and ships. Lac Megantic was a train carrying oil the crashed and harmed the environment massively. As well, Exxon Valdez was an oil ship that ran aground in BC and contaminated a lot of water and killed many animals. The Keystone Pipeline has it’s risks but there is less of a chance of it running into an accident than an oil ship or train and is safer for the environment and people living near

One of the policies the Canadian Government could pursue is to move forward and approve the pipeline expansions regardless of the Indigenous peoples’ perspective. These pipelines would connect the oil sands in Alberta to markets globally which would lead to economic growth. With these pipelines approved, it would mean greater exports. The Canadian economy would profit as it would create jobs and

The production of oil is one of Canada’s greatest assets as it brings in lots of profit but British Columbia is one the most beautiful places in the world and is a prime tourism area. This leads to the question is oil transportation right for British Columbia? Enbridge plans to build two pipelines that will carry oil from “central Alberta to coastal BC” (Alternatives Journal, 2012). Enbridge Incorporated is a company that is a main transporter of natural gas, crude oil and other liquids in Canada, as well as a major operator of pipelines in North America. Their plan is to run two 1170-kilometer pipelines across BC that will eventually be moving about 520,000 barrels of oil per day; this

Proposed in the mid-2000’s, the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline would send crude oil from just outside of Edmonton, Alberta to ports in Kitimat, British Columbia. From there it would be loaded onto tankers and shipped to countries in Asia. The Energy East Pipeline was proposed in 2013 and would send the oil towards New Brunswick and possibly Quebec. While theoretically this seems like an ideal way to quickly and efficiently ship large amounts of crude oil across the country to facilitate large amounts of trade and boost the economy, these pipelines have been the subject of massive controversy from a large number of groups. In this essay, I will briefly highlight the regional and national controversies, as well as backlash from interest groups and party politicians, who have opposed the pipelines for unique, broad, and irrefutable reasons.

On Wednesday, May 16, 2018, a town hall meeting was held at AREA to determine whether or not to advance and increase the production of oil sands and the Northern Gateway Pipeline project. Nine groups attended with various insights regarding the oil sands production and the Northern Gateway pipeline project.

Please accept this letter of request to represent my voice in parliament in opposition to the approval of the proposed Canada East Pipeline through the Nipissing/Temiskaming District. Over the last three years I attended many sessions and held discussions with proponents representing their various views/opinions either in support or opposition of this proposal. I’ve conducted my own investigation and research which is suited to my professional experience in such undertakings. In addition, I have had the opportunity to work as an environmental consultant with TransCanada Pipeline on their right-away in many locations in northern and southern Ontario. There are a few of the key elements I wish to summarize for you, from which I have drawn