...Permitting the Keystone XL Pipeline To Be Built Anthony Draper EN 1420 The Keystone Xl pipeline which is a proposed pipeline line that would run from Alberta Canada down through the US to the Gulf Coast should be permitted to be built. It would have a huge positive benefit on the country as a whole. It will provide America with more permanent jobs, economic growth; reduce our dependency on overseas energy, reduce emissions from trucks on the road transporting oil as well as train cars carrying oil. In a country hurting for jobs and some kind of positive economic relief this project can help ease some pains. If our government can waste millions upon millions on failed energy efforts than it can support one that will actually provide jobs and money to this country instead of taking money and not being worth the effort as many of the green initiatives have proven to be. The main opponents to the pipeline being built are on the environmental side. Their main reasoning is that it will have huge negative impacts on the environment and the areas in which the pipeline will cross through. Now while there is always the possibility of this pipeline having negative impacts on the areas around it but the way those on the environmental side would have attacked it are unjust. They claim it will leave a big carbon footprint and cause too much pollution in the environment. President Obama even made it a point not to permit this from being built until the dangers can be assessed. The State...
Words: 1985 - Pages: 8
...Introduction: Throughout history, The United States has been heavily reliant on oil and oil-rich countries. The present economic situation summons a domestic alternative, considering oil is addressed as “black gold”. Recently, pipelines have grown into a considerable means of transportation for fuels in various states, specifically throughout Alaska. While President Obama envisions that one day the United States will be energy independent, we have yet to attain this. However, some believe the Keystone XL pipeline could reduce our dependency on foreign oil, while others believe this project is a step in the wrong direction, putting us further away from energy independence. The Keystone XL pipeline is presented as safe and reliable, creating various jobs for our economy, while environmental groups argue this pipeline could be detrimental to the environment. These clashing arguments cause a question to arise: Should the United States Government authorize the Keystone XL pipeline to import tar sand oil from Canada? Various citizens, environmental groups, and politicians have outlined their concerns regarding the Keystone XL pipeline. Some of the social problems that arise from the proposed pipeline is environmental damage, including greenhouse gas emissions and potential oil spills. Tar sands are notorious for being one of the dirtiest types of oil in the industry and far more polluting than conventional oil with more than 1,400 known pollutants emitted by oil sands operations...
Words: 570 - Pages: 3
...Alberta Oil – Keystone XL pipeline The high demand for oil in the U.S. is continuously increasing. In 2010, the United-States, on average, consumed 19.15 million barrels of oil per day (bpd) (Index Mundi 1). Due to the high demand and the proximity to the U.S., Canada is a major supplier of their oil. The Alberta Tar Sands are the 2nd largest oil reservoir in the world and are a major source of Canada’s oil exports to the States and to the world. The high demand is being met with extreme dislike from environmentalists. It also creates thousands of jobs. Bureaucrats are pushing for its construction; they do it for the economical growth and the capital benefits. The construction of the Keystone XL pipeline (KXL) is a controversial issue which has lead President Obama to deny the permit for TransCanada to continue building in the United-States. Sending crude oil down to the United-States would be a sensitive issue and could hurt Canada’s economic development in the future if not handled correctly. The Keystone XL pipeline would primarily perform the job of bringing oil down from Alberta to the large refineries in Texas. The pipeline will provide millions of new jobs in North America. The quick job increase is due to the fact that government of Alberta assigns permits to extract oil from the Tar Sands and not one has been denied. Robert Rampton, a reporter for the Financial Post, wrote, “Canadian production is surging on expanding output from the oil sands. With exports to...
Words: 1747 - Pages: 7
...11/13/13 Geology 100 Keystone XL Pipeline The presentation on the Observation’s on Geology, Society, and the Nebraska Geological Survey where very interesting, and explained in multiple different ways. I observed many different points of views from Dr. Joechel and also the community. He started by the concept of, “Environmental literacy requires an appreciation of the solid Earth!” This meant a lot to him and he mentioned he wish’s everyone could understand it. He then went into talking about the aspects of mineral resource availability, and how many factors play into it. These include technical, environmental, social, political, and economic factors. People do not know the difference between hazard and risk he explained, “the pipeline is a potential hazard.” A significant hazard may or may not mean significant risk. Risk cannot exist in the absence of hazard. He had a lot of backup knowledge and understanding slides leading up to the main topic, which is when he introduced the Keystone pipeline expansion. I learned that the pipeline expansion allows for the shorter route for the transfer of heavy crude oil (crude bitumen) from tank farms in Alberta storing product derived from Athabasca Tar Sands. It would also carry oil from the Bakken and Three Froks Formations in Williston Basin of Montana and North Dakota. It would generate about 20,000 jobs in the U.S. Some of the pros of the pipeline would be that it’s an efficient mean of transport and will lead to lower...
Words: 654 - Pages: 3
...Keystone XL Pipeline What kind of government can force citizens to sell property from rightful owners and give foreign corporations the right to use this land? This was the case in Direct, Texas where Julia Crawford lost her land to TransCanada, the energy company that builds and operates energy infrastructure in North America. TransCanada was able to legally condemn her land and now her thirty-acre cattle pasture is now home to Keystone XL’s southern leg that runs through Oklahoma to the Gulf coast of Texas as broadcasted via National Public Radio (NPR). TransCanada certainly does not believe in Aldo Leopold’s view of The Land Ethic. In Leopold’s book A Sand County Almanac, Aldo Leopold writes of the community concept in his Land Ethic. This...
Words: 1269 - Pages: 6
...After the recent veto of the Keystone XL Pipeline by President Obama, there have been heated debates with supporters and non-supporters of the Keystone XL pipeline. What is a way that the United States can receive more oil at a more efficient price? How can the United States provide many unemployed Americans with jobs? The Keystone XL Pipeline would provide all of these things in the United States, but what harmful influences would it have on our environment. In this paper, there will be information about both the helpful and harmful effects of the Keystone XL pipeline. This paper will include the ways that the Keystone pipeline will help the economy. The paper will also include ways that the Keystone Pipeline could possibly harm the people...
Words: 1483 - Pages: 6
...Risk No Reward Coalition | GOALGoal 1- To oppose the Keystone Pipeline Project and create awareness among the public about the negative impact that it can have on the environmentGoal2 – To persuade President Obama and Secretary Kerry to reject the proposal of the project | TACTICTactic 1 – Forming a unique blend of various state and national groups to strengthen the coalition Tactic 2- Creating awareness using paid media such as newspaper and television advertisementTactic3- Establishing a youth centered mobilization effort to boost the movement | Coalition 2 – Multistate coalition of general attorneys | Goal 1 – To highlight the benefits that the project will have on the nation’s economyGoal 2- To urge President Obama and Secretary Kerry to approve and pass the Keystone Pipeline Project | Tactic 1- Writing a petition to Secretary Kerry to issue a permit for the project by emphasizing its benefits such as increased employment and energy independence. | Coalition 3- Group of Oklahomans tribe members including Camp Horinek and Whitman | Goal 1 – To draw national attention to the negative impact the project would have on the environmentGoal 2- To preserve the sacred lands of the tribes that may be destroyed due to the commencement of the project. | Tactic 1 – Initiating a national rally starting from Canada and extending all the way to Oklahoma for climate justice and expressing opposition to the keystone pipeline project. | Coalition 4 – Tar Sands Blockade | Goal...
Words: 419 - Pages: 2
...Keystone XL Pipeline Do you think you would want a pipeline to go through your property and put lives at risk? No, people don’t want the pipeline to happen because of the horrible things that could end up happening. Many believe the pipeline will create more jobs, but many think otherwise. A life could be taken away in a second. The pipeline would put the wildlife at risk from toxic oil spills, polluted water, and more. The people and animals in the way of the pipeline will end up having to move when the construction begins. In the U.S, the Keystone Pipeline is doing more harm than good. Trans Canada is a large public company that operates diverse energy-related investments (McElroy). They are also the leader in the development and reliable and safe operation of North American energy infrastructure. Trans Canada owns and has interests in over 10,500 megawatts and is one of the continent’s largest...
Words: 1261 - Pages: 6
...Why the Keystone XL Pipeline Should Be Approved Christopher Passey COMM/215 September 22, 2014 Chris Goodrich University of Phoenix Why the Keystone XL Pipeline Should Be Approved The United States Congress is currently debating a controversial topic, the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline’s construction, between Hardisty, Alberta Canada to Houston Texas. Both sides of the debate are deeply rooted and are split across political party lines which are making it difficult for the legislative branch to come to an agreement on the issue. Supporters reference the positive economic benefits the pipeline will create, whereas its objectors are concerned about the environmental impact the pipeline could cause. Even though there is a perceived environmental risk in importing Alberta (oil sands) crude oil to the United States, it should be approved because it will provide our country with a secure supply of oil and well-paying jobs that will help our economy. To begin with, let’s discuss some of the environmental concerns that those whom are against the approval are referencing. According to Janna Palliser (2012), “Oil sands crude is more corrosive to pipelines than normal crude oil and difficult to clean up if spilled.” (Palliser, 2012). Janna’s statement is a typical concern, however, many of the world’s top leading and respected research organizations have tested this claim and have all come to the same conclusion. “Diluted Bitumen (also known as oil sands) do not...
Words: 997 - Pages: 4
...The highly controversial, and much disputed issues surrounding the Keystone XL crude oil pipeline project have been under the scrutiny of American politics in recent months. A debate has ensued around national calls for the construction of infrastructure that would transport a crude oil alternative from Canada to the United States, and has rapidly gained increased exposure. This exposure can be attributed to a number of factors, but in large part rising gasoline prices and political pressures are the driving factors. Increased demand for more reliable and stable supplies of crude oil in the United States has been driven by an ailing supply of traditional heavy oil. TransCanada Corporation is a Canadian based energy company which develops and operates energy infrastructure throughout North America. The corporation finds itself at the focal point of the oil sands debate. The transnational corporation has applied for a permit to carry out a $7 billion project by the name of Keystone XL, which would allow TransCanada to construct and manage an oil transport pipeline between the United States-Canada border. The pipeline would transport crude oil produced from oil sands in Canada to oil refineries in the Texas Gulf Coast. Since the pipeline would cross international borders, the project requires the approval of the State Department in accord with Executive Order 13337. It is over this crucial point that much of the discussion has been centered. Time Magazine has dubbed oil sands “Canada’s...
Words: 4360 - Pages: 18
...Keystone Debate The proposal of the Keystone Pipeline XL has led to controversy in the United States recently. Why is there so much debate, you may ask, when it has, “the support of an increasing number of Democrats, as well as the vast majority of Republicans in Congress” (Steinhauer)? There are many disputes between political parties and groups in the U.S., but what is special about the Keystone Pipeline is that the support is not one sided. The oppositions and support of the pipeline breaks down according to beliefs of individuals. While a political party may share similar interests, core belief groups lie within these parties that separate them even more. To understand this and why there is not one hundred percent of either party approving,...
Words: 1514 - Pages: 7
...The Keystone XL Pipeline. The Keystone XL Pipeline system is a 1,000 mile pipeline proposed to transport synthetic crude oil and diluted bitumen from Alberto, Canada to the United States. It would bring 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day. The oil will be transported to oil refinies located in Illinois, Oklahoma and The Gulf Coast of Texas. Like all other pipelines, the project must secure permits, land rights and other commercial contracts in the United States and Canada to proceed. Environmental organizations have been lobbying against the pipeline due to the potential negative impact it can have on air, water and wildlife. President Obama postponed any decision until 2013. The Keystone XL Pipeline will have a enormous positive impact of The United States. Today, about half of the oil used in The United States is imported for foreign countries and will increase as we use up domestic resources. Reducing our dependency foreign oil would help stimulate the economy, reduce ever increasing oil prices and our obligation in the Middle East would be lessened. The project will create 20,000 high wage jobs and 118,000 spin off jobs from the construction. Independent studies find during the life span of the pipeline it will contribute $5.2 billion in property taxes to communities along the route. Pipelines are the safest methods for the transportation of petroleum products compared to other methods. According to The International Tanker Owners Pollution the number...
Words: 346 - Pages: 2
...TransCanada’s Keystone pipeline was proposed back in 2005, and has been in commission since 2010. When completed it would enable Canadian oil to access refining capacity on the U.S. Gulf Coast. The final phase of the pipeline dubbed the Keystone Pipeline XL, is currently waiting for U.S. approval. The total route of the pipeline is proposed to be 3,456km, as it would carry crude oil from Alberta to the gulf coast. President Obama is said to make the highly controversial issue deciding the fate of the pipeline later this year. Ultimately the Keystone XL Pipeline is one of the biggest issues for President Obama in his second term. The people who support the pipeline believe it would bring opportunities for thousands of jobs across Canada and...
Words: 727 - Pages: 3
...Hear no Evil, Speak no Evil, and See no Evil TransCanada Keystone XL “Alberta's tar sands” are being proposed to cross six states in the U.S. via a pipeline carrying as much as 830,000 barrels a day of a particularly dirty form of oil, expected to reach refineries in Port Arthur, Texas on the Gulf of Mexico. I hear the sound of disaster headed to us faster than a locomotive. Montana is full of pristine water ways and unspoiled lands. The greekgroke web site says sending bitumen down a pipeline is especially problematic and damaging: it’s a more acidic form of petroleum that requires more heat and pressure than conventional oil, which increase pipeline stress to keep it moving. (Chameides) How can this create anything but a hazard to the communities and environments of the states the pipeline is proposed to cross? The Environmental Defense website says Canada’s own environment commissioner says there is a lot the federal government doesn't know about the environmental effects of the oil sands, despite having spent close to $10 billion over the last three decades on climate-change programs. (Staff) Canada’s environmental record has been given a double blow, from a scathing federal audit and a European Commissions assertion to blacklist oil sands products. (Staff) Why would our government even consider putting toxic oil sands across the United States? Canada should use its own refineries and ports that are already established, especially in view of Canada not knowing...
Words: 1296 - Pages: 6
...sand marinated with bitumen. In 2008, TransCanada, an oil company, proposed the largest construction project on the planet, a pipeline that would transport tar sands oil from Alberta, Western Canada to the sixth largest refinery ever built located in the Gulf Coast of Mexico. The project faced a great number of criticisms from environmentalists, citizens, and some members of the U.S. government; however, as Canada’s tar sands oil industry grew, American and Canadian oilmen and politicians could not help but turn their eyes to Canada’s oil industry, a market that both countries cannot afford to lose, and so, as of 2010, the Keystone Pipeline made it through three phases of its construction. Nevertheless, the last and largest phase of the pipeline's construction is still on hold, as it will go through one of the greatest and richest aquifers on Earth, the Ogallala Aquifers. Tar sands oil is one of the dirtiest and most harmful fuels on Earth, and the 5,200 kilometer long Keystone XL Pipeline is boosting and promoting its industry in many parts of the world, therefore; its phase four construction permit must not be issued and the operating phases must be shutdown. Bush’s statement does not fall appropriate for America only anymore, for Canada is trying to build the biggest construction job in the world, the Keystone XL Pipeline, a 5,200 kilometer long pipeline that will transport one of the dirtiest oils on Earth, tar sands oil, to the 6th largest refinery in the world located in...
Words: 372 - Pages: 2
