Keystone Pipeline Risk

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.

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

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

The Canadian Keystone XL Pipeline is harmful and should not be encouraged by anyone, especially the Canadian government. The Keystone XL is harmful to the environment that surrounds the Keystone XL pipeline. Also shouldn’t be encouraged because the Keystone XL may cause pollution. Lastly, the Keystone XL Pipeline shouldn’t be encouraged because the Keystone XL pipeline negatively affects the health of citizens. The Canadian Keystone XL pipeline shouldn’t be encouraged because it negatively impacts the surrounding environment, it causes pollution, and it negatively affects the health of citizens.

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,

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.

It decides which topics are pivotal, from overseas conflicts to natural disasters on the home front. Within the last decades, environmental concerns have arisen as state and federal governments see the impact of pollution. The Keystone Pipeline system is a new transportation method for oil from the Northwest of the US down to the South for oil production (“Keystone XL Pipeline: Why Is It so Disputed?”). Alongside environmentalists, Native Americans whose land the pipeline would pass through joined the movement to redirect the system (McKenna). Organized protests in front of the White House and deliberate occupation of future construction sites garnered little attention for the media. Many occupiers were arrested for trespassing charges, but there are no publications of violent protests against the authorities (“Keystone XL Pipeline: Why Is It so Disputed?”). From conception until the presidential veto, the demonstrators kept their resolve to peaceful civil disobedience and its consequences. Even though the Keystone Pipeline project has the potential resurrect itself, the fortitude of the indigenous tribes and environmentalists displayed inspired the nation to reconsider its love affair with oil (“Keystone XL Pipeline: Why Is It so Disputed?”). The prospect of change through peace resonates with America’s conscience, while lawless violence reminds the people of the order and security

In his book The Boom, Russell Gold discusses the history of fracking from its origins through its development into modern times. As an accredited Senior Energy Reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Gold has a very unique relationship with the subject; one that makes him privy to the benefits and consequences of fracking from both a personal and employment-based perspective. Gold is able to contextualize the topics he discusses, including more technical aspects of fracking, and move between his vastly different perspectives with such fluidity that it remains relatable, no matter the background of the reader.

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

We are always trying to find new ways to exploit our resources to benefit our economy and the world. But the big problem is doing this in an environmentally friendly way. If we can share our resources with other countries then that will benefit our economy and make our world a better place. But if we are going to do this there are some risks we are going to have to take. Canada and the U.S are facing this problem, where we want to sell one of our resources to the U.S, one of our closest allies but they don’t. It all started in September of 2008, where a Canadian company, TransCanada applied to the U.S Department of State for a permit to cross the U.S Canada international border to carry out the Keystone XL pipeline project. Due to the fact

There is a debate between people on the oil pipeline. The Keystone XL pipeline, which is suggested to be one of the biggest projects of oil transport, is the topic of this discussion. Some people think that the pipeline will provide many benefits while others believe that the disadvantages of the pipeline will outweigh its advantages. This paper will look in two fallacies that are found in the article named “Pipeline raises tough choices: Jobs vs. environment” by Bertha Coombs. These are false dichotomy found in the proponents’ argument, and slippery slope found in the opponents’ argument.