Keystone XL pipeline route causes controversy!
A Nebraska court has signed off on the Keystone XL route bringing the project a step closer!
Pipe ready for the keystone XL pipeline project.
The pipeline is proposed to go from tar sands in Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas, the project has taken so long to happen because environmental groups and Nebraska landowners raised serious concerns.The project is costing up to $8 billion and up to 2 years to construct, the 875 mile keystone XL would carry heavy crude oil mixture. The tar sands are being mined in a region home to many native people, native groups have organized and protested to stop the expansion of tar sands operations.The company Transcanada say it is going to be beneficial for unemployed citizens saying it will provide around 42,000 jobs over its two year
…show more content…
Those portions were completed in 2010 and 2014. The pipeline in the midwest is capable of receiving nearly 600,00 barrels of oil per day, while the Texas refineries can receive almost 700,00 barrels a day. There are other options for shipping Canada's oil, energy companies are building/upgrading all sorts of other pipelines to transport oil-sands crude.There is Transcanada’s ‘Energy East project’, which would reconfigure a number of natural gas pipelines to carry crude all the way to Canada’s east coast. This project does not need US approval, although it’s running into heavy opposition in Quebec. If completed ,it would transport 1.1 million barrels of oil per day, more than the keystone project does. The 1,179 mile canada to texas pipeline is backed by 57% of the 1,011 Americans that were surveyed on the 18th of december saying that the cost is worth it but Just 28% oppose it as it could majorly affect the environment ,while 15% say they are unsure about the keystone XL
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
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 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,
“If completed and once processed, transported, burned, it would release 101.4 million metric tons of CO2 each year. Equivalent to the emissions from 29.5 coal plants or 21.4 million cars per year” (Dakota Access Pipeline: Top 3 Pros and Cons). Adding more greenhouse gasses is definitely something we shouldn’t do. This pipeline would worsen our climate once it begins to pump oil. The use of alternative energies could benefit our country through being energy efficient, cost effective, and people friendly. Furthermore, the use of trails to transport crude oil is another concern because explosions can occur, killing people and damaging habitats nearby. “Pipeline supporters cite the 2013 disaster in Quebec, Canada, where a train carrying crude oil derailed and destroyed downtown Lac-Mégantic” (Yan). Many support the use of alternative energy sources that would allow people to keep their lands as well as save the Earth. Help the
The origination of this case study begins on one brisk morning back on the 19th of September in 2008 when TransCanada first submitted their application to the U.S. State Department to build the Keystone XL pipeline. The Canadian based energy infrastructure company proposed a 1,179-mile, 36-inch diameter pipeline that would transport crude oil from Canada, through Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska. Along with transporting oil from producers in Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and North Dakota (Figure 1).
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
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.
The Keystone Pipeline system was first operational in the year 2010. And since then it has caused much controversy. Of the different phases in the Keystone Pipeline system, phase one, two, and three are complete. Phase four, also known as Keystone XL, has been put off due to the large amount of controversy it has caused. The Keystone XL pipeline segments will be used to allow American crude oil to enter the pipeline system in Montana, on their way to the storage and distribution plants located in Oklahoma. In 2015, the Obama administration rejected the building of Keystone XL, but with the election of Donald Trump as president, an executive order was signed to advance the project. The reason for such controversy with the Keystone XL pipeline is the effects it will have on native people, land located around the proposed pipeline course, and the wild life, as well as the many complexities due to the economic, social and political issues.
The Keystone XL pipeline will be one of the largest pipelines in the United States if it is constructed. The pipeline will travel 1,702 miles from Alberta, Canada, to the Gulf of Mexico and will be built by TransCanada, a Canadian-based company (Song). The major pipeline will cross six states on its journey to the Gulf of Mexico, which would be carrying an impressive 830,000 barrels of crude oil per day (Molina and Xiaobi 170). Each barrel of oil is the equivalent to forty-two gallons, which is a more relatable measurement. The pipeline will also connect with the previous Keystone pipeline traveling through the heart of America. It will be carrying oil from the tar sands of Canada, which are also known as oil sands. These contain heavier crude oil than what the United States
An environmental disaster waiting to happen in ones eyes, a potential “gold mine” in the others; the decision of the Keystone XL pipeline. What seems to be a perpetual environmental battle and one of the most politically controversial topics in the past decade. The Keystone XL pipeline is a proposed 1,179-mile pipeline running from Alberta, Canada, to Steele City, Nebraska, where it would join an existing pipe. There’s no question the intended pipeline has its pros such as its projected attribution to the American economy and the jobs it will create. However, I strongly believe the few pros it possesses simply do not outweigh the negative effects it will have. These include deforestation, the impact the pipeline could have on the environment and wildlife if there is a spill as well as the continued reliance to depend on fossil fuels; specifically coming from the tar sand oils from Alberta.