Introduction
This briefing is about the Pipelines project. In B.C., there are some pipelines projects, include inter and intra one. The famous one is the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines (NGP). This project is divided into two parts that are the East and the West. In my work, the main topic is the West line-inter pipelines. The Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipelines are proposing to construct and to operate twin pipelines. The total length of these Pipelines is 1177km (731 mi). It is primary transfers the natural gas or the oil from Bruderheim, Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia and finally exports to Asian market (mostly it is Chinese market oriented), since Alberta has abundant oil and natural gas and also BC province has a unique geographical environment, which is near the west coast of the Pacific Ocean and with many ports to facilitate exports. The entire project can transit 525,000 barrels of oil and 193,000 bpd (or 30,700m3/day) of condensate on average. This project, which is expected to implement in January 2019 was proposed in mid-2000 and was developed by Enbridge Incorporation. However, since the whole plan has a wide range of effect that is it is not only can bring huge economic profits but meanwhile it also has an impact on the surrounding environment and the lives of the residents. Therefore, the National Energy Board (NEB) has rejected the application of this program for many times. Thus, I am going to analyze the benefits and impacts of the implement of this project.
Benefits
First of all, in recently years Asian market increases their crude oil demand more and more, China, as the world fastest growing country, which has a huge demand for crude oil. Therefore, Canada, which has rich oil and gas resources can e...
... middle of paper ...
...tremendous economic growth. On the other hand, we also need to care about the loser group in the NGP plan, for which I have three suggestions. First of all, for the U.S. oil market, we can reduce part of the export price and transportation costs that making the U.S. crude oil market does not affected by the NGP plan. In addition, for the environment aspect, we need to reduce the environment pollution as much as we can when developing the NGP project such as increase construction costs, improve construction quality and reduce the risk of environmental pollution, which will help to reduce the government investment in the future environmental governance. Last but not least, to control the NGP crude oil exportation properly, to stable the domestic demand for crude oil, the government needs to reduce the crude oil tax transportation costs and reduces domestic oil prices.
no easy situation to address. Is it worth BC’s approval to build the pipeline, when it
On the 9th of February 2004 TransCanada Corporation, an energy company based in Alberta, Canada proposed a plan for the installation and use of a pipeline that would stretch from Alberta, Canada to oil refineries in the Gulf Coast of Texas in the United States. The pipeline, titled the Keystone Pipeline, would be installed in four separate phases and once completed would transport up to 1.1 million barrels of synthetic crude oil per day. Phases two through four of the pipeline encompass the parts of the pipeline that would be installed in the United States and would be located in the states of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Missouri, and Illinois. TransCanada is currently awaiting approval from the US government in order to begin the installation of the US portion of the pipeline.
In this essay we will be looking at why the Keystone XL Pipeline should not be built. This is a hot controversial issue that has been in the news for awhile. We will discuss the pros and cons of what will happen if the United States passes legislature to allow the Keystone XL Pipeline to be built. You have to ask yourself if destroying the environment is for our children is worth it to make a few billions richer or maybe little bit cheaper gas. If you agree with building the Keystone XL Pipeline you need to look your children in the eyes and tell them you’re sorry for destroying the environment for them and their children.
With our understanding that the pipeline is safe, and there are safety precautions in place if anything ever did happen. That it is the best economical way to transport this oil. And finally our need for this oil s huge and it will be huge for a long time unless we start the process of building nuclear power right now; even in that case we still have about 15 years before that is ready to take the work load of British Columbia. Even when we have a different sustained energy we will still have the need for oil due to the fact that’s cars are the main moat of transportation in the lower main land. That means we are far away from a province let alone a country that can run without the use of oil. And seeing how to transport it via pipe line is the safest spill wise and most economically friendly it seems to be the better choice.
The Alberta Oil Sands are large deposits of bitumen in north-eastern Alberta. Discovered in 1848, the first commercial operation was in 1967 with the Great Canadian Oil Sands plant opening, and today many companies have developments there. The Alberta Oil Sand development is very controversial, as there are severe environmental impacts and effects on the local Aboriginal peoples. This essay will discuss the need for changes that can be made for the maximum economic benefit for Canada, while reducing the impact on the environment and limiting expansion, as well as securing Alberta’s future. Changes need to be made to retain the maximum economic benefits of the Alberta Oil Sands while mitigating the environmental and geopolitical impact. This will be achieved by building pipelines that will increase the economic benefits, having stricter environmental regulation and expansion limitations, and improving the Alberta Heritage Fund or starting a new fund throu...
The Alberta tar sands have the second largest oil reserves in the entire world, only smaller than Saudi Arabia’s oil reserves. This vast supply of oil has created a large interest in the extraction and then production of different types of oil in Canada. The tar sands are believed to hold around 174.5 billion barrels of oil. The estimates are across the board but if it is true, the oil industry in Canada would become its largest export and substantially boost the economy. The tar sands were producing 53% of Canada’s oil output, but by the end of this year it will be around 83%. This number could increase to 99%, if the tar sands are fully taken advantage of. The extraction of oil has already begun and covers around 602 square kilometers of land. The problem is that ...
The oil companies, the customers, and the average employee will not benefit from the construction of this pipeline. If the pipeline does its job, it will take the whole load of oil from Canada to the United States. The other companies which are already responsible for transporting oil will not be required to do their jobs, as it is being done for them. All of these companies will go out of business. With 3 more pipeline plans in place for Canada, people are wondering whether they will ever need to build a new one again. With all of these companies going out of business, many employees will have to be laid off. This will cause insufficient manual labor, thereafter causing a lack of jobs. All the former employees are going to have to find another job. Since they won't have time to prepare in advance, for that time being, they also won’t have any source of income. "In our view, Trans Mountain plus the Keystone pipeline would make the Energy East pipeline less needed," said Divya Reddy, a global energy analyst with the Eurasia Group. "In terms of the production outlook for the oil sands over the next 10 years, it doesn't seem like that extra capacity is actually needed." Nothing is going to happen right away or very fast. So, in the instance that the pipeline doesn’t work, the other companies will still be running. This means both things will still be used. This will cause competition for attention and/or tasks between the pipeline and existing companies. This may draw attention away from the task at hand. “While we forecast continued growth in Canadian oil production, there might be too much pipe if Trans Mountain expansion and Line 3 replacement and Keystone XL all start up by 2020” said Afolbi Ogunnaike, a senior analyst at Wood Mackenzie, in a note. Because of this pipeline, people are going to lose their
This paper will discuss the effects of Keystone XL Pipeline project and how the findings of the research might be beneficial to the United States. The first point of argument will be the negative impact of the Keystone Pipeline to America’s economy and the environment. The second point of view will be the positive impact of Keystone Pipeline to America’s economy. Keystone XL Pipeline is TransCanada’s tar-sand transportation project. The pipeline is supposed to cut across America to be linked with Canada’s tar-sand mines. It is aimed at increasing energy security in America. However, the project has received a lot of criticism from both the citizens and environmentalists for climate reasons (Mendelsohn and Dinar 154). To understand the implications of Keystone XL Pipeline, it is important to look at its environmental and economic impacts to the United States.
The Keystone XL pipeline continues dividing the opinion of the people and being a controversial issue. The precious “black gold”, represents one of the main factors that moves the economy, nationally and globally. This extra-long pipeline will transport oil all the way from Canada to Texas. Some experts and the private oil corporation, who is the one in charge of this project, point to the benefits of this project, for example, will make the USA more independent from foreign oil, will create thousands of jobs and improve the economy. Nevertheless, are experts revealing how the pipeline is an unnecessary risk and will be negative for the environment, dangerous for the population living close to the big pipes, and long-term negative for the
The Keystone Pipeline started construction in 2008 for the main purpose of connecting Canadian and American oil refineries to transport crude oil from the oil sands of Canada faster and more efficient. So far the first three phases of the pipeline have been completed but the proposed and most controversial is Phase IV. It connects Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Oklahoma which requires a presidential permit and it also connects the 485-mile southern leg known as the Gulf Coast Project between Steele City and Port Arthur, Texas, which is now operating (Eilperin). The benefits of the pipeline include an increase in jobs, contribute $3.4 billion to the U.S economy and also save time and money from transporting the oil by pipeline instead of tanks and rails. At the same time it would be a great harm to the environment, making the climate unstable, and could cause possible future oil spills. The articles covering the Keystone Pipeline generally list out the same points, covering the same benefits and consequences of building the pipeline. Sources like Fox News and CNS have more of an opposition towards the pipeline and narrow in on the risks and of the effects it would have on the people. Whereas news stations such as CNN and The Washington Post address both sides of the controversy but are subtle about being in favor of the pipeline. The international sources such as Al Jazeera and Reuters oppose the pipeline and are more open with supporting the environmentalists.
The newest proposed phase has been met with mixed feelings. Many companies in industry wish to see the newest phase of the pipeline completed because many believe that it would be very beneficial to almost everyone. One of the biggest benefits that the construction of a new section of pipeline would provide is the large amount of jobs that it would create. The...
Recently, TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline has become a hot debate topic. Those who oppose the Western United States oil pipeline are misled and uniformed. The US Government should authorize the Keystone XL Pipeline that would import tar sand oil from Canada. The pipeline would generate jobs and help to remove foreign oil dependency, is the safest transportation option being considered and finally will not harm or affect the environment as opponents claim.
Issue: The issue at hand is that Enbridge proposed to construct two additional pipelines, the Alberta Clipper (AC) and the Southern Lights Diluent (SLD) pipelines. Sierra Club, an environmental group, has taken civil action against the state department, a variety of other governmental departments, and Enbridge Energy because these two pipelines were approved without proper review in their final environmental impact statements. The defendants motioned for summary judgement.
In most ways people think that the pipeline industry is all for itself,and in its process it destroys the enviroment.In fact there are protests and riots happening often, to say the least.People also hop on the bandwagon saying that the industry should be protested for its safety hazards.In this paper I will explain how the industry takes every precaution to prevent environmental and personal harm and what they can actually do for you if the right of way runs through your land.
Since the 19th century, gas has gradually become a necessity to mankind. It has been used for lighting our houses, to produce heat, to cook our food and to run our vehicles. As time passed, the price of gas has known many changes in Montreal. By the year of 2008 the price was relatively low, but suddenly became very high in 2014. This year in Montreal, the prices are as low as 3.4 US $/G. When considering the previously mentioned facts, we ask ourselves why the price of gas is low and what are the factors fluctuating its price. The main factor responsible of gas price changes is the cost of oil.