Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the effects the Keystone Pipeline has on the environment
Flashcards on the keystone pipeline
Keystone pipeline introduction
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
On September 19, 2008, The TransCanada Corporation submitted an application to the U.S. State Department to begin building the Keystone XL (XL standing for eXport Limited) pipeline in the United States. More than six years later, the pipeline is still under debate. The project, though generating little controversy when first submitted, began receiving attention in 2011 after an environmental impact study was released by the State Department (Hansen). Major newspapers and online sites picked up the report. Numerous pro- and anti- pipeline groups and websites sprang up soon afterwards. Major news networks such as Fox and MSNBC began extensively reporting on the Keystone XL pipeline. Politicians also began speaking in favor of or against the project. On February 17, 2013, nearly 40,000 people descended on Washington, D.C. to protest the pipeline (Meyer and Burch). Why is the Keystone XL pipeline so controversial? The proposed Keystone XL pipeline will transport tar sands oil from Hardisty, Alberta to Baker, Montana, and finally to Steele City, Nebraska. It will be over 1,700 miles long when it is completed (that is, if it is ever even built). It will be able to carry nearly 830,000 barrels of oil a day when it becomes operational (Eilperin). However, the Keystone XL pipeline will not be the first pipeline TransCanada will build in the US. It is, in fact, the fourth and final phase of the Keystone Pipeline system, a $12.2 billion oil-transporting network. The Keystone XL pipeline is expected to be the most expensive part of the pipeline system, costing an estimated $7 billion (Mufson). Once the pipeline reaches Steele city, it will be connected to an existing oil pipeline, and that oil will then be transported to refineries near Hous... ... middle of paper ... ...t in January of 2013, but a judge ruled it is an overreach of his power (“Nebraska Judge”). President Obama rejected the permit for the Keystone XL pipeline in January of 2012, but Congressional Republicans and Democrats are pressuring Obama to approve it. A new State Department environmental impact study released on January 31, 2014 stated that the pipeline would be unlikely to alter global greenhouse emissions, which brought further pressure on Obama to approve the project (Eilperin and Mufson). A recent ABC news poll showed that 65 percent of Americans support the pipeline while 22 percent oppose it ("Keystone XL pipeline"). President Obama will have to make a final decision within the next few months on whether to accept or reject the pipeline. Whatever his decision, the debate over the Keystone XL pipeline will likely continue for many years to come.
The Dakota Access Pipeline and the Keystone XL Pipeline are two pipeline projects that were suspended in the past. These pipelines were stopped because they could have a big impact of people and the environment. The making of these pipelines would cause a great amount of carbon pollution. Recently, President Trump signed the orders to approve the pipeline project. The projects have pros and cons, the people in favor of the pipelines think we would be able to rely less on foreign oil. The people against the pipeline believe that the pipelines would cause the release of gases into the air that could be harmful for other people.
would have the capacity to transport 525,000 barrels of oil per day. The project would
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.
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 reason for this report is to increase the reader’s knowledge on the Alberta Tar Sands, which will allow them to create their own opinions on the situation. It is a very pertinent issue in politics and will have a very large effect on the carbon emissions of Canada. Also, I wanted to further my understanding of the Alberta tar sands and learn the side effects of the tar sands. How the tar sands are different from other oil and energy procurement methods and which method is more energy efficient? Would the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States be an intelligent way for the US to involve itself in the tar sands? I wanted to answer these questions by knowing the real facts about the tar sands versus what the oil companies are telling the consumers. The ability to assess the entire situation will allow both the reader and I to formulate our own opinions about the tar sands and whether the extraction of oil at the tar sands should continue.
Mendes, Elizabeth. "Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline." Gallup.com. Gallup, 22 Mar. 2012. Web. 09 Apr. 2012.
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
From the arguments, it is evident that the negative effects of the construction of Keystone XL Pipeline supersede its positive impacts, both on the United States of America’s economy and environment. Therefore, it is important that the country takes into consideration the negative effects that might be associated with the pipeline before embarking on its construction.
The purpose of this research paper was to investigate the news media’s depiction of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. The coverage provided by the newspapers was compared to that of scientific journals to access their validity and insight. The reactions the coverage evoked on the public were also studied. The paper specifically addressed the media’s portrayal of the oil company versus that of environmental groups. It was found that the news media did not include the benefits the oil company had had on the people and economy of Alaska. It was also found that up until 1989, many Alaskans were opposed to environmental groups. Next, the paper followed the role the media played on the public’s emotions and subsequent government policy. In addition, the use of exaggerated statistics in the wake of the spill are examined and corrected. Finally, the debate over the recovery of the area is tackled. And while the debate remains open, the apparent discrepancies in data are discussed.
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.
Projects like the Keystone Pipeline are important as they will allow us to transport more oil than we would be able to in train cars, and grants larger access to oil reserves in the United States and Canada. The Keystone Pipeline itself is an oil pipe line which runs from the western Canadian sedimentary basin in Alberta, Canada to refineries in the United States. These refineries are located in three different main locations: Steele City, Nebraska, Wood River and Patoka, Illinois and refineries located in the gulf coast of Texas.
In today's global economy, energy is one of the most crucial and sought after commodities. Who supplies it and how much they supply determines how much influence they have over other countries as well as the global economy. This is why hydraulic fracturing is currently such an important and controversial topic in the United States. Hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as "fracking" or hydrofracturing, is the process of using pressurized liquids to fracture rocks and release hydrocarbons such as shale gas, which burns more efficiently than coal. This booming process of energy production provides a much needed economic boost, creating jobs and providing gas energy for Americans. The efficiently burning shale gas reduces carbon emission from electricity production plants, reducing carbon footprints on the environment. However, the process of hydraulic fracturing uses millions of gallons of pressurized liquid, which contains toxic chemicals, and some of this water is left over undealt with. The air near fracking sites is often also polluted and unsafe for nearby community residents. Injecting millions of gallons of water laced with toxic chemicals into the rock thousands of feet deep can cause earthquakes, causing a safety hazards for all nearby areas. Hydraulic Fracturing makes rare natural gases easily attainable, boosting the economy and reducing carbon emissions. However, the negative side effects such as contaminated water and air, make hydraulic fracturing a process that may not be worth the benefits.
Have you ever been to Hell? No one is quite sure how far underground you have to go to get there or what you have to do to be sent there, but no one truly wants to go. Fracking might be putting people closer to Hell than the government thinks. What is fracking? “…hydraulic fracturing… as a means of extracting natural gas and oil from shale formations located deep underground (Davis and Fisk 1). Fracking has caused many ethical issues due to the many problems it has caused for the people who live around the fracking sites. “…, it has become increasingly controversial because of rising public concerns about drilling-related impacts on environmental quality, local government infrastructure, and public health” (Davis and Frisk 1). The fracking
Keystone Pipeline - Partially constructed oil pipeline system that begins in Harbisty, Alberta and ends in Illinois and Texas.