Dakota Access Pipeline
The North Dakota Access Pipeline situation going on right now is something I’ve seen many times on Twitter, but never took the time to read and find out what exactly was going on. In all honestly, all I knew was that it had to do with pipes and it was going on in North Dakota. The first time I got real information on it was when we talked about it in class. Even then, all I found out was that people were trying to build pipes on Native American land that would carry oil from North Dakota to Illinois. After looking into the ongoing situation, I found out a lot of interesting things. I can’t say I’m an expert on the topic now, but I do have a better understanding on what exactly is going on and the pros and cons that come with it. I also have my own opinion on whether I believe the pipes should be built.
After reading just one article, there are many pros and cons that come with the situation. Personally, I believe the cons outweigh the pros tremendously. First, I’ll start with the pros. A few pros the article I read mentioned was the reliance the U.S would ...
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.
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.
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.
The Keystone XL Pipeline Imagine the world not as how it is now, but as how people wish it could be. There is no pollution, everyone has a job, the world is at peace and a safe place to live, and most importantly, everyone is happy. This is but a mere dream. Now open your eyes and look at it. See the reality of what the world truly is: we are intentionally hurting the environment, many people in the world are unemployed, many different countries are at war and people are dying because of it.
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 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 opening stories on CNS and FOX on the topic of the pipeline are in support for Obama’s decision against the pipeline. The coverage over the controversy is very one sided and mainly talks about the negative effects of letting the pipeline pass through Montana, South D...
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.
As with most complex issues where many competing rights are at odds the compromise is generally the best course of action. It is the right thing to do so the virtue ethic is obtained. Ethical examination of the pipeline going forward begins with my worldview. I personally have seen pipe installed in the ground with leak prevention and detection technologies to make it safe. Oil and gas is transported safely in pipelines throughout North America. I also have built tank cars and trailers that have transported products safely all over North America. My worldview supports this hybrid compromise. My intuition tells me the hybrid solution is correct. The compromise solution can be further supported by the 56% approval of the pipeline based on poles of Americans. Researching this issue yielded many issues that only clouded the ethical conflict. These included arguments for and against the pipeline based on its effect on the U.S. gross domestic product. U.S. energy security and North American energy independence was argued by proponents. The pipeline’s negative effect on alternative energy development was presented by opponents. A conflict of interest was suggested in that the consulting firm that performed the environmental impact study for the U. S State Department had oil industry clients, including TransCanada. One group proposed that it is more ethical to get oil from democratic states versus states with oppressive
Putting in the pipeline in the underground would be,” … designed to transport 470,000 barrels of crude oil per day (with a growth potential up to 570,000 barrels per day) “ (Energy Transfer) Companies makes more money by that but that leaves out the issues where they are going to put these pipelines. Of course these companies decided a place where a Native American’s reservation lies, destroying homes and historical places. “ The Dakota pipeline will create over 8,000 immediate jobs in the construction sector,’ (Blakeman) shows that going on with this plan will get people out of a job can go into this work field. Although creating jobs for thousands of people, but think about what the people who are living in the land feels. They’re going to be out of a job, house, and sense of security. The companies are picking up hundreds of families and making them move because they are destroying their drinking water.
The issue that confronts many Kentuckians is whether or not the Williams and Boardwalk Pipeline, commonly called the Bluegrass Pipeline, serves for public use. Many people say that the pipeline will benefit the economy and provide jobs, while others complain that the pipeline will cause more harm than good. I am here to argue with the latter, the pipeline will cause much more harm than good. The pipeline is less for public use and more for national and international.
The pros I am going to talk about are: The U.S had many alliances, it would give the U.S a reputation as a strong country, and also land could be gained. The cons I am going to talk about are: Loss of money, Casualties, and also the distraction from other problems.
One con would be the causalities the United States could have. Many men will be wounded or killed in battle. Men also could d...
Land of the free, home of the brave. However, in the United States it is often mistaken whose land it actually is. The U.S. government is notorious for abusing Native Americans and their land and with a new pipeline, which will disrupt indigenous land, it is clear to see that this abuse has not ended. One political cartoon titled Trash Talk by A.F. Branco argues against the Native Americans while two cartoons titled Standoff at Standing Rock by Wolverton and Dakota Access pipeline and Standing Rock by Steve Sack and one editorial titled Voices from Standing Rock by Kevin Sullivan argue against the U.S. government. Therefore, from four points of view, it can be concluded that the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline should be halted because