Monday, December 03, 2012
Building Keystone XL
Stina Nagel
COMS 369 L02
It is undeniable that North America is a land vast
natural beauty. The majestic Rocky Mountains, stretching across the
Canadian/American border, are a worldwide icon, visited by millions of people
every year. The crisp, clear mountain lakes and lush vegetation look like a
postcard three hundred and sixty-five days of the year. We in Canada are
immensely proud of our natural wonders, as are our neighbors to the south. And
not one of us wants to see that beauty destroyed. It is this fear which causes
unease with the proposal of the Keystone XL pipeline and why so many oppose its
construction.
The pipeline would run from the oil sands in
northern Alberta to refineries in Nebraska (and later Texas), transporting
countless barrels of crude oil to be made into usable product in the United
States. TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL project, has estimated
that construction and maintenance over a realistic 100-year life span of the
project would generate 570,000 jobs. In a country where the employment rate is
an astronomical 7.9%, this seems to be too good an opportunity for Americans to
overlook. And yet, the US government refuses to approve construction. Why? Two
reasons: economic protectionists in the White House and pressure from
environmental lobby groups.
There are far too many Americans, particularly
those in power, who feel that the US economy should be kept within their
borders. This opinion is far too widespread and prominent among Americans in
positions of power, the most important being. President Barrack Obama. Their
ideas are all well and good, however there is a fatal flaw in their belief; the
United States does not have the capability to meet its domestic oil needs. Without
a safe, steady and secure source of energy, other industries will come to a
standstill. This demand is currently being supplied by overseas imports from
the Middle East and Asia; however, these imports are costly and dangerous to
ship via tanker. In addition, purchasing oil from certain overseas countries
supports oppressive dictatorships that violate human rights. If it is necessary
to import oil from other countries, would it not be preferable to work with a
trusted neighbor and bring oil in by pipeline, the safest method of
transportation available? Keystone XL is clearly the answer.
If environmental lobby groups were
to achieve their goals, the oil and gas industry would be shut down in it’s
entirety and constructing Keystone XL would be out of the question. Not only
would Keystone XL astronomically benefit the oil industry as a whole, it would
facilitate further development of the oil sands in Alberta, which many
misinformed lobbyists see as “dirty oil.” This however is purely poor
information. Oil produced in northern Alberta is no different than oil from
anywhere else in the world. Not only that but every day, members of the Oil
Sands Development Group, a coalition of companies with stakes the oil sands,
are working towards more environmentally conscious ways of excavating and
transporting oil. At present however, “Steel pipelines provide the safest, most efficient
and most economical way to transport oil” (TransCanada). Studies have shown
that leaks in steel pipelines are rare and when spills do occur, the majority
are less than three barrels, a miniscule amount compared to disasters such as
the Exxon Valdez and the offshore BP oil spill. Designers have also factored
spill prevention into the blueprints for Keystone XL. Strategically placed
control centers will also be located along 1897 kilometers of pipeline that would
enable the flow of oil to be stopped within a matter of minutes if a leak
should occur. It is understandable that environmental groups would be concerned
with the possibility of leaks; Keystone XL is set to cross many beautiful and
vital natural resources, such as the Ogallala Aquifer. In spite of their
reservations, oil is necessary to our present way of life and pipeline is the
safest and most efficient method to transport Canadian surplus to the United
States where it is needed.
The
oil sands in northern Alberta are the third largest known reserve of oil in the
world. Traditionally, a suspected
location of oil must be explored and tested before real excavation can begin.
This is a lengthy and expensive process and one that does not always lead to
productive oil reservoir. This is not the case in the oil sands. The oil is
there, it only needs to be harvested. We in Canada have much more oil than we
can consume, therefore we need to export it. It is also the heart of Alberta’s
economy and funds equalization payments for the rest of the country. On the
other hand, the US is entirely incapable of meeting it’s own demand. The laws
of supply and demand paint a clear picture wherein the United States needs
Canadian oil to survive. The facts speak for themselves; Keystone XL is the
answer.
The
need for Keystone XL is apparent and yet many still oppose its construction. At
present, United States government has halted any progress for the foreseeable
future. Canadian and American citizens need to work together to ensure the
economic prosperity of both our nations. There is action we can take: writing
to politicians and expressing the need for this project, as well spreading the
correct information regarding Keystone XL and the oil and gas industry. With
this project, we can enjoy both economic prosperity and the beauty of land we
live on for generations to come.
For more information,
please visit:
http://www.oilsandsdevelopers.ca/
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]