As is often the case, recent Congressional debate has put fiscal benefits at odds with environmental protection. For the past few years, approval for the Keystone XL Pipeline has been argued and contested, with almost consistent gridlock. However, after almost six years, both chambers of Congress are about to take a vote on the approval of the project. On one hand, the economic value of the pipeline could be enormous. The ability to transport crude from the Canadian tar sands to the Gulf of Mexico allows for thousands of jobs and millions of barrels, skyrocketing trade between the two countries, resulting in billions of dollars in economic activity in the years to come. Further, there is the added benefit of Keystone ending our international oil dependency. Some argue that millions of barrels of oil in Canada could result in the US getting 90% of its oil from North America within 20 years, thus ending the reliance on OPEC and the Middle East.
On the other side, the primarily-Democrat led opposition have argued that the environmental harms aren't justified. For one, the aforementioned ending of oil dependency could have the adverse effect of discouraging research into alternative energy, either from a private angle, as investors don't feel confident in competing with an influx of so much oil, or a public one, in that decades of oil from Canada may not warrant further investment. Moreover, the relatively obvious risk of a 1100 mile pipeline is the potential for leaks, resulting in an oil spill which could dwarf the BP accident. The passage through the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the largest fresh-water deposits in the world may not be a risk worth taking, as a spill would permanently cripple the international fresh-water supply, which is already declining now.
Regardless of if the Pipeline passes or not, the constant Congressional bickering will probably not cease. At the very least, this might be one issue that could actually spur a decision with some negotiations and horsetrading, a good step for future policy.
Amit Bilgi
Sources:
http://www.aei.org/publication/americas-future-is-oil/?gclid=CL7Fzrmf7bACFdJd7AodEUicyw
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/07/the-keystone-pipeline-would-create-thousands-of-jobs/
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/keeping-canada-close-6472
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/12/louisiana-lawmakers-jockey-to-approve-keystone-xl-pipeline/
On the other side, the primarily-Democrat led opposition have argued that the environmental harms aren't justified. For one, the aforementioned ending of oil dependency could have the adverse effect of discouraging research into alternative energy, either from a private angle, as investors don't feel confident in competing with an influx of so much oil, or a public one, in that decades of oil from Canada may not warrant further investment. Moreover, the relatively obvious risk of a 1100 mile pipeline is the potential for leaks, resulting in an oil spill which could dwarf the BP accident. The passage through the Ogallala Aquifer, one of the largest fresh-water deposits in the world may not be a risk worth taking, as a spill would permanently cripple the international fresh-water supply, which is already declining now.
Regardless of if the Pipeline passes or not, the constant Congressional bickering will probably not cease. At the very least, this might be one issue that could actually spur a decision with some negotiations and horsetrading, a good step for future policy.
Amit Bilgi
Sources:
http://www.aei.org/publication/americas-future-is-oil/?gclid=CL7Fzrmf7bACFdJd7AodEUicyw
http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/07/the-keystone-pipeline-would-create-thousands-of-jobs/
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/keeping-canada-close-6472
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/11/12/louisiana-lawmakers-jockey-to-approve-keystone-xl-pipeline/
No comments:
Post a Comment