KeystoneXL-Why Should You Care?

We need energy. Our lifestyle requires energy sources. Energy that is affordable, cheap, reliable and dependable. Energy to run our appliances, heat our homes, power our modes of transportation, power our industries to make the products we love and enjoy, and even to produce our food that we eat. So where do we get this energy. For the past 150 years, this source has been of fossil fuels. They are called fossil fuels because their energy comes from an elongated process of breaking down once living material into a state that now produces power when it is heated. These fossil fuels are namely oil and coal, with natural gas being a highly sought after secondary source. These materials practically run the world and the source of the world’s achievements and of its conflicts.

Energy Budget for the United States

            The issue at hand though is that these sources of energy have negative consequences to them. Whether we like it or not, these sources do grave damage to the ecological, biological and environmental systems at the very least due to their harmful repercussions of producing them. To make a coal mine, a whole swath of land has to be completely cleared. This of course can kill off entire areas of plant and animal population, sometimes semi permanently.

The same goes for a technique of extracting natural gas called fracturing or “fracking” which breaks up the sedimentary rocks deep under the ground to release the gas out for consumption. This process, while proven more cost and energy efficient based off of the new high demand for cheap gas, also has some negative effects including contamination of the ground water supply which can kill off plants, livestock and even harm people directly.

Fracking is a becoming a more efficient way of extracting gas 

            The problem that presents itself is how we balance the two demands, energy necessity and protecting the world we live in from harm. Lately efforts have been put into place to promote green or “carbon neutral” energy to help alleviate some of the burden put onto the environment. While these efforts are helpful, they do not get close to solving the conundrum over energy. It is quite simple when spelled out though.

            If we want to keep safety in our economy and in our immediate future, we keep our production high for natural gas and oil. Most of our oil and gas gets sold overseas, thus lowering the price of gas here in America (why gas prices are dropping). Energy prices will stay relatively balanced with coal and natural gas again in the short term. This is the platform that many choose as they see shortsighted in this issue and point to economic stability and job production as a main concern for the welfare of the country as a whole.

            The other side of the coin is that our decisions we make today add up. It is not like if we emit more and more carbon dioxide, it will just go away. That carbon dioxide has to go somewhere. Notice how I have not even mentioned about global warming and climate change until now. That is only part of the equation. One of the hardest thing for people who support fossil fuels as a main source of energy to swallow is that these sources are temporary and non-replenishable. Once they are gone, they are gone forever. So clean energy is not just about saving the environment, it is about sustaining ourselves for the future to come.

Carbon Dioxide variations with time.
Notice the sharp unprecedented rise since the Industrial Revolution. 

            The Keystone XL Pipeline is a planned pipe that will go from the middle part of Alberta, down the Great Plains into the United States. The pipe will be mostly underground and will carry the oil from the tar sands in Northern Canada, south to the United States. The pipeline itself when completed will transport over 750,000 barrels of petroleum southward.  The Keystone pipeline has already been built, stretching from Canada down through Nebraska (there is an issue with that, read more about it here) and into Oklahoma. The KeystoneXL is merely a shortcut proposed that will have the pipe go through Eastern Montana and South Dakota making it more direct. The project of extending and finalizing the pipeline so that it connects to the Gulf Coast currently being discussed by Congress and is being proposed to move forward very soon. There have been concerns on both sides, namely the left about the safety and economic stability of such an investment.

Planned Keystone pipeline including the current pipeline as it stands (Washington Post)

            There is no doubt that the pipeline will require thousands of jobs and man hours to complete, so the argument that it will create jobs is not refuted. The estimates have it that over 40,000 temporary jobs will be created in result of the project being passed. Also if we decide against building the pipeline and the oil was left in the hands of Canadians, the demand for this petroleum would cause it to be used either way eventually. Also in the grand scheme of things, the pipeline would not directly contribute to climate change, as the extraction would be a small fraction of the emissions we already produce.  It also would be much safer than the current means of transport of oil, which over land is mostly by outdated railways. The EPA and State Department have reviewed and approved much of the process of construction of the pipeline.

Protest for the KeystoneXL

             The argument against is definitely more complex. It involves what if’s and situational concerns in the long term. It starts with extraction. However one plans on extracting the oil from the tar sands, environmental concerns arise. Either by pumping steam into the sands or strip mining them, the devastation will be all too noticeable.  Boreal Forests in Canada are already in danger; this would only speed up their process. The possibility of major leak is not if but when. The damage caused is not only environmental as the process of extraction releases more carbon dioxide than the normal production of oil. This in itself could be responsible for a temperature rise globally of over 2 degrees. Hundreds of thousands have protested against the pipeline in large scale fashion in the past several months.

Example of a protest against the pipeline in front of the White House

            From an economic standpoint, the jobs gained by this pipeline are not sustainable. This will mean a sharp crash after the pipeline is completed. Most of the money gained from the oil production will go to the companies themselves and to the pipeline company TransCanada and not into the US economy. The climate crisis currently is directly or indirectly responsible for billions of dollars of damages and hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. Eventually this will start to put a huge damper on our GDP and affect the global economy. We as a country should focus on more sustainable job growth, both from a green and economic level so that we can ensure success for generations to come.

A scary before and after photo of how Alberta would look after oil extraction

So why should you care? Well because it is your future. The general population's knowledge on how policy decisions is an integral part of how we can actually change the world for the better. Do your best to research these issues and try to form your own opinion rather than relying a news station or other people to do so. President Obama has taken large criticism for being too lenient on the issue. Liberals feel that with the way that the issue is shaping up, the final decision might come to him. Conservatives fear that the economy will be at risk of further turmoil if this pipeline does not get built and that environmentalist are just stalling progress.

 So what do you think? Yes or no to KeystoneXL? Comment with your opinion.