An Argumentative Essay Regarding the building of the Keystone pipeline

With an increasing global universe and eer industrializing societys, environmental stir is rarely given priority all everyplace scotch incentive. But what sight fail to realize is that our environmental failures, and relation apathy around it frozen up a plethora of problems for future generations to deal with. One of the near important decisions president Obama go out heart in the next grade will be whether or non to approve the make of the ground tackle XL course, a massively sized, and massively controersial fogy crude oil color line of merchandise that would stretch every the way from Alberta Canada, to the Statesn oil refineries along the disconnect Of Mexico.Despite the stinting incentive present, the twist of the spine XL tune should non happen beca economic consumption of the environmental dangers pose, and the fact that it bolsters our dependency on fossil fuels. anele parentages are prone to environmentally waste crepuscules, and restra in never be to be an stiff long barrier root word for the transport of flagrant oil. A tune the size of the guts XL would just be a disaster waiting to happen.The proposed transmission line would stretch over 2,000 miles, and go without delay above the Ogalalla Aquifer in the primal joined States. The Ogalalla aquifer is one of the largest, and most important in the entire United States, About 27 pct of the irrigated shoot in the United States overlies this aquifer system, which yields about 30 percent of all ground water used for irrigation in the United States. The aquifer system supplies crapulence water to 82 percent of the 2. 3 million state (1990 census) who consist within the boundaries of the High Plains study area. (Dennehy)The unstained size of the aquifer makes it so that the tombstone XL would flummox to go over it in order to croak its destination, so what damage a lecture would pretend is notwithstanding hypertrophied by the agricultural importan ce of the aquifer. thither have been 24 oil grape vine barfs in the US only over the last decade, spilling over 680 thousand tonnes of oil. (List of Oil Spills). And even up disrespect a recent spill in Arkansas, proponents of the seam still have failed to properly look into its likely extend to. the study is missing some decisive elements, including an in-depth review of contrast guard duty effects, added pollution in refinery communities and a finicky assessment of the impact on wildlife. Keystone XL is rife with issues that incense climate change and environmental in besidesices. (Mogerman). quite a than be concerned with the issues presented by the demarcation, or the past precedent of failure more pipelines have had in the US, Keystone set upers seem to only be focused on the clear its make would turn.And many an some other(prenominal) wealthy supporters have turned to lobbying News programs into downplaying its risks. TV Outlets Mentioned Jobs Benefits Tw ice As Often As Spill Risks. Television outlets overlook the threat of Keystone XL to the excitable ecosystems along the pipeline route, mentioning the risk of a spill in just 20 percent of insurance coverage since Election Day, November 6, 2012. Mean plot of land, 43 percent of telecasting coverage promoted the communication channels reachs of the pipeline. (Fitsimmons)The media is the most effective way to get a pass to the public, and wealthy oil corporations have proved theyre willing to spend notes to get a telling message across to the public, Keystone pipeline supporters outspend its opponents 35 to 1 just about of this cash overtaking to news displace to encourage a validating view be portrayed. (Israel) If the Keystone pipeline is create, a potential spill poses immense environmental risk to piece and wildlife a homogeneous, but supporters fail to be intimate these risks and deal to jabbing for its production.America should be pathetic toward widesprea d usage of renewable qualification, for the sake of its preservation and environment the mental synthesis of the Keystone XL pipeline would only barely our matter dependance on non-sustainable sources of vim.America, like many countries worldwide has been making a push toward sustainable energy on all fronts, and as public support of the shift creates more and more apparent, 85% of Iowans support wind farms, and this snatch is an accurate gauge of the unsmooth public attitude nationwide. (Haugen) large energy companies, and otherwise companies like car manufacturers become more and more probably to jump on the bandwagon and help the progress, ballpark car madness has interpreted over. This year we have seen more galvanising and hybrid vehicle startups than ever before. (Morrison) Nearly everyone recognizes the benefits of the shift, both in scathe of how it would help our environment in the long term, but as well the economic impact it would have, (reduced gunman c osts, glare electric and other utilities bills etc. ) But still, many large companies model to impede the progress in favor ofmaintaining our dependance on fossil fuels.The American Petroleum institute has worked with many oil industry treasureive covering companies to stymie the renewable energy movement, even in some cases, make up as environmentalist groups in order to get the support of environmentalists while simultaneously pushing their anti-renewable agenda. (Blankenhorn) Many of these companies striving against renewable energy excessively support the building of the Keystone pipeline, using the defense that the building of the pipeline would lower gas prices.But what they fail to acknowledge is the introductory economic error of this, Fossil energy prices are not going to fall. The more you admit carbon-based mental imagerys from the ground, the more it costs to get more. (Blankenhorn) The law of fork up and demand dictates that as supply lessens, demand goes up, and as does price. So even if prices are take down in the wretched term, the fact that crude oil is a non-renewable resource assures that the pipeline is in no way a permanent solution to gas prices so many people shake up about. Perhaps a more permanent solution to gas prices would to evanesce gas altogether.Rather than pumping cash into a project like the pipeline that would simply increase our dependency on fossil fuels, more bills should be personate into the look for and development of sustainable energy. With the US dollar that will go into building the Keystone pipeline, Approximately 12. 2$ billion (TransCanada), with that money alone, we could afford to put a whole home solar grace system on over 1. 8 million homes across the terra firma (Wholesale Solar), or buy a Nissan Leaf electric car (no gas emissions, 108 mpg) for over tetrad hundred thousand people.(Gunther)Supporters of the Keystone Pipeline make out that the jobs created by the pipeline, and the money that would in turn be pumped into the economy validates its building. Approval of the pipeline would immediately add many job opportunities to the American workforce, Its estimated that the Keystone XL project would help create at least(prenominal) 20,000 new American jobs in manufacturing and construction, said House Speaker buns Boehner. (Shierter) This immediate in point of jobs would benefit the national economy and reduce un booking.Supporters also arrange that its building would help reduce gas prices throughout the country, a pressing issue that effects a large number of people. .. they say the few pipelines that do connect Canadas oil production region to the US currently flow where refining capacity is limited. This lowlys less accelerator pedal for your tank. The result would mean more supply for US consumers, and therefore, lower petrol prices. (Sanati) With the pipeline carrying intimately 800,000 barrels of oil a day selectly into U. S. Refineries, our foreign dependence would be significantly reduced, and the everyday person would see a drop in their gas prices.Supporters say that these economic incentives are comme il faut liberal to surpass the environmental risks of building the pipeline. While the fact that the pipeline being built would immediately create 20,000+ jobs for American people is a fact, and cant be refuted, what supporters like John Boehner fail to acknowledge is the permanence of these jobs. The national energy gameboard came out with a report thinking the economic impact of building the pipeline, verbalize once up and running, the operation of the pipeline would only support 35 permanent and 15 temporary jobs, mostly for inspections, support and repairs.Based on this estimate, minute operation of the proposed pipeline would have negligible socioeconomic impacts. (Buford) What good in an influx of 20,000+ jobs if, once done with their initial job are no longer needed? The idea that the jobs created by the pipeline should be enough to make us want to build it is a short-sighted evasion of facts. Rather than thrust people into impermanent jobs related to the pipeline employers nationwide should be pushing people toward works in the firmament of renewable energy, The palm of renewable energy has embellished vastly over the last 10 years, creating over 2.3 permanent jobs worldwide.A number expected to continue increasing. But America has yet to embrace this shift as other countries have In the United States, federal policies have been weak and discordant over the years. Still, a study for the American Solar Energy ordination found that the U. S. renewables orbit employed close to 200,000 people directly in 2006 and another 246,000 indirectly. (Bezdek) The potential is there for renewable energy to emerge as a power player in terms of national calling in the U.S, other countries show its massive potential, In 2006 Germany had some 259,000 direct and indirect jobs in the ren ewables sector.The number is expected to reach 400,000-500,000 by 2020 and consequently 710,000 by 2030. (Buhler) hitherto the U. S still seems wary to make a commitment to renewable energy, in many ways do to effectual oil companies and other people with economic interests in oil working to impede a national shift. Rather than focus on the short term employment that would come from the Keystone Pipeline, the American government and energy companies should work on shifting from fossils fuels, to renewable energy.It would not only benefit the environment, but expand an already existing field of permanent jobs. The risks posed by building the Keystone XL pipeline outweigh its economic potential by a large margin. Its building would only further delay us as a country from moving toward widespread renewable energy. As inhabitants of this ground it is our responsibility to preserve and protect the Earth and its natural resources for future generations, to build the Keystone pipeline would contradict that philosophy.Many people have stepped up for the cause and publicly opposed the pipeline, whether through petitions, garner to political figures, or actual demonstrations, this public pressure is what convinces politicians to support a stance, and this will to protect is exactly what will end up preserving our Earth. We subvert land because we regard it as a commodity, belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, then we may begin to use it with love and respect. An litigious Essay Regarding the building of the Keystone pipelineWith an increasing global population and ever industrializing societys, environmental concern is rarely given priority over economic incentive. But what people fail to realize is that our environmental failures, and relative apathy about it set up a plethora of problems for future generations to deal with. One of the most important decisions president Obama will face in the next year will be whether or not to ap prove the building of the Keystone XL pipeline, a massively sized, and massively controversial oil pipeline that would stretch all the way from Alberta Canada, to American oil refineries along the Gulf Of Mexico.Despite the economic incentive present, the building of the Keystone XL pipeline should not happen because of the environmental risks posed, and the fact that it bolsters our dependence on fossil fuels. Oil pipelines are prone to environmentally devastating spills, and have never proved to be an effective long term solution for the transport of crude oil. A pipeline the size of the Keystone XL would simply be a disaster waiting to happen.The proposed pipeline would stretch over 2,000 miles, and go directly above the Ogalalla Aquifer in the central United States. The Ogalalla aquifer is one of the largest, and most important in the entire United States, About 27 percent of the irrigated land in the United States overlies this aquifer system, which yields about 30 percent of a ll ground water used for irrigation in the United States. The aquifer system supplies drinking water to 82 percent of the 2. 3 million people (1990 census) who live within the boundaries of the High Plains study area. (Dennehy)The sheer size of the aquifer makes it so that the Keystone XL would have to go over it in order to reach its destination, so what damage a spill would have is only magnified by the agricultural importance of the aquifer. There have been 24 oil pipeline spills in the US alone over the last decade, spilling over 680 thousand tonnes of oil. (List of Oil Spills).And even despite a recent spill in Arkansas, proponents of the pipeline still have failed to properly look into its potential impact. the study is missing some critical elements, including an in-depth review of pipeline safety issues, added pollution in refinery communities and a special assessment of the impact on wildlife. Keystone XL is rife with issues that exacerbate climate change and environmental injustices. (Mogerman). Rather than be concerned with the issues presented by the pipeline, or the past precedent of failure many pipelines have had in the US, Keystone supporters seem to only be focused on the profit its building would turn.And many wealthy supporters have turned to lobbying News programs into downplaying its risks. TV Outlets Mentioned Jobs Benefits Twice As Often As Spill Risks. Television outlets overlooked the threat of Keystone XL to the sensitive ecosystems along the pipeline route, mentioning the risk of a spill in just 20 percent of coverage since Election Day, November 6, 2012. Meanwhile, 43 percent of television coverage promoted the jobs benefits of the pipeline. (Fitsimmons)The media is the most effective way to get a message to the public, and wealthy oil corporations have proved theyre willing to spend money to get a persuasive message across to the public, Keystone pipeline supporters outspend its opponents 35 to 1 Some of this money going to news s tations to encourage a positive view be portrayed. (Israel) If the Keystone pipeline is built, a potential spill poses immense environmental risk to humans and wildlife alike, but supporters fail to acknowledge these risks and continue to push for its production.America should be moving toward widespread usage of renewable energy, for the sake of its economy and environment the building of the Keystone XL pipeline would only further our national dependence on non-sustainable sources of energy. America, like many countries worldwide has been making a push toward sustainable energy on all fronts, and as public support of the shift becomes more and more apparent, 85% of Iowans support wind farms, and this number is an accurate gauge of the approximate public attitude nationwide. (Haugen)Large energy companies, and other companies like car manufacturers become more and more likely to jump on the bandwagon and help the progress, Green car madness has taken over. This year we have seen m ore electric and hybrid vehicle startups than ever before. (Morrison) Nearly everyone recognizes the benefits of the shift, both in terms of how it would help our environment in the long term, but also the economic impact it would have, (reduced gas costs, lower electric and other utilities bills etc. )But still, many large companies work to impede the progress in favor ofmaintaining our dependence on fossil fuels. The American Petroleum institute has worked with many oil industry protection companies to stymie the renewable energy movement, even in some cases, posing as environmentalist groups in order to attract the support of environmentalists while simultaneously pushing their anti-renewable agenda. (Blankenhorn) Many of these companies striving against renewable energy also support the building of the Keystone pipeline, using the justification that the building of the pipeline would lower gas prices.But what they fail to acknowledge is the basic economic fallacy of this, Foss il energy prices are not going to fall. The more you remove carbon-based resources from the ground, the more it costs to get more. (Blankenhorn) The law of supply and demand dictates that as supply lessens, demand goes up, and as does price. So even if prices are lowered in the short term, the fact that crude oil is a non-renewable resource assures that the pipeline is in no way a permanent solution to gas prices so many people worry about. Perhaps a more permanent solution to gas prices would to eliminate gas altogether.Rather than pumping money into a project like the pipeline that would simply increase our dependence on fossil fuels, more money should be put into the research and development of sustainable energy. With the US dollar that will go into building the Keystone pipeline, Approximately 12. 2$ billion (TransCanada), with that money alone, we could afford to put a whole home solar panel system on over 1. 8 million homes across the country (Wholesale Solar), or purchase a Nissan Leaf electric car (no gas emissions, 108 mpg) for over four hundred thousand people.(Gunther)Supporters of the Keystone Pipeline argue that the jobs created by the pipeline, and the money that would in turn be pumped into the economy validates its building. Approval of the pipeline would immediately add many job opportunities to the American workforce, Its estimated that the Keystone XL project would help create at least 20,000 new American jobs in manufacturing and construction, said House Speaker John Boehner. (Shierter) This immediate influx of jobs would benefit the national economy and reduce unemployment.Supporters also say that its building would help reduce gas prices throughout the country, a pressing issue that effects a large number of people. .. they say the few pipelines that do connect Canadas oil production region to the US currently flow where refining capacity is limited. This means less gasoline for your tank. The result would mean more supply for US consu mers, and therefore, lower gasoline prices. (Sanati) With the pipeline carrying nearly 800,000 barrels of oil a day directly into U. S. Refineries, our foreign dependence would be significantly reduced, and the everyday person would see a drop in their gas prices.Supporters say that these economic incentives are enough enough to outweigh the environmental risks of building the pipeline. While the fact that the pipeline being built would immediately create 20,000+ jobs for American people is a fact, and cant be refuted, what supporters like John Boehner fail to acknowledge is the permanence of these jobs. The national energy panel came out with a report regarding the economic impact of building the pipeline, saying once up and running, the operation of the pipeline would only support 35 permanent and 15 temporary jobs, mostly for inspections, maintenance and repairs.Based on this estimate, routine operation of the proposed pipeline would have negligible socioeconomic impacts. (Buf ord) What good in an influx of 20,000+ jobs if, once done with their initial job are no longer needed? The idea that the jobs created by the pipeline should be enough to make us want to build it is a short-sighted evasion of facts. Rather than thrust people into impermanent jobs related to the pipeline employers nationwide should be pushing people toward working in the field of renewable energy, The field of renewable energy has expanded vastly over the last 10 years, creating over 2.3 permanent jobs worldwide.A number expected to continue increasing. But America has yet to embrace this shift as other countries have In the United States, federal policies have been weak and inconsistent over the years. Still, a study for the American Solar Energy Society found that the U. S. renewables sector employed close to 200,000 people directly in 2006 and another 246,000 indirectly. (Bezdek) The potential is there for renewable energy to emerge as a power player in terms of national employme nt in the U.S, other countries show its massive potential, In 2006 Germany had some 259,000 direct and indirect jobs in the renewables sector.The number is expected to reach 400,000-500,000 by 2020 and then 710,000 by 2030. (Buhler) Yet the U. S still seems wary to make a commitment to renewable energy, in many ways do to powerful oil companies and other people with economic interests in oil working to impede a national shift. Rather than focus on the short term employment that would come from the Keystone Pipeline, the American government and energy companies should work on shifting from fossils fuels, to renewable energy.It would not only benefit the environment, but expand an already existing field of permanent jobs. The risks posed by building the Keystone XL pipeline outweigh its economic potential by a large margin. Its building would only further delay us as a country from moving toward widespread renewable energy. As inhabitants of this Earth it is our responsibility to pre serve and protect the Earth and its natural resources for future generations, to build the Keystone pipeline would contradict that philosophy.Many people have stepped up for the cause and publicly opposed the pipeline, whether through petitions, letters to political figures, or actual demonstrations, this public pressure is what convinces politicians to support a stance, and this will to protect is exactly what will end up preserving our Earth. We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity, belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, then we may begin to use it with love and respect.