The Pros and Cons of the Keystone XL Pipeline

A pipeline to carry crude oil from Alberta, Canada to the Texas refineries may have at one time seemed like a “pipe dream” but it is actually partially completed at this moment. Arguments rage daily about the pros and cons of carrying as much as 830,000 barrels of crude oil through areas that would subject to permanent damage if there were problems with the integrity of the system. The subject has become political fodder for debate when it comes to weighing the actual financial benefits of creating the Keystone XL Pipeline over the ability to simply cut back on the dependence for fossil fuels.

Political Debate

It would be easy to define the political debates as an even split of the “have and have-not’s,” but this would not be an accurate picture. Typically liberals tend to be on the side against an extensive pipeline because they want to see a lesser dependence on fossil fuels. The elite 1% money-earners need cheaper fuels and energy in order to create and transport goods to maintain their wealthy status. The New Yorker published an article in September, 2013 that shows the debate is not that simple. President Obama conceded that he has had to bow to some pressure of the average American that needs and wants cheaper gas prices to ease strain on the budget. You can read the full article here.

Environmental Concerns

One of the biggest drawbacks to the pipeline is the unknown impact it will have in the long-run to areas that are sifting and pulling oil from the oil sands of Alberta. There is sure to be negative impacts to the environment, but it may be the price that has to be paid to break the choke-hold that OPEC nations have on the Western world with oil supplies.

Pipeline Failure Possibilities

Another major fear of environmentalists is the thought of a major pipe break or failure that dumps millions of gallons of crude oil out onto the ground to enter the water and food supply. It is unlikely to happen in the grand failure scenarios that are usually presented by the anti-pipeline crowd, but it is enough to get people thinking as to whether the risk is worth it. The facts are that the existing pipeline is routinely inspected, serviced and cleaned to avoid this type of disaster. Pipeline maintenance happens daily. You can read how large pipeline cleaning is done at Inline Services.

Lower Fuel Prices

The recent drop in fuel prices has been beneficial to everyone. Demand for the completion of the pipeline was never more vocal than when oil hit prices over $100 dollars a barrel. The constant fluctuation in prices (mostly upwards) put a damper on spending because there wasn’t much left at the end of a paycheck after fueling the family car. The consistent ability to pipe crude oil from Canada to Texas should stabilize prices. It is beneficial whether prices are running high or low as it would reduce the cost of transporting the oil. You can read more about that here.

Increase in Jobs

A big pro in the pipeline debate has been the promise of steady jobs. Most pro-pipeline analysts have promised as many as 100,000 plus new jobs created to build the remainder of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Actual figures place the job increase as much less than that and of a short duration, but new decent paying jobs are a good thing. It has won a lot of support based on these promises.

No matter where you stand on the issues it seems that the addiction to heavy amounts of crude oil and the constant push for high prices in fuel might win ultimately. If the dependence on crude oil did not exist the arguments against the pipeline might stand a chance. The only real solution offered to increased energy and fuel demands is to find more crude oil at any cost. Rather than alternative energy solutions the Keystone XL Pipeline is the only offering that is feasible to feed the energy needs of a petroleum-driven society.

Photo Credit: (c) 2011 MCT | Source: TransCanada Corp. | Graphic: Matt Moody, Los Angeles Times