MacKenzie Bills The Keystone XL Pipeline Halts Climate Control Advancement The fact is that the Keystone XL pipeline

is simply an extension of an already existing program that is working well, creating jobs and expanding U.S. manufacturing. It should be an easy decision for anyone concerned about the economy.1 Matthews opinion is not uncommon for many Americans, 57% of adults approve the Keystone XL pipeline.2 Although it is understandable for citizens to be in favor of opportunities for creation of jobs, it is necessary to weigh the amount of jobs produced to the implications of such an action. The Department of State should not approve TransCanada to build Phase 3 and 4 of the Keystone XL pipeline through America to take a step forward in Americas clean energy initiative and support Americas economy. TransCanada and pro- pipeline supporters say the pipeline will create over 20,000 13,000 construction jobs,3 but Politifact disproves this statement. Close to 2,000 jobs will be created during the construction of the pipeline during the first two years and afterwards, only 50 to 100 people will be needed to work the pipeline.4 The US economy needs long-term, sustainable jobs, to restore the unemployment rate to a healthy percentage, of which temporary jobs will not do. The US needs to find ways to improve its economy, rather than helping TransCanada. In fact, if the US were to approve the pipeline, the US would improve Canadas

1 2

6 reasons to approve the stalled project, last modified September 5 , 2013, www.usatoday.com/story/opinion nd Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline, last modified March 22 , 2012, www.gallup.com 3 Pipe Dreams: How Many Jobs Will Be Created By Keystone XL?, last modified 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource 4 Obama says Keystone XL would mean maybe 2,000 jobs, last modified 2013, www.politifact.com

th

economy while increasing Americans gas prices from 20 to 40 cents per gallon.5 Multinational Oil Companies goal is to reach exports outside the US for tar sands and refined fuels. TransCanada will surpass the Midwest in search of Texas refineries, reducing supply, which will hijack oil prices. This causes up to $4 billion loss of American consumers.6 Thomas Seyer nailed it when he said, A vote for Keystone is a vote to raise gas prices on Americans and send the profits to a foreign oil company.7 The 20 to 40 cent gas raise will invest in a multinational oil company that supports outsourcing jobs. The US struggles to provide employment in the U.S. already, therefore it should not support companies that make it difficult for Americans to obtain jobs. If the pipeline were to have a greater economic impact than it does, it might compensate for the disruption of land and water the pipeline will cause. 850 miles of pipeline would be laid in the US, crossing 6 states starting from Phillips Count through Montana and onto Steele City, Nebraska.8 The 6 states it crosses will cut through Americas agricultural heartland, including Niobrara Rivers, Ogallala Aquifer, walleye fisheries, and much more. This puts a danger on the public water supplies and croplands. Yes, the current TransCanada pipeline has transported oil sands from Canada to US refineries without leaks for three years, but no know ones what could or will happen tomorrow. If the pipeline were to be built, there is a chance of a spill and if the spill were to occur, it will poison people, wildlife, and crops miles around. The small job increase is not worth the risks the pipeline brings.
5 th

Report reveals Keystone XL Pipeline would raise U.S. gas prices, last modified July 28 , 2013, www.dailykos.com 6 Approving the Keystone Pipeline Could Cost US Consumers $3-4 Billion Per Year in Higher Gas Prices, last th modified July 16 , 2013, www.thinkprogress.com 7 th Report reveals Keystone XL Pipeline would raise U.S. gas prices, last modified July 28 , 2013, www.dailykos.com 8 About Keystone XL Pipeline, last modified 2013, www.keystonexl.com/about/theproject/#sthash.n2eelbph.dpuf

Lastly, the Keystone XL pipeline could potentially triple the U.S. consumption of tar sand oil of which is one of the most polluting and carbon-intensive fuels in the world.9 Canada promised to reduce current greenhouse gas emissions by 17% by 2020 in the Kyota agreement10, but is physically impossible with the countrys tripling tar sand operations. Even if Canada froze tar sand operations at their 2011 levels, they would still need to reduce its emissions by 14%11, which as of right now, is impossible. This brings up two problems, Canada will break international agreements by eliciting greenhouse emissions and Canada will be contributing to the greater predicament, climate change. The goal of many developed nations is to decrease its carbon footprint. By supporting the Keystone XL pipeline, the US is counteracting its work to reduce greenhouse emissions. The US should continue its progress in cleaner energy rather than adopting the pipeline which will halt its advancement. The United States State Department should not grant permission to TransCanada to build the last two phases of the Keystone XL pipeline in the United States because it will be detrimental to both US economy and progress of greener energy advancement. The Department of States decision will be a statement to the rest of the world on the USs sincerity on slowing climate change. Declining TransCanadas application for the pipeline is a decision to take the next step to try and save Earth. The advantageous choice is to say no and to take a stand for the environment and mankind.

Keystone Pipeline, last modified 2013, http://www.nwf.org/What-We-Do/Energy-and-Climate/Drilling-andMining/Tar-Sands/Keystone-XL-Pipeline.aspx 10 Keystone XL and Canadian tar sands are incompatible with solving climate change, last modified 2013, www.theguardian.com/environment 11 Ibid.

Bibliography 1. Merrill Matthews, 6 reasons to approve the stalled project, USA Today, last

modified 2013, http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/09/04/keystone-pipeline-obama-useconomy-column/2768185/.

2.

Elizabeth Mendes, Americans Favor Keystone XL Pipeline, Gallup Politics,

last modified 2013, http://www.gallup.com/poll/153383/americans-favor-keystone-pipeline.aspx. 3. Pipe Dreams: How Many Jobs Will Be Created By Keystone XL?, Forbes, last

modified 2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2013/05/10/pipe-dreams-how-many-jobswill-be-created-by-keystone-xl/.

4.

Obama says Keystone XL would mean maybe 2,000 jobs, Politifact.com, last

modified 2013, http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jul/31/barackobama/obama-says-keystone-xl-would-mean-maybe-2000-jobs/.

5.

Dan Bacher, Report Reveals Keystone XL Pipeline would raise U.S. gas prices,

Daily Kos, last modified 2013, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/28/1227226/-Reportreveals-Keystone-XL-Pipeline-would-raise-U-S-gas-prices.

6.

Ryan Koronowski, Approving the Keystone Pipeline Could Cost U.S.

Consumers $3-4 Billion Per Year in Higher Gas Prices, Climate Progress, last modified 2013,
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/07/16/2307741/approving-the-keystone-pipeline-could-cost-usconsumers-3-4-billion-per-year-in-higher-gas-prices/.

7.

Dan Bacher, Report Reveals Keystone XL Pipeline would raise U.S. gas prices,

Daily Kos, last modified 2013, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/28/1227226/-Reportreveals-Keystone-XL-Pipeline-would-raise-U-S-gas-prices.

8.

About Keystone XL Pipeline, TransCanada, last modified 2013,

http://keystone-xl.com/?gclid=CPy9xtPJp7sCFdE-MgodYz8Awg.

9.

Keystone Pipeline, National Wildlife Federation, last modified 2013,

http://www.nwf.org/What-We-Do/Energy-and-Climate/Drilling-and-Mining/Tar-Sands/Keystone-XLPipeline.aspx.

10.

Danny Harvey, Keystone XL and Canadian tar sands are incompatible with

solving climate change, theguardian, last modified 2013,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/oct/25/climatecange-tar-sands-incompatible.