Keystone XL Pipeline will do more harm than good
Proponents of the Keystone XL pipeline insist that the project will bring more jobs into the U.S. economy, provide a more local source to replace oil imports from abroad, and do all of this while operating a safe pipeline that will not damage the environment. Alex Pourbaix is the president of Oil and Energy pipelines for TransCanada, and these are some of the arguments he outlines in his article for the St. Louis Post (Pourbaix, 2012). All of these points he uses to support the pro-Keystone XL argument are negated by multiple sources.
Pourbaix claims that the Keystone XL project could create up to 20,000 U.S. jobs (Pourbaix, 2012), but various other sources point to the State Department’s evaluation of the project to contradict this idea. The Natural Resources Defense Council explained that the State Department determined that only around 6,500 construction jobs would be created, and these jobs would be temporary (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2013). Another estimate based on TransCanada’s own presidential permit application projects only 3,500 to 4,200 construction jobs (Harrigan, 2012). Harrigan’s article provides a State Department estimate for only 20 permanent U.S. jobs, also pointing out that the estimation provided by TransCanada is not only limited to U.S. jobs, but encompasses construction jobs in both Canada and the U.S. (Harrigan, 2012).
As far as replacing imported oil with a better, cheaper alternative, it is very likely that most of the tar sand oil would be sent into the international market after being refined (New York Times, 2013). According to the Natural Resources Defense Council, the refineries along the Gulf Coast are in Foreign Trade Zones, meaning they would be raised to international prices in an attempt to avoid taxation in the U.S. (Natural Resources Defense Council, 2013).
Safety is another key point in Pourbaix’s article, but the environmental impacts are predominantly negative. TransCanada originally predicted only one accident on the Keystone I pipeline within a seven year time span, but instead the pipeline saw twelve accidents within one year (Harrigan, 2012). The New York Times editorial points to the State Department evaluation, claiming that the extraction and refining process of tar sand oil releases around seventeen percent more greenhouse gas emissions than typical crude oil production in the U.S. (New York Times, 2013).
For a project that was originally estimated to cost the U.S. $5.4 billion (Harrigan, 2012), the Keystone XL pipeline does not benefit the United States enough to justify such an extravagant expense. If anything, the pipeline would be detrimental to the environment and the economy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/opinion/when-to-say-no-to-the-keystone-xl.html?smid=pl-share
Harrigan, R. (2012). TRANSCANADA’S KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE: POLITICS, ENVIRONMENTAL HARM & EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE. University of Baltimore Journal of Land and Development, 1(2), 207-234.
Pourbaix, Alex. (2012). America needs Keystone XL Energy – Expansion of TransCanada’s pipeline is crucial for U.S. jobs and energy security. St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
http://www.nrdc.org/energy/keystone-pipeline/
WAC Energy and Environment 