The Keystone Pipeline, in the news for years, is currently a
much debated topic in Congress and across the nation. There are strong opinions
on both sides of the issue. And like in so many matters, the debate is largely between
“conservatives” and “liberals.”
Keystone Pipeline is the name of
the oil pipeline system in Canada and the United States. It runs from Alberta,
Canada, to refineries in Nebraska, Illinois and the Gulf Coast of Texas.
Three phases of the project are
in operation, and the fourth is awaiting U.S. government approval. The latter,
and the phase that has been so much in the news recently, is the Keystone XL
Pipeline. (“XL” stands for “eXport Limited.”)
The first two phases were
completed in 2010 and 2011 and the third phase in January of this year. Phase 1
included pipes laid from Nebraska across Missouri to Illinois. Many times I saw
that construction in the country north of Clay County where I live, but I had
no idea it was part of the Keystone Pipeline.
Phase 4 was proposed in 2008. It
was approved in Canada (and South Dakota) in 2010, but later that year the
Environmental Protection Agency raised serious questions, and in 2011 the
Department of State postponed making a decision to approve the new construction.
The main arguments favoring
construction of the fourth phase are: (1) The XL Pipeline would create jobs and
stimulate the U.S. economy. (2) It would enhance energy security and support
energy independence.
Although it is not usually
explicitly said, one of the main reasons why many wealthy people (and people
beholden to them) support the new pipeline is that it would make them
wealthier.
In a related argument, a recent article
in Forbes magazine declares, “Keystone XL should be built because we want
the private sector to be free to do as it chooses sans government meddling”
(5/4/14).
As usual, the conservatives (most
Republicans) are on the side of the wealthy and opposed to government
regulations and any curbs on “free enterprise.”
Similarly, there are two main
reasons for opposing the plans for the fourth phase of the Keystone XL
Pipeline. There are mainly environmental concerns, although not directly
related:
(1) There is the threat of spills
leading to massive contamination of water used for drinking, irrigation, and
livestock watering. (2) It would lead to increased greenhouse gases in the
atmosphere, resulting in acceleration of global warming.
Also as usual, the liberals (most
Democrats) are on the side of protecting the environment and combating global
warming—even though the Forbes article referred to environmentalists as still being
“caught up in a global warming delusion.”
In the short
haul, building the XL Pipeline would likely be beneficial to the country. But
in thinking of the future, it is most likely to be unwise. Unfortunately, most
politicians feel the necessity for short-term, current-benefit thinking.
The President
is caught between the long-range benefits of disapproving and the short-term
benefits of approving. My guess is he wants to prohibit the XL Pipeline, which
would be good for the country in the long haul, but he realizes it would be
detrimental to his party this year.
That, most
likely, is why he keeps kicking the can down the road, as they say.
But I
sincerely hope the President will keep listening to the voices of such people
as Bill McKibben and the 350.org organization. They are representative of
those who are seeking the long term well-being of the planet.
.jpg)