Environmental Impact
The Bad
o Pollution
equivalent to building 7 new coal-fired power planes.
o Will
act as a catalyst, opening the door to Canada’s vast oil-sand resources
o Oil
from oil sands produces between 5% to 30% more greenhouse
gas emissions than traditional crude
o Can
leech toxins into waterways
The Good
o The
project will be too small to make a significant difference in worldwide
pollution
Economic Impact:
- create 13,000 construction jobs and 7,000 additional jobs making the steel, pumps and other necessary equipment.
- Bring an additional 700,000 barrels of oil a day into the United States
- Will help Canada expand it’s oil industry
The Solyndra
factor
After going
bankrupt, the high-tech solar panel manufacturing company Solyndra has been
guaranteed a half-billion dollar loan from the federal government. The Obama administration has been taking heat
on its decision to support this unproven new solar technology. If the administration denies this pipeline to
be build, then it will have supported an unproven new solar energy technology,
and then dismissed a proven source of energy and jobs (oil). This will not look good for the Democrats in
the upcoming 2012 elections.
NPR
What do you think he should do Dominic? I think that he will probably approve the oil pipeline given that such a decision would create consistency with his proposed jobs plan as well as aid the Economy (given the several economic benefits without negatives you have provided.) However, while the above comment is what he will probably do, do you believe he should do it?
ReplyDeleteAs you can see I have reiterated the question and hope to hear back from you on it. However, I'll give you my opinion. If you remove the political bias of this decision then you are left with just the facts you've presented. The oil is not a significant factor in pollution even though it is a bigger pollutant and the decision will create jobs and stimulate the economy. However, isn't the following statement true: Our carelessness in regards to protecting our environment has led to environmental impacts and the possibility that every small bad decision has led to one big problem. Do you believe we should, while waiting for better alternatives, continue to destroy our atmosphere bit by bit in an attempt to make our current situation better? I believe that this decision is one that should only be made with the promise of greater expenditure in the research of energy alternatives. While I'm not a staunch environmentalist I do believe that the recent advertisements on television telling people to stop searching for alternatives and return to good old fashion American Coal and Oil is an extension of the problem. The only way to solve the problem is to HIRE (consistency with his job plan?) and fund more research in environmental sciences to protect our economy, nation, and even the world for the future. Thank you for posting this Dominic you did a good job.
I am almost certain that he will give them the green light on this project, for the exact reason you gave: the positive economic impact. Indeed, when I was typing up this post, I originally had two section for the Economic section: good and bad. But there were no bad economic impact, so I removed the sections.
ReplyDeleteObama has made huge efforts to advance alternative forms of energy, recently seen in his commitment to help the high-tech solar panel manufacturer Solyndra stay out of bankruptcy. If Obama approves this pipeline, he will still be able to point to the other efforts he made on alternative energy. I think if anyone has the right to approve an oil pipeline, it is Obama. I think enough environmental effort has been made to justify the construction of this pipeline. However, efforts to protect the environment need to continue to be made.