Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/07/us/obama-expected-to-reject-construction-of-keystone-xl-oil-pipeline.html?_r=0
Date: November 13, 2015
Summary: Over the past seven years there has been a debate over the Keystone XL pipeline. This was supposed to be a 1,179 mile pipeline, which would have carried 800,000 barrels of carbon heavy petroleum from Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast. When the pipe first started it was intended to be just an oil transportation project, but it soon got extremely political especially in mid 2011 to now.There are arguments for and against the pipe. Some individuals feel that it will help stimulate the economy by adding jobs and giving us more oil. They also feel that since the oil will be used anyway why not do it more efficiently while helping Canada and ourselves. While others feel that the cost is too great and that it will hurt the environment. Environmentalists had sought to block construction of the pipeline because it would have provided a conduit for petroleum extracted from the Canadian oil sands. The process of extracting that oil produces about 17 percent more planet-warming greenhouse gases than the process of extracting conventional oil. Since it goes cross border, the pipeline needs the presidents permission. However, Obama rejected the deal. Some felt that if he rejected it he was ignoring the American people, but others felt that it demonstrated his seriousness about climate change. This was one of Obama's last final major decisions in office.
Questions: Do you agree Obama's decision? Why do you think that Obama rejected it? Do you think that this help help raise awareness about climate change? Although people feel strongly about different arguments about the pipes, many are overblown and not as drastic as they seem. Why do you think this is, and why are things often exaggerated in politics Do you think that the over politicalization of the pipeline reflects that America is too wrapped up in politics thus hindering our ability to pass helpful legislation?
Date: November 13, 2015
Summary: Over the past seven years there has been a debate over the Keystone XL pipeline. This was supposed to be a 1,179 mile pipeline, which would have carried 800,000 barrels of carbon heavy petroleum from Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast. When the pipe first started it was intended to be just an oil transportation project, but it soon got extremely political especially in mid 2011 to now.There are arguments for and against the pipe. Some individuals feel that it will help stimulate the economy by adding jobs and giving us more oil. They also feel that since the oil will be used anyway why not do it more efficiently while helping Canada and ourselves. While others feel that the cost is too great and that it will hurt the environment. Environmentalists had sought to block construction of the pipeline because it would have provided a conduit for petroleum extracted from the Canadian oil sands. The process of extracting that oil produces about 17 percent more planet-warming greenhouse gases than the process of extracting conventional oil. Since it goes cross border, the pipeline needs the presidents permission. However, Obama rejected the deal. Some felt that if he rejected it he was ignoring the American people, but others felt that it demonstrated his seriousness about climate change. This was one of Obama's last final major decisions in office.
Questions: Do you agree Obama's decision? Why do you think that Obama rejected it? Do you think that this help help raise awareness about climate change? Although people feel strongly about different arguments about the pipes, many are overblown and not as drastic as they seem. Why do you think this is, and why are things often exaggerated in politics Do you think that the over politicalization of the pipeline reflects that America is too wrapped up in politics thus hindering our ability to pass helpful legislation?
I agree with Obama's decision because I think that the environment's current condition is a serious issue that needs immediate response. I believe Obama rejected it because he does not want to be put to blame for the Keystone XL pipe line which is detrimental to the environment. Obama's decision is a major game changer and totally raises awareness about climate change because he is making a sacrifice of jobs for the environment. I think that things are often over exaggerated in politics so politicians can grab the attention of the undecided voters. Yes, I do believe that the pipeline reflects that america is too involved in politics because everyone wants to get involved and input whatever will be beneficial to them.
ReplyDeleteI think Obama made the right decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline because the effects would be very harmful to the environment. I think his decision demonstrates his concern for the environment. Although the Keystone XL pipeline would create many new jobs, the 17% increase in emissions of greenhouse gases would not be worth the new jobs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Obama's decision to reflect the pipeline. Gobal warming is a serious problem that needs to be addressed more rigorously. I don't think that Obama's rejection of the pipeline really helped to raise awareness, I wasn't even aware the pipeline was an issue until I read this. I feel as though republicans would jump on any chance to criticize Obama, so yes I believe this problem is over exaggerated. This pipeline represents American politics as they are right now, in gridlock.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with Obama's decision to reject the pipeline. Sure, the oil sands produces 17% more greenhouse emissions than conventional methods, but that doesn't account for having to ship oil through an entire ocean. Plus, there is no chance of oil spills into the oceans. If you take that into regard, I'm certain the pipeline is more environmentally friendly than oil from the Middle east.
ReplyDeleteI am impartial to Obama's decision to shut down the Keystone XL pipeline. While it can have an adverse effect on our environment, one must also consider the economic impact involved along with it. It is also a far more efficient solution to obtaining the oil that the US needs than simply purchasing it from the Middle East annually.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Obama made the right call by negating the construction of this pipeline. Building this would guarantee the use of oil as a primary energy source for decades to come. The United States needs to start putting oil on the back burner(no pun intended) and start using more green energy sources, such as wind, solar and electric energy. I do believe though, that this whole situation does show how the political aspects of a lot of issues get too important and real, productive legislation being passed is is nearly a miracle in Congress today.
ReplyDeleteI believe Obama made the right decision. Yes, America is in need of creating new jobs, but is it worth the price we'll have to pay? It's not worth creating more environmental problems than there already are. There are plenty of other ways to create jobs
ReplyDeleteAgreed with my main man Mufaray. Our environment is significantly more important than creating new jobs. We want humans to live on this world as long as possible and having a clean environment is one of the most important aspects of that. We can already see having disregard for the environment take it's toll on places like China. Many endemic and pandemic flus have largely developed as a result of the overcrowded slums of China. Having no regard for the environment only brings disaster.
DeleteI agree with Obama's decision of saying no to the pipe line. Although the pipeline might help us today by creating jobs, I still think that the preservation of our environment will be more valuable over time. Also, I believe that it needed to get rejected because the pipeline only benefited the wealthy in the oil industry and dismissed all the negative that could happen. Obama's decision sets a statement about the US' stance on climate change because he is protecting the future by protecting the environment. Lobbyist and politicians being shady try to can grab the attention and sway the undecided votes. The pipeline reflects that america big businesses and industries are too involved in politics , and ultimately at the expense of our voters.
ReplyDeleteI think this decision was a big statement as to how the government needs to be operated, in Obama's opinion. For so long, there has been talk of climate change and how the government needs to be a part of it, but very little in terms of results. Sure, there have been bills passed and policies implemented, but none have been as big as this decision. Obama knows that we cannot be bystanders as the world changes; our policies must change with the world.
ReplyDeleteThe Keystone XL pipeline has been controversial for numerous years. Jobs and climate change have both been a key aspect of Obama's agenda ever since his 2008 election.
ReplyDeleteBoth sides are passionate about protecting their interests and many senators have stooped to practically threatening the White House to ensure that the decision made would be in their favor. Obama probably chose to deal with it now in his second term so that his decision would not affect any reelection campaigns. Skippy is right in suggesting that "the over-politicalization of the pipeline" is an example of "America [being] too wrapped up in politics [and] hindering our ability to pass" any effective legislation.
I completely agree with Obama's decision to block the pipeline. I believe that he rejected this deal because he is serious about the environment and understands how important it is. The sad thing about many Americans, and people in general is that at the end of the day they only think about themselves and what will benefit them. On this topic especially, it seems as if many people who were for it were only concerned with the idea that it would be easier access to oil and could possibly stimulate the economy. However, did they think about the effects it would have to the environment and our planet? Instead of taking the easier way, wouldn't it be better to try and prevent ruining the environment at a quicker rate and not build this pipeline? Yes, the short term effects of it seem nice, but after we're gone, the environment will still be around, so we should do everything in our power to try and protect it for the future generations.
ReplyDeleteI think that many people often over politicize things to try and work with their own agenda. They always blow topics way out of proportion and try to use it to benefit them or hurt their opponent. I do believe that the over politicization of the pipeline reelects how America can be too wrapped up in politics to pass meaningful legislation. I'm sure that many members of congress are only interested in the decision that will get them reelected. This means they can be easily influenced by the public opinion, but if citizens don't take the time to stop and think about the long term effects of projects like this, then we're equally at fault.
Blocking the pipeline was 100% the right thing to do. The environmental damage that it would do to the great white north would devastate it. I do see a positive to building the pipeline in that if we do, we would not have to buy as much oil from the middle east as we do which would cause less of a dependence for oil. Another reason would that there would be a lot of jobs that would be created with this pipeline. Untouched earth is something that is very rare now and days and we should make sure that we do not destroy the planet that we are living on.
ReplyDeleteWhile adding American jobs to the economy is almost always a good thing, in this case, preserving our environment takes precedence over gaining a jobs. Even though many Americans refuse to admit it, climate change is a real and scary proposition and steps need to be made to ensure that our future generations can live in a safe world. There are many other alternatives to gain American jobs and they need to be used in substitution of the Keystone Pipeline.
ReplyDelete