Critical Analysis Paper: Lyndsey Grahm Keystone XL Pipeline

CRITICAL ANALYSIS PAPER: LINDSAY GRAHAM KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE
Name
Institution
Date
Introduction
The Keystone XL Pipeline has been proposed to transport tar sands oils / diluted bitumen from Canada to refineries in Oklahoma and Texas. There are divergent views on whether the project is worthwhile, the economic, political and environmental issues the main source of conflicts. The Keystone XL Pipeline has delayed over politicization of the project, but there are legitimate concerns about the likely environmental impact. Since TransCanada started backing the project the company has touted the project and its benefits, but there are few estimates of the worse-case scenario. TransCanada has supported the Keystone XL project construction, but the company may have underestimated the frequency of oil spills. Similarly, Senator Lindsey Graham has supported the case for Keystone XL based on the job creation, energy independence and economic interests.
Meaning
Senator Lindsay Graham (R. S.C) of South Carolina was one of the early ardent proponents of Keystone XL pipeline arguing that this would be beneficial to the US and Canada through creation of jobs, and diversifying oil supply away from the Middle East oil imports. Even as the Senator has deviated from the Republican stance on climate change policy n some instances, he has nonetheless focused more on energy independence and the economic benefits of Keystone XL (Kress, 2015). Senator Lindsey Graham has in the past argued that he would support the case for a clean environment, but energy independence is also a top priority, further stating that he would ensure a strong economy, healthy environment and energy independence (Kress, 2015).
The energy policy mostly emphasizes energy needs and environmental aspects while also addressing economic concerns. The energy policy will cover regional and national policy significance that are of interest to local communities, government agencies, local governments and the private sector entities. The effectiveness of energy policies is the ability to consider environmental regulation, energy supply security and efficiency in transporting the energy sources. In the case of Senator Graham’s proposals, energy independence, security and job creation are top priorities that influenced the decision to support the construction of Keystone XL Pipeline.
Structure
The political, environmental and economic factors are the main issues influencing the decisions for and against Keystone XL pipeline. The main argument advanced by Senator Graham is that the pipeline creates jobs and ensures energy independence. In analyzing the statement by Senator Graham, highlighted the case for considering environmental concerns rather than simply emphasizing energy security and few jobs creation related to the Keystone XL project. On one hand, the debate surrounding the project highlights oil independence, and the other, are the environmental concerns associated with construction of the pipeline through Montana to Texas. There are benefits to the pipeline, but the environmental consequences are potential high costs to the local communities
Keystone XL is the third phase of the project, and has garnered attention and debate surrounding the route as well as the benefits and costs of the pipeline are addressed (O’Rourke, 2013). The economic benefits to Canada are irrefutable, while the protracted efforts to secure approval in the US are the result of environmental concerns. The House Energy and Commerce Committed then urged Secretary Clinton to block approval of Keystone XL, the EPA issue a statement indicating that the report largely failed to consider the environmental impact of the pipeline (O’Rourke, 2013). On the contrary, the State Department issued and environmental impact assessment report in August 2011 reiterating that there were no significant environmental resources to the pipeline construction (O’Rourke, 2013).
Style
In analyzing the statement by Senator Graham, it is necessary to look at his assertions on economic interests, energy independence and environmental protection. The claim of job creation was not a realistic estimates of jobs, given that even the low oil process have dampened investment in the energy sector. the question of energy independence is one that has dominated public interest, but then the costs associated with transporting the tar oil sands is likely to affect the local communities more than the big corporations. In the case of Gulf of Mexico oil spill, BP paid huge fines, but it is the local communities living along the coast and especially farmers and fishermen who were disproportionately affected by the disaster. As such, what TransCanada and Senator Graham stated merely acknowledges the projected benefits, while downplaying the environmental risks.
The analysis further highlights the environmental implications of approving the Keystone XL Pipeline. TransCanada has consistently stated that the risk of oil spills is low and that the company will transport oil using comparable pipelines (O’Rourke, 2013). Since the tar oils are more corrosive there is a need to exercise more caution when importing the oil products into the US. The pipeline covers over two thousand miles, and problems in one section of the pipeline is likely to have far reaching consequences. It is noteworthy that there are few studies focusing on the environmental risk of transporting tar oil over long distances. There have been oil spills that have occurred in the completed sections of the pipeline, and despite assurance of using the latest technology it is necessary to consider the pipeline’s environmental impact (O’Rourke, 2013).Background and Influences
Senator Graham has emphasized the need to create jobs if he were the president, and articulated his vision in his website. Even as the pipeline extends from Alberta, Canada to the US Gulf Coast, the senator acknowledged that the pipeline would have national ramifications allowing the country to be more energy reliant. Senator’ Graham’s approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline Act was in line with his position on energy. He further states, “The choice is simple - build the pipeline, create jobs in the United States, and lessen our dependence on oil from the Middle East.” Even though, he stated that he did not support a clean environment he was more concerned with economic interests
Senator Graham and the House speaker Nancy Pelosi were some of the first American legislators to visit North Alberta touting the oil stands following request for the expanding of Keystone X (Casey, 2011). The argument that the US needs a safe and stable source of energy sources for future security is valid. Nonetheless, the environmental policy should include measures to mitigate the risk of environmental pollution. For instance, there is likely to be contamination of water quality in Alberta, and even the risk of pollution in American soil cannot be ignored.
Even as corporations get involved in extracting oil form the oil sand, it is likely that government bureaucracies and corporation interests will take precedence over environmental interests (Casey, 2011). As such, it is less likely that environmental concerns and interests of the populations will be taken into account. Senator Graham and supporters of the Keystone project have emphasized the benefits, and ignored the costs. The...