By Faustino Galante
In 2008, Canadian oil company TransCanada proposed Keystone XL, a pipeline, which, according The Economist, will cover a distance of 1,200 miles, stretching from Alberta Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. The proposed pipeline is projected to pump up to 830,000 barrels of oil per day through the United States.
Following TransCanada’s 2008 proposal, the State Department gave the project an “OK.” Soon enough, though, controversy ensued when members of the “environmentalist left” began to protest the proposed pipeline.
They complained that the pipeline would hurt the environment and that ultimately, its installation would cloud America’s focus on finding new sources of renewable energy. Republicans in Congress were quick to refute this negative sentiment citing the improvements the U.S. economy would experience with Keystone XL’s construction.
With such long and heated debates over the proposed pipeline, former President Barack Obama ended the conflict on Nov. 6,
2015 when he rejected TransCanada’s proposal.
Though the proposal seemed dead after its initial rejection, President Donald J. Trump reignited hope last week when he revived the proposed pipeline. Trump’s signing of Keystone XL, while controversial, was absolutely warranted and geared towards the betterment of the United States.
The proposed pipeline will minimize U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil, will provide countless jobs to American citizens and will not harm the environment as severely as environmentalists claim.
A major reason Middle Eastern economies manage to survive, despite corruption and terror, is because of their stronghold on crude oil. Without oil, countries such as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Syria would have their GDP’s split in half. The United States has been well aware of this Middle Eastern “oil monopoly.”
For years, the U.S. has focused on keeping peace with these nations in order to be granted access to their oil. In foreign policy negotiations with the Middle East, oil has always been an underlying issue.
The proposed Keystone pipeline will allow the U.S. to grow its already established oil production. It will grant the United States the ability to focus on other Middle Eastern issues without being pressured by the Middle Eastern oil market. Keystone XL will likewise lessen the Middle East’s “monopoly” on oil.
With a diminishing oil stronghold, corrupted Middle Eastern economies will slowly fall. The U.S., in lessening its dependence on foreign oil, will be able to better equip itself in controlling the fluctuating prices of oil. This will therefore give America facilitated access to controlling the prices of domestic gasoline.
Keystone XL will not only minimize our dependence on foreign oil, but will also provide countless jobs to American citizens.
Throughout the Obama presidency, many Republicans in Congress were vocal on the fact that the Keystone XL pipeline would have brought a multitude of jobs to America. According to yahoo.com, these claims were not fallacies. The website stated, in an article by Amanda Becker, that, “thousands of jobs” would have been created if the pipeline were put into place.
With Trump’s signing of Keystone XL, America will now be able to provide countless short and long-term jobs to its citizens.
In the short-term, workers will be hired to construct the pipeline. These construction jobs, according to the Yahoo article, will be two-year work programs. In the long-term, many workers will be necessary to maintain and run the pipeline as well.
It is evident in the above paragraphs that Keystone XL will help America immensely. Many Democrats and environmentalists in Congress still “fail to see the light” and argue that the “ends fail to justify the means.” They hold the belief that the environmental implications of Keystone are too dangerous and argue that the pipeline will prevent the U.S. from advancing and looking into renewable energy alternatives ultimately hurting the environment.
What the opposition to Keystone fails to realize is that TransCanada and other oil companies will still drill whether this specific pipeline is put into place or not. Failing to enact Keystone will also not stop Americans from consuming fossil fuels.
When it comes to buying into renewable resource alternatives, rejecting Keystone does nothing in incenting them.
Though Trump is obviously not the best man to hold the job of POTUS, his signing of Keystone XL was a respectable move. Keystone will allow the U.S. to reduce its focus on foreign oil agencies and will create new job opportunities for its people. To those who argue against this pipeline, they must keep in mind that when it comes to oil, the American economy is more important than the environmental threats posed by offshore drilling.