Pipeline In the US from Canada to Texas?

Written by College of Energy

Should the United States allow the pipeline from Canada to Texas to be installed, possibly causing harm to the sensitive ecosystem, or should Obama rule it out altogether, in order to focus on new sources of energy?

The majority of the U.S.’s oil imports come from Canada. As Canada only exports oil to the U.S., holding back on making a decision about the pipeline could lead Canada towards trading with China, a significant loss for the U.S. Yet Congress may not be able to come to a decision as easily as some may suggest. On one hand there are the environmentalists that understand the impact a pipeline from Canada to Texas would have on the ecosystem. Pipelines often have a history of leaks, most currently occurring in Illinois and Michigan. The oil reserves in Alberta are also oil sands, which use a lot of energy and water to separate the oil. Not only is the requirement of so much energy negative, but the process increases greenhouse gas emissions and could harm forests and rivers as well. For these reasons, many, who tend to support Obama and the Democrats, would oppose this pipeline. Yet on the other hand, the significance of losing vast amounts of resources to China cannot be underestimated. Canada exporting oil to China could increase prices, cause accidents still close to U.S. borders (the pipeline for China would end in British Columbia), or force an even greater dependence on the Middle East. While it may not be ideal to continue the U.S.’s reliance on oil by putting in a pipeline to Texas, it could be necessary for the long-term interests of the U.S. So now the question remains, how can Congress and the President balance the country’s interest in new and clean energy sources and protection of the environment with the importance of having access to Canada’s oil reserves, decreasing dependence on the Middle East, and keeping prices down by keeping China out?

Login Form