Res: The US should approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

As Side Con, I wish to demonstrate why the State Department of the US should NOT approve the Keystone XL pipeline, urging a Con ballot on the aforementioned resolution. I have three contentions in support of this claim. Contention 1: The Keystone XL pipeline is deleterious to the US economy. Contention 2: The Keystone XL pipeline is a threat to the environment. Contention 3: The Keystone XL pipeline is a threat to public health. Let us look at these contentions one by one: C1: The Keystone XL pipeline is deleterious to the US economy. Let us first address who actually owns the Keystone XL pipeline: Canadian energy corporation TransCanada. Most supporters of Keystone claim the pipeline will provide oil directly to the US, decreasing US oil dependency. Yet such a view is not consistent with the designs of TransCanada. The purpose of the Keystone XL pipeline is NOT to give oil to the US, but to ship oil from Canadian tar sands down to the Gulf of Mexico to be sold to foreign markets (1). Namely, TransCanada and other Canadian oil companies can sell their oil to other countries for far higher prices than they could sell it in the US or Canada, raking in the cash. With all of this, since Keystone is owned by TransCanada, the US economy sees little to none of the export revenue. Even worse, the private citizens owning 95% of their land to the pipeline will lose this land in eminent domain cases, citizens who can use said land to boost property values or grow crops. With this in mind, we do not see a clear economic benefit to the pipeline. Looking deeper, however, we see more dangerous economic implications. Since countries such as China and South Korea are willing to pay TransCanada more for crude oil, by virtue of supply and demand, TransCanada will increase the price nominally. Currently, in the US Midwest, the excess supply of TransCanada oil has given the Midwest a "discount on oil" with prices about $3.40 a gallon. Once TransCanada ups the prices, the Midwest will be paying far more for its oil " an estimated "20 to 40 cents a gallon" (1). The effects of this price spike will ripple throughout the entire economy. Think about it. The Midwest of the United States is the nation"s "bread basket"; the vast majority of the nation"s food is produced there. When oil prices there go up, that increases the costs of production for tractor fuel, fuel for power plants, and gasoline for transportation. The nation will see a massive increase in food prices. And this is not just confined to gas prices and food costs. This also affects medical costs. Petroleum is essential in manufacturing pharmaceuticals, including antibiotics, analgesics, antibacterials, and dozens of other medications (2). So, when oil prices go up, pill prices go up. The ripple effect on the economy cannot be understated. According to Neal Soss, chief economist of Credit Suisse, a single cent increase in oil prices decreases US consumer spending by $1 billion. Since consumer spending is one of the three primary components of gross domestic product, this tool would stunt economic growth, slowing our recovery even further. But all the money in the world is worth nothing if the world is unlivable. Which brings me to" C2: The Keystone XL pipeline is a threat to the environment. Let us first look purely at the composition of the oil planned to course through the Keystone pipeline. According to the Congressional Research Service, most of the oils transported through the Keystone XL have greater quantities of potassium hydroxide, increasing their capacity to erode the surrounding area. The total acidity of this oil is higher than average US oils. The oil also contains more sulfur, often by 1% of total content. The burning of these fuels then has greater impact on pollution emissions than oil produced directly in the US (5). This is compounded by the emission facets of the oil sand processing. According to the CRS survey, Canadian oil sand producers increase greenhouse gas emissions an approximate 14-20% more than US-based refineries. Well-to-transport emissions have even greater disadvantages, with an average range of increase from "72%-111%" of emissions over US competitors. The oil sands are heavier due to excess carbon rather than excess hydrogen. We also cannot disregard the possibility of a spill due to a fracture in the pipeline. Such a tragedy is not unprecedented with such pipelines. In 2011, hundreds of gallons of oil spilled into the Yellowstone River due to severe oversight (4). Furthermore, such a fracture is more likely with the Keystone pipeline due to the higher acidity of the oil itself. The acid can easily corrode the inside of the pipe, weakening the overall structure. This is compounded by irregularities in pressure in the pipeline. Diluted bitumen pipelines generally require the oil to be stored at 1,440 psi, but reports on the pipeline estimates have seen a range of figures from 2,130 psi to 1,308 psi. In any case, fluctuating pressure can lead to pipe instability. Not to mention, the average size of these spills is 918 barrels of oil, a whopping 38,556 gallons of oil (5). That"s about twice the size of a large swimming pool (6). While my opponent may claim the EPA or other regulatory bodies might work consciously to prevent possible spills, such a claim holds little water. The EPA is chronically underfunded, unable to fulfill most of its priorities. Furthermore, the EPA has let several pollutants slide under the Clean Air Act, allowing certain emissions to slip out into the atmosphere (7). Merely having some regulation will not solve the problems. And these problems do have a profound impact on our citizenry, bringing me to" C3: The Keystone XL pipeline is a threat to public health. According to the NOAA, air pollution leads to 50,000 premature deaths a year (8). The only reason we do not notice: it is spread across a large area over a longer period of time. Gradually, the toxins build up in the lungs, blood, and other bodily organs and systems, leading to cancer and other diseases. Permitting this pipeline to be built on US land will only exacerbate the number of deaths, boosting medical costs for the entire nation, as well as robbing our citizens of lives and family members. An even greater threat comes from the most fundamental chemical to human bodily function: H2O. Pure water is safe for human consumption; it is necessary for human function. But water used in processing the oil from Keystone can undoubtedly kill. In order to pump the oil out of the ground, oil companies use about three gallons of water to pump out a single gallon of oil. So much water is used, it must be stored in man-made pools called trailing ponds. This water is exceedingly polluted with toxins from the oil. Invariably, this water eventually trails into local water supplies. Since the Keystone pipeline travels straight through the US, this will nominally affect the water of several states. Not to mention, if a spill breaks out, entire states could have water supplies tainted by crude oil. This undoubtedly has adverse effects on national health. For sake of the health of our economy, the health of our environment, and the health of our citizenry, we can find no choice but to vote Con. Thank you. 1. http://www.consumerwatchdog.org... 2. http://www.orionmagazine.org... 3. "Tensions Raise Specter of gas at $5 a gallon," New York Times, Clifford Krause, Feb. 29, 2012. 4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com... 5. http://www.fas.org... 6. http://www.poolproducts.com... 7. http://eponline.com... 8. http://www.foe.org...