LITTLE ROCK — The more I think about the Keystone XL pipeline, the more questions I have. Here are some of them:
According to U.S. Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts, the oil that would flow down the pipeline is the dirtiest oil on the planet. Does it make economic sense for us in the U.S. to be the ones to clean up that Canadian oil? Can’t that oil be refined in Canada where it is produced, at no potential harm to the U.S.? Are we perhaps playing the role of sucker again in international affairs by being willing to let another country export its problems onto our soil? Isn’t it a legitimate function of the State Department to see to it that other countries don’t just dump their problems on us to solve?
Even if we do want to be Canada’s rescuer in finding a market for its dirty oil, couldn’t we at least refine it someplace closer to Canada to avoid having to transport it across such a large expanse of our country? Every mile of pipeline is another mile susceptible to leaks. And every mile costs more money to build, use and maintain. Does it even make economic sense to transport it all the way?
I’m no tree-hugger, but I do think it’s our responsibility to protect the natural resources that we have left in this nation. I have read that Sen. Mark Pryor thinks technology will protect the environment if this pipeline is built. Haven’t we yet learned that technology can’t solve all our problems? There is always the human factor in putting that technology to work. It was technological mistakes and human error that caused the Gulf oil spill.
Do we really want to take a chance on something catastrophic like that happening to the drinking-water supply for millions of our own citizens?
There is already one major oil pipeline from Canada reaching down into the heartland of our country. How is it doing? Any leaks? Why not just expand that one if we want to take the oil to the Gulf instead of constructing a whole new one?
And why choose two cities on the Gulf in Texas as the refiners in the first place? Who are those refiners? To me, this smacks of Big Oil lobbying Congress to get lucrative contracts for the refining job. Perhaps payback for some “favors” from the past?
And what do they plan to do with the oil after they refine it? According to Rep. Markey, they plan to export it to other countries. Little if any will go toward reducing our own country’s dependence on foreign oil for our domestic uses.
I also want to comment on Welspun’s statement that it might have to lay off some Arkansans if the pipeline isn’t built.
I appreciate our congressional delegation looking out for the interests of Arkansans. However, Welspun’s choice to go ahead and build pipe before it had a firm contract was its own business decision. Not all business decisions work out as planned.
Isn’t this outcry against the possibility of losing 60 Arkansas jobs just another result of lobbying by big companies and industries and their unions to protect their special interests? And Welspun isn’t even a U.S. company. Why are we willing to make its problem our problem?
Many have questioned President Barack Obama’s choosing to not make a final decision on this matter until 2013, after the presidential election. Actually, delaying that decision sounds like a good idea to me: Get the election-year politics out of it, and get into the facts of the matter instead. Get beyond the hysteria of people shouting “Jobs! Jobs at any cost! Jobs!” and get into taking some constructive steps in resolving the matter.
This project was first proposed back in 2008. I have to wonder why it is becoming an issue just now. I wonder who is behind its resurgence; I can only guess at it, and none of my guesses are pretty.
Canada is still willing to proceed on pursuing the pipeline now after all these years. It’ll likely still be willing in 2013. I don’t think we have to worry about it giving its business to the Chinese instead of us if we decide we want it.
It has been stated emphatically by several sources that there is no tax money involved in this project, that it is all to be done with private money. I have a hard time believing that. Have you ever known of a project of this magnitude that didn’t end up involving taxpayer dollars? Do we really want to spend more of our tax money on attempts to advance the use of oil?
The world is running out of oil. That is a well-known fact now. So why are we whipping a dead horse in trying to squeeze the very last drop of it out of the Earth, when we could be using our money and brains to develop sustainable sources of energy instead?
We need a reality check here, to take a good look at what we are doing and decide that it is time to change course in our quest to provide for the energy needs of our people. No single industry lasts forever. The oil industry is no exception. It’s a dying industry. So let it go and move on.
I encourage readers to consider their stance on this important matter very carefully.
———◊-
———
Kathy Purnell is an author living in Horseshoe Bend.
Editorial, Pages 11 on 02/13/2012