Tag Archives: New York Times

Pipeline May Be Key to Unlocking Next Government Shutdown

02 Wednesday Oct 2013

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo by Anne Sherwood for The New York Times. Dawson County Montana–one of the areas through which the proposed Keystone Pipeline XL would pass if approved.

The Keystone Pipeline XL may be a key to unlocking the next cement door put up by the GOP to meeting fiscal deadlines, the New York Times reported. The Republican Party will likely seek approval of the pipeline in the discussion to raise the national debt ceiling, which has an Oct.-17 deadline, rather than in debates pertaining to the missed Oct. 1 budget deadline that defunded the U.S. government and brought the government into its second day of the shutdown. Tying the pipeline to the debt ceiling could have a significant impact on landowners’ rights as TransCanada, the pipeline builders, try to attain land for the project, which will bring into question the eminent domain rights of the company as a “public” utility as well as any resulting condemnation claims.

House of Representative member Lee Terry (R-Nebraska) said to the NYT that the Republicans feel the debt ceiling debate may be their “only option” in seeing the pipeline come to fruition, and his opinion may not be far from the truth considering President Obama’s more aggressive approach toward preventing climate change in his second term. The pipeline crosses an international border and needs approval from the Obama administration in order to continue, and the President has ordered an internal review to consider the potential environmental risks the Keystone Pipeline XL may impose. A decision on the pipeline from the President without interference from Congress could come in early 2014, but a Republican-led, last-ditch effort to guarantee the pipeline’s completion may change that timeline.

President Obama stated that he has little patience for any provisions on the upcoming debt ceiling bill, and considering the lack of bipartisanship that has become a trademark of about the last 4 years of U.S. politics, another looming budget battle about the national debt ceiling, and, therefore, the Keystone Pipeline, likely awaits the Congress currently tied up on approving a national budget.

This battle will most likely not carry the same momentum as the current budget debates simply because it follows the budget deadline that resulted in defunding the U.S. government, a move not well received or likely to be repeated within the same term. But, nothing is certain, especially the future of the Keystone Pipeline XL.

Supporters of the pipeline argue that it would help decrease the United States’ dependency on the Middle East for oil and create more jobs within the nation, while opponents fear the carbon emissions that would result from such a large build.

The Center for Biological Diversity, a non-government organization that often lobbies for greater environmental protection for endangered species, recently released a study about the potential damage the pipeline will cause on habitats it crosses, according to Al Jazeera America on Sept. 29. Al Jazeera America also reported that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, sponsored by the United Nations, released a report linking global warming to “human carbon dioxide output from fossil fuels, including carbon-rich tar sands oil like that which the Keystone pipeline is designed to transport.”

The Pew Research Center reported that about two-thirds of Americans support the pipeline, but the same margin of Americans also opposes great carbon emissions. Waiting for the Obama administration’s report on the Keystone Pipeline XL could lead to a well-informed decision that considers all different arguments for and against the pipeline, but forcibly linking that decision to the debt ceiling may rush an important decision on an issue that is clearly more grey than black or white.

The decision to link the pipeline to the Oct. 17 deadline might change considering the potential political ramifications that will result from the current government’s continued failure to pass a budget — a move not boding well for Republicans in office as their constituents begin to feel the effects of a government shutdown domestically and abroad.

Coauthored by Justin Hodge and Ayla Syed.

With the Keystone decision looming, will the President propose a quid pro quo?

03 Monday Jun 2013

Posted by in Pipelines, Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

To many, the ultimate approval of the Keystone XL pipeline project is inevitable. Environmentalists and oil and gas advocates have long been engaged in a heated debate that has narrowed its focus to TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline.

Here are a few of President Obama’s options: a) approve the pipeline and offer an energy-efficient tax incentive or alternative energy goal proposal for the future; b) approve the pipeline and disregard the cries of environmentalists; c) strike the pipeline and disregard upset oil and gas investors that are likely to pursue the pipeline’s construction anyways; d) strike the pipeline and offer some kind of proposal to alleviate what to advocates of traditional energy forms would seem like an utter crisis; e) indefinitely postpone the decision entirely. The problem with creating an additional proposal to his decision to strike or approve the pipeline is that it would require approval from Congress, which we all know has been facing much difficulty seeing eye to eye. Regardless of the path President Obama chooses, someone is bound to be upset; such is the nature of dramatic once-in-a-term decisions like this. Because of the opportunity’s rarity, the decision to keep or remove the contentious pipeline will leave a lasting impact on how the Obama legacy will be perceived. What is left undeciphered now is through which lens the President’s term will be remembered – will he be envisioned as the environmental advocate or the oil and gas subjugate?

To read about additional possible outcomes of this contentious debate, please click here.

Wind Energy v. Coal – the Endless Debate

08 Monday Oct 2012

Posted by in Pipelines, Politics, Property Rights

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

As with all things that closely intertwine with politics and the economy, wind energy also has its pros and cons. While some may defend it for its efficiency and its potential to sustain clean energy in the long run, others may point out how wind farms obliterate the beauty of American landscapes with their loud noises and endless strings of wire.

One player we generally forget to think about is the landowner whose land is burdened. When wind farms are created, as when pipelines are laid, who’s pockets make the greatest profit? Borrowing from “East of Eden”, the lucky Adam Trask whose luscious land had that magical oil well or windy hill and the shrewd power or oil company that taxes the consumers for the goods produced. No one really thinks about the Sam Hamilton under whose land the power lines that generate the wind farm or the pipeline that transfers oil is laid. This landowner is left stuck in between a rock and a hard place when the only compensation for use of his land is the value of the installation of the required equipment. What about the potential fire hazards as a result of sparks or lightening? And don’t forget the environmental hazards posed by a leaking pipeline, rendering this landowner’s property value virtually diminished.

Instead of debating over which form of energy is more cost effective or eco-friendly, it’s time we consider the effects of our policies on the unforgotten player in the game of energy production.

To read more, click here.