Professional Ceramic Tableware Sets Manufacturer And Wholesaler For Star Hotel & Restaurant Since 1998.

safety regulations for dishes in a hotel or restaurant 2017 Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Pros, Cons, and Other Facts

by:Two Eight     2019-08-21
safety regulations for dishes in a hotel or restaurant 2017 Keystone XL Pipeline Project: Pros, Cons, and Other Facts
The Keystone XL pipeline project is expected to create thousands of jobs for Americans.
However, it has been torn by critics for its harmful environmental effects, which they believe far outweigh any benefits to the economy.
OpinionFront aims to eliminate confusion by giving you some pros and cons of the Keystone XL pipeline and other facts, such as its controversy and politics-Related aspects.
According to NASA scientist James Hansen, approving the Keystone XL project means the "end of the game" of Earth ".
Keystone pipeline project 2,100 miles in length
A long pipeline for transporting crude oil extracted in Canada.
This is a joint venture of a Canadian company called TransCanada Corp.
When the Keystone project began in Canada in 2005, the United States government approved a cross-section
From Hardisty, Canada, to Patoka's border pipeline in Illinois in March 2007.
The pipeline began operations in 2010.
On 2008, however, TransCanada submitted a request to restart the fourth phase of the pipeline, which will again cross the international border.
This shorter "Phase 4", known as the Keystone XL pipeline project, plans to cross the Northwestern United States from the Alberta Basin in western Canada.
Since the State Department received the proposal, it has caused widespread controversy throughout the country.
The project has crossed some of North America's most pristine landscapes, and environmental activists are shocked.
The pipeline plans to transport a crude oil called tar or oil sands from Alberta, which has the world's largest tar reserves.
Due to this serious oil pollution, there is concern that the project will cause irreversible damage to the environment.
On the other hand, industrialists defended the project, saying it provided a second job opportunity for about 25 million of Americans who were unemployed.
Here are the pros and cons of the Keystone XL pipeline project and some other important facts.
The Keystone XL project is a proposed plan to build 1,179 miles
US crude oil pipeline-
International border of Canada.
36-North leg
The inch-wide pipeline plans to connect Alberta's Hardisty with the city of Steele, in NEAs.
The south section connects the city of Steele to the port of Cambridge, Texas.
As the north passes through the international border, since TransCanada first introduced the initiative in 2008, the initiative is awaiting approval from the state Department of the federal government of the United States.
The south section of the pipeline was put into use in 2014.
The cost of the Keystone XL project is expected to be approximately $7 billion.
TransCanada believes that the project will provide direct and indirect work for approximately 42,000 workers across the country.
In particular, it notes that about 13,000 American workers will receive jobs in manufacturing and construction, more than 7 million.
It will create hours of labor.
The project aims to improve energy security in the United States.
Currently, the Gulf Coast is dependent on oil imports from countries such as Mexico and Venezuela;
This number has fallen rapidly over the years.
Pipeline oil supply from Canada is considered the second largest oil in the world
Rich areas after the Middle East will provide a stable source of oil.
In addition to energy security, the project will also ensure energy independence across North America by 2035.
This is because, for many years, the United States has been steadily increasing its oil production, and by 2020 it is likely to reach 11 per day.
1 million barrels.
Canada's oil production has also seen similar growth, linking the two countries 'oil production will separate the two countries from importing oil from distant and unfriendly countries.
The pipeline project will contribute more than $3 billion to us gdp.
The biggest contribution in this regard will be the property tax levied by the places passing through the pipeline.
Supporters of the project believe that the project will not be harmful to the environment, but will have the opposite effect. The world-
The first-class technology used will minimize greenhouse gas emissions.
In addition, independent analysts found that the chemical composition of the project's oil will be the same as oil sources in areas such as Nigeria, Mexico and Alaska, which are delivered to the United States through pipelines.
If the project is not approved, the US oil source in the Middle East remains dependent.
Compared with direct delivery of oil from Canada, this long-distance transportation of oil will definitely increase the carbon footprint.
Transporting crude oil through a pipeline is much safer than transporting crude oil through a rail or tanker, as the possibility of a rail or tanker explosion is higher.
The possibility of pipeline leakage is small.
The pipeline leaked more than 80% barrels of oil and wasted less than 5 barrels of oil.
The Keystone XL project will be equipped with sensors to send data to monitoring satellites every 5 seconds, one of the safest pipelines.
The study claims that the use of tar supplied by the pipeline can lead to a large amount of greenhouse gas emissions, eventually increasing the Earth's temperature by 2 °c.
This will lead to a decline in us gdp of about 2. 5 %.
In addition, this climate change will increase the frequency of extreme weather such as hurricanes and sandstorms.
This will lead to big
In addition to cutting thousands of jobs, it will also cause massive damage to the economy.
The pollution caused by tar extraction is three times that caused by traditional oil.
Tar is often described as the "dirtiest fuel" that can be used ".
In addition, there is concern that by approving the project, American technology will be almost entirely dependent on this polluting energy source.
The planned pipeline runs through very sensitive terrain and cannot withstand any adverse effects.
Northern forests in Canada are an example of what is said to be the most complete ecosystem in the world.
It takes a long time to pump steam directly into the ground.
In addition to killing many migratory birds and interfering with the animal's life cycle, this process can also cause Forest breakage.
In the case of leakage and leakage, the traditional oil
In this project, the cleaning technology may not work effectively because the physical properties of tar are different from that of traditional oil.
The main difference is that the tar sinks to the bottom instead of floating on the surface of the water.
In addition, this acidic oil is corrosive and increases the possibility of leakage.
If past examples are worth mentioning, oil companies have extracted tar from 700 square feet of land.
Kilometers of Alberta
The waste extracted from it is called tailings and dumped in an open pond.
It is so toxic that fish living in ponds produce tumors that any freshwater bird that lands in the water will die immediately.
Approval of the project will reduce investment in "clean" technologies that focus on minimizing environmental impact.
Oil leakage can damage the supply of underground drinking water.
This can lead to the spread of the disease, while affecting the crop production of land that is mainly agricultural.
Most Americans, especially those who live on planned construction sites, are strongly opposed to the program.
In fact, some surveys show that only 56% of Americans support the pipeline, despite its weight.
Promote economic benefits.
Indigenous tribes and economically backward areas of the region account for the majority of the local population.
Although it is most vulnerable to the negative impact of the project, the decision-making system ignores these effects --
Manufacturers and oil companies.
These people have reported a lot of diseases like kidney failure and cancer.
Job creation is the biggest driver of the project.
Supporters of the pipeline gave different estimates of the expected number of jobs, from 20,000.
Independent studies, however, say the claim is misleading, saying that most of the work is temporary and that the number is small.
Wages of a nature, involving foreign workers.
Also, once the pipe is ready, it will only take about 50 workers to operate the pipe.
Contrary to the myth of job creation, oil companies lobbying for the project themselves are responsible for large oil companies
Mass layoffs in the past.
Companies such as ExxonMobile, Shell and BP fired about 11,200 American workers between 2005 and 2010, although the profit was about $546 billion.
Environmental resource management, an environmental consultancy, was assigned to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on behalf of the State Department for the Keystone project ).
This report is a prerequisite for any project that requires government approval, as it examines any future impact the project may have on the environment.
Finally, on March 1, 2013, the state Department of the United States issued a report describing the key projects positively.
It was later discovered that government-hired consulting companies such as ERM and EnSys Energy, in fact, have worked with many oil companies in the past, including TransCanada Corp, behind the Keystone project.
This creates a conflict of interest.
Many activists even accused ERM of receiving an "undisclosed amount" to change the findings of the report, which is now an official document.
There are also allegations that TransCanada received preferential treatment because of the close ties between TransCanada's lobbyists and former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
TransCanada, the company behind the project, submitted the proposal to the federal government of the United States because the pipeline crossed the international border shared between the United States and Canada, which made it necessary for the United States to approve.
The federal government of the United States, the State Department, was entrusted to review the project before deciding to approve it.
It considers the economic, environmental, health effects of the project and the impact on foreign policy.
Congress has no jurisdiction over such approval.
There are differences in the political atmosphere on this issue.
Democrats believe that the project should be canceled because of the adverse impact of the project on the environment, and Republicans want the president to approve the project on the grounds that the project will create a lot of jobs, think it should be approved earlier. With the long-
With regard to the long-standing controversy over the Keystone XL project, what is the final decision of the US State Department, remains to be seen.
However, one thing is clear --
This result will reflect the attitude of the US government towards environmental issues.
Custom message
Chat Online
Chat Online
Leave Your Message inputting...
Sign in with: