When it comes to pipelines, in my opinion, it depends on where the individuals’ values lie with the economy or the environment. Pipelines are important for economic growth as they are the essential infrastructure for the oil and gas industry. For countries that rely on the export of natural resources for revenue, such as Canada (especially the province of Alberta in Canada) and, to some extent, the USA, pipelines is a critical to the transportation of oil and gas. The oil and gas industry has advocated that transport by pipelines is safer and cleaner than by other means, such as by ships or rail. Arguably, the spills would be better and effectively contained in pipelines, if it happened, than had it occurred on land or in water during transport. Massive spills in the past have occurred, such as the BP Oil spills and large clean-up operations were conducted to clean up as much of the oil spills and contamination as possible in the ocean. Building pipeline infrastructure is a one-time cost, whereas shipping and rail transport will be a continuous, large operational cost to the oil and gas companies. Moreover, rail accidents have happened in the past and in some instances, have resulted in serious injuries or death. Moreover, the oil and gas sector is a large employer and has created many jobs to boost the economy.

On the other hand, if you are an environmentalist, the reasoning would be to make sure the environment be as clean and unpolluted as possible for future generations. Anything that has a huge potential of causing pollution or contamination to the air and environment is a very bad thing and needs to be heavily regulated. At least, that’s the environmentalists lobbying the government use as their arguments to prevent pipeline constructions and to impede progress in the oil and gas industry. This in turn, will stall economic growth and prevent job creation. Look at the Obama years when Keystone XL pipeline and the Dakota pipeline projects were stalled and prohibited from moving forward. The USA economy was made worse. More people on food stamps and companies became stagnant due to the heavy burdens of environmental regulations, and all of this had resulted in massive job loss and low GDP over Obama’s 8 years of government. However, the reasons behind these disruptive decisions to the economy were related to political and financial gains, rather than just for the sake of the environment, which was used mostly as a smokescreen for environmentalist to advance their climate change agenda.

A similar situation is now faced by the company, TransCanada, that wants to expand their oil pipeline between Alberta and British Columbia, as the focus of their Trans Mountain pipeline project. Though on the face of the argument against the pipeline project is due to environmental concerns however, reports have shown that the B.C. Premier actually wanted a bigger piece of the pie (money). This pipeline project is interprovincial, and affects the Canadian economy and revenues as whole. As well, the federal government should have jurisdiction as the pipeline crosses provincial borders and would not likely be governed by one set of provincial rules versus the other. Therefore, the federal government may very well play the referee role.

In my opinion, pipelines are essential to economic growth and job creation. Massive spills are preventable by keeping them contained in the pipelines. A portion of the oil and gas revenue may be used to do further safety research to prevent future spills. Individuals must examine the benefits and costs of pipelines on the economy and environment objectively with good research data, as well determine the impact pipelines have on their livelihood versus the environment.