This article from The New York Times discusses the environmental investigation that is taking place into the proposed TransCanada Pipeline. Do you think it is ethically correct for the government to hire this company to conduct the investigation? Does this forecast the approval of the pipeline? Do you think that our government is showing bias? What does this say about our government?
I should let you know that before reading this article, I was not a large fan of the current state of our US Government. The poor decisions that they make effect our country as a whole, and I don't believe that they think about that when these select decisions are made.
ReplyDeleteIn this case, I think that it is not ethically correct for the government to hire this company to conduct this investigation. Mainly because the people who are being hired are only slightly educated on the topic, and narrow minded. For example, Dan Frosch said, "Keystone XL, Which would carry 700,000 barrels of crude a day, would create thousands of jobs." This is the only positive of making the Keystone XL, there are so many negative ways that this pipeline could effect our country and oceans. The main man who is pushing for the installation of the pipeline is Cardno Entrix who is an environmental contractor on the topic whom our State Department hired. When Entrix wrote two prior draft environmental impact statements, the EPA jumped on them saying they were "inadequate" with "insufficient information." This decision is on our Government, why would they hire a man who is insufficient on such a serious topic?
I believe that our government is showing bias towards the environmental contractors and TransCanada because there would be no other reason to put our country's environment in this much jeopardy. There has to be some kind of deal going on that is not being released. For example, TransCanada is paying off consultants but they will not reveal the amounts they are paying, why would they do something like this? This shows that our Government ultimately cannot be trusted to make decisions like this. They need to leave decisions like this to environmental agencies, not the State Department. People that actually know information on the topic need to be hired to investigate the topic of the Keystone XL, not people like Cardno Entrix.
I don't think it is a good idea to give a company that is closely related to TransCanada take the investigation of Keystone XL, and we all know what "closely related" (if I am explaining myself ok) means. But it isn't easy to decide what company has to do this, the best idea would be to select another company that hasn't any kind of relationship with TransCanada and one that you can trust in. But in this globalized world it's difficult to find a company like that, so the decision is always hard.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kade Colen in that the only "good" thing of this pipeline would be the creation of jobs and to carry more barrels of crude a day. When there is a project like this one, the good things that the politicians and companies say are always improving the transportation of petrol and creating jobs, but they don't say that at least a half of these jobs will be only during the construction of the pipeline.
About letting Cardo Entrix investigate the pipeline, I think that the governement is looking forward to build the pipeline, although it is having many doubts because of the always present opposition of the green movement. With this I'm not trying to say that the green movement is doing something wrong, it's just the opposite. They're peacefully fighting for living in a better world, where the big companies and governments don't control the world doing whatever they want to do, it doesn't matter how much they destroy it.
“response to a spill from the proposed pipeline would not require unique clean up procedures.” I think, or at least what I had understood about this is that a spill of petrol has always horrible consequences, it takes a long time to cleanup the spill and lots of years for nature to recuperate from the consequences of petrol. In my opinion, what this says about the government of the USA is that they're really looking for the creation of jobs, this is because of all that wonderful things that Obama promised to change the USA are now in the oblivion and he really needs something to improve his options to be elected in next elections. This is how we see this topic in Spain, I'm sorry if I offend somebody, because it isn't my intention. I'm just giving my humble opinion about Keystone XL.
From Ryan P
ReplyDeleteI do not believe it is ethically correct for the government to hire Cardno Entrix,an Environmental Contractor based in Houston, to review the Keystone Pipeline XL. The contractor has worked with TransCanada, the company working on the pipeline, on projects prior to this one. Also Cardno Entrix lists TransCanada as a "major client." The government has the responsiblity to find an appropriate and unbias environmental company to review large environmental topics such as the Keystone Pipeline XL. Cardno Entrix is a bias company towards the pipeline and the US Government. The article stats, "The E.P.A. has criticized two prior draft environmental impact statments prepared by Cardno Entrix on Keystone XL as 'inadequate' and provididing 'insufficient information'..." I agree when Kade says, "This decision is on our Government, why would they hire a man (contractor) who is insufficient on such a serious topi?" Kade hits the argument right on the head.Why is our government, who is supposed to be protecting us, making such an irresponsible and foolish decision, hiring a contractor with an obvious bias towards passing the pipeline. Hiring a company with this strong bias most certainly forecasts the approval of the Keystone Pipeline. This demonstration of foolishness and greed shows that our government will pull any strings needed to get what it wants. The government wants the pipeline so the pipeline must be built. Our people are supposed to have a voice, that is the very foundation our country was built on, and their voices are not heard for the pipeline. The Government will do whatever it takes to find a favorable outcome for itself, even if that means hiring bias contractors and ignoring the voices of the people.
Even though I was all for the pipeline during the discussion, right now I am very much on the opposite side. First of all, I do not think it is correct to allow the company, Cardno Entrix, to be helping out TransCanada. They were recommended by TransCanada, being a "major client" of some sort. It is not right for many people who oppose this because they have friendly contact with the company. I believe for such a big project Cardno Entrix is not a fit for the environmental studies. Like what Guillermo said, they should definately find a company that is like a stranger to TransCanada to make it equal for everyone. Even after studies and more studies by this company i still do not think they should have the final say, they should give their information to the E.P.A. and the government should have the final say. That would be fair. I agree with what they say about how the state department should monitor the work that is being done. Making sure nothing is being snuck in that was maybe denied. All in all, i believe the government will do what they think will make people happy, not for what they think will be the right thing to do. I don't think they'll make the right decision involving the people, and more importantly the environment
ReplyDeleteIn the discussion that we had in class i all for the pipeline, and so excited for what benifits would come out of it, but i was wrong. i totally agree with Tyler, when he says " That Cardno Extrix shouldnt be invovled in these major works only because there "good clients" of Transcanada.Theleakshat may occur during the comission of the pipeline. If we go back to the huge oil spills in the Gulf, and what they did to the enviorment just think of what would happen this time. I dont agree with this pipeline what so ever there are to manny negitives that come out of it so all in all this pipeline is a bad idea. By Cameron Crook
ReplyDeleteP.s sorry for the weird sentence thats messed up there is more to it but my computer wouldnt let me fix it so its whatever.