Battlelines are being drawn.

At the center of the conflict is a potential pipeline carrying “one of the dirtiest, most carbon-intensive fuels on the planet,”

Some see an environmental disaster-in-waiting. Others pooh-pooh the dangers and see instead an economic boon. 

Estimates of jobs created by the pipeline range from zero to more than one hundred thousand.

Oh, and the pipeline already exists. 

Confused yet?

The Keystone XL pipeline is designed to carry crude oil from Canadian oil sands to the Gulf Coast. Most of it has already been built. But because a portion crosses the US/Canadian border it has turned this business concern into an international concern requiring presidential approval. 

There are no doubts some benefits to the pipeline. Canadian oil sands can be refined to produce a healthy amount of conventional petroleum for US consumption or export. Plus the source is not an unstable Middle East supplier.  This is good news, but it comes with a catch: “well to wheel,” oil sands produce 17% more greenhouse gas emissions than traditional oil sources.

Extraction is both polluting and ecologically destructive.  Plus there’s the dangers of accidents and spills when in operation.

However, the State Department released a report last Friday declaring that  completion of the pipeline would not exacerbate climate change.

This is because the oil will probably reach the market with or without the Keystone pipeline. The suppliers with just use trains instead. In fact, if Keystone isn’t built, transporting the oil via train may actually increase total emissions.

Some who support the Keystone XL promote it as a job creator.

But estimates of Keystone-supported jobs vary wildly, in part because many more bodies are needed during construction than during the subsequent operation of the pipeline.

The State Department estimates the two-year construction phase of the pipeline will support 42,100 temporary American jobs. Regular operation will require about 50 employees. 

In the end, the critical question is whether the economic benefit is worth the environmental risk.

 So what’s your verdict? Don’t just tell us; the government is accepting public comment on the project until March 7.