Energy East Pipeline Case Study

The pipeline has been opposed largely due to its environmental impact. This includes the increase in carbon emissions and the potential oil spills.
Canada may become more reliant on fracked oil. The Energy East Pipeline will encourage Alberta’s oil producers to increase production. The development of this oil produces a lot of carbon emissions. Between 62 and 164 kilograms of CO2 is released per barrel produced. In situ development produces even more carbon than mining; between 99 and 176 kilograms of CO2 per barrel is released. These levels are estimated to be 3.2 to 4.5 times more than the production of conventional crude oil.
In addition to carbon emissions, the oil sands also pollute fresh water. The production of one barrel of crude oil requires two to four barrels of fresh water. This poses problems for the environment. The water is sourced from the Athabasca River throughout the year including during the river’s low flow periods. This can harm the river’s aquatic life. The water becomes toxic during the process and cannot be returned to the river. In situ development uses about 0.9 barrels of water per barrel of oil, but still uses more water than conventional oil production.
(http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5771)
The pipeline would traverse the traditional territory of 180 different aboriginal communities, each of whom must be consulted and have their concerns accommodated as part of the company’s effort at winning project approval (McCarthy, 2014) A spill could have great environmental impact as crude oil is difficult to remove from water. Given time, crude oil will sink quickly and adhere to surroundings. An example of this is the large spill in the Kalamazoo River in 2010. 3.3 million litres of oil sank into Michigan's river (Paris, 2013). Enbridge, the owner of the pipeline, learned that bitumen sinks quickly in fresh