New York Times- XL Pipeline Freezes in Cold Battle

In the midst of the Siberian Express, president Obama vetoed the Keystone XL Pipeline bill.  Such a bill would allow the construction of an extensive oil pipeline network from Canada cross-borders to the United States.  There was much fracas on both side of the argument for this legislation.

The supporters believed that the XL pipeline was a good business move that would create jobs and reduce pollution totals, while the opposition believed that the XL pipeline would be too costly and risky a project which could possibly lead to another oil spill much like the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico five years ago.

There has been much debate on the alternatives of creating an oil pipeline as opposed to trains and trucks shipping oil.  Freight trains have been often in the news lately, but not for good reasons.  There have been a large number of train derailments as of recent times.  Several oil trucks have reported suffering accidents that cause oil to spill onto roads and off the sides.  Many argue that a pipeline would be more efficient and less expensive in transporting oil, while the opposition not only believes the opposite, but they believe that there is higher risk should the pipeline experience mechanical issues that could lead to a horrid spill.

Pertaining to Human Environment Interaction, the opposition want nothing to do with another possible crisis like BP caused years ago.  BP is still cleaning up after it as well, only this time the drinking supply of millions would be far more at risk for contamination in addition to wildlife suffering as well.  Place and region are both affected, as the potential placing of the pipeline project is within a region of North America rich and plentiful in waterways and sources, in addition to large populations of cities and surrounding area in which wildlife thrive.