Keystone Pipeline: Environmentally Immoral and Constitutionally Illegal?

By: Heather DeLaurie

The Keystone Pipeline has been a controversial topic among politicians and environmentalists alike. The Senate recently voted against the pipeline that would extend from Canada, through the mid-western United States, down to Texas.[1] There will be another vote in the Senate this month for the approval of the Keystone Pipeline.[2] Obama has threatened to veto this bill.[3] Proponents rally that it will vastly improve our economy.[4] Environmental groups fear the pipeline will only have negative impacts on the environment, including oil spills due to accidents and faulty technology causing pollution of water sources.[5] However, citizens should be questioning the government about the constitutionality of their land being seized under the Eminent Domain Doctrine.[6] Politicians and environmentalists aside, the pipeline raises serious concerns that the public should be addressing. Is the pipeline technologically sound and can the government constitutionally take away the public’s land for a private purpose?

The Keystone Pipeline would be transporting 35 million gallons of oil a day.[7] This amount of oil begs the question – How safe is the technology? TransCanada, the company that wishes to extend the pipeline to the United States, claims there are multiple technologies in place.[8] The pipeline is constructed of steel and is covered with alloys so the material will not become worn out.[9] Also, there are sensors that keep oil pressure constant.[10] Additionally, airplanes will be used to act as security.[11] In theory, if there is a potential threat to the pipeline, the airplanes will detect it.[12] Lastly, the pipeline will have leak detection systems that collect data, detecting leaks almost immediately by personnel.[13]

But how accurate are these sensors? The U.S. State Department claims they are not sensitive enough.[14] To accurately detect spills before they happen, the leak detection systems need to be internal and external.[15] At the moment, the part of the pipeline that is already in operation in Alberta, Canada only has internal systems that rely on a computer to alert to spills.[16] According to the current system they want to implement, the Keystone Pipeline would have to be spilling 1.5 percent of its 830,000-barrel capacity to trigger an alarm.[17] However, there are many technologies that confidently detect leaks before a spill occurs.[18] These include, external monitors and fiber optic cables.[19] The catch? These are very expensive for TransCanada to implement and the technology may not even be available yet for a project of this multitude.[20]

Other than worrying about oil spills that could pollute town’s drinking supplies, lawmakers have decided that eminent domain is applicable.[21] Eminent Domain is the doctrine that allows the government to take private land for public purpose.[22] In March 2014, the House voted to block eminent domain for private interests, unless it was for the construction of the Keystone Pipeline.[23] Theoretically, companies are not allowed to take land for private developments such as sports stadiums.[24] However, there is a loophole. TransCanada is technically a Canadian company, not an American company. Republicans are disregarding the protection of this country’s citizens to push forward with their own agenda.

A few state courts have already ruled that the Keystone Pipeline may not take land due to eminent domain.[25] In Iowa, republican and democrat state legislators stood up for the landowners of their state.[26] They state that it is not in our national interests to take away American farms.[27] Not only is it not in our national interests, but it is against the American ideals. It is shocking that lawmakers would allow a foreign company to take away hard earned land that Americans work most of their lives to have. A Nebraska judge struck down the use of eminent domain stating that the law violated the state constitution.[28] TransCanada claims that most of the land in Nebraska was voluntarily given.[29] TransCanada seemed to think this was an acceptable reason to then take the amount of land that was not given voluntarily, by force.

Landowners and citizens of the United States should put aside the arguments made by lawmakers and environmentalists and consider their own well-being. If the correct technology is not implemented during the construction of the pipeline, a spill could occur that could devastate a town’s water supply. Furthermore, hard earned land could be taken away through the use of eminent domain due to a loophole that is arguably unconstitutional. State courts and citizen groups should take a stand to protect their constitutional rights.

UPDATE: The Senate passed legislation January 29, 2015 approving the Keystone XL oil pipeline on a 62-36 vote.[30]