Biden’s Annulment of the Keystone XL Pipeline Is Politically Detrimental

By Kaveri Pillai ’23

Staff Writer

On Jan. 21, history was made in the Oval Office when Biden signed 17 executive actions on his first day as president. Landmark decisions include rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement and repealing the Trump administration’s “Muslim ban,” setting an optimistic tone for supporters of Biden’s presidency. Moreover, after a turbulent four years for Indigenous rights and environmental activists, the nomination of Rep. Deb Haaland as secretary of the interior, making her the first Native American Cabinet member, and former Secretary of State John Kerry as the special climate envoy were seen to be major wins for these overlooked communities. These voices and protests were also recognized by the Biden administration when the Keystone XL pipeline project was finally blocked in one of the executive orders. 

The Keystone XL pipeline was an oil pipeline used to help transport oil from Alberta, Canada, to Steele City, Nebraska. While the end of this oil pipeline project is a success in protecting Indigenous lands and encouraging renewable sources of energy, this monumental move made by the Biden administration will have severe political consequences that cannot be ignored. 

U.S.-Canada relations are bound to sour with the aftermath of the Keystone XL pipeline shutdown, which will inevitably affect the Canadian oil market. 

The 1200-mile-long pipeline, connected to the preexisting Keystone pipeline, was going to create a direct route for the transport of U.S.-produced oil and Canadian oil. Currently, 550,000 barrels of oil per day are brought to the U.S. from Canada, which was anticipated to go up by 830,000 barrels of oil per day after the construction of the pipeline. 

The Canadian National Energy Board approved the Keystone XL pipeline project in 2000, but the development process was blocked in 2015 under the Obama administration. The Environmental Protection Agency was said to have advised Obama on making this decision because the project would not create long-term jobs for either of the countries and would result in a toxic dependence on non-renewable sources of energy. Despite this information, former President Donald Trump overturned the project block within the first days of his presidency. 

While the EPA’s warning regarding the unlawful extraction of natural resources still remains true, it is the political relationship between Canada and the U.S. that is under duress. 

With over 300 miles of the pipeline being constructed and the goal of providing oil to an international market at low prices being threatened, it is Canada that is unfortunately facing harmful losses. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau echoed his disappointment with the U.S.’ decision on the pipeline, considering that this project was important for economic and energy security reasons. 

Another political consequence that both countries will face is the loss of potential jobs. 

The Canadian Indigenous groups in the province of Alberta were looking at the construction of the pipeline as a solution to poverty. According to Andy Black, who is the president and CEO of the Association of Oil Pipelines, this bill is “killing 10,000 jobs and taking $2.2 billion in payroll” from the American workers. 

The case of the Fort Belknap Indian community and the Rosebud Sioux tribe in the United States demanding sovereignty over their native land and natural resources, which fueled the shutdown of the pipeline project, champions Indigenous groups on an international level, and it cannot be undermined. However, the thousands of people who were looking at the pipeline as a source of temporary income during the pandemic could now be in devastating economic situations. The blurry line between livelihood and the protection of land comes into question in such a situation. 

The developed oil sands in Alberta were supposed to be the answer to the Middle Eastern oil dependency problem. The quantity and availability of oil was expected to rise in the oil sands in Alberta that would make it possible for the American oil demand chain to move away from the Middle East oil supply. With sanctions in Iran heating up U.S.-Middle East relations and the fear of over-extracting oil from a world producer that already produces one-third of the global oil supply, the Keystone XL pipeline was supposed to be an opportunity for the U.S. to branch out and find reserves closer to home. 

Investment in renewable sources of energy will take time. Until then, the U.S. might have no other option than to depend completely on the diminishing Middle East oil tank. 

2021 began with promises of protection and preservation, but the losses that the U.S. will face, either of American jobs or a valuable ally, will be destructive in the long run, and the duality of the Keystone XL pipeline issue cannot be ignored.