STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
PEOPLE, PLACES, AND PIPELINES: DEBATING TAR SANDS AND SHALE OIL
TRANSMISSION
CASE STUDY FOR AAC&U STIRS PROJECT
Tami S. Carmichael, University of North Dakota
STUDENT CASE
Learning Objectives
1. Review basic information on tar sands oil extraction and transmission.
2. Examine and evaluate evidence and arguments about environmental impact of tar sands
pipelines.
3. Examine and evaluate evidence and arguments about economic impact of tar sands
pipelines.
4. Examine and evaluate evidence and arguments about tar sands pipeline impact on
cultural resources.
5. Consider the issue of "public good" and of the balance between the few and the many in
a society.
6. Formulate group and individual positions with evidence-based reasoning.
Before the next class:
 Read material in this case study to Part A only.
 Read the article "The Keystone XL Pipeline: Should the President Approve
Construction?" by Michael B. McElroy (found at
http://harvardmagazine.com/2013/11/the-keystone-xl-pipeline) and the article
"Shipping Crude Oil by Rail: New Front in the Tar Sands Wars" by Jacques Leslie (found
at
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/shipping_crude_oil_by_rail_new_front_in_tar_sands_war
s/2717/).
 Listen to the NPR podcast "USSD: Tar Sands Pipelines Should Be Held to Different
Standards" from All Things Considered, April 25 2013:
http://www.npr.org/2013/04/24/178844620/tar-sands-pipelines-should-get-specialtreatment-epa-says
 Research and Write responses to the following questions. Bring the answers to the next
class:
1. What is tar sands oil and what is oil shale?
2. Where are tars sands oil deposits and where is active drilling occurring?
3. How is tar sands oil extracted and why is this of concern?
4. What are the concerns that surround tar sands oil transmission?
 Bring personal computer or tablet and this case study to the next class.
1
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
What Is the Public Good?....
During the first week of October 2013, a group of Anishinaabe tribal members rode on
horseback across 230 miles of the proposed Enbridge Alberta Clipper Pipeline to protest the
proposed construction of a tar sands pipeline designed to carry crude oil from Alberta, Canada
to Superior, Wisconsin, USA, a pipeline that will desecrate their sacred spaces such as tribal
burial grounds and that might, they fear, contaminate the water on the land where tribal
members live (Nienaber 2013).
Just two months later in a small North Dakota town, a freight train carrying crude oil collided
with a recently derailed train carrying grain. The trains exploded, and though no one was
immediately injured, 400,000 gallons of crude oil spilled out onto the prairie, and a massive
mushroom cloud of fire forced the evacuation of over 1,400 people (Grand Forks Herald 2013).
As the United States seeks to become more energy independent, attention is given to extracting,
transmitting, and refining the oil that lies beneath the great shale formations of the mid west
and in the Alberta tar sands. Currently there is a national push to construct more pipelines for
this "tar sands oil" transmission, and state and federal departments, legislators, and even the
President, seek answers about the environmental, economic, and cultural impact of these
pipelines. Final decisions are being made in the United States, as the US Environmental
Protection Agency files final Environmental Impact Statements, and governments in both
Canada and the United States move closer to further pipeline construction that will traverse
both countries.
Over the next few class periods, you will examine the arguments for and against constructing
tar sands pipelines, analyze some of the scientific findings that are used in these arguments, and
debate whether or not further pipelines, like the proposed Keystone XL, should be constructed to
carry tar sands oil.
Background
Tar sands pipelines carry a specific kind of crude oil, extracted from the tar sands of Alberta,
Canada and oil shale of the Bakken Formation in North Dakota, to refineries within the United
States. "Tar sands oil" contains bitumen, or raw tar sands along with light natural gas liquids,
making it more hazardous than other conventional oils because its vapors can ignite at lower
temperatures (Skinner and Sweeney 2012). As the United States and Canada seek to extract
more oil, increasing amounts of tar sands oil will need to be shipped long distances to
refineries. Currently, tanker trucks, trains, and pipelines are used for this function; however, for
a variety of reasons including cost, efficiency, and safety, there is an increasing call for
extending pipelines like the Keystone pipeline that carries oil from Alberta, Canada to refineries
in Nebraska and Illinois (USSD 2014).
2
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Figure 1: Tar Sands Pipelines: Current and Proposed
Retrieved from: insideclimatenews.org, March 17, 2014
As seen in Figure 1, current pipelines run across international and state borders as well as tribal
lands. Proposed pipelines like the controversial Keystone XL that would carry crude oil out of
the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota would potentially cross important watersheds like
the Ogallala Aquifer that supplies much of the water to the Midwestern United States (Giles
2013). In addition, it will affect important cultural resources like Native American sacred places,
state and federal wildlife reserves, and prime hunting and fishing areas.
Becoming energy independent has been an important goal for both the United States and
Canada for decades, and increasing turmoil in the Middle East, a major supplier of oil to North
America, has made this goal more important to attain. The extraction and refinement of oil
from Alberta's tar sands and from the oil shale of the Bakken, it is argued, creates a way that
the United States can gain energy independence. In addition, it is argued that the development
of tar sands oil, including pipeline construction, will benefit the local and national economies by
creating jobs.
It is clear that current tar sands pipelines affect many groups and may have impacts that are
long term and potentially hazardous. Data and arguments can support both sides of the issue.
Ultimately, as citizens, you have the opportunity to voice your informed opinion on these issues
3
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
as state and federal governments collect responses in open and online forums when new
pipelines are proposed. What will you decide and what information will you consider to make
that decision?
Part A: Environmental Impact and Safety
Personal Computers/Tablets Required
The readings and podcast you have prepared for today focus on concerns over tar sands oil and
tar sands pipelines in both the United States and Canada, and particularly regard the
development of the Keystone XL pipeline and the Endbridge Northern Gateway pipeline (locate
these on the map above). The issues raised in these articles express the concerns and opinions
of many US groups, and any decision taken on further pipeline construction will have to take
into account the effects of those pipelines on people and places on both sides of the
international border.
Let's begin by seeing how you feel about the tar sands pipelines. Write responses to the
following statements (your instructor will tell you if you are to hand in these responses):








Whenever the public welfare is at stake, individual rights are of less concern.
We must develop oil reserves in the United States and Canada to be secure.
The development of natural resources like oil will be economically beneficial.
There are other considerations regarding oil development that are more important than
financial/economic considerations.
Pipelines will not have a long-term impact on environment and wildlife.
Our environment and our communities are safer if we use pipelines to carry oil.
The President should not approve the Keystone XL Pipeline.
More tar sands oil pipelines should be developed.
Your instructor will break you into groups. In these groups, discuss your responses to the
preceding statements, using information from the texts and podcast you reviewed before class
and from your basic research.
The arguments surrounding oil development in the tar sands and oil shale are complex, and
emotions run high on both sides of the issue. Our work today will focus on the reality that there
is tar sand oil being extracted and that it does need to be moved to refineries. Given that, the
question becomes whether pipelines provide a safe and effective method for moving this oil. As
people consider whether or not to approve further pipeline development, they want to know
how pipelines will affect the environment through which they will travel. Throughout the
following case study, you will be presented with information from common news sources that
you, as an educated citizen of a democracy, might encounter by reading a newspaper or
general magazine article. You will also be asked to access general news stories or websites that
are meant for public consumption. How do you take in this information and use it to
4
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
understand the situation? In groups, and per your instructor's directions, read over the
materials provided and work as a group to answer the questions that follow.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
To understand the potential impact of a tar sands pipeline being constructed, let's look at the
research done in response to the request for a Presidential Permit by TransCanada Keystone
Pipeline, LP to construct and operate the Keystone XL Project (USSD 2014). This request was
reviewed by the US State Department (USSD), and a final report was written that provided
information and rationale for evaluating the project. This report can be found at:
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/221135.pdf .
In this Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, the USSD "evaluated the potential
construction and operational impacts of the proposed Project [pipeline] and alternatives across
a wide range of environmental resources" including the potential effects on climate change and
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions associated with oil sands development, refining, and
consumptions.
First, in your group, see if you can remember how the Greenhouse Gas model works. Review
the GHG Effect by drawing a model of the effect. Explain, in writing, how GHGs contribute to
climate change. Use online resources only as a last resort. Your instructor will review your
model.
In order to predict the effect of future pipelines on climate change, the US State Department
studied the "wider GHG emissions associated with the crude oil being transported by the
proposed Project" (USSD 2014). They used what they term a "wells-to-wheels" approach that
compared the GHG emitted by tar sands oil from the Western Sedimentary Basin in Canada
(WCSB) and the Bakken Shale Formation (BSF) in the United States. This wells-to-wheels
analysis considers GHG emissions of tar sands oil from extraction, processing, transportation,
refining, and refined product use and compares those potential emissions with the emissions of
other heavy crude oils and with petroleum coke. There is concern about the effects of tar sands
oil because, according to the USSD (2014), tar sands crude oils "are generally more GHG
intensive than other heavy crudes they would replace or displace in US refineries, and emit an
estimated 17 percent more GHGs on a lifecycle basis than the average barrel of crude oil
refined in the United States in 2005."
The following chart is from the USSD's Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(2014) and shows the comparison between GHG emissions from Western Canadian
Sedimentary Basin tar sands oil and emissions from other types of crude oil like "Mexican
Maya" oil and "Middle Eastern Sour" oil.
5
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Figure 2. GHG Emissions, USSD 2014.
Using information in this chart, answer the following questions according to your instructor's
directions:
1. Express the difference between total GHG emissions from WCSB and Mexican Maya as a
percentage of the total emissions from WCSB.
2. What stage of the entire process contributes most to the release of GHGs? How about the
least?
3. What stage of the process varies the most between oil sources in GHG emissions?
4. What further information do you need to determine if a new pipeline would contribute to
climate change?
The next chart compares GHG emissions (in carbon dioxide equivalents) between different
transportation routes and transportation forms, including different routes that might be taken
by the pipeline, as well as using rails to tankers and using rails directly to the coast refineries.
The information in the chart below measures GHG emissions for potential routes through the
central United States to the Gulf Coast (see Figure 1). Concentrate on the final four columns
that compare a proposed entire pipeline, a rail/pipeline option, a rail/tanker option, and the
current rail-only option. Examine the information and to see what the GHGs are for different
routes and types of transmission (i.e. pipeline, trains [rails], tanker trucks, or some
combination).
6
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Figure 3. GHG Emissions by Transportation Routes, USSD 2014.
Using information in this chart, answer the following questions according to your instructor's
directions:
5. There is a vast increase between the direct "Overall I-90 Corridor Alternative Route" and the
next column "Rail/Pipelines scenario." How great is the increase in GHG emissions? Why
might this be?
6. How does the GHG emission increase between the I-90 corridor alternative route and the
rail/tanker scenario compare to the increase between the direct "Overall I-90 Corridor
Alternative Route" and the next column "Rail/Pipelines scenario"? Is the difference between
using rails/pipeline and rail/tanker of significance?
7. What is difference in GHG emissions between the I-90 corridor alternative route and the rail
direct scenario?
8. What conclusions can you draw regarding GHG emissions and pipeline transportation? Rail
transportation?
9. Review the information at this website: http://www.c2es.org/energy/source/oil/keystone.
How does the information in those articles relate to the data in any of the data sets you've
looked at here?
Trains v. Pipelines
The chart above indicates that there are currently varying ways to transport tar sands oil:
pipeline, rail, and rail/tanker (trains and tanker trucks). You've already drawn some conclusions
about GHGs and rail transportation, but the biggest safety risk to the environment comes from
spills. Let's look at some data surrounding incidents of oil spills in trains vs. pipelines.
7
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
The chart below tracks amounts of crude petroleum transported by rail from 2003–12.
"Originated Rail Carloads" refers to the actual amount of carloads of crude petroleum that
started out from loading sites to be transported to refineries. Compare information in the
following two charts and answer the questions below.
Figure 4. Association of American Railroads 2013.
Amounts shown in barrels per day (bpd)
Figure 5. Crude Oil Spills, Tate 2014.
8
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
These charts represent total amounts of oil shipped and spilled from trains. What we can't
know is how much of this oil was tar sands oil, but we do know that two major instances in
2013, the Casselton, ND spill and the Parkers Prairie, MN spill both involved tar sands oil. In
these incidents, over 430,000 gallons of tar sands crude was spilled (Shaffer and Ramstad 2014;
Sheppard and Jones 2013). Looking at the charts, what can we deduce? Answer the following
questions according to your instructor's directions:
10. Consider the differences in spills from 1975 and 2013: What percent greater is the oil spilled
in 2013 than the total amount of oil spilled from 1975–2012?
11. Look at both charts in Figure 4 and Figure 5. What is the trend over time as represented by
the graph in Figure 4 for amounts of crude shipped by trains? What is the trend over time as
represented by the graph in Figure 5 for amounts of crude spilled in rail accidents or events?
12. By comparing these charts, what projections can you make regarding oil transmission and
trains, if the trends continue?
Now let's look at incidents of oil spills in pipelines. The map below details the major tar sands
oil spills*.
9
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Figure 6. Major Tar Sands Oil Spills, Tar Sands Solutions Network 2013.
*Clarification of five listed spills (image was not available in higher resolution):
1. July 1 2011: 12" pipeline 63,000 gallons Yellowstone river (X1)
2. July 2012: Kalamzoo River, Marshall, MI, 1 million gallons (X2)
3. Aug 2012: Red Deer River, Sundre, Alberta, CA pipeline rupture, 475,000 litres (X4)
4. March 2, 2013: Parkers Prairie, MN 30,000 gallons (X5)
5. March 29, 2013: Mayflower, Arkansas, 500,000 gallons, 20" Pegasus Pipeline ruptured (X5)
Using information in this chart, answer the following questions according to your instructor's
directions:
13. How much is the total gallons of oil spilled in pipeline incidents for 2011–13?
14. What percent greater is the oil spilled by train in 2013 vs. oil spilled by pipeline in the same
year?
15. What further information would you need to make predictions about pipelines and future
oil spills?
Groundwater Issues
To understand the potential impact of a tar sands pipeline being constructed, let's look at the
research done in response to the request for a Presidential Permit by TransCanada Keystone
Pipeline, LP to construct and operate the Keystone XL Project (USSD 2014). The pipeline, if it is
built, would run 875 miles from the Canadian border to Steele City, Nebraska, connecting two
sections of the pipeline already built that carry oil to the Gulf Coast. The pipeline would be 36
inches in diameter and run along a 110-foot-wide swath of land (Magill 2013). Most of the
pipeline would run aboveground though in some areas it would run below the ground surface.
What would happen if a leak occurred in the pipeline?
To find answers to that question, we will look at information from the USSD's Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement regarding the proposed Keystone XL, as well as
from the Enbridge pipeline spill into the Kalamazoo River, Michigan (July 2010).
In their Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL, the USSD
indicates they have "evaluated the potential construction and operational impacts of the
proposed Project [pipeline] and alternatives across a wide range of environmental resources"
including the potential effects on water resources, especially any potential effects on wells and
on groundwater aquifers like the Ogallala that provide much of the water to the upper Midwest
United States.
Figure 7 shows a map of the route of the proposed Keystone XL and of the Ogallala Aquifer
(also known as the High Plains Aquifer) it will cross. You will see that the main area where the
pipeline crosses the aquifer is in Nebraska. This section of Nebraska is the Sandhills region. The
Sandhills "are ancient sand dunes that have been stabilized by grasses. Because of their very
permeable geology, nearly 100 percent of the annual rainfall infiltrates to a very shallow
aquifer, often less than twenty feet below the surface. This aquifer is the well-known Ogallala
10
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Aquifer that is one of the most productive and important aquifers in the world" (Stansbury
2011). On the map below, the colored swaths indicate the varying depths of the aquifer.
Figure 7. Proposed Pipeline Route over High Plains Aquifer, USSD 2014.
Using information in this figure, answer the following questions according to your instructor's
directions:
16. What is the Ogallala Aquifer, where is it located, and what is its importance? (Use online
resources as needed).
17. What fears might people have about the Keystone XL pipeline and the Ogallala, particularly
in Nebraska?
18. Using the map above, what conclusions can you draw about potential effects of the
proposed pipeline on the Ogallala?
The following table outlines what the USSD has determined about the effects of potential tar
sands oil releases on aquifers. Read through the table and answer the questions that follow.
11
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Figure 8. Potential Effects of Pipeline on Aquifers, USSD 2014.
Using information in this chart, answer the following questions according to your instructor's
directions:
19. What can you determine from this chart and the map above (Figure 7) regarding the
potential effect of pipelines on aquifers?
20. What further information do you need to evaluate the validity of the claims in this chart?
21. Consider the USSD's conclusions (above), the map of the aquifers crossed, the research
you've done, and the statements here. Do you agree or disagree with the findings and why?
What further concerns might people raise about the pipeline and potential impacts on
aquifers?
22. Watch this video provided by the National Wildlife Federation: http://www.nwf.org/WhatWe-Do/Energy-and-Climate/Drilling-and-Mining/Tar-Sands/Michigan-Oil-Spill.aspx and then
read the information provided by the USSD: http://www.epa.gov/enbridgespill/.
 Using the CRAAP test (Currency/Relevance/Authority/Accuracy/Purpose test: Appendix
A), evaluate the two sources. What are the strengths and weaknesses? Does one seem
more valid than the other? If so, why?
 Compare and contrast the information from the two websites on the Kalamazoo River
oil spill. Draw conclusions.
 What might you now conclude about the safety of aquifer systems that have pipelines
above them?
12
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Wildlife and Habitat
To understand the potential impact of a tar sands pipeline being constructed, let's look again at
the USSD report (USSD 2014).
In their Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, the USSD "evaluated the
potential construction and operational impacts of the proposed Project [pipeline] and
alternatives across a wide range of environmental resources" including the potential effects on
wildlife, including threatened or endangered species.
According to the USSD (2014), construction of the proposed pipeline "could have direct and
indirect as well as temporary...and permanent impacts on wildlife resources." The following
chart provides information on habitats to be affected. Consider the information and answer the
questions that follow according to your instructor's directions.
Figure 9. Table 3.6-2 Habitats Located within the Proposed Project, USSD 2014.
23. Which habitats will seem to receive the most impact?
24. What does the list above tell you about the kinds of wildlife that might be affected? (use
online resources as needed)
25. In what ways could pipeline construction affect these habitats? Be specific.
26. What conclusions can you draw between construction disturbance and operation
disturbance?
13
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
27. What other secondary effects might there be (beyond habitat and wildlife) if these habitats
are negatively affected?
Many groups of wildlife would be affected, as you've noted, but we will take look at one specific
group: large mammals. According to the USSD report (2014), "the proposed pipeline has been
designed to avoid impacts, where possible, to many state and federally managed areas within
the vicinity" of the pipeline. Additionally, the report indicates that "in Nebraska, all statemanaged wildlife management areas that provide protected habitats for wildlife have been
avoided. These areas are all more than 500 feet from the proposed [pipeline] centerline." Look
over the chart below and follow the instructions/answer the questions that follow according to
your instructor's directions.
Table 3.6-2 Big Game Animals with Habitat within the Proposed Project Area
Species
Bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis)
Elk (Cervus canadensis)
Gray wolf (Canis lupus)
Mountain lion (Puma concolor)
Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus)
Pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra
americana)
White-tailed deer (Odocoileus
virginianus)
Occurrence by State
Habitat Type
MT
SD
NE
Semi-open, rough, rocky steep buttes and
canyons of mountains; forage in mixed
x
x
x
grass prairies, forests, and forest edges
Coniferous forests, mixed grass prairies,
x
x
x
meadows, and along forest edges
x
Habitat generalists
x
x
Require cover and large prey availability
Often characterized by drainages with
deciduous trees and shrubs and north
slopes dominated by coniferous or
x
x
x
evergreen trees
Open plains, fields, grasslands, brush,
x
x
x
deserts, and basins
x
x
x
Wooded areas
Source: American Society of Mammalogists 2012; International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
(IUCNNR) 2012; Montana Field Guides 2012; Smithsonian Institution 2012; University of Michigan Museum of Zoology 2012
Figure 10. Table 3.6-2 Big Game Animals with Habitat within the Proposed Project Area, USSD 2014.
28. Which of these animals could be most harmed and/or reduced by habitat disruption?
29. Which of these animals would be least likely to be harmed and/or reduced by habitat
disruption?
30. Which animal(s) on this list would be of most concern to you if a pipeline was constructed
through its habitat and why?
31. Read the "Fact Sheet" on endangered waterfowl provided by the National Wildlife
Federation: http://www.nwf.org/~/media/PDFs/Global-Warming/2014/Tar-Sands-FactSheet_Pelly-Amendment-UPDATE.pdf.
 What specific information here is valuable in understanding the impact of tar sands
pipelines?
 Do you find any information in this "fact sheet" suspect, and if so, why?
14
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Assignment
According to your instructor's directions, use the information and the conclusions you've
reached to write a one-page position paper on one of the issues studied in this section. A strong
paper will include:
 A clear, simple explanation of the issue
 A clear stance on that issue supported with evidence
 An acknowledgement of the counter arguments and/or of conflicting evidence
You will post this paper to the online forum your instructor has created for this class.
Before Next Class
 Read all the position papers posted on your class' electronic forum as well as
 Listen to the podcast "One Thing Obama Can Do: Decide the Fate of the Keystone
Pipeline" on NPR, Fresh Air, Oct. 9, 2013:
http://www.mprnews.org/story/npr/230699848
 Write notes and responses to readings and podcast that connect what you've already
learned to statements made in the texts and podcasts and that may help you in class
discussions. Bring these notes with you to class.
 Bring personal computer or tablet to the next class.
Part B: Pipeline Impact on Economic and Cultural Resources
Personal Computers/Tablets Required
Today you will consider arguments made concerning the impact of new tar sands oil pipelines
on job creation and on cultural resources like state and federal parks, hunting and fishing lands,
and Native American sacred places. Many of the arguments you encounter will connect with
the information you encountered during the last class period. The environmental impact of
pipelines on natural habitat, for instance, has an indirect effect (as some of you have noted) on
hunting and fishing. You will also need to consider when and if the good of the individual (or
the few) outweighs the good of the many.
At the same time that you are considering the content of the arguments, you will also want to
evaluate the validity of the sources themselves. Use the CRAAP test, located in Appendix A, to
evaluate the Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose of the arguments.
Break into groups according to your instructor's directions and consider the following
topics/information. Using the topic or information given, complete the Assignment at the end
of this section.
15
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Topic A: Job Creation
"Putting Keystone XL tar sands pipeline's jobs numbers in context" by Anthony Swift:
http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/putting_keystone_xl_tar_sands.html.
"The Impact of Tar Sands Pipeline Spills on Employment and the Economy," by Lara Skinner and
Sean Sweeney: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_Impactof-Tar-Sands-Pipeline-Spills.pdf.
"Beyond the Hype, Keystone Would Yield few Permanent Jobs," by Allstair Bell. Attached PDF
(Appendix B) or at http://www.grandforksherald.com/content/beyond-hype-keystonewould-yield-few-permanent-jobs .
Topic B: Recreational and Visual Resources
USSD Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: "Land Use, Recreation and Visual
Resources." http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/221168.pdf.
"Killdeer Mountain Group Wants Line Redrawn" by Lauren Donovan:
http://bismarcktribune.com/bakken/killdeer-mountain-group-wants-lineredrawn/article_c8afbc28-8222-11e3-86cd-001a4bcf887a.html.
TED talk "The True Cost of Oil" by Garth Lenz:
https://www.ted.com/talks/garth_lenz_images_of_beauty_and_devastation.
Topic C: Native Peoples and Sacred Places
"Spiritual Leaders Vow to Defend Mother Earth from Oil Sands and Pipelines with Spiritual
Declaration," by David P. Bell, Indian Country, November 23, 2012:
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/11/23/spiritual-leaders-vow-defendmother-earth-oil-sands-and-pipelines-spiritual-declaration.
“Comments of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) on the Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Keystone XL Pipeline,” April 22, 2013.
http://www.ncai.org/attachments/Testimonial_UkbhoziSbdrsSGfibMHfjfdKvjlZBHcrVkGDi
YgBFhDNBpKeYEJ_KEYSTONE%20COMMENTS%20APRIL%20222013%20%20FINAL_1.2.pdf.
"First Nation Riders Protest Enbridge Tar Sands Pipeline" by G. Nienaber. The Huffington Post,
September 30, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com.
Assignment
1. Read and evaluate the arguments and sources for your assigned topic. In the articles, how
are individuals and small groups responding to external pressures to drill and transport oil
through/near their communities? How do oil transportation (pipeline or train) affect
individuals? Debate the issue as a group and summarize the issues.
16
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
2. Make a list of questions that the arguments raise and spend some time finding answers
online.
3. As a group, write a "letter to the editor" that takes a stance or provides an argument
regarding your topic.
Before Next Class:





Read the "Letters to the Editor" posted by your peers. In addition:
Watch "Bill McKibben to Obama: Say No to Big Oil" from Moyers and Company,
February 7, 2014: http://billmoyers.com/episode/bill-mckibben-to-obama-say-no-tobig-oil/?gclid=CMTyns_1nL0CFdBcMgodUFgAzQ.
Consider your own community. How would you respond to an increase in oil transport if
a pipeline or additional trains were to come through your community? What effect
might that increase have on your community? Would it be positive or negative?
Write your thoughts about other arguments that can/should be made in support of or
against tar sands oil development and the construction of tar sands pipelines. Bring this
writing to class for the next group discussion.
Bring personal computer or tablet to the next class.
Part C: Discussion and Debate: Allow Pipeline Construction?
Personal Computers/Tablets required
Today we will begin to formulate arguments for and against further construction of pipelines to
carry tar sands oil from the point of extraction to refineries. To begin with, we will take time to
determine personal opinions.
A. Respond as your instructor directs to the following questions:
 Whenever the public welfare is at stake, individual rights are of less concern.
 We must develop oil reserves in the United States and Canada to be secure.
 The development of natural resources like oil will be economically beneficial.
 There are other considerations regarding oil development that are more important than
financial/economic considerations.
 Pipeline construction will not have a long-term impact on environment and wildlife.
 Our environment and our communities are safer if we use pipelines to carry oil.
 The President should not approve the Keystone XL Pipeline.
 Further tar sands oil pipelines should be developed.
B. According to your instructor's directions, discuss the responses to these statements above
and consider the questions below.
 Has your stance changed? If so why? If not, what evidence do you now have to further
support your opinion?
 What are the most compelling arguments for and against pipeline construction?
17
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL

At what point do or don't the needs of or effects on the few outweigh those of the
many? In other words, at what level, in this issue, do we determine what is "public
good"?
Assignment
When tar sands pipelines are proposed and companies make requests for permits, part of the
decision requires a period of public comment. These comments are collected in person and
online. According to your instructor's directions, draft an informed comment on a proposal to
build a new tar sands pipeline that would run through your state. An excellent response will:
 clearly articulate stance
 provide evidence to support the argument
 make consideration of public good
 provide a discussion of stakeholders affected
 provide a discussion of alternatives if appropriate
Post these comments to whatever electronic forum your instructor has established for this
class.
18
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Appendix A: Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, and Purpose (CRAAP) Test
Document available at: http://www.juniata.edu/services/library/instruction/handouts/craap_worksheet.pdf.
19
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Appendix B: Grand Forks Herald Article, March 14, 2014
20
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
References
Alberta Energy. 2014. "About Oil Sands." (accessed March 12, 2014).
http://www.energy.alberta.ca/ourbusiness/oilsands.asp.
American Petroleum Institute. 2014. "Spills and Accidental Releases." (accessed March 8, 2014).
http://www.api.org/environment-health-and-safety/clean-water/oil-spill-prevention-andresponse/spills-and-releases.
Association of American Railroads. 2013. "Originated Rail Carloads of Crude Petroleum on U.S.
Class I Railroads: 2003–2012.“ Transportation of Crude Oil by Rail. (accessed March 13, 2014).
https://www.aar.org/todays-railroads/what-we-haul/crude-oil-by-rail.
Bell, A. 2014. "Keystone Would Yield Few Permanent Jobs." Grand Forks Herald, March 14.
http://www.grandforksherald.com/content/beyond-hype-keystone-would-yield-fewpermanent-jobs.
———. 2012. "Spiritual Leaders Vow to Defend Mother Earth From Oil Sands and Pipelines with
Spiritual Declaration." (accessed March 20, 2014).
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/11/23/spiritual-leaders-vow-defendmother-earth-oil-sands-and-pipelines-spiritual-declaration.
Donovan, L. 2014. "Killdeer Mountain Group Wants Line Redrawn." Bismarck Tribune, January
20. http://bismarcktribune.com/bakken/killdeer-mountain-group-wants-lineredrawn/article_c8afbc28-8222-11e3-86cd-001a4bcf887a.html.
Hansen, J. E. 2011. "The White House and Tar Sands." Countercurrentx.org. (accessed March 17,
2014). http://www.countercurrents.org/hansen030911.htm.
Hefflinger, M. 2013. "American's Dangerous Pipelines." Bold Nebraska. (accessed February 18,
2014) http://boldnebraska.org/video-americas-dangerous-pipelines/.
Leslie, J. 2013. "Shipping Crude Oil by Rail: New Front in the Tar Sands Wars." (accessed March
16, 2014).
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/shipping_crude_oil_by_rail_new_front_in_tar_sands_wars/2717/
Magill, B. 2013. "How Will the Keystone XL Pipeline Be Built?" Popular Mechanics. April 8, 2013.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/how-will-the-keystone-xlpipeline-be-built-15322047.
McElroy, B. 2013. "The Keystone XL Pipeline: Should the President Approve Construction?"
Harvard Magazine. (accessed March 15, 2014). http://www.harvardmagazine.com/2013/11/thkeystone-xl-pipeline.
21
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Middleton, D. 2013. "Canadian Oil Sands Pollute Nearby Lakes. Report Is Blow to Keystone
Pipeline (Or Not)." (accessed March 17, 2014).
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/11/canadian-oil-sands-pollute-nearby-lakes-report-isblow-to-keystone-pipeline-or-not/.
National Congress of American Indians. 2013. “Comments of the National Congress of American
Indians (NCAI) on the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed
Keystone XL Pipeline,” April 22, 2013. (accessed March 15, 2014).
http://www.ncai.org/attachments/Testimonial_UkbhoziSbdrsSGfibMHfjfdKvjlZBHcrVkGDiYgBFh
DNBpKeYEJ_KEYSTONE COMMENTS APRIL 222013 - FINAL_1.2.pdf.
National Public Radio. 2013. "EPA: Tar Sands Pipelines Should be Held to Different Standards."
All Things Considered, April 25. (accessed March 5, 2014).
http://www.npr.org/2013/04/24/178844620/tar-sands-pipelines-should-get-special-treatmentepa-says.
National Public Radio. 2013. "One Thing Obama Can Do: Decide the Fate of the Keystone
Pipeline." Fresh Air, October 9. (accessed April 5, 2014).
http://www.npr.org/2013/10/09/230699848/one-thing-obama-can-do-decide-the-fate-of-thekeystone-pipeline.
Nienaber, G. 2013. "First Nation Riders Protest Enbridge Tar Sands Pipeline." Huffington Post,
September 30. (accessed March 20, 2014). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/georgiannenienaber/first-nation-riders-protest_b_4014538.html.
Schaffer, D., and E. Ramstad. 2014. "NTSB: 400,000 Gallons of Crude Spilled in N.D. Train
Wreck.” Minneapolis StarTribune. January 13. (accessed March 10, 2014).
http://www.startribune.com/business/239948631.html.
Schneider, R., K. Stoner, G. Steinauer, M. Panella, and M. Humpert, eds. 2011. The Nebraska
Natural Legacy Project: State Wildlife Action Plan. 2nd ed. Lincoln, NE: Nebraska Game and
Parks Commission. http://outdoornebraska.ne.gov/wildlife/programs/legacy/pdfs/NE Natural
Legacy Project - 2nd edition.pdf.
Sheppard D., and J. Jones. 2013. "Minnesota Oil Spill: Canadian Train Derails, Spilling 30,000
Gallons of Crude in United States.” Huffington Post. March 28. (accessed March 16, 2014).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/28/minnesota-oil-spill_n_2967118.html.
Skinner, L., and S. Sweeney. 2012. "The Impact of Tar Sands Pipeline Spills on Employment and
the Economy." March, 2012. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University ILR School Global Labor Institute.
http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_Impact-of-Tar-SandsPipeline-Spills.pdf.
22
STUDENT CASE STUDY—CARMICHAEL
Swift, A. 2013. "Putting Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline's Jobs Numbers in Context."
Switchboard: Natural Resources Defense Council Staff Blog. August 6, 2013. (accessed March
19, 2014). http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/aswift/putting_keystone_xl_tar_sands.html.
Tar Sands Solutions Network. 2013. “Detailed Oil Spill Map Depicts Major Spills Since 2011.”
(accessed March 20, 2014). http://tarsandssolutions.org/visuals/detailed-oil-spill-map-depictsmajor-spills-since-2011.
Tate, C. 2014. "More Oil Spilled from Trains in 2013 than in Previous Four Decades, Federal Data
Show." (accessed March 8, 2014). http://www.mcclatchydc.com.
US Department of Transportation. 2014. "Hazardous Liquids Spilled from Pipeline Incidents."
(accessed March 18, 2014). http://www.dot.gov.
US State Department (USSD). 2014. “Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for
the Keystone XL Project,” January 2014. Washington: US State Department.
http://keystonepipeline-xl.state.gov/documents/organization/221135.pdf.
23