President Barack Obama made the proper decision last week when he rejected the Keystone XL pipeline that would have run through six states to United States gulf coast refineries.

Obama claims that he did not have sufficient time to decide if the pipeline would be in the better interest of America. What Obama should do is indefinitely reject the pipeline.

Republicans pounced on President Obama after the announcement, utilizing his rejection as a means to denounce his legitimacy as president, citing that stalling the pipeline was evidence of Obama’s inability to create jobs.

In reality, the pipeline would have only created 2,500 to 4,650 jobs, as opposed to TransCanada and Republican’s claim to tens of thousands of jobs, according to Cornell ILR Global Labor Institute.

The pipeline would have taken only a couple of years to construct. Those few thousand employed would quickly find themselves without work within a few years time. This project is not a legitimate goal for long-term economic growth and sustainability.

Besides exaggerated job claims by pipeline proponents issues with Keystone XL stretch across a number of other boundaries.

The current Keystone pipeline already had 12 leaks in the last year and, although TransCanada calls these “minor” averaging “10 gallons,” one spill resulted in 21,000 gallons of oil spilled in Millner, N.D.

Residents that live in Michigan who live near a tar sands pipeline are suffering adverse negative health effects from a pipeline spill over a year ago, according to Michigan Radio.

The rate of Canada’s increased oil production through Keystone XL expansion would result in cutting down 740,000 acres of boreal forest, which is a natural carbon reservoir. Further, extracting oil from tar sands requires steam-heating the sands to produce petroleum slurry which need to be diluted.

According to a report from Canada’s environmental ministry this would raise greenhouse gas emissions by nearly one-third by 2020, adding to the threat of global warming.
The pipeline is also not a feasible investment in the future of energy.

The pipeline would allow TransCanada to drain Midwest oil reserves and export the fuel. According to Oil Change International, this would raise gas prices not only in the Midwest but across the country. The project will result in a 10 to 20 cent raise of gasoline and diesel fuel for millions of Americans.

According to the study conducted by Oil Change International, the oil market has changed in the last several years with the U.S. oil demand decreasing due to economic struggle and U.S. production increasing for the first time in 40 years.

Therefore, the U.S. refineries are turning to export in order to make profit while the Keystone XL, which aims to refine its oil in U.S. refineries, will ultimately be transporting oil to foreign nations where oil fetches a higher price.

The construction of the Keystone XL, in essence, will not lessen America’s oil dependence.

Even if the oil was not exported, the Obama administration’s report to Congress concludes that there is excess capacity in the cross-border pipeline. The administration says there is “other new domestic pipelines, expansions or reversals of existing pipelines and other modes of transport such as rail” that could import crude oil from Canada to the United States.

Instead, the United States should focus its attention on clean energy that could produce more permanent jobs and help spur the struggling economy.

Ultimately, it would mean a cleaner atmosphere for humans and increase rates of survivability and livelihood. The Keystone XL pipeline doesn’t grant us any of that.