Repository logo

Building pressure: a deliberative argument against the Northern Gateway Pipeline

Faculty Advisor




conservation, Northern Gateway Pipeline, Alberta, British Columbia, Enbridge, environment

Abstract (summary)

This is a rhetorical analysis comparing and contrasting the supposed benefits and likely consequences of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline. The issue of the Northern Gateway Pipeline is analyzed through the use of established rhetorical devices and appeals. The result of this rhetorical analysis finds the project to be a far greater liability than a benefit to the people of Alberta and British Columbia. The promises of job creation by Enbridge account for a small minority of the population being employed for a relatively short duration of time. Furthermore, the wealth generated by the pipeline project is not equally distributed back to the people of Alberta and British Columbia, respectively. Enbridge has also made dubious claims to “sustainable communities,” which amount to little more than large one time payments to charities and other organizations across North America. Furthermore, there are findings that suggest health complications in those individuals employed in the oil industry.

Publication Information

Pluim, D. N. (2012). Building pressure: A deliberative argument against the Northern Gateway Pipeline. Earth Common Journal, 2:1. Retrieved from



Item Type

Student Article




All Rights Reserved