Would the Keystone Pipeline be a great economic asset to the United States? Hardly.

[ba1614]

You gotta love this. Out of every productive project you could possibly have going, like high speed rail, developing new energy sources or infrastructure spending..the one's conservatives advocate for..is mining old technology. It's a wonderful thing too. Lets put pipeline pumping environmentally destructive substances through environmentally sensitive regions. Makes a great deal of sense. And it's from an industry that is constantly crying wolf to get it's way. Which makes this country do incredibly stupid things, like topple governments and go to war.

President Obama should tell these folks to go pound sand.

Interesting to note that the "productive projects" you advocate can't compete on their own and require government money.

Entirely laughable considering how much tax payer funding goes into the energy sector..including big oil.

How much government money is Keystone asking for?

 

[Stephanie]

Lets put pipeline pumping environmentally destructive substances through environmentally sensitive regions.

well for sure. because of all that lets just DENY ourselves and OUR COUNTRY energy, and jobs..

nothing like cutting of your nose to spite your face

amazing

Which goes back to alternative energy sources, infrastructure building/re-building and high speed rail.

All of which would create jobs, efficient uses of energy and a reduction in the need for fossil fuel.

wel HELLl yeah, because Amtrak is so efficient, affordable and profitable.
Oh, and how bout heating your homes...they don't care about that either.

 

[Sallow]

Interesting to note that the "productive projects" you advocate can't compete on their own and require government money.

Entirely laughable considering how much tax payer funding goes into the energy sector..including big oil.

How much government money is Keystone asking for?

Upfront? Not sure.

But over the long term..the government is impacted by infrastructure wear and tear, providing security..and other costs that generally don't become apparent until the project is underway.

Think Alaska pipeline. And the boomtowns.

 

[The Rabbi]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:

The industry’s US jobs claims are linked to a $7 billion KXL project budget.
However, the budget for KXL that will have a bearing on US jobs figures is
dramatically lower—only around $3 to $4 billion. A lower project budget means
fewer jobs.
»
The project will create no more than 2,500-4,650 temporary direct construction
jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s own data supplied to the State
Department.
»
The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and
manufacturing jobs in the U.S is not substantiated.
»
There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material
input for KXL—steel pipe—will not even be produced in the United States. A
substantial amount of pipe has already been manufactured in advance of pipeline
permit issuance.
»
The industry’s claim that KXL will create 119,000 total jobs (direct, indirect, and
induced) is based on a flawed and poorly documented study commissioned by
TransCanada (The Perryman Group study). Perryman wrongly includes over $1
billion in spending and over 10,000 person-years of employment for a section
of the Keystone project in Kansas and Oklahoma that is not part of KXL and has
already been built.
»
KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at
all in putting Americans back to work. Even if the Perryman figures were accurate,
and all of the workers for the next phase of the project were hired immediately, the
US seasonally adjusted unemployment rate would remain at 9.1%—exactly where it
is now.
»
KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at
higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the
Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel
fuel. These additional costs (estimated to total $2–4 billion) will suppress other
spending and will therefore cost jobs.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

The Global Labor Institute is a labor union org with close ties to the green movement.
Cornell University - ILR School: Global Labor Institute -  Sponsors
So they are hardly objective.

Even so, one would think the gov't would welcome the creation of even one job. Further their criticism of the job counting that they count collateral jobs is hilarious considering that is all the job count they do from the stimulus.
Another crap thread from the new Crap Poster of 2012. Congratulations, Billy. You are a zero.

 

[Charles_Main]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:

The industry’s US jobs claims are linked to a $7 billion KXL project budget.
However, the budget for KXL that will have a bearing on US jobs figures is
dramatically lower—only around $3 to $4 billion. A lower project budget means
fewer jobs.
»
The project will create no more than 2,500-4,650 temporary direct construction
jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s own data supplied to the State
Department.
»
The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and
manufacturing jobs in the U.S is not substantiated.
»
There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material
input for KXL—steel pipe—will not even be produced in the United States. A
substantial amount of pipe has already been manufactured in advance of pipeline
permit issuance.
»
The industry’s claim that KXL will create 119,000 total jobs (direct, indirect, and
induced) is based on a flawed and poorly documented study commissioned by
TransCanada (The Perryman Group study). Perryman wrongly includes over $1
billion in spending and over 10,000 person-years of employment for a section
of the Keystone project in Kansas and Oklahoma that is not part of KXL and has
already been built.
»
KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at
all in putting Americans back to work. Even if the Perryman figures were accurate,
and all of the workers for the next phase of the project were hired immediately, the
US seasonally adjusted unemployment rate would remain at 9.1%—exactly where it
is now.
»
KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at
higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the
Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel
fuel. These additional costs (estimated to total $2–4 billion) will suppress other
spending and will therefore cost jobs.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Yep Because up to 20,000 new Jobs, and a Million Barrels of Oil from a None Hostile Ally every day, are "not significant"

lol

You liberals are such assholes.

 

[Billy000]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:

The industry’s US jobs claims are linked to a $7 billion KXL project budget.
However, the budget for KXL that will have a bearing on US jobs figures is
dramatically lower—only around $3 to $4 billion. A lower project budget means
fewer jobs.
»
The project will create no more than 2,500-4,650 temporary direct construction
jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s own data supplied to the State
Department.
»
The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and
manufacturing jobs in the U.S is not substantiated.
»
There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material
input for KXL—steel pipe—will not even be produced in the United States. A
substantial amount of pipe has already been manufactured in advance of pipeline
permit issuance.
»
The industry’s claim that KXL will create 119,000 total jobs (direct, indirect, and
induced) is based on a flawed and poorly documented study commissioned by
TransCanada (The Perryman Group study). Perryman wrongly includes over $1
billion in spending and over 10,000 person-years of employment for a section
of the Keystone project in Kansas and Oklahoma that is not part of KXL and has
already been built.
»
KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at
all in putting Americans back to work. Even if the Perryman figures were accurate,
and all of the workers for the next phase of the project were hired immediately, the
US seasonally adjusted unemployment rate would remain at 9.1%—exactly where it
is now.
»
KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at
higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the
Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel
fuel. These additional costs (estimated to total $2–4 billion) will suppress other
spending and will therefore cost jobs.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

so why should we believe your study over the ones that have already been done? I see no compelling reason to place the word of Cornell University over another study.. dew ewe?? except that it furthurs your hate America and we must allow no energy except Arab energy into America.. Got it?

If you have a study to dispute it, then post it. What is it? The one made by the company doesn't count I'm afraid.

 

[Sallow]

well for sure. because of all that lets just DENY ourselves and OUR COUNTRY energy, and jobs..

nothing like cutting of your nose to spite your face

amazing

Which goes back to alternative energy sources, infrastructure building/re-building and high speed rail.

All of which would create jobs, efficient uses of energy and a reduction in the need for fossil fuel.

wel HELLl yeah, because Amtrak is so efficient, affordable and profitable.
Oh, and how bout heating your homes...they don't care about that either.

Are we facing oil shortages now? Or for the next 2 decades or so?

Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. Oil companies are looking for ways to slow production. Why? They want to keep prices high.

And no 'transportation' is cost efficient. I find it interesting you mention Amtrak and completely leave out Airlines..which are privately owned and heavily subsidized by the government. They also cost us big. Like on 9/11.

 

[Billy000]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:

The industry’s US jobs claims are linked to a $7 billion KXL project budget.
However, the budget for KXL that will have a bearing on US jobs figures is
dramatically lower—only around $3 to $4 billion. A lower project budget means
fewer jobs.
»
The project will create no more than 2,500-4,650 temporary direct construction
jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s own data supplied to the State
Department.
»
The company’s claim that KXL will create 20,000 direct construction and
manufacturing jobs in the U.S is not substantiated.
»
There is strong evidence to suggest that a large portion of the primary material
input for KXL—steel pipe—will not even be produced in the United States. A
substantial amount of pipe has already been manufactured in advance of pipeline
permit issuance.
»
The industry’s claim that KXL will create 119,000 total jobs (direct, indirect, and
induced) is based on a flawed and poorly documented study commissioned by
TransCanada (The Perryman Group study). Perryman wrongly includes over $1
billion in spending and over 10,000 person-years of employment for a section
of the Keystone project in Kansas and Oklahoma that is not part of KXL and has
already been built.
»
KXL will not be a major source of US jobs, nor will it play any substantial role at
all in putting Americans back to work. Even if the Perryman figures were accurate,
and all of the workers for the next phase of the project were hired immediately, the
US seasonally adjusted unemployment rate would remain at 9.1%—exactly where it
is now.
»
KXL will divert Tar Sands oil now supplying Midwest refineries, so it can be sold at
higher prices to the Gulf Coast and export markets. As a result, consumers in the
Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 cents more per gallon for gasoline and diesel
fuel. These additional costs (estimated to total $2–4 billion) will suppress other
spending and will therefore cost jobs.

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Yep Because up to 20,000 new Jobs, and a Million Barrels of Oil from a None Hostile Ally every day, are "not significant"

lol

You liberals are such assholes.

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

 

[Stephanie]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:




http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

Yep Because up to 20,000 new Jobs, and a Million Barrels of Oil from a None Hostile Ally every day, are "not significant"

lol

You liberals are such assholes.

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

 

[Billy000]

Yep Because up to 20,000 new Jobs, and a Million Barrels of Oil from a None Hostile Ally every day, are "not significant"

lol

You liberals are such assholes.

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

3000 temporary jobs just isn't worth the environmental toll. Had it actually been 20,000 sustainable jobs, I'd be for it. But it's not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Does anyone still doubt that the American Left is economically to the left of real Communists?

 

[Stephanie]

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

3000 temporary jobs just isn't worth the environmental toll. Had it actually been 20,000 sustainable jobs, I'd be for it. But it's not.

omg, the ENVIRONMENTAL TOLL..then give up your car, ride a bike. go live in a cave and heat it with cow dung..and while you're at it, donate your computer to charity.

 

[Sallow]

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

3000 temporary jobs just isn't worth the environmental toll. Had it actually been 20,000 sustainable jobs, I'd be for it. But it's not.

If it had that..and provisions for adequate disaster recovery plans, a requirement that those jobs be held by Americans, a minimum requirement for barrels of oil sold to the US at cost (or a little better) and adequate enviromental impact studies..

I'd be all for it..and this should be part of a package that includes subsidies for alternative energy and high speed rail.

Not extending tax cuts and unemployment.

 

[Sallow]

Does anyone still doubt that the American Left is economically to the left of real Communists?

Does anyone still doubt that the American Right is economically to the right of real Fascists?

 

[WillowTree]

Obama had it right.

According to an independent study conducted by Cornell University Global Labor Institute, the claims of a significant economic boost to the US economy as a result of the pipeline are quite exaggerated. Here is a summary of their findings:




http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_Reportpdf.pdf

so why should we believe your study over the ones that have already been done? I see no compelling reason to place the word of Cornell University over another study.. dew ewe?? except that it furthurs your hate America and we must allow no energy except Arab energy into America.. Got it?

If you have a study to dispute it, then post it. What is it? The one made by the company doesn't count I'm afraid.

why doesn't it count? oh yeah,, cause ewe don't like the reeeeesults.. asswipe

 

[Mr. H.]

What is with you people in not reading the article? There is no 20,000 jobs. Only 3000 temporary ones.

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

3000 temporary jobs just isn't worth the environmental toll. Had it actually been 20,000 sustainable jobs, I'd be for it. But it's not.

Environmental toll? The pipeline isn't even there, and you're conceding environmental toll?


It's also amusing that you have a threshold for such assumed environmental risk- 20,000 jobs.
You guys crack me up.

On the topic of the environment- why aren't you campaigning for the cessation of agriculture in the state of Nebraska?

Here's real, existing, and current "environmental toll":

From Nov. 30, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/01/opinion/polluting-the-ogallala-aquifer.html

Compliments of the American farmer...

Chemicals trickle inexorably downward with each rainfall or application of irrigation water, creating a situation that the Geological Survey has referred to as “creeping normalcy.” Over the coming decades, it warned, contaminants will continue to creep down into the aquifer, and more wells will exceed federal safety levels.

Already, 14 percent of all Ogallala irrigation wells tested contained one pesticide or more. Most common was Atrazine. This herbicide, used ubiquitously in cornfields, is a known hormone disruptor and is suspected of, among other things, retarding fetal development. Five percent of the irrigation wells contained nitrate levels equal to or in excess of safety standards set by the Environmental Protection Agency. Excess nitrate levels in drinking water can impair the blood’s ability to deliver oxygen in infants, causing “blue baby syndrome.”

 

[healthmyths]

Which goes back to alternative energy sources, infrastructure building/re-building and high speed rail.

All of which would create jobs, efficient uses of energy and a reduction in the need for fossil fuel.

wel HELLl yeah, because Amtrak is so efficient, affordable and profitable.
Oh, and how bout heating your homes...they don't care about that either.

Are we facing oil shortages now? Or for the next 2 decades or so?

Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. Oil companies are looking for ways to slow production. Why? They want to keep prices high.

And no 'transportation' is cost efficient. I find it interesting you mention Amtrak and completely leave out Airlines..which are privately owned and heavily subsidized by the government. They also cost us big. Like on 9/11.

What did you mean Airlines cost big on 9/11?
Did you mean because an airplane piloted by a hijacker?
Or after 9/11 3 days no flights cost airlines business?
Or after 9/11 passenger traffic down 20%?

What did you mean "9/11 costs"?

 

[Sallow]

wel HELLl yeah, because Amtrak is so efficient, affordable and profitable.
Oh, and how bout heating your homes...they don't care about that either.

Are we facing oil shortages now? Or for the next 2 decades or so?

Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. Oil companies are looking for ways to slow production. Why? They want to keep prices high.

And no 'transportation' is cost efficient. I find it interesting you mention Amtrak and completely leave out Airlines..which are privately owned and heavily subsidized by the government. They also cost us big. Like on 9/11.

What did you mean Airlines cost big on 9/11?
Did you mean because an airplane piloted by a hijacker?
Or after 9/11 3 days no flights cost airlines business?
Or after 9/11 passenger traffic down 20%?

What did you mean "9/11 costs"?

No. I mean that private airlines fought tooth and nail not to implement a new security bill introduced by Al Gore.

And I mean the costs incurred by four airplanes..hijacked in the SAME FUCKING DAY..that got used by hijackers..which were OWNED BY PRIVATE AIRLINES..WHO FUCKING FAILED TO STOP THEM IN ONE OF THE MOST HAIRBRAINED SCHEMES IN HISTORY.

Got it?

 

[WillowTree]

what is wrong with you cheering the denial for us to get jobs and energy?

3000 temporary jobs just isn't worth the environmental toll. Had it actually been 20,000 sustainable jobs, I'd be for it. But it's not.

omg, the ENVIRONMENTAL TOLL..then give up your car, ride a bike. go live in a cave and heat it with cow dung..and while you're at it, donate your computer to charity.

excuse me,, but cow dung releases methane. but you got the rest right. but alas even though billjojimbob agrees with the environmentalists neither he nor they will give up jack shit for the environment.. just like the asswipe obie doodle flies around on his jet aeroplane leaving his carbon footprints all over hell and back..

 

[WillowTree]

Are we facing oil shortages now? Or for the next 2 decades or so?

Absolutely not. Quite the opposite. Oil companies are looking for ways to slow production. Why? They want to keep prices high.

And no 'transportation' is cost efficient. I find it interesting you mention Amtrak and completely leave out Airlines..which are privately owned and heavily subsidized by the government. They also cost us big. Like on 9/11.

What did you mean Airlines cost big on 9/11?
Did you mean because an airplane piloted by a hijacker?
Or after 9/11 3 days no flights cost airlines business?
Or after 9/11 passenger traffic down 20%?

What did you mean "9/11 costs"?

No. I mean that private airlines fought tooth and nail not to implement a new security bill introduced by Al Gore.

And I mean the costs incurred by four airplanes..hijacked in the SAME FUCKING DAY..that got used by hijackers..which were OWNED BY PRIVATE AIRLINES..WHO FUCKING FAILED TO STOP THEM IN ONE OF THE MOST HAIRBRAINED SCHEMES IN HISTORY.

Got it?

and then the hypocrite alllll gooooore got in a giant fucking jet aeroplane and zoomed all over hell and back..