Posted on 07/30/2013 7:54:56 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
So… is that kind of like how aggressively pushing for federal, i.e. taxpayer “investment” in public-sector infrastructure projects but actively blocking private-sector ones is “not a jobs plan”? Or, maybe it’s more along the basic lines of how more Keynesian stimulus, deficit spending, increased regulation, and top-down market interference is “not a jobs plan”? Yeah, I think that’s the one.
If they’ve got a better plan to bring back more manufacturing jobs here to Tennessee and around the country, then let them know — let me know. I want to hear them. If they’ve got a better plan to create jobs rebuilding our infrastructure or to help workers earn the high-tech skills that they need, then they should offer up these ideas. But I’ve got to tell you, just gutting our environmental protection, that’s not a jobs plan. Gutting investments in education, that’s not a jobs plan. They keep on talking about this — an oil pipeline coming down from Canada that’s estimated to create about 50 permanent jobs — that’s not a jobs plan. Wasting the country’s time by taking something like 40 meaningless votes to repeal Obamacare is not a jobs plan. That’s not a jobs plan.
Ah, yes — the oh-so-typical refrains of how Republicans just hate the environment and their only proffered solution is to simply slash at the government spending that our economy so obviously needs at its current and preferably an even higher level. The biggest takeaway from that perfidious little moment, however, was that the president doubled down on his claim that the Keystone XL pipeline will only create a handful of jobs — a claim that he knows full well takes some mighty conspicuous liberties with the truth.
In citing the 50-jobs number, though, the president was using the smallest possible number attached to the pipeline project. The estimate he used likely refers to a State Department finding that — after the pipeline is built — it would take roughly 50 people to maintain it.
But the comment ignores the rest of the State Department report that estimates the project would create nearly 4,000 annual construction jobs — and potentially “support” an annual 42,000 jobs.
Obama similarly ignored those findings during an interview he gave recently to The New York Times. In the interview, Obama said the project would create roughly 2,000 construction jobs and maybe 100 additional jobs after that — calling it a “blip relative to the need.”
Glenn Kessler at the Washington Post took President Obama to task for the claim as well, and I just can’t manage to get over the fact that not only has the Obama administration approved similar projects for oil-and-gas-pipelines elsewhere in the United States, but also that the president took the opportunity during his speech to also talk up natural gas as the great and cleaner-burning fuel that it is. If the president does indeed want to continue to foster the shale-gas boom and the jobs that come from domestic energy production, we’re going to need a lot more pipeline infrastructure — stat.
Who cares? That’s fifty more (non-government) jobs than you’ve created!
Uh, huh. How many “permanent” jobs did the $787B stimulus bill create?
does anyone still take this clown seriously?
40,000 Direct jobs & 100,000 indirect jobs, Mr. anti-capitalist, anti-energy, anti-American, economic illiterate.
Ping.
So, 50 more than Solandra?
He got the Prince Allweedy memo.
Okay. Let me get this straight. The Keystone Pipeline is not a “jobs plan” but ObamaCare is. Doh! Pelosi and Reid keep telling us about all the jobs ObamaCare is going to “create”. Lots of shovel-ready undertaker jobs will be created.
One of the selling points the Wind Farm proponents always tout, is the “hundred of local jobs” that involved when Big Wind comes to your little town.
A few hundred temporary jobs, most specialized and from out of state, and a grand total of 8 permanent jobs for 150 industrial turbines. Pay from $15.00 to $32.00/hr
The Keystone XL Pipeline project is owned by TransCanada, a Canadian corporation which builds, maintains, and owns oil and gas pipelines, power plants, and natural gas storage facilities in North America. TransCanada already owns the Keystone Pipeline which runs in two branches from Alberta to both Nebraska and Illinois. The proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would follow a direct route from Alberta through Montana and South Dakota to Nebraska and then continue through Kansas and Oklahoma to the refineries in Texas along the Gulf Coast. This new pipeline would ideally transport crude petroleum recovered from the Alberta tar sands and from North Dakota shale fields. This petroleum contains more sulfur and requires additional refining which can be completed in Houston refineries.
The chart below compares some of the key facts of these two pipeline projects.
|
Trans-Alaska Pipeline (actual) |
Keystone XL Pipeline (proposal) |
|
| Length |
800 miles |
1,179 miles |
| Maximum capacity in barrels per day |
2.1 million BPD |
830,000 BDP |
| Pipe diameter |
48 inch |
36 inch |
| Estimated cost before construction |
$900 million |
$5.3 billion |
| Actual cost |
$8 billion |
— |
| Construction time |
3 years 2 months |
2 years |
| Starting point |
Prudhoe Bay, Alaska |
Hardisty, Alberta |
| Termination |
Valdez, Alaska |
Houston, Texas |
Employment Estimates
Estimates for job creation statistics for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline’s construction continued to fluctuate from the time it was first planned until the labor was set. In March of 1973, Alyeska estimated that the pipeline would employ 26,000 people in construction jobs. These numbers were later dropped significantly to 18,000 construction jobs in October 1973. By January of 1974, once union contracts for the labor had been negotiated, Alyeska estimated that “perhaps 13,000” jobs would be created, “at its peak.” During the summer of 1974, when initial work on the pipeline was just getting started, the labor force was estimated to grow to more than 14,000 workers by the following spring, when the pipe-laying would begin. When the company began hiring in earnest in March 1975, they estimated that between 14,000 and 18,000 workers would be required that summer. The chart below shows the fluctuations in job predictions for construction workers preceding hiring.
In reality, Alyeska employed 21,000 workers during peak construction in the summers of 1975 and 1976. Despite the fact that Alyeska kept dropping its estimated job numbers, the company employed more workers then all their prediction except for the first. By numbers hired, the project was a huge success. But, how do these estimates compare to the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline, and what does this teach us?
The table below illustrates the fluctuations in construction worker job predictions for three different sources: Trans-Canada, the U.S. federal government, and a study conducted by a the Global Labor Institute at Cornell University’s College of Industrial and Labor Relations. Trans-Canada’s job predictions follow a generally similar path to Alyeska’s, in which the job estimates tend to decrease as the project approaches its start date.
Lyin’ just come natural to him.
I’ll be happy to take one of those “50 jobs”
well Obama’s Saudi friends told him to kill it
Impeachment File on Benghazi Coward “B. Hussein Obama,” formerly known as Barry Soetoro, currently a Legal Citizen of the Sovereign Nation of Indonesia.
Let’s use our common sense shall we?
This megaproject will stretch 1,661 miles from Alberta to Texas’s Gulf Coast region. Immediately upon completion, the pipeline will have the capacity to carry 700,000 barrels per day (bpd) and ultimately the ability to transport 900,000 bpd.
The ability to move an additional 900,000 bpd to refineries won’t have the effect of lowering gas prices?
In fact, the Keystone XL pipeline will give our country a more stable and cheaper source of fuel and create thousands of quality American jobs. And taxpayers (think Solyndra) will not risk a dime.
Think of the public-policy benefits of the project, the sound private economics aside.
The United States currently consumes 25% of the world’s energy, but produces less than 5 percent. Heavily dependent on foreign oil, America imports 11 million barrels each day.
This need for foreign oil isn’t going to change anytime soon. The 2010 Annual Energy Outlook projects that over 40 percent of U.S. liquid fuel consumption will be supplied by imports through 2035. Global demand for oil will only rise too — 39% between 2005 and 2030.
Also note that oil imports to the United States from South America aren’t holding steady. Mexico and Venezuela, two historically large exporters of crude oil, have radically reduced production in the past few years, making imports from Canada that much more essential.
A new influx of up to 700,000 bpd from Canada will dramatically increase U.S supplies and in turn drive gas prices down. A study from Energy Policy Research Foundation found a greater supply of Canadian oil could save Gulf Coast refiners almost $500 million annually in transport costs, which, in turn, would mean lower prices for consumers at the pump.
Keystone XL’s impact on cost is simple: a supply of plentiful and easily accessible oil drives down prices for gasoline and other consumer staples.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
