"If a private company spends "X" number of dollars to build a pipeline and the government(s) spend the the same "X" number of dollars to fix roads, bridges, and other infrastructure, should the number of jobs created by either construction project be ROUGHLY the same?" Factor out for a minute the future benefits or costs either of these two projects might have on society. What is the impact on jobs immediately, since this seems to be the argument of the day regarding this two projects?I am no engineer. I do not know the answer. I dont care much about the politics. I just want to know why one project, in total, allegedly would create lots of jobs and the other would not. Seems like depending on your policial view, you can insert either "Pipeline" or "Roads, Bridges, other infrastructure" in the appropriate place and get the conclusion you want.
Thanks!
View My Stats
Hey Gene..Don't mean to assign a teacher, homework but here is a good analysis for why keystone xl is not a huge job creator.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_011912_FIN.pdf
Also...Its not just an issue of jobs. Its a much dirtier oil then traditional oil. Besides a large carbon footprint, Bitumen is really thick and is diluted with acids just so it can be pumped through the pieplines. Even traditional oil is known for causing leaks and contaminating once in a while and in the case of Bitumen, it would be more prone to leaks and contamination. The Keystone XL was designed to go through sensitive terrain so that could cause major issues.
Realistically...It is a minor victory for enviromentalists cuz Tar sands arent going away. Their production will only increase and probably a matter of time before redesigned pipeline will make its way through to the gulf.
I just wanted to clarify one point...to make it kinda political...no one that I have heard on the left including Obama has an issue with the jobs aspect of it. They are not trying to punish companies or policies that add jobs..the issue is entirely about how dirty this oil is and a pipeline carrying this is going through sensitive terrain. Before Obama rejected this, trams Canada was already coming up with redesigning the path for this because its also in their interest in case there are leaks that it doesn't contaminate aquafers..if this thing leaks in some remote area it won't get attention. Look what one spill did to BP. Also...there are many pipelines in this country..the reason why this is an issue is cuz none of them carry bitumen (tar sand oil), at least that is my understanding of it.
Delete