https://www.wkyc.com/video/news/politics/joe-biden-green-energry-environment-debate/287-df28226c-ee94-496e-83ff-333762d46700
The era of heavy reliance on fossil fuels in America is slowly coming to an end, thanks in part to the courage of Joe Biden in killing off the Keystone pipeline. That deal that would have transported thousands of gallons of the world’s thickest, dirtiest, most poisonous crude oil all the way down from Alberta, Canada, through the middle of our country and out our southern ports.
But, the Reactionary Republicans, being financially and culturally wedded to a 19th century energy source, will still not allow us to progress on to greener things without putting up a fight. They still argue that we should have the pipeline and look for every opportunity to attack Biden’s decision.
As soon as Biden signed the executive order cancelling the pipeline the Reactionary Republicans started screaming. None of the howls of protest concerned the environment: no Reactionary Conservative was saying that the pipeline was good for mother nature. No one even really tried to argue that the pipeline carrying the gooey oil sludge was not dangerous.
No, in true Reactionary Conservative fashion it was a money argument. And the claim was that Biden’s cancellation of the pipeline would kill off jobs.
There are really no good economic arguments against killing off the Keystone pipeline. But, to explain why, lets start with a news broadcast from Fox (Fake and Phony) News that aired just after Biden’s action cancelling the pipeline. I chose them because they really are the number one boot licking organization for conservative causes as well as a constant defender of the oil and gas industry.
On the air that night was Phil Flynn, the guest columnist for Fox Business News, who immediately asserted that 11,000 jobs had been lost because of Biden’s decision to to cancel the pipeline. He added, “TC Energy [the company behind the pipeline formerly known as TransCanada] said the Keystone XL was going to sustain more than 11,000 jobs in 2021 so we can start the Biden administration with a net negative of 11,000 jobs job {sic} is lost.”
https://frontpagelive.com/2020/01/14/high-tensions-rupert-murdochs-son-slams-fox-news-for-climate-change-denial/
Shortly thereafter the Wall Street Journal (which is another publication owned by Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News) claimed that the “TC Energy company and unions had tried to persuade the Biden team by explaining keystone’s benefits to progressives, including 10,000 union construction jobs, but were rebuffed. Thus, the WSJ said, “TC announced layoffs on Wednesday.”
Sounds terrible, doesn’t it! 10,000 jobs, or maybe 11,000 job lost. And good union jobs, too. Because, conservatives just love unions and want to see them strengthened wherever possible.
Is this true? No, of course not. The reason we refer to Fox News as Fox (Fake and Phony) News is because they lie. And the lie here is that the cancelled Keystone pipeline was some kind of miracle employment machine.
Fox News, and the various conservative economists, industry analysts and conservative politicians (especially those in the state through which the pipeline would run) are lying.
Here’s why:
-The 10,000 jobs were never real and could never be guaranteed.
The 10,000 jobs claim made by TC Energy was just - hypothetical! In fact, Keystone was still awaiting permits in several states before it could begin production, and other permits were tied up in litigation. Moreover, TC Energy isn’t, and wouldn’t, be involved in the actual hiring of Keystone pipeline workers; it issued the grants in October to construction companies to do that. There is little evidence that those companies have employed many people so far.
TC Energy company never really could say with any accuracy or honesty how many jobs would be employed. And the contractors who are the ones that would actually do the hiring evidently haven’t put many people on the payroll.
So how many full time jobs would be created? Cornell University did an in depth study of the pipeline’s benefits and came to some very unhappy conclusions. Starting with main issue of jobs here is what it discovered:
-The project would create no more than 2,500 to 4,650 direct temporary construction jobs for two years, according to TransCanada’s (now named the TC Energy Co.) own data supplied to the state department.
(The Cornell study was being used in discussions of the Keystone pipeline in 2011. In 2017 CNN reported that when the Keystone pipeline was complete only 35 employees would be needed to operate the pipeline along with 15 temporary contractors. And they concluded that the Keystone XL isn’t expected to be a boom for the job market by any stretch.)
-The company’s claim that the KXL would produce 20,000 temporary direct construction and manufacturing jobs (both fields together) is not substantiated.
-KXL will divert Tar Sands Oil now supplying Midwest refineries so that it can be sold at higher prices at the Gulf Coast and exported to foreign markets. As a result, consumers in the Midwest could be paying 10 to 20 percent more per gallon for gasoline and diesel fuel. These additional cost (estimated to be $2 - 4 billion) will suppress other spending and therefore cost jobs.
-Pipeline companies never create a lot of employment.
If you really want to employ people then erect houses, or build things in factories or educate millions of kids in elementary schools. These businesses require a lot of labor. You will never gain (or lose) a lot of employment with pipeline transportation companies because the entire industry is small and doesn’t need many workers, This fact alone tells us that Reactionary Conservatives are lying about how many jobs are being lost.
IBIS World, in it’s report on the Oil Pipeline Transportation in the U.S. basically explains why pipeline companies don’t need a lot of people, “The Oil Pipeline Transportation industry in the US is capital intensive, which means businesses are more reliant on capital (plant, machinery and equipment) than labor.” The Bureau of Labor Statistics counted only 49,300 employees who worked in the pipeline transportation sector as of December 2020 - fewer than the number of people who work at Bed, Bath and Beyond. IBIS World ranks the entire pipeline construction sector as only the 161st largest in the entire U.S. And the Reactionary Conservatives want us to believe that there are thousands of drops of (unemployment) blood that are going to be squeezed from this little turnip? Never gonna’ happen.
-The threat of environmental damage and job loss sent the pipeline to America.
The Canadian government, and particularly the province of Alberta (home to the tar sands oil) has long wanted to diversify their shipments of oil away from America to various places in Asia. They see this as an important way to increase the value of their oil and help them reduce their dependence on America (especially our refineries).
Back in 2018, when the TransCanada pipeline from Alberta to Vancouver was being debated, John Kenny, the head of the conservative party in Alberta said, “This pipeline is the single most important economic opportunity that Canada will have in the foreseeable future.”
It seems that Canada has a real problem with what to do with its oil. Canada has the world’s third largest oil reserves but is overwhelmingly dependent on refiners in the U.S., where a barrel of Canada’s heavy oil is sold at a discount of between $15 and $30 per barrel. Given this hit to its pricing power it is easy to see the benefit of piping the oil directly to Vancouver for shipment to new markets in Asia.
How much of a benefit? John Kenny had an estimate, “If we had access to global markets through a coastal pipeline we would be generating $40 million more in wealth for the Canadian economy every day.”
But the pipeline was never built west from Alberta down to the port of Vancouver. Because the British Columbia provincial government would not allow it (please see the previous blog). Because, among other reasons, the possible loss of jobs was just too great.
https://twnsacredtrust.ca/concerns/spill-record/
The mayoral government of Vancouver as well as the provincial government of British Columbia had experience in dealing with pipeline oil spills. In 2007 there had been a pipeline rupture in the suburb of Burnaby, a city just south and east of the port of Vancouver. The rupture (it was owned by Kinder Morgan Company) sent 224,000 litters of of crude oil spewing out of the ground, coating nearby homes and seeping into the the harbor.
But it wasn’t the threat of just the environmental harm that caused British Columbia to oppose the pipeline. Vancouver’s harbor is a creator of jobs and economic wealth. And the potential loss of jobs from an oil spill would have been devastating. In fact, Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson thought the “unacceptable damage” done to harbor fisheries, real estate values, tourism and ocean ecology would result in the loss of 10,000 jobs.
The Canadians of British Columbia stopped the original TransCanada pipeline that would have brought tar sands oil from Alberta to Vancouver. They judged both the environmental and economic risks too great, even though it also held out the promise of more money and more markets for Canadian oil companies.
Will some jobs in America be lost due to the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline? Yes, some, not many, and almost none on a long term basis. Are the environmental and economic risks too high to build it? Yes, by far.
The alternative?
Just today I was reading an article from Oilprice.com, a trade publication with insightful articles about alternative forms of energy.
The article concerned itself with explaining the problems that Texas was having as the oil shale fracking industry continues to struggle. But at the end, this is what they wrote concerning the possibility that alternative energy might be what is best for Texas,
“When it comes to job creation, green energy is the way to go. Back in June PV Tech reported on “a raft of new studies” which has “come to underscore the business case of pushing renewables to the heart of the COVID-19 recover, amid claims green energy plays offer a low-cost, high-return opportunity for investors.” And just a month after that report, “physicist, engineer, researcher, investor, serial entrepreneur, and MacArthur 'genius’ grant winner” Saul Griffith’s organization Rewiring America ‘made its big debut with a jobs report showing that rapid decarbonization through electrification would create 15 million to 20 million jobs in the next decade, with 5 million permanent jobs after that.”
Reactionary Conservatives continue to tie themselves to a 19th century energy business and press on to build a pipeline full of disgusting, poisonous crude oil that kills both the environment and jobs. I say let’s go with Joe and clean, environment protecting, jobs created by green new energy sources.
Go green, go clean, go progressive!