The political battle over the Keystone XL pipeline, a $7 billion project to carry oil from Canada to Texas Gulf Coast refineries, is likely to heat up again in the next few weeks. And the focus will again be on the number of Keystone pipeline jobs created.
House Speaker John Boehner said Sunday congressional Republicans will make another push to win approval for the pipeline by including it in a new jobs bill. He restated his party's claim that tens of thousands of Keystone pipeline jobs are to be had as part of the project.
See also: Obama Kills Keystone XL Pipeline Project - For Now
"Now that the president has decided for political reasons that we're not going to move ahead just yet, not until after the election ... we're going to have to find another way to lean on the Senate, to take this issue up, because the Keystone pipeline will create ... over 100,000 indirect jobs," Boehner said on ABC's This Week.
But how accurate are such claims? Will there really be more than 100,000 indirect Keystone pipeline jobs? Or are project supporters exaggerating?
(Photo: House Speaker John Boehner. Credit: Mandel Ngan / AFP / Getty Images)
Comments
Hi Tom –
100,000 jobs? Doubt it. Thirty pumping stations. A much longer pipeline, the TransAlaska, employs less than 5,000. Perhaps 20,000 new jobs, counting temporary construction jobs. Nice, but a long way from full employment. By contrast, the economy created about 212,000 new jobs in December.
And a long way from energy independence, as well. There is a better than even chance that most of the oil will be exported. Almost all of the Alaskan oil is exported.
Just before Thanksgiving, the Nebraska Governor approved legislation that moved the pipeline away from the Ogalala aquifer. A major spill on the aquifer would adversely affect Nebraska’s agriculture. By August, Nebraska should be finished surveying the new route. Sometime after that, the Administration should approve the pipeline.
I doubt that anyone will much notice.
BTW, I understand that the major funding for the pipeline is being provided by the Koch brothers. No wonder it’s a FoxNews issue!
Good points, RealTime53. I did not mean to imply that I endorse or believe the 100,000-jobs figure to be a fair estimate. I was merely hoping to point out that few politicians appear to have a solid grasp on the economic impact of Keystone XL. Their projections are all over map.
Thanks,
Tom Murse
Hi Tom –
“I did not mean to imply that I endorse or believe the 100,000-jobs figure to be a fair estimate.”
I never took it that way. I understood your skepticism about that number. I’m sorry if I came across as harsh.
RealTime53 -
No, I didn’t take your comments as harsh. I just wanted to make sure I was being clear about the intention of the pipeline piece, as well as acknowledge your feedback. I’m relatively new around here, and I’d like to impress upon readers that this particular space on About.com is not partisan in the slightest. I’m about as skeptical as they come when it comes to politicians, regardless of their party affiliation.
Thanks again,
Tom Murse
Guide to U.S. Politics