US House overwhelmingly approves bill for oil pipeline

[Lite Beer]

US House overwhelmingly approves bill for oil pipeline
DINA CAPPIELLO, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. House overwhelmingly passed a bill Friday authorizing a major oil pipeline, despite a renewed pledge by the White House to veto the legislation after a state court removed a major obstacle.

The Keystone XL pipeline has been one of the biggest areas of conflict between President Barack Obama and Congress, which Republicans took full control of this week for the first time since he took office.

The pipeline would move tar sands oil from Canada 1,179 miles (1,900 kilometers) south to refineries on Gulf of Mexico Coast. Supporters say it would create jobs and ease American dependence on Middle East oil. Critics argue that the drilling is environmentally harmful, and said much of the Canadian crude would be exported with little or no impact on America's drive to reduce oil imports, which have already been greatly reduced because of record U.S. oil production.

The House on Friday approved the measure 266-152, with 28 Democrats voting in support. It was one of the first pieces of legislation considered by the Republican-controlled Congress and the 10th vote the House had taken since July 2011 to advance the $8 billion project.

"We shouldn't be debating it, we should be building it," said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who noted that more than 2,000 days had passed since the pipeline was first proposed in 2008.

The Senate has a test vote on Monday with enough support to pass an identical bill.

Hours before the House vote, Nebraska's highest court tossed out a lawsuit challenging the pipeline's route, an obstacle the White House said it needed removed to make a decision.

The White House veto threat was based partly on the outstanding Nebraska case. Obama has said he needed the state court ruling before deciding whether the cross-border pipeline is in the national interest.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, following the court's decision, renewed a call for Obama to reconsider his promise to veto the measure.

"Today's ruling provides the perfect opportunity for the president to change his unproductive posture on this jobs project and reverse his veto threat," McConnell said. "The president now has every reason to sign it."

In a statement, a White House spokesman said the court's decision will have no effect on the president's plan to veto the bill.

"Regardless of the Nebraska ruling today, the House bill still conflicts with longstanding executive branch procedures regarding the authority of the president and prevents the thorough consideration of complex issues that could bear on U.S. national interests, and if presented to the president, he will veto the bill," said deputy press secretary Eric Schultz in a statement.

In the face of a veto threat, Democrats called the bill a waste of time Friday.

Rep. Frank Pallone, the top Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said building the pipeline would increase reliance on Canadian tar sands oil and reverse the strides to reduce the pollution blamed for global warming.

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-01-10

[NeverSure]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

[sanuk711]

They took all the trees
Put 'em in a tree museum
And they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see 'em

--- J Mitchell

"The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada,

enhancing and running the refineries"...neversure

One day neversure , you may have to revise your belief that making a $ is good for America --no matter what the other cost are.

........ Oh yes lots & lots of permanent jobs....35 of them at best guess.

The State Department environmental review

--temporary jobs over its two-year construction period — about 3,900 of them in construction,

the rest in indirect support jobs, such as food service. It estimated that it would create about 35 permanent jobs.

The company that is touting a better tomorrow for all with jobs etc.."Keystone pipeline" have been actively cutting, not creating, jobs: Despite generating $546 billion in profits between 2005 and 2010, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP reduced their U.S. workforce by 11,200 employees over that period. In 2010 alone, the top five oil companies slashed their global workforce by 4,400 employees “” the same year executives paid themselves nearly $220 million. But at least those working in the industry as a whole get paid high wages, right? Turns out that 40 percent of U.S oil-industry jobs consist of minimum wage work at gas stations.----http://www.labor4sustainability.org/articles/5-reasons-why-the-keystone-pipeline-is-bad-for-the-economy/

[wwest5829]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

And yet those obstructionist Canadians voted to block the pipeline going to their west coast? Why was that?

[hhgz]

The KXL is a multi-billion dollar subsidy to Big Oil, paid by US taxpayers. None of the oil will be sold to the US, as it is not suitable for gasoline. According to the study supported by the conservatives, it will provide 35 permanent jobs. Wow!

[realenglish1]

There is no looking to the future by the USA

They need the pipeline. If their fortune changed and the Arabs where back in control of Oil et al 1970s then the USA is in trouble again

This way they can assure a regular supply of oil without involving the Arabs

After what happened in France you would think they would be more serious about a pipe line But no President Obama

Does not get it .

He is without a doubt the worst present in the 20th and 21st century. Even President NIxon had faults and was a crook but was still a decent president

[reptile91602]

Those guys that think Obama is the worst pres of all time for the US must be living in some sort of la la land in some foreign country for many years with fox news as their only bed time play fellow. Oh yeah , they live in Thailand. Republcians are daily being drafted and manufactured with the requirements that they they just have no reasoning power, no desire to see and understand facts, and are usually over 60. See any resemblance to yourselves.

[BlueSkyCowboy]

The KXL is a multi-billion dollar subsidy to Big Oil, paid by US taxpayers. None of the oil will be sold to the US, as it is not suitable for gasoline. According to the study supported by the conservatives, it will provide 35 permanent jobs. Wow!

The oil will come out of the ground and go to where ever, one way or the other. By pipeline, train, trucks. Now a lot of oil travels by trains owned by Obama buddy Warren Buffet. I wonder why he does not want the pipeline. We already have several 100 thousand miles of pipelines in the US. Some must be close to 100 years old. It is about power and fraud/politics

[Bakeman]

They took all the trees

Put 'em in a tree museum

And they charged the people

A dollar and a half just to see 'em

--- J Mitchell

"The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada,

enhancing and running the refineries"...neversure

One day neversure , you may have to revise your belief that making a $ is good for America --no matter what the other cost are.

........ Oh yes lots & lots of permanent jobs....35 of them at best guess.

The State Department environmental review

--temporary jobs over its two-year construction period — about 3,900 of them in construction,

the rest in indirect support jobs, such as food service. It estimated that it would create about 35 permanent jobs.

The company that is touting a better tomorrow for all with jobs etc.."Keystone pipeline" have been actively cutting, not creating, jobs: Despite generating $546 billion in profits between 2005 and 2010, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP reduced their U.S. workforce by 11,200 employees over that period. In 2010 alone, the top five oil companies slashed their global workforce by 4,400 employees “” the same year executives paid themselves nearly $220 million. But at least those working in the industry as a whole get paid high wages, right? Turns out that 40 percent of U.S oil-industry jobs consist of minimum wage work at gas stations.----http://www.labor4sustainability.org/articles/5-reasons-why-the-keystone-pipeline-is-bad-for-the-economy/

All scare tactics by the Democrats and a bunch of tree huggers.

http://www.caintv.com/scare-tactics-behind-pipeline

[NeverSure]

They took all the trees

Put 'em in a tree museum

And they charged the people

A dollar and a half just to see 'em

--- J Mitchell

"The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada,

enhancing and running the refineries"...neversure

One day neversure , you may have to revise your belief that making a $ is good for America --no matter what the other cost are.

........ Oh yes lots & lots of permanent jobs....35 of them at best guess.

The State Department environmental review

--temporary jobs over its two-year construction period — about 3,900 of them in construction,

the rest in indirect support jobs, such as food service. It estimated that it would create about 35 permanent jobs.

The company that is touting a better tomorrow for all with jobs etc.."Keystone pipeline" have been actively cutting, not creating, jobs: Despite generating $546 billion in profits between 2005 and 2010, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP reduced their U.S. workforce by 11,200 employees over that period. In 2010 alone, the top five oil companies slashed their global workforce by 4,400 employees “” the same year executives paid themselves nearly $220 million. But at least those working in the industry as a whole get paid high wages, right? Turns out that 40 percent of U.S oil-industry jobs consist of minimum wage work at gas stations.----http://www.labor4sustainability.org/articles/5-reasons-why-the-keystone-pipeline-is-bad-for-the-economy/

Tinfoil hat link. All about climate and gas station jobs.

I have news for them. The 40% of jobs in gas stations will neither increase nor decrease due to the pipeline. It won't change people's driving habits. And it never mentions jobs at the refineries or shipping jobs if it's exported, or an improvement in balance of trade if it's exported.

It won't cause the US to use more oil. It will help free the US from dependence on other oil.

It's written by an oil hater who probably drives a big SUV, has a tinfoil hat franchise, and wants the world to go back to the stone age. Except for him of course.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.

[IAMHERE]

The pipeline is not needed anymore by the American consumer. It was worth the risk several years ago, times change. Where is this oil going? Probably ends up in Japan and Europe; they are not worth ruining our water and land for. If the oil in this XL pipeline doesn't go to Japan/Europe then it frees up other oil to go there.

[YeaBiGgiEs]

After the invasion of IRAQ, I figured that US citizens would benefit in someway by directly pipelining oil from Iraq to the USA, but instead gas shot up to more than $4 a gallon.

US government goes to war and the citizens pay and receive NO benefits. US government makes worldwide enemies and its the citizens who suffer becoming victims when traveling.

[digbat]

Tinfoil hat link. All about climate and gas station jobs.

I have news for them. The 40% of jobs in gas stations will neither increase nor decrease due to the pipeline. It won't change people's driving habits. And it never mentions jobs at the refineries or shipping jobs if it's exported, or an improvement in balance of trade if it's exported.

It won't cause the US to use more oil. It will help free the US from dependence on other oil.

It's written by an oil hater who probably drives a big SUV, has a tinfoil hat franchise, and wants the world to go back to the stone age. Except for him of course.

Gosh, is that your best shot.

it's written by Oil hatters who drive big SUVs

[Bakeman]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

Agreed 100%

Political games and first Obama and his Democrats ruled with a majority and complained that the Republicans were blocking progress and now the Republicans rule by majority so the Democrats and Obama don't want to play any more and will be blocking progress. The people have voted and spoken so the end is nearing in less than two years for the Democrats and the White House rule.

[Bakeman]

the deficit was ALL George bush doing. No one else!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Only the FY2009 Deficit was inherited from Bush. All presidents inherit the first year deficit from the previous president. What about the other 5 years to date?

[chicowoodduck]

Tinfoil hat link. All about climate and gas station jobs.

I have news for them. The 40% of jobs in gas stations will neither increase nor decrease due to the pipeline. It won't change people's driving habits. And it never mentions jobs at the refineries or shipping jobs if it's exported, or an improvement in balance of trade if it's exported.

It won't cause the US to use more oil. It will help free the US from dependence on other oil.

It's written by an oil hater who probably drives a big SUV, has a tinfoil hat franchise, and wants the world to go back to the stone age. Except for him of course.

Gosh, is that your best shot.

it's written by Oil hatters who drive big SUVs

Too many Democraps on this thread.....:-)

[Chicog]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

What a load of rubbish.

This will benefit:

(1) Canada

(2) The people who invested in companies that will reap the profits (guess who?).

Yes it creates wealth alright. Ask Boehner. Or The Koch Brothers.

As for jobs, temporary construction jobs for a year or so and then about 50 permanent jobs if you are lucky.

Funnily enough I just don't see anything like this reported on Fox News, what a stunner.

Obama will veto it and rightly so, who needs it with oil at $50-ish a barrel, and how does it really benefit the US to handover land to the Canadians?

Edited January 10, 2015 by Chicog

[blazes]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

And yet those obstructionist Canadians voted to block the pipeline going to their west coast? Why was that?

Because Canada is run by the Politically Correct riff-raff who have created such overwhelmingly liberal laws that any little Indian band or band of tree-huggers can file a law-suit claiming that a pipeline will destroy a cabbage patch or some 'sacred' animal-killing ground, and so hold up development for decades.

But fear not: Canada will adapt and will return to living in wig-wams and will send smoke signals when their cell-phones don't work cos the electricity has run out.

[chuckd]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

And yet those obstructionist Canadians voted to block the pipeline going to their west coast? Why was that?

You might want to catch up on what's happening. The Canadian west coast pipeline has hardly been "voted" down.

This from June 2014.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canadian Government Approves Northern Gateway Oil Pipeline To Pacific Coast

AP | By ROB GILLIES

Posted: 06/17/2014 5:36 pm EDT Updated: 08/17/2014 5:59 am EDT

TORONTO (AP) — Canada's government on Tuesday approved a controversial pipeline proposal that would bring oil to the Pacific Coast for shipment to Asia, a major step in the country's efforts to diversify its oil exports if it can overcome fierce opposition from environmental and aboriginal groups.

Approval for Enbridge's Northern Gateway project was expected as Canada needs infrastructure in place to export its growing oil sands production. The project's importance has only grown since the U.S. delayed a decision on TransCanada's Keystone XL pipeline that would take oil from Alberta to the U.S. Gulf Coast.

The northern Alberta region has the world's third largest oil reserves, with 170 billion barrels of proven reserves.

Article from Huffington Post Green: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/canada-approves-northern-gateway_n_5505109.html

[chuckd]

Tinfoil hat link. All about climate and gas station jobs.

I have news for them. The 40% of jobs in gas stations will neither increase nor decrease due to the pipeline. It won't change people's driving habits. And it never mentions jobs at the refineries or shipping jobs if it's exported, or an improvement in balance of trade if it's exported.

It won't cause the US to use more oil. It will help free the US from dependence on other oil.

It's written by an oil hater who probably drives a big SUV, has a tinfoil hat franchise, and wants the world to go back to the stone age. Except for him of course.

Gosh, is that your best shot.

it's written by Oil hatters who drive big SUVs

How about this for reasons to discount your article?

Your article purports to provide five reasons to NOT approve Keystone.

Reasons number 1, 3 and 4 are based on severe weather which is being blamed (in this article) on man. I have never heard of a pipeline that caused a hurricane. Anybody?

Reason number 2 is the ridiculous assertion concerning the oil industry employment. Their statistics covered a period from 2005 to 2010, which, as most of us know, was four years ago. Anything current to report?

Reason number 5 turns out to be a plea for something they are calling a "green infrastructure program" that apparently consists of spending more money on green projects to theoretically create more jobs.

How does one spell "Solyndra" again?

It's a dumb, outdated article.

[Chicog]

How does one spell "Solyndra" again?

The same way you should spell "Benghazi":

"I R R E L E V A N T R E P U B L I C A N C H A F F".

Solyndra represented 1.3% of a much bigger program that has been a success.

(Reuters) - The controversial government program that funded failed solar company Solyndra, and became a lighting rod in the 2012 presidential election, is officially in the black.

According to a report by the Department of Energy, interest payments to the government from projects funded by the Loan Programs Office were $810 million as of September - higher than the $780 million in losses from loans it sustained from startups including Fisker Automotive, Abound Solar and Solyndra, which went bankrupt after receiving large government loans intended to help them bring their advanced green technologies to market.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/13/us-doe-loans-idUSKCN0IX0A120141113

U.S. Expects $5 Billion From Program That Funded Solyndra

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-12/u-s-expects-5-billion-from-program-that-funded-solyndra.html

Edited January 10, 2015 by Chicog

[chuckd]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

What a load of rubbish.

This will benefit:

(1) Canada

(2) The people who invested in companies that will reap the profits (guess who?).

Yes it creates wealth alright. Ask Boehner. Or The Koch Brothers.

As for jobs, temporary construction jobs for a year or so and then about 50 permanent jobs if you are lucky.

Funnily enough I just don't see anything like this reported on Fox News, what a stunner.

Obama will veto it and rightly so, who needs it with oil at $50-ish a barrel, and how does it really benefit the US to handover land to the Canadians?

While you are asking Boehner and the Koch Brothers how they will enrich themselves from the pipeline, be sure and include Warren Buffett, Bill Gates and Tom Steyer how much they will enrich themselves if the pipeline is NOT built.

I see you have used Van Jones as your new source of information. You do know Jones is the only Obama czar that was forced ti resign his job due to his previous Marxist affiliations, among other reasons. A good choice there.

However, since we're going down that road, let me offer another opinion. This is an op-ed appearing in Forbes concerning the potential employment benefits from building Keystone.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OPINION 2/07/2014 @ 4:37หลังเที่ยง 19,080 views

The Keystone Pipeline Would Create Thousands Of Jobs

By ALBERT HUBER and PETER BOWE

<<From the article>>

"Even President Obama’s own administration recognizes Keystone’s positive jobs impact. The final State Department review found that the pipeline would create upward of 42,000 jobs during the construction period alone, and it would do so without a significant environmental impact, according to the State Department’s report. Economists, meanwhile, have found that the pipeline would create 20,000 manufacturing and construction jobs and an additional 118,000 spin-off jobs."

Read here: http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2014/02/07/the-keystone-pipeline-would-create-thousands-of-jobs/

35 jobs? pshaw, I say

PS: Exactly what lands are being handed over to the Canadians?

[Chicog]

35 jobs? pshaw, I say

PS: Exactly what lands are being handed over to the Canadians?

Like any construction project it will only create jobs temporarily, they will be gone. I thought I made that clear by using the words "temporary" and "permanent", but there you go.

And unless they are planning on burying the pipeline the whole way, I'm just wondering what else you will be able to do with all that land that has thousands of miles of pipeline on it pumping Canadian oil to overseas (Non-US) markets?

And it's not like the US needs any oil, does it?

Oh, and I wouldn't necessarily use a TV reporter as a source, which is why I went to Politifact.

The State Department report puts the total at 42,100 jobs, though the definition of a job in this sense is a position filled for one year. Much of the construction work would come in four- or or eight-month stretches. About 10,400 seasonal workers would be recruited for construction, the State Department said.

When looked at as "an average annual job," it works out to about 3,900 jobs over one year of construction or 1,950 jobs each year for two years.

The rest of the jobs would be the result of spillover spending (formally called indirect or induced economic activity) as Keystone workers buy equipment and materials to complete the project and spend their money on an array of services, including food, health care, and arts and entertainment. As you might expect, it’s much harder to measure the widespread effect on job creation.

There’s no doubting that most of the economic activity comes during construction. Jones honed in on jobs after construction, which aren’t really a source of sharp debate.

"There’s very few jobs operating pipelines," said Ian Goodman, president of the Goodman Group Ltd., an energy and economic consulting firm in Berkeley, Calif. "That’s one of the reasons why pipelines are attractive to the oil industry. They’re relatively inexpensive to build and operate."

The report says the project would provide jobs for about 35 permanent employees and 15 temporary contractors.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Chicog

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

"We get all the risk," he said, "while the oil companies will reap all the rewards."

Bull pucky.

This will improve the economies of Canada and the USA by creating new wealth and an enormous amount of good jobs. These oil and pipeline jobs pay very well for the people.

The jobs are building and then maintaining the pipeline, working in the oil fields as more oil is sold in Canada, enhancing and running the refineries...

And whoever said it would just be exported doesn't get it that it would be refined and then improve export numbers if not used in the US. There would be value added all along the way, and more shipping jobs. All are very good jobs.

Now we get to see who the real obstructionist is, Obama.

seems like it may be payback for being obstructed at every turn for the last 6 years. Sum nu na to the republicans who have let America suffer just so they could make sure this president could not get any bills past. Absolutely disgusting display of Americanism. Completely broken and corrupt system.

[chuckd]

How does one spell "Solyndra" again?

The same way you should spell "Benghazi":

"I R R E L E V A N T R E P U B L I C A N C H A F F".

Solyndra represented 1.3% of a much bigger program that has been a success.

(Reuters) - The controversial government program that funded failed solar company Solyndra, and became a lighting rod in the 2012 presidential election, is officially in the black.

According to a report by the Department of Energy, interest payments to the government from projects funded by the Loan Programs Office were $810 million as of September - higher than the $780 million in losses from loans it sustained from startups including Fisker Automotive, Abound Solar and Solyndra, which went bankrupt after receiving large government loans intended to help them bring their advanced green technologies to market.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/13/us-doe-loans-idUSKCN0IX0A120141113

U.S. Expects $5 Billion From Program That Funded Solyndra

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-12/u-s-expects-5-billion-from-program-that-funded-solyndra.html

Goodness, no reason to get all excited. Next thing you will be doing is posting in all caps.

Let's calm down and look at your two links, allegedly disproving my remark about Solyndra.

Your first link to Reuters claims the Energy Department program of making loans to renewable energy companies has had some $810 million in interest revenue, which is some $30 million over and above the $780 million in already defaulted loans, such as Solyndra at $538 million.

I seriously doubt the alleged $30 million revenue is sufficient to offset the federal government's cost of handling of the loan program to begin with, never mind the principal repayment.

Despite your protestations, the link proves nothing other than they have some interest revenue coming in to help offset some of the costs of running the program.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now on to the other link you so boldly provided us...

It can best be addressed by this one simple quote from the article:

The potential gains are the first estimate for the loan guarantee program released by the Energy Department. The $5 billion to $6 billion figure was calculated based on the average rates and expected returns of funds dispersed so far, paid back over 20 to 25 years.

The operative words here are..."potential gains", "estimates", "paid back over 20 to 25 years" and "released by the energy Department".

We, in the real world, call this a WAG (wild ass guess).

If you choose to believe it, then go for it. Just don't expect everybody to believe everything an Energy Department led by one of Obama's chosen few to be deemed believable.

[chuckd]

35 jobs? pshaw, I say

PS: Exactly what lands are being handed over to the Canadians?

Like any construction project it will only create jobs temporarily, they will be gone. I thought I made that clear by using the words "temporary" and "permanent", but there you go.

And unless they are planning on burying the pipeline the whole way, I'm just wondering what else you will be able to do with all that land that has thousands of miles of pipeline on it pumping Canadian oil to overseas (Non-US) markets?

And it's not like the US needs any oil, does it?

Oh, and I wouldn't necessarily use a TV reporter as a source, which is why I went to Politifact.

The State Department report puts the total at 42,100 jobs, though the definition of a job in this sense is a position filled for one year. Much of the construction work would come in four- or or eight-month stretches. About 10,400 seasonal workers would be recruited for construction, the State Department said.

When looked at as "an average annual job," it works out to about 3,900 jobs over one year of construction or 1,950 jobs each year for two years.

The rest of the jobs would be the result of spillover spending (formally called indirect or induced economic activity) as Keystone workers buy equipment and materials to complete the project and spend their money on an array of services, including food, health care, and arts and entertainment. As you might expect, it’s much harder to measure the widespread effect on job creation.

There’s no doubting that most of the economic activity comes during construction. Jones honed in on jobs after construction, which aren’t really a source of sharp debate.

"There’s very few jobs operating pipelines," said Ian Goodman, president of the Goodman Group Ltd., an energy and economic consulting firm in Berkeley, Calif. "That’s one of the reasons why pipelines are attractive to the oil industry. They’re relatively inexpensive to build and operate."

The report says the project would provide jobs for about 35 permanent employees and 15 temporary contractors.

"And unless they are planning on burying the pipeline the whole way, I'm just wondering what else you will be able to do with all that land that has thousands of miles of pipeline on it pumping Canadian oil to overseas (Non-US) markets?"

You must have never heard of that ancient concept of leasing land rights to put a pipeline on. The original land owner keeps ownership of the land and leases a portion of it to provide access to, and the building of, a pipeline on his/her land. It's a rather lucrative income for the impacted land owner. The pipeline pays handsomely for the rights to the land.

Now on to your Van Jones 35 employee myth.

To put it to bed rather quickly and without a lot of band width waste, the pipeline will very likely require more than 35 permanent employees to handle the land leases and payment of same.

Then there is the constant maintenance and upkeep required on a project of this size. It is 3,456 kilometers from it's inception point to where it connects with the existing pipeline in Nebraska.

You're in the middle east. Talk to somebody in the oil business and find out how many inspectors and maintenance people would be required to continuously care for a pipeline of this length.

Maybe that's the 15 temporary contractors?

Cheers.

[samran]

I wonder what the economics of the pipeline look like with oil at current prices.

Regardless, curious why the canuks don't export their oil via their west coast.

Also curious as to why this isn't being approved. It isn't like there are no cross border pipelines already?

Edited January 10, 2015 by samran

[connda]

Big win for the Canadian environmental lobby. Pump that goo across the US to be exported. US eats the risks for next to none of the reward. Canada save it's pristine forests and beloved Straights of Juan de Fuca and makes CND! US gets the pollution potential and change.

The US: Up-and-coming banana republic and EPA Super-Fund Site.

[Chicog]

You must have never heard of that ancient concept of leasing land rights to put a pipeline on. The original land owner keeps ownership of the land and leases a portion of it to provide access to, and the building of, a pipeline on his/her land. It's a rather lucrative income for the impacted land owner. The pipeline pays handsomely for the rights to the land.

Not in Nebraska it doesn't. They simply use a Republican Governor's outdated legislation that gives him the power to force people to sell their land even if they don't want to.

Meanwhile the Koch Brothers get an awesome return on the money they've been using buying republican politicians.

Edited January 10, 2015 by Chicog