Keystone XL, regulation and jobs creation (or the lack thereof)

[jon_leonard]

President Obama's announcement that he'd make the final decision on the Keystone XL pipeline has had a presumably unintended effect. Getting approval on an alternate pipeline path would take at least another year. The Canadians want to sell their oil; if the US path to selling the oil is tied up by politics, then they'll actively seek to sell the

Comments

[prock]

Having access to that oil would not increase our energy security. It would marginally reduce the rate at which our energy security is decreasing. I guess that's an improvement.

[jon_leonard]

I guess much depends on what you consider the baseline level of security. I mostly mean that Canada is unlikely to cut us off from energy supplies for political reasons.

That, and if we need energy, short-transport-distance oil is pretty cheap.

[prock]

By energy security, I assume you mean control (direct or indirect) over consumed energy. Back in 1950, we controlled close to 100% of our consumed oil. Today, we control about 37.5% of our consumed oil. If we got the projected 500k barrels of oil per day out of the pipeline, that would raise our oil control ratio up to 40.0%. That assumes no growth in oil usage, and no further decline in domestic oil production.

(fixed goofed pct)

[jon_leonard]

That does put it in perspective; it's certainly not enough. Thanks.