Why Keystone is worth considering

Steven Saterlie, Las Vegas

Thursday, Aug. 15, 2013 | 2:01 a.m.

Recent letters to the editor written by David Klamann (Aug. 3) and Dave Starr (Aug. 6) claim that the Keystone XL pipeline should not be built. The following is a counterpoint that indicates why consideration is warranted.

Mr. Klamann says the pipeline would create fewer jobs than advertised. Forbes has estimated the creation of 40,000 jobs. Regardless of the number, it will still be significantly more than the zero jobs produced by the failed Solyndra. Also, unlike Solyndra’s over $500 million taxpayer cost, the Keystone pipeline would cost the taxpayer nothing (some limited tax credits to refineries).

Mr. Klamann contends that if the pipeline is not built, the oil will stay in the ground and not contribute carbon pollution. This supposition is false. The Canadians will pump the oil and sell it. If not to us, then they will send it to their west coast by truck and rail, and ship it to China. More CO2 would result this way than pumping it to U.S. refineries.

Mr. Klamann says that temperatures are on track to be the hottest on record. He and President Barack Obama are worried about CO2 from fossil fuels causing global warming.

Numerous sources using UAH satellite measurements have found that the average global temperature is essentially unchanged over the past 15 years.

Additionally, all of the work done by this country over the past five years to reduce CO2 was wiped out in just 4 days of eruptions by Iceland’s volcano in 2010 (Ian Plimer).

The Keystone pipeline will provide jobs and an oil supply from a stable trading partner, and we should give it serious consideration.