Lessons From Ike's Highway System For Keystone XL

With America's unemployment rate remaining stagnant at over nine percent, it's little wonder that our leaders are turning to physical infrastructure projects to create employment opportunities.

This is not the first time in our nation's history that physical infrastructure projects have been untaken to combat an economic downturn. For example, the country has substantially benefited from the establishment of the Eisenhower Interstate Highway System since construction began in the 1950s.

In addition to the individual benefits conferred by the hundreds of thousands of jobs directly created by the initial construction process, the American public as a whole has also benefited immensely from our Interstate system. Whether driving to the beach for vacation, undertaking a daily commute to the office, or even purchasing produce in the grocery store, Americans daily reap the economic benefits generated by the creation of these transportation corridors between our major cities.

In order for today's lawmakers to garner similar success from another "shovel ready" project, they must identify an opportunity with both short and long-term potential. Enter the Keystone XL Pipeline project. Pipelines are our local, interstate, and international energy highways, delivering almost two-thirds of all energy products used in the U.S. each year.

Studies estimate development of the proposed 1,700-mile pipeline from Alberta, Canada to U.S. refineries in the Gulf region would directly create 20,000 U.S. jobs and an additional 118,000 spin-off opportunities for the American workforce. Even after construction is complete, subsequent Canadian oil development and trade with the U.S. has the potential to create more than 340,000 U.S. jobs and add tens of billions of dollars to our GDP.

Moreover, the $7 billion project would be privately, not publicly, funded, providing direct stimulation to our economy without spending federal funds, and without adding to our deficit.

Despite its ample benefits, the project faces an obstacle. Protesters have been trying to temper interest in this promising infrastructure opportunity by raising the specter of environmental damage. For instance, Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman opposes the pipeline by citing the fact that its planned route would cross the Ogallala aquifer - a large source of the state's drinking water and irrigation.

Though the protection of our environment, especially groundwater resources, is an important issue, allegations about the pipeline's eco-risk don't ... well, hold water.

After leading an exhaustive, independent, three-year environmental review of Keystone XL, the Obama administration's State Department released a final environmental impact report, which found constructing the pipeline along the proposed route would have no significant impact on the environment. In fact, the statement concluded that planned additional safety measures "would result in a project that would have a degree of safety over any other typically constructed domestic oil pipeline system."

Researchers even debunked the much hyped scare over potential contamination of water sources. In April, the State Department reported that "impacts from even very large spills would likely be limited to localized groundwater contamination that would not threaten the regional viability of the aquifer system."

While industry leaders have been continually enhancing the technology and safety of pipelines, lawmakers have also bolstered their oversight - particularly in the last decade. Beginning with the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, the federal government in partnership with state inspection agencies has adopted a systematic, risk-based management approach.

Pipelines cross through ecologically sensitive areas every day and are not only safer now than ever before, they're also much more efficient than the alternatives. A single pipeline can move 150,000 barrels per day, an amount equal to 750 tanker trucks, or a train of seventy-five rail tank cars. Since they use less energy to accomplish more, pipelines by definition should be part of any legitimate conservation agenda.

Furthermore, the Canadian government will proceed with production of its oil sands with or without U.S. partnership. Should we choose not to reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern sources by embracing North American energy, foreign competitors are prepared to step in and take the fuel, as well as the jobs and economic activity that accompany it. In fact, China is already competing with American companies for Canada's energy resources; over the past 18 months, Chinese firms have invested $15 billion in Alberta's oil sands alone.

With 25 million Americans unable to find the full-time employment they're seeking, we would be remiss to let such a "shovel ready" opportunity slip away. It's in our best interest, both now and down the road, for the Obama Administration to grant a ‘presidential permit' for the Keystone XL project and truly stimulate our economy.