January 25, 20179 yr One of the companies who stands to benefit greatly from this pipeline is Energy Transfer Partners. Any of these board members jump out at you? Key People Energy Transfer Partners L.P. Board of Directors Name/Title Current Board Membership Kelcy L. Warren, 60 Chairman & Chief Executive Officer Energy Transfer Partners LP Matthew S. Ramsey, 60 President, Chief Operating Officer & Director Energy Transfer Partners LP Richard D. Brannon, Director Energy Transfer Partners LP James Rick Perry, 65 Director Energy Transfer Partners LP David K. Skidmore, 60 Director Energy Transfer Partners LP Marshall S. McCrea, 56 Director Energy Transfer Partners LP Michael K. Grimm, 61 Independent Director Energy Transfer Partners LP Ted Collins, 77 Independent Director Energy Transfer Partners LP So no names jump out as being familiar? P.S. ETP up 3.5% in one day.
January 25, 20179 yr Rick Perry :popcorn: Anybody see what he said to Franken in his hearings :lol2:?
January 25, 20179 yr Rick Perry to Al Franken: 'I hope you're as much fun on that dais as you were on your couch' - Washington Times
January 25, 20179 yr I don't know much about it but this article pretty good of talking about jobs and tax revenue. Steel industry will get a major benefit and local counties and states will collect about $110 million in property taxes annually. Who benefits from revived Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines? - CBS News
January 25, 20179 yr Rick Perry :popcorn: There we go. Our likely new Energy Secretary profits from an EO. Drain The Swamp
January 25, 20179 yr I don't know much about it but this article pretty good of talking about jobs and tax revenue. Steel industry will get a major benefit and local counties and states will collect about $110 million in property taxes annually. Who benefits from revived Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines? - CBS News Thrilled for every new albeit temporary job that this produces. Once it's completed the pipeline will require only 40 people to run it. Let's also be clear on the tax money. I saw $55M but let's use $110M instead. That's not $110M per county. That's $110M (maybe only $55M) spread between 27 counties in four states. Again, better than $0.
January 25, 20179 yr It seems to me there is an environmental positive to this. Transporting by pipeline has to be better than truck or train environmentally speaking ... as long as there are no leaks.
January 25, 20179 yr It seems to me there is an environmental positive to this. Transporting by pipeline has to be better than truck or train environmentally speaking ... as long as there are no leaks. Correct...as long as there are no leaks.
January 25, 20179 yr Thrilled for every new albeit temporary job that this produces. Once it's completed the pipeline will require only 40 people to run it. Let's also be clear on the tax money. I saw $55M but let's use $110M instead. That's not $110M per county. That's $110M (maybe only $55M) spread between 27 counties in four states. Again, better than $0. $55 was for one pipeline. There are two. Again, I'll be first to admit, I am not very educated on this but this shows benefit. I believe this is from US Chamber of Commerce and is only talking about the Keystone Pipeline: Benefits of Keystone XL | Institute for 21st Century Energy
January 25, 20179 yr $55 was for one pipeline. There are two. Again, I'll be first to admit, I am not very educated on this but this shows benefit. I believe this is from US Chamber of Commerce and is only talking about the Keystone Pipeline: Benefits of Keystone XL | Institute for 21st Century Energy $110M it is then.
January 25, 20179 yr There we go. Our likely new Energy Secretary profits from an EO. Drain The Swamp Day 4 and no hesitation. Makes me think by 10 he'll be back in charge of Trump Inc.
January 25, 20179 yr That is one of the definites. There will be temporary construction jobs as well. Areas will receive property tax money. It will be (most likely) safer than rail transportation. It will be faster transportation. It will be cheaper transportation. Those are the definites. The rest has a whole list of "yeah IF..." to go with it before they are true and right now those "ifs" do not exist. Those positives outweigh any proven negative , and no or minimal tax dollars are being used correct ? So even if you don't want to believe any of the other positives why would you be against a project 3/4th the way done ? Honestly I don't know what argument you are trying to make.
January 25, 20179 yr Those positives outweigh any proven negative , and no or minimal tax dollars are being used correct ? So even if you don't want to believe any of the other positives why would you be against a project 3/4th the way done ? Honestly I don't know what argument you are trying to make. I never said I was against it.
January 25, 20179 yr Are you against it? No based on assumptions that it's safe. I'm just saying we should evaluate it on what's legit and not assumptions about gas prices.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.