Labovitz on Economic Impacts of CapX
The “CapX 2020 toilet-on-a-stick” seen in New Trier, near Hampton…
You’da thunk they’da learned a thing or two about Labovitz…
Just out from the CapX 2020 Transmission Lines ‘R’ Us crew:
Truth be told, I haven’t read it, but it’s downloaded and printing out, ready for highlighting and post its.
Meanwhile, the STrib and everyone else is running promotional pieces lauding the “jobs, jobs, jobs” — but that’s what they pay their shills for, eh? Oh, that’s what WE (ratepayers) pay their shills for:
CapX2020 power lines will add thousands of jobs
By JENNIFER BJORHUS, Star Tribune
“It’s a major part of our business in this economy,” he said.
Do take a few minutes to read this thing, and look for not just the “benefits” but look for any attribution of socioeconomic costs. What I do know of Labovitz Reports is gleaned from the Labovitz Report on Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Project — and that report was the laughing-stock of the hearing, those holding it up as a basis for permitting that coal gasification lost credibility. Here’s the last part of Alan’s cross in Taconite, MN on that report:
Q. Table at 3.4-2 identifies, by my arithmetic, a total of something over 15 million pounds per year of regulated air pollutants. And without getting into detail, let me just suggest, if I may, for purposes of this question, suppose that 15 million pounds a year of regulated air pollutants would constitute a negative impact. If those 15 million pounds a year air pollutants were to cause asthma, bronchitis, cancer of the lungs and so on and so forth, in a certain number of people, those people would need — might very well, probably would seek medical care for those problems,and they would buy inhalers, they would go to the emergency room, they would experience surgicalprocedures at the local health care facilities and so on. In your model would that be a component of economic stimulus?
MR. STARNS: Object to the form of the question.
JUDGE MIHALCHICK: Can you answer that?
A. Not really. I don’t — I mean, he’s asking a hypothetical question I don’t quite understand. I mean, he’s trying to lead me to say that it’s going to cause economic damage, and I’m not in a position to — I’m not an environmental person, so I’m not going to say that that’s necessarily going to happen. There’s other witnesses that maybe could answer that question.
Q. I appreciate that, and I’m trying to focus my question to you on the specific issue of whether –
JUDGE MIHALCHICK: Is the question whether his model included such a cost?
Q. Yes, whether increased use of health care facilities, funeral homes and so on and so forth would constitute a form of economic stimulus that would be acknowledged as such in your model?
A. I mean, if you want to look at it in a bizzare way, yeah.
Q. How is that bizzare?
A. Well, funeral homes are businesses. Hospitals are businesses. They need sick people, I mean, if you want to look at it. We’re not taking that into account, taking that pollution into account here, and you need to ask other witnesses about, you know, the environmental impacts or the effects of those.
MR. MULLER: I don’t have anything more. Thank you.
So let’s check out what this study on CapX 2020 has to say… I’m hoping I won’t be disappointed!
Comments
Labovitz on Economic Impacts of CapX — No Comments
HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>