Res: The US should approve the Keystone XL pipeline.

I will keep this round brief because we are debating in circles and the same points keep arising. Con says it is unfair to argue the pipeline from the possibility of it being built in the future, and I think that statement is a fallacy. Merely due to the fact, the pipeline would take over a year to complete if it were approved at this very moment. We also know this is not the case, so we can even assume it could take them two or three years to even pass this plus another year of construction. The only way to argue this is from a future perspective. (1) Economy(2) Ecology and health(1)Con has once again brought up the point about jobs being created indirectly because of this pipeline. I have shown in over 3 sources that this estimate is among most leading experts in the field. I have also directly stated as Con said, that the amount of permanent jobs would be directly relevant as to how long it will take to make the pipeline. The permanent jobs Con has mentioned are taken into two different categories. Permanent literally meaning permanent, as in will continue after the pipeline is build. These 35 jobs Con has shown, are the ones that will go past the completion of the pipeline. This is maintenance and over watch jobs mostly. The other context of the word permanent is jobs that will be until the pipeline is finished. These are the estimates that range in the 20k mark. Since Con seems to once again miss the point of indirectly creating jobs. I will clarify for the second time. Indirect jobs are any jobs that result because of the pipeline being build. Where as construction or truck drives could be placed under both categories I will not categorize them in indirectly. Bear in mind , if con wishes to stick them in the category of direct jobs, that is around another 10k jobs that would benefit from the direct building of the pipeline. Indirect jobs could be anything from openings in the EPA, from scientist getting soul samples, from extra openings of any market/ hotel that people will have to shop or stay at because of business with the pipeline. As i have shown in the sources above this is not an opinion it is a fact that most experts agree with. Oil itself is an american necessity, building this pipeline will allow us a way to have more of it. Simple as that. Where as I and Con agreed that a lot of this could be exported and sold this is another way to stimulate the economy in itself. The gas prices as I previously stated are if the pipe line were passed and built at this instant. This is an illogical survey, due to the fact it would take over a year to complete the pipeline and the variables that would have to be considered within that time frame are impossible to figure in. This is also directly quoted by scientific studies as I have shown in sources. The one fact we do know is that it will directly impact jobs, which is the one thing that we need more than anything at the moment. With the possibility and almost guarantee of around 150,000 jobs + direct jobs, I think that is a factor we cannot ignore. (2) This point Con actually agreed with me on. He states "I will put it right out: global warming will not increase significantly as a result of Keystone", but then goes on to argue this is not the main issue despite half of his sources claiming that this is the main issue. I have shown multiple times and even gave a way to calculate this in my prior round. The pipeline itself will virtually have no effect on global warming at all which again CON has agreed to. As far the gas emissions from the pipeline itself. This argument is mute. He is stating the EPA wont regulate this well because of issues in the past, I am saying they will handle this because of the pressure they will be getting from the Obama administration and congress to control it. We can also assume the pipeline would not even be passed if they could not find a way, as stated by the president himself. So again this point is pure subjectivity. In closing. While I may not advocate the pipeline itself, I have shown why there are viable reasons for people to vote in favor of it. I have shown how it will help the economy by creating 120,000-150,000 jobsI have also shown using mathematical principles that this will have virtually no effect on global warming, and have also shown that experts say the same thing through providing multiple sources in my previous rounds. I will once again state that Con agrees with this. I have shown due to strict regulatory pressure that will be placed on the EPA, how they will be able to contain oil spills, and how the pipeline itself would not be passed otherwise.Why some people may see downsides to this, my job was not to show that it should be passed but to counter pros points and show why there are viable reasons to vote for it. I have done just that. thank you for your time.