Projected taxpayer funded dollars to build the entire thing (a projected bell curve of expenditure).
Projected oil demand, and price for the time that the pipeline remains operational.
Finally, a bell curve of ROI for us.

I know I know, the environmental damage this would do is horrible, blah blah blah. I agree. I just want to know if this is at the very least a good financial decision or not.

Again, I'm looking for actual quantitative projections. Not stuff like, "but Asia is moving toward renewables".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Foxer@lemmy.ca -1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Missing from your calculation is the interest paid on the $30 billion or whatever it cost us. That money was borrowed and we pay interest on it every year. So when calculating the return on investment you have to add all of the interest costs to the cost of the project. Something that the liberals in the media tend to forget conveniently

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Also missing is the cost of maintenance over that time period. That's a non-zero amount, and increases (or should increase) with the age of the infrastructure.

[–] Foxer@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 days ago

Well it is possible that the supposed amount of profit is net rather than gross meaning that the costs of operation are taken from it. But you're right that this is not clear