In his op-ed “The Shell cracker plant is a boon for business” (Aug. 9, TribLIVE), Allegheny County Councilman Sam DeMarco said the “science of economics” shows that Shell’s massive plastics factory in Beaver County is going to “trigger a period of regional economic growth unrivaled by any industrial project since the age of steel.”
DeMarco must have missed a report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis that predicted Shell’s plant will open in an oversaturated market and won’t come close to realizing the economic potential promised by boosters of the project.
To make his case, DeMarco cited a study that offered a “steely-eyed look” at Shell’s predicted economic impact, a study undertaken by Robert Morris University. To his credit, DeMarco mentioned a critical fact: Shell paid for the very study that, unsurprisingly, painted Shell’s economic impact in a glowing light.
What DeMarco didn’t mention is just as important: The RMU researchers cited local journalists’ reports of projected job creation that, again unsurprisingly, came from Shell.
It’s one thing for Shell to pay for a study that it can then use in public relations campaigns. It’s another thing for that study to be couched as a truly independent analysis when the data used to compile that analysis was provided by Shell, either directly or indirectly.
These kinds of studies serve one purpose: to shift the narrative away from the pollution and sickness caused by petrochemical manufacturing, and the taxpayer subsidies the industry relies upon.
Gail Neustadt
Collier