Download report Download summary & toolkit
It’s been more than twelve years since Shell announced plans to construct a massive petrochemical facility in Beaver County, Pennsylvania, assuring everyone from local community members to the governor that the state-of-the art ethane cracker would spur economic growth. According to project backers and a study commissioned by professors at Robert Morris University (RMU) in 2014, the facility would create between 5,300 and 6,700 new direct, indirect, and induced jobs, renew business investment, and maybe even touch off a resurgence in local manufacturing. So appealing were the promises that, in order to convince Shell to locate in Pennsylvania rather than somewhere else, state lawmakers enacted the largest-ever subsidy in state history, a tax break valued at $1.65 billion.
Beaver County is an excellent case study in the local economic impacts of petrochemical development. The Ohio River Valley Institute has been tracking economic data from Beaver County and comparing the county’s track record to that of Pennsylvania and the rest of the United States. What the data reveal is that Shell’s claim that the plant would be a “windfall” to the economy has utterly failed to materialize as trends previously identified in our research continue.
Since the announcement of Shell’s petrochemical complex in 2012,
- Beaver County’s GDP has contracted by more than 12% despite double-digit growth in Pennsylvania and the nation, adjusting for inflation.
- Beaver County’s population has fallen by nearly 3% despite population growth nationally and statewide.
- Beaver County’s employment has dropped by more than 13%, according to the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, while the number of employed people grew in Pennsylvania and the US.
- Beaver County has lost business firms and establishments despite business growth nationally and statewide.
Jackson Zeiler, public health analyst at the Environmental Health Project, explains that “In addition to impacts they feel from an economic downturn, local residents also experience greater risks of negative health issues from the Shell petrochemical complex, which releases high levels of pollutants into the airshed and waterways. These negative health risks include asthma, heart disorders, mental health symptoms, poor birth outcomes, and cancer, among others. When combined with a legacy of industrial pollution in the region, the Shell complex adds to the threat of increased hospitalizations and premature deaths while reducing the quality of life for many frontline families.”