The Movement To Phase Out Fossil Fuels Is Huge, and Supported By More People Every Day
Frequent commenter Marco Polo writes: Transportation of oil will always be a difficult and risky task. It seems everyone wants the benefits of oil products, but the “not in my backyard” syndrome seems to obsess a small, but very loudly vocal group of opportunistic objectors.
I would offer the following:
It’s not really a “not in my backyard” syndrome, but rather a “not on my planet” syndrome. All environmentally (and socially) responsible people want a cessation of fossil fuel consumption as quickly as practically possible–on a planetary basis.
This is anything but a “small, but very loudly vocal group of opportunistic objectors.” Even here in the U.S. a fully 70% of voters say that the government should be actively forwarding the cause of renewable energy.
You habitually describe environmentally conscious people and the movement to replace fossil fuels as some sort of radical, fringe obsession. That’s completely incorrect, and I have to believe that, at a certain level, you understand this very well yourself.
Transportation of oil won’t always be a difficult and risky task, because in a few decades the entire practice will have ceased to exist.
Ad hominem is a wasteful and impotent tactic, yet it remains a severe challenge for some people to leave aside.
Craig,
There will always be a conflict between those who see the world and it’s problems as they are in reality, and those who dream of an idealistic future and use those dreams as an excuse not to ignore the problems of today.
That’s not to say there is no place for dreamers or those advocating a better future. Such people are neither “radical, fringe”, so long as they acknowledge the need for practical, viable solutions, within a realistic time frame, for real world circumstances.
The oil (and natural gas) industry produces over 350,000 products with only a few energy related. Every year US railroads carry over oil 500,000 tanker wagons and an increasing number of of high pressure NG tankers. These often monster trains further degrade and already decayed and unsafe US rail infrastructure.
In fact, these tanker cars have become the main cause of track infrastructure failure and degradation.
As I wrote earlier the environmental, safety and efficiency advantages of pipelines -v- rail (or tanker) is irrefutable.
Pretending that the problem will magically ” disappear” in the foreseeable future is ‘irresponsible’ and won’t happen no matter how much you wish it to be a reality!
I don’t believe even 5% of true environmentalists when given the choice to continue with a really environmentally disastrous method of transporting oil or a far superior, but not perfect, method would opt for disaster.
That’s the problem ! That’s the real difference between those who just dream of a utopian ideal while blocking any improvement in the real world, and those who acknowledge reality and work to implement practical (if not perfect) improvements.
I don’t want to sit idle and ignore the appalling cost of human life, environmental disaster and further degradation of US rail infrastructure while I await a utopian fantasy that may never arrive. I want a practical even if not perfect, solution today !
Craig, did you read the facts in my reply to “Comedians Struggle To Cover Environmental Disasters”?
Have you taken the time to investigate the dramatic and radical improvements occurring in pipeline technology to lessen impact on the environment ? Do you really want to assist the worsening toll in losses of human life, economic damage, environmental catastrophe?
Are you so committed to a “symbolic ideological dream” that you would continue to oppose a practical (not perfect) solution to save both lives and the environment just to enrich Warren Buffet ?
Will you explain in person to the relatives of those 47 people killed in one Oil Train wreck alone, or the 2500 evacuated as their town burned with thick black smoke for 5 days, that their ‘sacrifice ‘ was worth dying for because one day (but you can’t say when) oil may no longer be needed ?
What about the thousands of residents across the USA whose lives, health and towns have been destroyed by a fireball accompanied by thick black acrid smoke caused by a rail disaster ? Or don’t these folk matter ?
What about Mary Jane Deacon, whose life will never be the same after a Warren Buffet owned oil train destroyed her home killing her mother and searing the lungs of her Husband and 5 children for life. Will you tell her that the destruction of her home and that of her neighbors was better than building a pipeline ?
(Interestingly, Warren Buffet and Hillary Clinton both refused to meet Mary Deacon, while Trump spoke to the family and offered support).
Unwittingly, the blood of all these victims, and so much environmental catastrophe is the result of ill-informed protestors and objectors to pipelines.
Pipelines are not perfect, but not building pipeline won’t stop the production or usage of oil and natural gas. However, it will produce more deaths, more injury, and far more preventable environmental disaster.
Is that really want you want ?
Or will you just relax behind your Rose tinted glasses and pretend the victims don’t matter ?