Gordon: Beyond Keystone pipeline — The real climate debate

Hard to believe the writer used to work for Chevron as a chemical engineer — or maybe not.

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Deborah Gordon writes at Politico:

The Keystone XL pipeline debate and the entire oil sands discussion is being framed as a choice between energy security and climate security. This false dichotomy masks the real issue: How to manage the climate effects of the shift from conventional oils to unconventional oils like oil sands — projected to comprise 40 percent of global oil supplies by 2040.

Environmentalists say approving the Keystone XL pipeline would lock the world into a global warming trajectory that guarantees economic destruction, widespread human suffering and species extinction.

Skeptics, even some who admit to concern about climate effects, say Keystone is not the problem. Instead, they suggest we focus on larger, structural issues — urban sprawl, inefficient energy use and inadequate investment in renewable fuels. The benefits of getting oil from our friends to the north rather than the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries outweigh any environmental worries.

Both sides are right…

Read the entire commentary.

One thought on “Gordon: Beyond Keystone pipeline — The real climate debate”

  1. Anything “Carnegie” is suspect, because Carnegie was raised in Socialist-houses called “Chartist” houses. Carnegie stole the bessimer-process, of steel-making, and was generally acknowledged to have abused his workers until he retired. It was good that he contributed to Libraries but I hear he mostly wanted them for reposi- tories of Darwin, Marx, & Engels. Because oil is always being formed, as I type and as you read, tar sands will NOT be “40% of 2040 reserves”, imo. There are SEAS of liquid oil, deep below the Mid-west, below the water-table and the Oglala Reservoir, so the dim-bulb Turner, imo, will NOT have to worry about what his Buffalo Herds will drink. If WE hadn’t refined the Canadian Keystone oil, having done a pipeline to more safely transport it, the Red Chinese would have taken and used it, via new pipelines to the West and will yet, and I TELL you, the Demmed-Eco-Nazis will NOT be ABLE to STOP it, if the Red Chinese want it! Only ONE side is correct, the skeptics. The Enviros-Globalist-Eco-Nazi-pukes are wrong, but don’t disturb them with the facts, at any time,–facts don’t matter to them. If the skeptics are correct, and they are, then GORDEN…is also WRONG, and a “tool”,imo, of the Globalists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.