Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumNYT's Andy Revkin: accept Keystone, there's nothing we can do about it.
[div style="float: left; margin-right: 12px;"]
"...the Keystone XL pipeline which, if not blocked by President Obama, would carry the crudest form of oil from Canadian tar sand deposits to Gulf Coast fuel refineries it seems theres little room for varied stances, at least according to some protesters.
As I wrote in 2011, a tight focus on Obamas decision over the pipeline could be counterproductive if the hope is to build policies that might someday reduce the need for oil, whether the source is Alberta oil sands, the floor of the Gulf of Mexico or the Niger River delta. (A solid review of the climate impact was provided by Raymond Pierrehumbert on Realclimate.org in 2011.)"
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/18/is-there-room-fo-varied-approaches-to-energy-and-climate-progress/
Dave Roberts proceeded to dispatch this "peace in our time" blather post-haste in Grist:
"A couple things have happened since then. One, Obama got reelected, pretty easily. Two, its become clear that literally anything Obama does will be distorted as anti-jobs by congressional Republicans, which is one reason they are so widely hated.
Obamas reelection is no longer at risk. Hes got nothing to lose and no reason to trim his sails to please an unpleasable opposition. Has that changed Revkins calculus? (Or Walshs? Or Grunwalds?) If so, I havent heard it.
Instead, we continue to hear vague references to things Obama could be doing if he werent stuck with these meddling Keystone kids. Revkin says Keystone is a distraction. (Distracting whom? What would they be doing if they werent distracted? He doesnt say.) Professional wanker Matt Nisbet says it distracts and limits Obamas ability to broker a deal. (A deal on what? With whom? He doesnt say.) Michael Levi says it makes 60 Senate votes for a price on carbon less likely. (Less likely than impossible?) I could cite a dozen more examples, people casually accusing Keystone activism of impeding or draining energy from other solutions.
http://grist.org/climate-energy/the-virtues-of-being-unreasonable-on-keystone/
msongs
(67,443 posts)enough
(13,262 posts)A somewhat different approach, but the same conclusion.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/opinion/nocera-how-not-to-fix-climate-change.html?ref=joenocera&_r=0
wtmusic
(39,166 posts)The ways to be stupid are limitless.