Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumThomas Friedman (NYT): "I hope that Bill McKibben and his 350.org coalition go crazy."
An unexpectedly rational op-ed from a staunch supporter of the Iraq War."I HOPE the president turns down the Keystone XL oil pipeline. (Who wants the U.S. to facilitate the dirtiest extraction of the dirtiest crude from tar sands in Canadas far north?) But I dont think he will. So I hope that Bill McKibben and his 350.org coalition go crazy. Im talking chain-themselves-to-the-White-House-fence-stop-traffic-at-the-Capitol kind of crazy, because I think if we all make enough noise about this, we might be able to trade a lousy Keystone pipeline for some really good systemic responses to climate change. We dont get such an opportunity often namely, a second-term Democratic president who is under heavy pressure to approve a pipeline to create some jobs but who also has a green base that he cant ignore. So cue up the protests, and pay no attention to people counseling rational and mature behavior. We need the president to be able to say to the G.O.P. oil lobby, Im going to approve this, but it will kill me with my base. Sasha and Malia wont even be talking to me, so Ive got to get something really big in return.
Face it: The last four years have been a net setback for the green movement. While President Obama deserves real praise for passing a historic increase in vehicle mileage efficiency and limits on the emissions of new coal-fired power plants, the president also chose to remove the term climate change from his public discourse and kept his talented team of environmentalists in a witness-protection program, banning them from the climate debate. This silence coincided with record numbers of extreme weather events droughts and floods and with a huge structural change in the energy marketplace.
What was that change? Put simply, all of us who had hoped that scientific research and new technologies would find cheaper ways to provide carbon-free energy at scale wind, solar, bio, nuclear to supplant fossil fuels failed to anticipate that new technologies (particularly hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling at much greater distances) would produce new, vastly cheaper ways to tap natural gas trapped in shale as well as crude oil previously thought unreachable, making cleaner energy alternatives much less competitive. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/opinion/sunday/friedman-no-to-keystone-yes-to-crazy.html?_r=3&
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
9 replies, 2218 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (8)
ReplyReply to this post
9 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thomas Friedman (NYT): "I hope that Bill McKibben and his 350.org coalition go crazy." (Original Post)
wtmusic
Mar 2013
OP
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)1. But Tommy won't be risking his phat lifestyle with them now will he?
al bupp
(2,179 posts)2. The problem is that the oil's going get to market one way or the other
As along as the price of a barrel remains as high as it now, if they have to, and there's no pipeline, they'll just ship the oil by truck or rail. We have to ask ourselves which is better for the environment?
wtmusic
(39,166 posts)3. Currently Western Canada Select futures are 1/3 cheaper than Texas crude
meaning tar sands oil is worth a lot less on the market, due to fears about the scenario you describe actually becoming reality.
It's already more expensive to extract, without Keystone XL it will be more expensive to ship. The bottom line: the more expensive tar sands oil is to sell, the more of it stays in the ground. That's a good thing.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)7. Thanks for noting that! eom
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)4. As one of the comments says:
"Man, when Friedman himself is advocating chain-yourself-to-the-fence protests, you know we've crossed the Rubicon!"
joshcryer
(62,276 posts)6. Heh! That's fucked up.
But true.
motocicleta2
(44 posts)9. no truer words. nt