Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Energy Security VS Environment- Obama's Dilemma

Yesterday's online issue of the Washington Post highlighted the issues Obama has to decide between in the Keystone XL Pipeline proposal. Since this has been such a huge issue, written about almost every week in the papers, I won't go into the small details. But Eilperin and Mufson highlight the reasons behind the cause we're all fighting for in the protest of the pipeline.
The article starts off with, "In May, environmental writer and activist Bill McKibben — pondering a simmering energy issue — asked a NASA scientist to calculate what it would mean for the Earth’s climate if Canada extracted all of the petroleum in its rich Alberta oil sands region.
The answer to McKibben’s query came a month later: It would push atmospheric carbon concentrations so high that humans would be unable to avert a climate disaster. 'It is essentially game over,' wrote James E. Hansen, who heads NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and is one of the nation’s leading voices against fossil fuel energy."
(Click photo for article.)


  1. I just attended a talk with Jim Wallis, a well-known commentator on ethics and its interplay with political/public life. He referred to the importance of MORAL politics/economics/etc, which includes sustainable living. What about our future generations? He even specifically referred to this article and Hansen's warning.

  2. Let's hope this issue gets pushed to the forefront of the presidential campaign.