I stand with the people of Standing Rock.
11
Only 35 people will be full time employees.
But 20,000 employees plus the economic impact on local economies and support from suppliers supporting the pipeline, heavy equipment requirements etc.
Even though the pipeline has been approved by the EPA and 2 environmental impact studies by the State Department, radical environmentalists would rather have zero jobs instead of 20,000+ temporary jobs. And you wonder why Trump was elected.
But 20,000 employees plus the economic impact on local economies and support from suppliers supporting the pipeline, heavy equipment requirements etc.
Even though the pipeline has been approved by the EPA and 2 environmental impact studies by the State Department, radical environmentalists would rather have zero jobs instead of 20,000+ temporary jobs. And you wonder why Trump was elected.
3
You lose all credibility when you use the term "foreign corporations." If it were foreign solar or windmill corporation would you invoke "foreign corporations."
Love the photo "People can't drink oil". And they can't heat their homes with water either!
2
Two Times Picks (Kurfco CA, John F NH NH) have such serious flaws that they deserve a comment in addition to replies.
They write as if wind and solar are the only presently operating renewable technologies. Kurfco asks “Why do so many people think that wind and solar power can provide (all ? LL) our electricity today? No informed person thinks that. My comments name the renewable energy technologies widely used in Europe that provide heat and/or electricity 24/7 without doing environmental harm: 1) solid-waste incineration, 2) biowaste to biogas , 3) heat-pumps,most important Ground-source geothermal (GSG).
Comments revealing no awareness of these should not be Times Picks. In addition a comment (John F) referring to people who know about renewables as “environmental crazies” should never get by the algorithm.
How to deal with such non/misinformation? Commission Bill McKibben to produce a series in which these technologies are explained. As concerns solid-waste incineration, somebody will have to come to Linköping SE since there is no system in the US of the level of sophistication of the Gärstad plant 4 km from me. As concerns heat pumps, McKibben need only visit colleges in Vermont to start with. After that he can visit the Cornell Campus on Roosevelt Island where the GSG system is ready for testing or being tested.
I look forward to the series.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US Se
They write as if wind and solar are the only presently operating renewable technologies. Kurfco asks “Why do so many people think that wind and solar power can provide (all ? LL) our electricity today? No informed person thinks that. My comments name the renewable energy technologies widely used in Europe that provide heat and/or electricity 24/7 without doing environmental harm: 1) solid-waste incineration, 2) biowaste to biogas , 3) heat-pumps,most important Ground-source geothermal (GSG).
Comments revealing no awareness of these should not be Times Picks. In addition a comment (John F) referring to people who know about renewables as “environmental crazies” should never get by the algorithm.
How to deal with such non/misinformation? Commission Bill McKibben to produce a series in which these technologies are explained. As concerns solid-waste incineration, somebody will have to come to Linköping SE since there is no system in the US of the level of sophistication of the Gärstad plant 4 km from me. As concerns heat pumps, McKibben need only visit colleges in Vermont to start with. After that he can visit the Cornell Campus on Roosevelt Island where the GSG system is ready for testing or being tested.
I look forward to the series.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US Se
3
I have been saying for a long time that the environmental movement's obsessive jihad against pipelines is a strategic blunder. They are a symbolic issue of little substantive consequence or long-term impact. Throwing bodies at them has proven to be ineffective at best.
Conflating safety with "Keep it in the ground" is as weak a misdirection as the other side conflating pipelines with jobs. As the other side gleefully points out, if oil and gas are going to be extracted and consumed regardless, a new pipeline presents less risk and better energy efficiency than rail or trucks.
Having suffered such an ignominious defeat, it's time for the movement to re-think their strategy. Better to focus on needed steps on the demand side to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and make them less competitive, than try to choke off supply.
Conflating safety with "Keep it in the ground" is as weak a misdirection as the other side conflating pipelines with jobs. As the other side gleefully points out, if oil and gas are going to be extracted and consumed regardless, a new pipeline presents less risk and better energy efficiency than rail or trucks.
Having suffered such an ignominious defeat, it's time for the movement to re-think their strategy. Better to focus on needed steps on the demand side to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and make them less competitive, than try to choke off supply.
2
You can't take us back to the '50s unless you at least triple the unionization of workers.
2
Crooks. Trump signed an executive order that benefits him & his business personally. He must be stopped.
4
“The number of workers employed in generating solar power now surpasses those employed in the generation of electricity from coal, gas and oil combined.” And what is the total of global MW hours of electricity produced of wind and solar? That is the actual measure of it is a viable option to replace oil and gas or not. Not how many people work in that industry. If it takes that many people now to produce such little power output (As compared to oil and gas) any attempt to ramp this up will require more people which means higher prices for consumers. And unless it’s financially viable for consumers then they will begin the process of rejecting it. In order for non-hydrocarbon energy sources to be implemented with enough numbers to make a global impact they cannot be done at the cost of a thousand dollar a month hydro bill. This is what happens when wind and solar are implemented incorrectly. Reference small town and rural customers in Ontario Canada.
1
President Obama wasn't able to do enough to position the U.S. to capture the alternative fuel market & jobs. China has been moving quickly to take control of that industry and the millions of jobs that will be created. But, at least Obama tried in the face of stiff opposition.
Trump is abandoning that market, which means the U.S. will lose out on most of that huge future opportunity
Trump is abandoning that market, which means the U.S. will lose out on most of that huge future opportunity
3
In recent years environmental protesters turned their attention to tangible targets, pipelines. The idea being it was easy to gather and maintain support when the protesters could achieve a victory (Blocking a pipeline).
The fundamental flaw in this process is the majority of the general public and main stream media is energy illiterate. So the targets they choose would have little to no effect in improving the world’s environment.
During the many years the Keystone XL pipeline was delayed approval under the Obama administration the US quietly planned to once again ship its oil on the world market. This decision would ensure pipelines like the Dakota Access line and many more like it will happen in the years to come. While everyone was busy patting themselves on the back for banning Keystone XL thirty days later the US began shipping its product again on the world market. Much of this oil comes from the Bakken shale formation which is in North and South Dakota.
If the energy consumer group known as protesters were energy literate their efforts might be better focused in areas that would actually make a difference.
Sorry to wreck your day.
The fundamental flaw in this process is the majority of the general public and main stream media is energy illiterate. So the targets they choose would have little to no effect in improving the world’s environment.
During the many years the Keystone XL pipeline was delayed approval under the Obama administration the US quietly planned to once again ship its oil on the world market. This decision would ensure pipelines like the Dakota Access line and many more like it will happen in the years to come. While everyone was busy patting themselves on the back for banning Keystone XL thirty days later the US began shipping its product again on the world market. Much of this oil comes from the Bakken shale formation which is in North and South Dakota.
If the energy consumer group known as protesters were energy literate their efforts might be better focused in areas that would actually make a difference.
Sorry to wreck your day.
1
This project may be DoA because of its dubious economics at current and projected international oil prices, not to speak of the inevitable environmental and social risks it would encounter. Trump may have dealt the industry a hollow illusion reviving this canard.
2
We will pump oil and ship it until it is more expensive than the alternative sources available. That is not looking backward. It is addressing reality.
Insisting that the world will do otherwise is hysterical shrieking and a wealthy nation's conceit.
Insisting that the world will do otherwise is hysterical shrieking and a wealthy nation's conceit.
1
This article is completely nonsense. How many permanent jobs are created by building a new bridge, highway, rail line, or any other infrastructure project that the Democrats want to build?
2
Bridges, highways and rail lines have real value to the people being moved on or by them.
Pipelines, particularly Keystone, move product to refineries. The product to be moved by Keystone is bitumen, sometimes called diluted tar sands. It is one of the dirtiest energy sources that there is, and costs much to refine into usable oil. And its intent is to provide a make work project for Gulf Coast refineries, then oil tankers to take to China to supplant their coal use.
China, major burner of coal and serious air polluter, appears to be more committed to trying renewable energy that the retrograde Trump Administration is. Think about that.
Also consider that the concern of the future is not energy, but water. Keystone and Dakota both threaten potable water supplies. Dakota goes under an important reservoir, and Keystone traverses the largest aquifer in America. Try drinking oil, or irrigating crops with it...
Pipelines, particularly Keystone, move product to refineries. The product to be moved by Keystone is bitumen, sometimes called diluted tar sands. It is one of the dirtiest energy sources that there is, and costs much to refine into usable oil. And its intent is to provide a make work project for Gulf Coast refineries, then oil tankers to take to China to supplant their coal use.
China, major burner of coal and serious air polluter, appears to be more committed to trying renewable energy that the retrograde Trump Administration is. Think about that.
Also consider that the concern of the future is not energy, but water. Keystone and Dakota both threaten potable water supplies. Dakota goes under an important reservoir, and Keystone traverses the largest aquifer in America. Try drinking oil, or irrigating crops with it...
3
This pipeline is being built to aide Canada and China, not the US. It will connect with another existing pipeline near Chicago. The oil will then travel to the Gulf Coast where it will be exported, primarily to China. This project will help China and hurt the US. This route is far cheaper than crossing the Canadian Rockies. Gerry Messler
4
This is about the Koch brothers, the gazillionaires who've monopolized the fossil fuel industry, who want oil and uranium exploration in the Grand Canyon Nat'l Park. They are revered for their business acumen, foresight and integrity. They have more wealth than 4 generations of Kochs can spend. If they were courageous, had foresight, why wouldn't they do something with their capital like invest in renewable energy? What's to lose? Even more generations of Kochs would have limitless wealth. They could do something for this planet, for all people, all species. They would be revered.
Like the other billionaires who are buying land and citizenships in New Zealand (Peter Thiel) for when we come for them with pitch forks, The Koch Brothers literally TAKE. That's all, they TAKE, and they suppress. They suppress women, science, people that are not white or weren't born here, for profit and control.
Why? Because they are men, white men, old white men, threatened, resentful, old white men that are afraid. On a recently vandalized building someone wrote, " Diversity is another word for white genocide." I think they meant white patricide. Being threatened and resentful of the 'new' comes with age. It is especially hard for aging men who've felt they were in charge. They lose their sense of identity. Women do too, but if we have children we see ourselves giving up our very selves from the moment our bodies begin to change.
It's about The Kochs, scared old white men.
Like the other billionaires who are buying land and citizenships in New Zealand (Peter Thiel) for when we come for them with pitch forks, The Koch Brothers literally TAKE. That's all, they TAKE, and they suppress. They suppress women, science, people that are not white or weren't born here, for profit and control.
Why? Because they are men, white men, old white men, threatened, resentful, old white men that are afraid. On a recently vandalized building someone wrote, " Diversity is another word for white genocide." I think they meant white patricide. Being threatened and resentful of the 'new' comes with age. It is especially hard for aging men who've felt they were in charge. They lose their sense of identity. Women do too, but if we have children we see ourselves giving up our very selves from the moment our bodies begin to change.
It's about The Kochs, scared old white men.
11
Anybody posting agreement here, should be forwarding this article to his or her Member of Congress where it will do some good. In some ways, our failure to engage in politics is the reason we now have Trump. We each have only one voice in Congress, and constant pressure on your member of congress will have far more effect than posting here. Print it, handwrite an endorsement; mail it. Repeat next week on the best article you can find.
4
First, the U.S. needs to have energy independence from OPEC. Second, we need to move to renewable forms of energy. Taking step 2 before taking step 1, i.e. the Obama approach, creates huge problems for our economy and overall well-being. Duh.
1
"Mr. Reason,"
As of now, we already ARE energy independent. And exploiting the Canadian Tar Sands, the biggest presence in doing so is a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, does NOTHING toward advancing energy independence, as it is a make work program for Gulf Coast refineries and destined for export to China.
And, for the first time, free of subsidy, renewables are competitive with fossil fuels. Do I hear anyone advocating the end of the oil depletion allowance?
As of now, we already ARE energy independent. And exploiting the Canadian Tar Sands, the biggest presence in doing so is a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, does NOTHING toward advancing energy independence, as it is a make work program for Gulf Coast refineries and destined for export to China.
And, for the first time, free of subsidy, renewables are competitive with fossil fuels. Do I hear anyone advocating the end of the oil depletion allowance?
5
The front runners have stepped back. In six weeks Trump and his republican clowns have begun turning back the hands of time. Perhaps the energy front will be less damaged because the free market is bending towards renewables
2
Taken directly from the DOE report cited by this article:
"Electric Power Generation and Fuels technologies directly employ more than 1.9 million workers. In 2016, 55 percent, or 1.1 million, of these employees worked in traditional coal, oil, and gas, while almost 800,000 workers were employed in low carbon emission generation technologies, including renewables, nuclear, and advanced/low emission natural gas."
Of course, Mr. McKibben's assertion was specific to power generation, but it's hard to imagine he isn't misleading a few readers as to the actual employment landscape of the energy sector. Renewable energy is indeed a high growth industry - overselling the argument only undermines its merits.
"Electric Power Generation and Fuels technologies directly employ more than 1.9 million workers. In 2016, 55 percent, or 1.1 million, of these employees worked in traditional coal, oil, and gas, while almost 800,000 workers were employed in low carbon emission generation technologies, including renewables, nuclear, and advanced/low emission natural gas."
Of course, Mr. McKibben's assertion was specific to power generation, but it's hard to imagine he isn't misleading a few readers as to the actual employment landscape of the energy sector. Renewable energy is indeed a high growth industry - overselling the argument only undermines its merits.
3
"Environmental racism" is mostly a myth. The population of Flint, MI is majority white. Most of the refineries, factories, etc. in poor neighborhoods were there before the residents. When many of these facilities were built, the workers who lived nearby were white - when living close to your job was a necessity. People don't like living next to a refinery today so housing there is cheap. Refineries aren't being built in poor neighborhoods. Poor people are moving into neighborhoods near refineries because that's all they can afford.
2
The environmental concerns about the pipeline are not in the U.S.; they're in Canada.
We don't need the excess oil; we're doing Canada a favor by getting their oil to the market.
The pipeline is not necessary for U.S. energy; however, we need to examine the benefit to Canada and determine if it's in both counties best interest to complete it.
We don't need the excess oil; we're doing Canada a favor by getting their oil to the market.
The pipeline is not necessary for U.S. energy; however, we need to examine the benefit to Canada and determine if it's in both counties best interest to complete it.
1
A Caesar forcing HIS opinion on the (his?) PEOPLE.
For all the chestbeating from Big Oil fans, I have a question: have any of you experienced a pipeline disaster? In your own town? In your own neighborhood? I lived in Bellingham in 1999 when Olympic Pipe Line Co.'s aging line broke open in the heart of the city. Three people were burned beyond recognition and 277,000 gallons of gasoline spilled creating a fire that looked as if hell's doors were suddenly flung open. It's not a question if a pipeline will fail, but when.
11
Don't forget that a pipeline failure of either one has the potential to foul potable water sources. In the case of Keystone, the Ogallala aquifer, the largest in the country. You can creat energy by many different means. There is no substitute for potable water.
2
Well said, Mr. McKibben. There is also the strange but actual fact that Donald Trump has investments in the Dakota Pipeline. The future is heated and cooled by renewable energy sources -- this is where the jobs are.
11
What all of you miss is that Trump's supporters need these "pipelines" just like they need all the pipelines of his con job to make America Great Again by simply allowing his voters to Feel Good About Themselves Again such as those folks in the Warren/Youngstown, Ohio areas who swallowed his lies that he's going to bring back the economic prosperity of those Ghost Towns.
Americans take more time and give more thought to purchasing a car than they did to elect the president who we now have.
Americans take more time and give more thought to purchasing a car than they did to elect the president who we now have.
11
What is environmental racism?
4
When you put the toxic industries, waste dumps, incinerators, etc., in poor
neighborhood where many African American and other people live. Think of the South Bronx and parts of Louisiana.
neighborhood where many African American and other people live. Think of the South Bronx and parts of Louisiana.
5
Tell me, each of the 145 commenters in print, how is your home or apartment heated. I tell you in my main comment about space heating in Sweden, not done by burning fossil fuels at all. By contrast, everywhere I go in New England or in the New York State I left 20 years ago, all I see, with the exceptions mentioned in my blog is heating by fossil fuel burning. If you do not want tar-sand oil and fracking-gas pipelines then the choice is yours, at least if you own your own home.
So tell me, I want data.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - US SE
All homes in my neighborhood and my city heated either by district-heating (see comment and blog) or by heat pumps of many kinds. There are NO oil delivery or propane delivery trucks and no natural gas pipelines. You do not need those pipelines.
So tell me, I want data.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - US SE
All homes in my neighborhood and my city heated either by district-heating (see comment and blog) or by heat pumps of many kinds. There are NO oil delivery or propane delivery trucks and no natural gas pipelines. You do not need those pipelines.
13
Pipelines provide jobs and this is about capitalism and jobs. When the Alaskan pipeline was built in the mid seventies many people were put to work and did very well financially. They did better than they could in their towns and states. People in LA and NY do not understand those people in remote areas. They want jobs and will finally get what they were promised. Luckily the president is not a bureaucrat.
4
How long does it take to build a pipeline? Once it's built what do you do for work? Consider the jobs created by building a renewable energy project, like geothermal. More jobs plus you don't have the guilt hangover of knowing you've contributed to climate change.
8
Did you read the article? To build 27000 to maintain 35 oh so many jobs. Does that outweigh the first oil spill? Would like in your aquaphir? Your back yard?
2
I believe one definition of conservatism is not changing, leaving things as they are. This definitely defines Trump and today's neocons. They think the robber baron mentality, and keeping women in the kitchen, minorities beneath their heel is what makes America great. "Sad," as Mr. Trump would say.
5
Until wasteful energy practice gets under control, the costly production of tar sand energy is unpatriotic.
4
For those who are students of the teachings of Jesus, he describes two attitudes: lust and anger. Lust is wishful thinking about the future, and anger is about the past. Mr. Trump's backward perspective is not creative. You wonder what he is so mad about. A patient of mine commented recently that, "Trump is setting us back a century." I am not sure that is true, but it does appear that he is marching us into the past. Even the appointment of Scott Pruitt for EPA chief is backward.
Speaking of backward, would that we could go back two years, start over, and elect Hillary Clinton to be our president. I'll vote for that!
Speaking of backward, would that we could go back two years, start over, and elect Hillary Clinton to be our president. I'll vote for that!
2
Hillary Clinton advocated and pushed for tracking in countries around the world where she jetted as Secretary of State.
3
It's simple. If the future is about enough growth to feed and placate the growing billions, you will need fossil fuels in abundance. If the future is about more agrarian, less availability, slow to no growth and a world population several billion less than currently, then we can cap the wells, scrap the pipelines, stop the exploration and drilling and settle down to yurt life. We can have Bill pen the flowery prose explaining all this to those third-worlders who will be sacrificed on his alter of sustainability.
4
What is your time horizon? At what point do those growing exceed the planets ability to feed and care for them? What about the reality that fossil fuels were all created millions of years ago and that they aren't making anymore. Does it occur to you that endless growth is impossible on a finite planet. Just saying.....
4
People in third world countries are getting sacrificed in either situation, no? No matter what they will pay the high price, which is immensely saddening. Given the options Abrahams, if the earth keeps warning... well you can't water crops with gasoline. Can you?
1
Don the Con is signing all these executive orders before his cabinet is formed and he has an opportunity to properly review and vet his ideas with all the appropriate government agencies. It's very scary to see one man -- a man who lives in his own version of reality and who relies upon obscure websites and urban myths for his facts -- taking action without consulting.
4
The reason POTUS's cabinet is not filled is because petty Dems can't believe they lost House, Senate and White House. They can't accept the reality that they no longer have power over the President, his phone and his pen. Conservatives had to sit back and watch as Obama shoved his radical leftist agendas down their throats. Now it's the lefts turn.
1
I spent 2 hours in line for gas in the early 70s, at a closed gas station, based on a rumor. By 76 we had acres of roof top solar on tech companies in San Jose. GOvernment incentives got cut and they disappeared. Fossil fuel subsidies,tax breaks and other incentives continued but clean new tech clean energy was on its own. I dream of how USA could have put that oil and gas and coal federal handouts to solar, wind,wave,geo-thermal and ways not yet invented.
5
In the overall energy picture, Keystone amounts to one drop in a large bucket. Trump's revival of Keystone thus amounts to a symbolic token reversal of a symbolic token step towards decarbonizing energy use and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. How different the world might be today if a bonafide US environmental movement had really pushed for a genuinely effective revenue neutral carbon tax in 2009 (akin, for example to what actually did pass in British Columbia then), and successfully lobbied to get it approved by the then Democratic majorities in Congress and signed by the Democratic president Obama. Instead of indulging in eight years of politically correct posturing, clickavism, and feel-good marches to nowhere.
3
So, count on me to send money to Dakota Access and others resisting the pipelines. And, I'll stand on the picket line as well.
But what can I (actually we) do to stop this mad plunge forward with fossil fuels? Simple, really - reduce carbon footprint to zero. So, this spring, I'm switching to solar hot water, and solar electric, and adding insulation. As for daily transportation, an electric car is in my future. (Tesla's auto driving features have reduced accidents by 40 percent.) And, I'll save money as solar is cheaper than fossil. And, industry will shift to meet my (our) demand. No one will want to build a pipeline to carry a product that no one wants to buy.
Just imagine for a moment what our country would be like once fossil fuels are in our distant past. The sun would shine clearly, not blocked by smog. No more oil leaks that despoil and destroy our lands. No more nuclear plants spewing radiation everywhere in 'accidents' that aren't supposed to happen. People would stop dying from asthma attacks brought on by air pollution. Our children would grow up free, strong, and healthy. And, we'd save the planet, and stop the sixth extinction in its tracks (we are on the menu on this one).
I keep mixing up we, us, and I. But aren't they the same? Together, Trump or not, we can move forward on this. Trump can't stop us, only get out of the way. We can relegate him to the dustbin of history.
But what can I (actually we) do to stop this mad plunge forward with fossil fuels? Simple, really - reduce carbon footprint to zero. So, this spring, I'm switching to solar hot water, and solar electric, and adding insulation. As for daily transportation, an electric car is in my future. (Tesla's auto driving features have reduced accidents by 40 percent.) And, I'll save money as solar is cheaper than fossil. And, industry will shift to meet my (our) demand. No one will want to build a pipeline to carry a product that no one wants to buy.
Just imagine for a moment what our country would be like once fossil fuels are in our distant past. The sun would shine clearly, not blocked by smog. No more oil leaks that despoil and destroy our lands. No more nuclear plants spewing radiation everywhere in 'accidents' that aren't supposed to happen. People would stop dying from asthma attacks brought on by air pollution. Our children would grow up free, strong, and healthy. And, we'd save the planet, and stop the sixth extinction in its tracks (we are on the menu on this one).
I keep mixing up we, us, and I. But aren't they the same? Together, Trump or not, we can move forward on this. Trump can't stop us, only get out of the way. We can relegate him to the dustbin of history.
12
Without the elements of greed, avarice and ignorance on the part of the fossil fuel industry and it's fossilized followers I would not begin to comprehend the endless resistance to alternative energies and associated progressive methods. Why such a large group of supply siders would not have seen the pot at the end of the alternative fuels rainbow is,... well it just is.
This is a business in which sunlight, wind and the temperature of the very top of the earths crust are collectd and sold as electricity. All that needs be done is to figure out how and the fruits will follow. There would be jobs, profits and public good will. Instead we have in great part squandered decades, trillions of dollars, millions of lives, destroyed huge swathes of flora and fauna and lost what has become precariously precious time. And all primarily to further enrich the richest among us.
The damage to this planet and all of it's inhabitants and the loss of potential, relatively risk free, revenue is collossal. The clock is ticking and it cannot be silenced by putting it in a pipe or burying it in a mine.
This is a business in which sunlight, wind and the temperature of the very top of the earths crust are collectd and sold as electricity. All that needs be done is to figure out how and the fruits will follow. There would be jobs, profits and public good will. Instead we have in great part squandered decades, trillions of dollars, millions of lives, destroyed huge swathes of flora and fauna and lost what has become precariously precious time. And all primarily to further enrich the richest among us.
The damage to this planet and all of it's inhabitants and the loss of potential, relatively risk free, revenue is collossal. The clock is ticking and it cannot be silenced by putting it in a pipe or burying it in a mine.
13
@ PG Detroit - 34 minutes ago from Larry Sweden 52 minutes ago. PG, your second paragraph is a perfect complement to my comment 3 down from yours counting yours as 1. Perhaps you could reply as I do here.
I have tried for 3 years to get the Times to provide its first ever OpEd on heat-pump alternatives, on solid-waste incineration, and on conversion of food waste to biogas. I have written to Editors, columnists, Public Editor without the slightest success.
Bill McKibben did mention a family in Vermont that had installed a heat pump but rather indirectly and with no exact information. I will be sending him jpgs showing the technologies standard in Sweden and better represented in Vermont - given its small size - than perhaps anywhere else in the northeast hoping he can provide a new column.
I will move one or more of these jpgs up to a new post at my blog ASAP. Some appeared quite a while ago but will try to provide anew.
If only we could get the Times to show, for example, the devastation caused by coal mining and tar-sand mining and then show how solid-waste incineration, using a readily available "free" resource can produce the same electricity with 1/3 to 1/2 the CO2 output per unit energy without disturbing a single tree.
The Times is extraordinarily blind in this area.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-US SE
I have tried for 3 years to get the Times to provide its first ever OpEd on heat-pump alternatives, on solid-waste incineration, and on conversion of food waste to biogas. I have written to Editors, columnists, Public Editor without the slightest success.
Bill McKibben did mention a family in Vermont that had installed a heat pump but rather indirectly and with no exact information. I will be sending him jpgs showing the technologies standard in Sweden and better represented in Vermont - given its small size - than perhaps anywhere else in the northeast hoping he can provide a new column.
I will move one or more of these jpgs up to a new post at my blog ASAP. Some appeared quite a while ago but will try to provide anew.
If only we could get the Times to show, for example, the devastation caused by coal mining and tar-sand mining and then show how solid-waste incineration, using a readily available "free" resource can produce the same electricity with 1/3 to 1/2 the CO2 output per unit energy without disturbing a single tree.
The Times is extraordinarily blind in this area.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen-US SE
2
No resistance at all - let's agree to END all subsidies for all energy industries and let the market decide. You cool with that?
Mr. McKibben,
As a professor, I'm sure you understand that the statement, "Mr. Trump clearly prefers a world where Indians are simply colorful set decorations in the diorama of American history," doesn't logically follow from his executive actions, or anything he has said, regarding the pipeline.
As a man, I'm sure you understand that it's wrong to put those kind of words in another man's mouth.
It would be prudent to correct, or rescind, that sentence.
Niko, an undergraduate student in Boston
As a professor, I'm sure you understand that the statement, "Mr. Trump clearly prefers a world where Indians are simply colorful set decorations in the diorama of American history," doesn't logically follow from his executive actions, or anything he has said, regarding the pipeline.
As a man, I'm sure you understand that it's wrong to put those kind of words in another man's mouth.
It would be prudent to correct, or rescind, that sentence.
Niko, an undergraduate student in Boston
7
The "People Can't Drink Oil" sign made me think of my own hypocrisy, decades ago, when I was protesting our dependence on foreign oil. It suddenly occurred to me that I'd driven to the protest in a car that was powered by foreign oil.
I wonder how the woman carrying that sign got to the rally.
That said, a very-gradually rising carbon tax strikes me as fair.
On the one hand, if Mary Jones spends $500,000 to buy some land known to have oil reserves, we can't simply declare Mary Jones to be an evil fat cat that should be prohibited from extracting oil from her land. That would effectively confiscate money from Mary Jones. If "we" don't want that oil extracted, "we" should pay for that.
It nevertheless strikes me as fair to impose a very-gradually rising tax on oil-producing land that eventually makes the land worth a tad less than it otherwise would be worth. Over a great deal of time, the land price won't include a premium for its oil-producing potential.
That strikes me as fair if such a tax is phased in very gradually -- but not if it is imposed suddenly. If that happens and the owner loses money because the tax makes it prohibitively expensive to extract oil, we're effectively deciding that a private landowner should bear the entire cost of a position that "we" have declared is correct. Nothing wrong with such a declaration, but "we" should bear the cost of it, not some private landowner. Nor does that change by declaring the landowner to be an "evil fat cat."
I wonder how the woman carrying that sign got to the rally.
That said, a very-gradually rising carbon tax strikes me as fair.
On the one hand, if Mary Jones spends $500,000 to buy some land known to have oil reserves, we can't simply declare Mary Jones to be an evil fat cat that should be prohibited from extracting oil from her land. That would effectively confiscate money from Mary Jones. If "we" don't want that oil extracted, "we" should pay for that.
It nevertheless strikes me as fair to impose a very-gradually rising tax on oil-producing land that eventually makes the land worth a tad less than it otherwise would be worth. Over a great deal of time, the land price won't include a premium for its oil-producing potential.
That strikes me as fair if such a tax is phased in very gradually -- but not if it is imposed suddenly. If that happens and the owner loses money because the tax makes it prohibitively expensive to extract oil, we're effectively deciding that a private landowner should bear the entire cost of a position that "we" have declared is correct. Nothing wrong with such a declaration, but "we" should bear the cost of it, not some private landowner. Nor does that change by declaring the landowner to be an "evil fat cat."
1
@ MyThreeCents - What I would really like to hear from you and the other 100+ commenters is how your home or apartment is heated. My main comment tells readers how all homes in my neighborhood and in my city are heated and my blog being updated step-by-step shows these technologies. They do not use fossil fuels and they heat whole cities including mine, Linköping, Sweden.
So tell me here, at my blog, or to my Gmail at the blog
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Duel citizen US SE
So tell me here, at my blog, or to my Gmail at the blog
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Duel citizen US SE
Many people who came to the protests in Manhattan came by subway and commuter rail. The trains were packed.
1
Make America 19th Century again, build Keystone and burn more coal. I remember oh so well the coal fired furnace in Rumford, RI, kept the home fires burning. I miss it so much.
Want to put people to work, lots of them. Want to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Here today in minimalist form. Bill McKibben can provide photos in a future column.
Replace all coal-fired plants with solid-waste fired plants exactly like the world's most advanced installation at Gärstad 4 km north of my home here in SE. A great glass house next to E4 at the Linköping N exit.
Replace oil and natural gas units with ground-source geothermal heat-pump systems, invisible to visitora to Champlain College, Saint Michaels College, Bennington, VT state building, Vietnam Memorial on I-89 all in VT.
Heat pumps in every home, solar on every apartment building.
Think Integrated Solar, a Vermont metaphor for total integration of mixed renewables; Vermont first in the 21st century, then New England, at least.
Bill, I look forward to a presentation in the Times of the kind I cannot offer in 1500 characters.
Larry
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - US SE
Want to put people to work, lots of them. Want to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Here today in minimalist form. Bill McKibben can provide photos in a future column.
Replace all coal-fired plants with solid-waste fired plants exactly like the world's most advanced installation at Gärstad 4 km north of my home here in SE. A great glass house next to E4 at the Linköping N exit.
Replace oil and natural gas units with ground-source geothermal heat-pump systems, invisible to visitora to Champlain College, Saint Michaels College, Bennington, VT state building, Vietnam Memorial on I-89 all in VT.
Heat pumps in every home, solar on every apartment building.
Think Integrated Solar, a Vermont metaphor for total integration of mixed renewables; Vermont first in the 21st century, then New England, at least.
Bill, I look forward to a presentation in the Times of the kind I cannot offer in 1500 characters.
Larry
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen - US SE
6
@ myself - LL - I have now begun to update the blog so there are now pictures of Ground-source geothermal heat pump systems at Champlain College and on an island, Styrsö, on the west coast of Sweden. More to be added:
@ http://only-neverinsweden.blogspot.se/2017/01/bill-mckibben-at-new-york-...
@ http://only-neverinsweden.blogspot.se/2017/01/bill-mckibben-at-new-york-...
2
These pipelines are private infrastructure to be built at private economic risk using private money in support of the public economy. If there were no public economic benefit, private money would not take the financial risk to build them. If it were more economical to meet the energy needs of the United States using solar, wind or nuclear power, there would be strong market pressure to build infrastructure for those entities instead. It is much safer and more economical to move large quantities of fossil fuel by pipeline than by rail or truck. Using current technology, it should be possible to construct a pipeline that poses minimal environmental risk and to sharply limit the impact should a leak occur. If a major war breaks out in Europe, the Middle East or Asia (not unlikely), the United States would be buffered from the economic fallout that would occur from disruption of the world oil supply. Remember the gasoline rationing, long gas lines and economic recession caused by the OPEC oil embargo of 1973?. Imagine trying to fight a war on top of that without adequate fuel supply! Moreover, building pipelines does not preclude building infrastructure for solar, wind and/or nuclear power should those prove economically feasible. Building the pipelines makes good economic sense, would bolster the security of the country and could be done without significantly injuring the environment. Sometimes Trump is right. Let it be done.
9
@ JT Stasiak - JT it is even easier to not move the coal or the tar-sand oil at all but to leave it in place. Swedish cities including my own, Linköping same size as Burlington, VT, are heated by using a natural resource even more readily available in your city, Hartford, or even better, Springfield MA north of you, a resource that is used in Springfield, for example, to build mountains next to the Mass Turnpike.
The resource is solid waste, a large fraction of which after removal of plastics to recycling is renewable energy fuel. I have not seen Hartford's landfills so I use Springfield as example. Springfield's landfill mountains are ugly, produce vast volumes of methane, and have absolutely nothing to recommend them. If their contents were used as fuel, Springfield could end the construction of mountains, reduce the burning of coal, and be a much better place to live.
The evidence? Just come to Sweden and we can show you a country where landfills are forbidden by law, where coal use has been dramatically reduced, and where we are all keeping warm in a way far better than I ever experienced in my 62 years as resident in the US.
We do not need your pipelines - at all!
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
The resource is solid waste, a large fraction of which after removal of plastics to recycling is renewable energy fuel. I have not seen Hartford's landfills so I use Springfield as example. Springfield's landfill mountains are ugly, produce vast volumes of methane, and have absolutely nothing to recommend them. If their contents were used as fuel, Springfield could end the construction of mountains, reduce the burning of coal, and be a much better place to live.
The evidence? Just come to Sweden and we can show you a country where landfills are forbidden by law, where coal use has been dramatically reduced, and where we are all keeping warm in a way far better than I ever experienced in my 62 years as resident in the US.
We do not need your pipelines - at all!
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen US SE
3
You are lost in the past. Many companies take on projects that privatize profit and socialize risk. They do not give a fig about water pollution, Indian illness or destruction of the earth. It's all about hoarding the benjamins. Greed rules.
2
There is no future expense imaginable greater than society's collapse from climate change, and that is not a a fantasy; it is science. We do not WANT cheaper oil. It is a cheap ticket to our destruction.
Ahhh, yes, eminent domain. Such a charming throwback. Let's just see how the good folks that have so staunchly defended their "champion" and his "vision" feel when he causes to have their property taken away for one of his grandiose schemes, and then starts explaining that it is their tax dollars which will pay for his grandiose pyramid , while his bootheel lick-spittle lackeys rake in ludicrous amounts of filthy lucre.
3
Let's get some fake facts out of the way. Solar and Wind are a fool's paradise. They survived the past 10 years on a diet of high oil prices, subsidies, and the pleas of bleeding-heart liberals. All that is history. Even Germany, oft quoted for its wind-farms, is clinging tight to its coal and nuclear. The only bright light for Europe in Wind are their sales pitches for contracts in the USA. That went well under Obama, but not anymore. If you have investments in either, sell. The party is over.
Now, for developing countries in Africa and elsewhere, it does make sense, but the case is more on humanitarian grounds than anything vaguely business. So Mr. Gates and others, please do continue your good work.
With Wind and Solar growth doomed to at best flattening-out, if not sloping downward, countries are gonna rip their climate agreements, as they should. There was never any good faith anyway signing them other than the photo-op with great human being Obama. Keep the photo, rest in peace.
Another myth: construction only provides temporary jobs. And where does one go for permanent? Aah, governments, universities, and some op-ed departments. Listen, all jobs are temporary these days. But they provide valuable experience for the next one. Just like they do for photographers, journos, and programmers working for Twitter and Yahoo. Don't pooh-pooh temp jobs, these are the only real jobs around these days. And in Construction, they pay well. Very well.
Now, for developing countries in Africa and elsewhere, it does make sense, but the case is more on humanitarian grounds than anything vaguely business. So Mr. Gates and others, please do continue your good work.
With Wind and Solar growth doomed to at best flattening-out, if not sloping downward, countries are gonna rip their climate agreements, as they should. There was never any good faith anyway signing them other than the photo-op with great human being Obama. Keep the photo, rest in peace.
Another myth: construction only provides temporary jobs. And where does one go for permanent? Aah, governments, universities, and some op-ed departments. Listen, all jobs are temporary these days. But they provide valuable experience for the next one. Just like they do for photographers, journos, and programmers working for Twitter and Yahoo. Don't pooh-pooh temp jobs, these are the only real jobs around these days. And in Construction, they pay well. Very well.
5
Good sign, "People can't drink oil." When the Missouri and Mississippi are contaminated, how will that affect Middle America? Why isn't there more news of the leaks that are contaminating our waters and soils?
While we often speak of the Midas touch, there's rarely a mention of Midas's death. Everything he touched turned to gold? So he starved to death. The moral of the tale is that money isn't everything. And water is more essential to life than oil, as the sign bearer testifies.
While we often speak of the Midas touch, there's rarely a mention of Midas's death. Everything he touched turned to gold? So he starved to death. The moral of the tale is that money isn't everything. And water is more essential to life than oil, as the sign bearer testifies.
3
I marched in the Women's March LA, which dwarfed Trump's inauguration crowd. If there is a face off between Native Americans and authorities at Standing Rock, I'm going there. Trump beware: you and your cronies will be shocked at how many thousands converge on North Dakota to protect the rights of the Sioux and all Native Americans, and resist the corporate agenda to plunder the planet for profit and short term gain in the face of growing evidence of global warming.
4
What are the Trump voters going to do now that they have elected a president who is destroying what little respect the world had for America?
We are only beginning to see the damage Trump is causing for America and it's not yet a week into his 4 year term.
Europeans are aghast that Americans have exercised such poor judgment in electing Trump.
We American expats overseas are receiving a consistent message of lost respect for the United States.
I have no answer for their comments!
We are only beginning to see the damage Trump is causing for America and it's not yet a week into his 4 year term.
Europeans are aghast that Americans have exercised such poor judgment in electing Trump.
We American expats overseas are receiving a consistent message of lost respect for the United States.
I have no answer for their comments!
2
Trump voters, like myself, are ecstatic that finally something is being done in Washington that goes along with their conservative values. What the progressive liberals are feeling now is what we have been facing 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for 8 years. It does not feel good but it might go away in 8 years or so if the left comes down off their lofty east and west coast ivory towers and see what they were doing to middle America. But the way it looks now the left has no chance of a comeback any time soon. All one has to do is look at the majority of candidates to run the DNC.
1
I don't care what trump thinks because he is ignorant.
I do care what trump signs. I doubt he even knows what he is signing, or what its impact will be. But the public will never really know, we only know that it will likely be bad.
McKibben generally has the correct narrative. I generally agree with him, and always support and vote for politicians of like mind.
My worldview is however very dark. It is already too late, we have already gone by a number of tipping points. Disaster is already baked in, it is merely a matter of time. All environmental problems are driven by the population explosion. The population which is at 7.5 billion, has a net increase of 80 million (births minus deaths) every year. This is the equivalent of the population of Germany. This swamps any and all efforts to address energy, food, waste, etc production.
So while I hope that the rape of the environment never kicks into high gear, in the end it really now longer matters.
I do care what trump signs. I doubt he even knows what he is signing, or what its impact will be. But the public will never really know, we only know that it will likely be bad.
McKibben generally has the correct narrative. I generally agree with him, and always support and vote for politicians of like mind.
My worldview is however very dark. It is already too late, we have already gone by a number of tipping points. Disaster is already baked in, it is merely a matter of time. All environmental problems are driven by the population explosion. The population which is at 7.5 billion, has a net increase of 80 million (births minus deaths) every year. This is the equivalent of the population of Germany. This swamps any and all efforts to address energy, food, waste, etc production.
So while I hope that the rape of the environment never kicks into high gear, in the end it really now longer matters.
4
Trump's reversal of President Obama's decision to not build the XL Pipeline is what is at the center of his executive order, not a desire to create jobs.
The XL Pipeline was and is symbolic. To environmentally conscious people concerned about the future of the earth, stopping the project was a demonstration of commitment to stopping global warming. To the pipeline supporters it is symbolic of American self-interest. To Trump it means erasing President Obama.
The XL Pipeline was and is symbolic. To environmentally conscious people concerned about the future of the earth, stopping the project was a demonstration of commitment to stopping global warming. To the pipeline supporters it is symbolic of American self-interest. To Trump it means erasing President Obama.
24
Tar sends represent 35% of Canada's emissions. We are thus among the worst per capita poluters in the world. Our dollar and budget are addicted to oil. Trudeau's empty promises will not change that. Trump just did us a favor in buying us an extra decade of free carbon emissions. Our new carbon tax is a joke in that context. TY Donald!
A cynical pseudoenvironmentalist, as most of us liberals are...
A cynical pseudoenvironmentalist, as most of us liberals are...
1
The national power grid is a hodgepodge of different systems, some of which can share with others and some that are isolated. A high power backbone system that allows solar from Arizona to flow out of Arizona and from the winds of North Texas.
This is what killed the plan for T. Boone Pickens. He had the right idea and the location but the power grid in Texas is isolated so he couldn't get the power out to the rest of the country.
Fossil fuels are the past, electricity is the future. What we really need is a trans continental pipeline for electrons.
This is what killed the plan for T. Boone Pickens. He had the right idea and the location but the power grid in Texas is isolated so he couldn't get the power out to the rest of the country.
Fossil fuels are the past, electricity is the future. What we really need is a trans continental pipeline for electrons.
1
Mr. McKibben misses the point: the reason why the Keystone XL pipeline is run by "robots" is because that system is the absolute gold standard in safety, in regards to leaks. Yes, there may only be (allegedly) 35 full time, permanent jobs associated with the pipeline, but there will be thousands of construction workers, hundreds of safety software engineers and dozens on maintenance contractors working on the project. In addition, there are thousands of existing pipelines, that carry critical natural gas and fuel oil to the Northeast, that need to be upgraded. That's tens of thousands of more jobs. I guess we could tell those people to go get a solar cell to provide their heat, but I think they'd prefer to use tried and true methods to not freeze to death....
The Con Don is stuck in some make-believe gilded age and seems to truly think he can whisk America back to a "better" time. He is trying to put America into the his little vision of greatness.
America is great and WE must all fight to keep it that way before he destroys it and us. WE outnumber the Robber Barons by 99%. Time for us to show them who is boss.
America is great and WE must all fight to keep it that way before he destroys it and us. WE outnumber the Robber Barons by 99%. Time for us to show them who is boss.
4
An environmental activist professor who teaches environmental studies at Middlebury College. Talk about layering liberal on liberal on liberal. Paul Krugman doesn’t have a patch on this guy.
Our “energy future” will be the mix of fuel sources that meets the demands for energy of a growing global population – nobody who reads the numbers believes that this can be done by green solutions alone, unless we were to put aside investment in ALL other things (as we pretty much already have in our dartings down the healthcare rabbit-hole) and focus it ALL on transitioning energy workers to new sources and our products, autos and homes to heavily-subsidized alternatives to carbon.
Our “energy future” must find ways to mitigate the effects of climate change in a way that ALSO preserve stable, mature jobs – unlike brand new industries that hire kids and pay them little. And that “future” almost certainly includes a far greater exploitation of the cleaner potentials of fracked natural gas and nuclear – not the favorite subjects, for some set of politically-correct reasons that have nothing to do with common sense – of environmental activist professors who teach environmental studies at Middlebury College.
The next 4-8 years likely aren’t going to be good ones for such curious life forms.
Our “energy future” will be the mix of fuel sources that meets the demands for energy of a growing global population – nobody who reads the numbers believes that this can be done by green solutions alone, unless we were to put aside investment in ALL other things (as we pretty much already have in our dartings down the healthcare rabbit-hole) and focus it ALL on transitioning energy workers to new sources and our products, autos and homes to heavily-subsidized alternatives to carbon.
Our “energy future” must find ways to mitigate the effects of climate change in a way that ALSO preserve stable, mature jobs – unlike brand new industries that hire kids and pay them little. And that “future” almost certainly includes a far greater exploitation of the cleaner potentials of fracked natural gas and nuclear – not the favorite subjects, for some set of politically-correct reasons that have nothing to do with common sense – of environmental activist professors who teach environmental studies at Middlebury College.
The next 4-8 years likely aren’t going to be good ones for such curious life forms.
4
Richard,
At your idea of instituting said success lies with Mr. Oops or Trump and Rex in charge. No, I think at the rate Trump is going we will have to wait two years. Just so you know though, at high tide today, the ocean water is now on the grassy properties of Palm Beach, Florida. Do the energy companies now pay for the wall or any other negative externalities from their business operations? Or are we supposed to pay for that through public tax dollars? If that is the case then capitalism is producing the outcome of private profits and socialized costs, yes? and how does that square with Conservative values? Is it conservative to ask the public to pay for the profits of wealthy corporations or not? Hey, I would like your opinion since Republicans know so much about conservative principles. By the way, "liberal on liberal" doesn't make their argument any less valid. You may not like the messenger but the validity of the message is not dependent on people being liberal or not, just truthful or in this case, logically reasoned and inferred by facts.
At your idea of instituting said success lies with Mr. Oops or Trump and Rex in charge. No, I think at the rate Trump is going we will have to wait two years. Just so you know though, at high tide today, the ocean water is now on the grassy properties of Palm Beach, Florida. Do the energy companies now pay for the wall or any other negative externalities from their business operations? Or are we supposed to pay for that through public tax dollars? If that is the case then capitalism is producing the outcome of private profits and socialized costs, yes? and how does that square with Conservative values? Is it conservative to ask the public to pay for the profits of wealthy corporations or not? Hey, I would like your opinion since Republicans know so much about conservative principles. By the way, "liberal on liberal" doesn't make their argument any less valid. You may not like the messenger but the validity of the message is not dependent on people being liberal or not, just truthful or in this case, logically reasoned and inferred by facts.
Those "heavily-subsidized alternatives to carbon" -- you prefer the traditional heavily-subsidized carbon?
1
long winded way to say nothing - good job
2
I appreciate the platform the New York times represents, allowing for free-spirited writing. Nonetheless, this article lacks important information readers may deem important. "An increased supply of oil from Canada would mean a decreased dependency on Middle Eastern supplies. According to market principles, increased availability of oil means lower prices for consumers."(BBC) To be frank, the United States still consumes a tremendous amount of oil. Instead of depending on the Middle East, why not do business with Canada?
I am not a Trump supporter but, right here, the American population may, in fact, benefit from this move. Same demand, more supply, equals lower prices.
I am not a Trump supporter but, right here, the American population may, in fact, benefit from this move. Same demand, more supply, equals lower prices.
8
And we dont transport it across oceans risking another catastrophic tanker disaster.
Jason - "To be frank, the United States still consumes a tremendous amount of oil. ... why not do business with Canada?"
We buy plenty of the dirty, polluting oil from those Canadian tar pits. Therein lies the problem. From a purely economic point of view, if we need to import the oil, does it really matter the source? Unless, that is, we buy it on the cheap but spend a lot secondarily cleaning up the mess left behind, treat the resulting increase of disease in the population (of course TrumpCare to the rescue) because of the pollution and nasty effects on the environment, etc. Lower prices. Really?
We buy plenty of the dirty, polluting oil from those Canadian tar pits. Therein lies the problem. From a purely economic point of view, if we need to import the oil, does it really matter the source? Unless, that is, we buy it on the cheap but spend a lot secondarily cleaning up the mess left behind, treat the resulting increase of disease in the population (of course TrumpCare to the rescue) because of the pollution and nasty effects on the environment, etc. Lower prices. Really?
Except the cost of extracting the oil from the tar sands is several multiples more costly than pumping it in the Middle East. This is why, as the article cites, that tar sands production has decreased. It is not a given that importing oil from Canadian tar sands would lead to lower fuel prices in the US.
1
With the pipelines, Trump looks to economic growth.
Growth is an abstract number. The pipeline construction is added to that of the existing pipelines: more pipes = more construction and material throughput = growth. It doesn't matter if the pipeline company stays in business or whether the entire industry collapses in five years, what matters is immediate top line expenditure and nothing else. Trump wants a GDP number he can take credit for even if is counterproductive in the future.
Trump is attempting the China 'catch-up' model of mercantile manufacturing expansion in a mature, post-industrial economy. Trump aims to throw money at anything promising growth: physical plant, infrastructure, in mining and basic industries, also more military spending.
Instead, there will be ADDITIONAL excess capacity (why Trump's tombstone factories closed in the first place), with workers being denied credit and unable to buy. There will also be more problems with water, topsoil and air quality and increased regulation -- indeed, there will be more STATE regulation(s) ultimately lender insolvency.
Trump's belligerence works against him: every word out of his mouth kills a little confidence somewhere in our highly-complex, tightly coupled world. Economies are built on a foundation of confidence and credibility, when these are gone so is the economy.
The clock is ticking for Trump.
Growth is an abstract number. The pipeline construction is added to that of the existing pipelines: more pipes = more construction and material throughput = growth. It doesn't matter if the pipeline company stays in business or whether the entire industry collapses in five years, what matters is immediate top line expenditure and nothing else. Trump wants a GDP number he can take credit for even if is counterproductive in the future.
Trump is attempting the China 'catch-up' model of mercantile manufacturing expansion in a mature, post-industrial economy. Trump aims to throw money at anything promising growth: physical plant, infrastructure, in mining and basic industries, also more military spending.
Instead, there will be ADDITIONAL excess capacity (why Trump's tombstone factories closed in the first place), with workers being denied credit and unable to buy. There will also be more problems with water, topsoil and air quality and increased regulation -- indeed, there will be more STATE regulation(s) ultimately lender insolvency.
Trump's belligerence works against him: every word out of his mouth kills a little confidence somewhere in our highly-complex, tightly coupled world. Economies are built on a foundation of confidence and credibility, when these are gone so is the economy.
The clock is ticking for Trump.
6
The comparable overinvestment cycle occurred more than eighty years ago. It is not just a coincidence that tax cuts for the rich have preceded both the 1929 and 2008 financial crises. The Revenue acts of 1926 and 1928 worked exactly as the Republican Congresses that pushed them through promised. The dramatic reductions in taxes on the upper income brackets and estates of the wealthy did indeed result in increases in savings and investment. However, overinvestment caused the depression that made the rich, and most everyone else, ultimately much poorer.
We know how the earlier period ended. Unemployment is the USA remained at depression levels throughout the 1930s. Stimulus efforts such as the massive Hoover Dam project were insufficient to restore economic activity to earlier levels. In 1940 the unemployment rate was 14.45%. The entry of America into World War II was what restored the economy.
Hopefully, the current glut period will not be ended by a war. The overinvestment from the period preceding 2008 has created imbalances that remain. More mines were developed and oil wells drilled than would have been the case had the savings and thus the loanable funds not been available. In classical economics, eventually these gluts work themselves out as reductions in capital spending brings capacity back in line with demand. Had World War II not occurred, that might have happened in the 1940s or maybe the 1950s. We can never know...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4016292
We know how the earlier period ended. Unemployment is the USA remained at depression levels throughout the 1930s. Stimulus efforts such as the massive Hoover Dam project were insufficient to restore economic activity to earlier levels. In 1940 the unemployment rate was 14.45%. The entry of America into World War II was what restored the economy.
Hopefully, the current glut period will not be ended by a war. The overinvestment from the period preceding 2008 has created imbalances that remain. More mines were developed and oil wells drilled than would have been the case had the savings and thus the loanable funds not been available. In classical economics, eventually these gluts work themselves out as reductions in capital spending brings capacity back in line with demand. Had World War II not occurred, that might have happened in the 1940s or maybe the 1950s. We can never know...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4016292
That tar is destined to be refined in Texas and sold -- at ludicrous profit -- to Europe.
2
As I read this opinion on the oil pipeline (infrastructure), I wonder if we have the capacity to run an effective infrastructure program?
-Is it just projects related to oil in gas or will all projects be terminated due to environmental considerations?
- Are we capable of consensus when it comes to prioritizing projects and the distribution of money?
The last President struggled with "shovel ready" projects and I guess this one will too. I feel we will accomplish nothing in the next decade because we don't share a common vision for our economy, infrastructure, power sources, or modes of transportation. I think this says less about the leadership of Presidents Trump and Obama and more about the complexity of the political environment in which they operate(d). A paradox of the environmental movement may be the harder they push on what is probably an insignificant pipeline, then the harder the opposing parts of the country will push on them when they are in power and trying to accomplish something big (e.g. Paris Climate Agreement). When will compromise return to our politics?
-Is it just projects related to oil in gas or will all projects be terminated due to environmental considerations?
- Are we capable of consensus when it comes to prioritizing projects and the distribution of money?
The last President struggled with "shovel ready" projects and I guess this one will too. I feel we will accomplish nothing in the next decade because we don't share a common vision for our economy, infrastructure, power sources, or modes of transportation. I think this says less about the leadership of Presidents Trump and Obama and more about the complexity of the political environment in which they operate(d). A paradox of the environmental movement may be the harder they push on what is probably an insignificant pipeline, then the harder the opposing parts of the country will push on them when they are in power and trying to accomplish something big (e.g. Paris Climate Agreement). When will compromise return to our politics?
3
When useful infrastructure is proposed.
2
The author is the poster-boy for why Trump was elected.
Keystone will provide "only" 28,000 temp well-paid construction jobs - like that is something that fell off the table.
Oil will be shipped north/south and east/west - do you prefer truck or the insanity of rail? (you can google the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster if you want an example)
Solar and Wind are fabulous developing technologies - but if they are so of-the-moment why do they still require massive government subsidies?
Keystone will provide "only" 28,000 temp well-paid construction jobs - like that is something that fell off the table.
Oil will be shipped north/south and east/west - do you prefer truck or the insanity of rail? (you can google the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster if you want an example)
Solar and Wind are fabulous developing technologies - but if they are so of-the-moment why do they still require massive government subsidies?
4
Burlington Northern Railroad moves a ton of oil, via rail tank cars. Warren Buffet is the majority shareholder of BNR. Barack Obama tried to kill the Keystone XL Pipeline. Warren Buffet makes more money, because the oil has to move via the railroad. Warren Buffett was a major financial supporter of Barack Obama.
See how crony capitalism works?
See how crony capitalism works?
Sir,
Every energy and oil and transportation industry required a lot of subsidy. Read some history.
Wind costs have plummeted in a fractional time frame relative to oil/coal and nuclear. Solar costs reduction has put wind to shame.
28k temporary jobs - we se job numbers fluctuate more than that monthly. Solar and wind job growth has been enormous. The pipeline will take about 100 people to run and maintain after its built.
Every energy and oil and transportation industry required a lot of subsidy. Read some history.
Wind costs have plummeted in a fractional time frame relative to oil/coal and nuclear. Solar costs reduction has put wind to shame.
28k temporary jobs - we se job numbers fluctuate more than that monthly. Solar and wind job growth has been enormous. The pipeline will take about 100 people to run and maintain after its built.
1
The same reason rhe gas and oil industry got them. Please explain why they still do?
3
I hope the Water Protectors show Trump that the people do have power.
Also, why do liberals hate nuclear so much? When something like 2 lbs of material can power a submarine for 25 years straight, I think it should get some attention. Todays reactors are much more safe then the dinosaurs we currently have. We should upgrade our nuclear power production, shut down the old plants, and invest in a safe disposal site.
Wind generators slaughter birds and solar panels take up giant amounts of space. Both suffer because they cant work 24/7. Nuclear produces consistent, controllable power in huge quantities while using very little material and producing zero greenhouse gases. I believe in a triad of nuclear, wind, and solar.
Also, why do liberals hate nuclear so much? When something like 2 lbs of material can power a submarine for 25 years straight, I think it should get some attention. Todays reactors are much more safe then the dinosaurs we currently have. We should upgrade our nuclear power production, shut down the old plants, and invest in a safe disposal site.
Wind generators slaughter birds and solar panels take up giant amounts of space. Both suffer because they cant work 24/7. Nuclear produces consistent, controllable power in huge quantities while using very little material and producing zero greenhouse gases. I believe in a triad of nuclear, wind, and solar.
7
There is no safe method of disposing of the nuclear waste. Cheap energy comes at the expensive and toxic problem of nuclear waste that does not go away.
8
Significant amounts of greenhouse gases are/were required to dig up and refine Uranium 235, greater than zero.
1
Nuclear plants are very very very expensive to build, run and maintain for ever. No thanks.
1
Bill McKibben is so brilliant and intelligent on environmental matters. I'm surprised that he can interrupt throwing up about our environment long enough to write. Thanks Bill.
2
Bill McKibben's entire anti-pipeline campaign does nothing at all to mitigate climate change, nothing at all to reduce demand and consumption of fossil fuels, and increases greenhouse gas emissions attributable to crude-oil=by-rail operations.
In carrying out his campaign, Bill McKibben threatens to divide both the Democratic Party and the union labor movement in the United States by throwing AFL-CIO building and construction trades workers and Teamsters under the bus by denying the existence and value of these jobs and jeapardizing the employment of these union Democrats. In doing so, Bill McKibben helps contribute to Democrat's problems with working class voters that helped put Donald Trump into the White House.
Bill McKibben fails to be accountable to anyone about whether or not his accomplishment and positions result in any greenhouse gas emission reductions and progress in addressing the mitigation of climate change.
In carrying out his campaign, Bill McKibben threatens to divide both the Democratic Party and the union labor movement in the United States by throwing AFL-CIO building and construction trades workers and Teamsters under the bus by denying the existence and value of these jobs and jeapardizing the employment of these union Democrats. In doing so, Bill McKibben helps contribute to Democrat's problems with working class voters that helped put Donald Trump into the White House.
Bill McKibben fails to be accountable to anyone about whether or not his accomplishment and positions result in any greenhouse gas emission reductions and progress in addressing the mitigation of climate change.
2
Apparently Trump doesn't mind if his own grandchildren die of inhaled noxious toxins. Or perhaps they will wear gas masks our own children won't have access to. The man is sick. Why don't the Republicans out if kindness acknowledge his illness and get him decent medical care
15
Funny comment coming from Chicago.
He is a 70 year old man with no curiosity. He is incapable of looking forward. All he can do is look backwards.
21
he has the intellectual curiosity of a clam
and im sorry to all clams who may be reading this
11
Trump won, Hillary lost. Sounds like you're the one looking backwards (to November, 2016).
1
Quite simply, this is a bridge to nowhere. It puts on the shiny appearance of solving a problem, by creating temporary jobs, but it is all show and no go. When President Trump said "The carnage ends now" my interpretation is that he meant the opposite. The 1950's was America's zenith because the rest of the world was rebuilding from WW II. We can't go back in time! When I read these well thought out articles and their comments, I am encouraged that we as a group, as a nation "of the people" will unite to overcome this terrible and troubling cloud over head.
21
I'm no fan of Trump, nor of fossil fuels and pipelines, in particular. However, until some form of clean energy is available to run the world's industries - most of which are forced to rely on the internal combustion engine - then oil and natural gas are necessary evils. Natural gas is the cleanest and most logical bridge fuel between now and the day renewable energy can be harnessed to run the world's energy needs.
But oil and natural gas must be transported from where they are extracted to where they are needed. Thus we have the pipeline controversies. Certainly pipeline projects should be diverted from drinking water sources. But if you stop pipeline projects in general, what you're left with is oil and gas transport by rail. And rail transport has proved to be far more damaging and dangerous. For the sake of the environment and of human lives and property damage, scrapping pipelines and thus forcing oil and gas onto more and more rail cars is definitely not a move forward.
But oil and natural gas must be transported from where they are extracted to where they are needed. Thus we have the pipeline controversies. Certainly pipeline projects should be diverted from drinking water sources. But if you stop pipeline projects in general, what you're left with is oil and gas transport by rail. And rail transport has proved to be far more damaging and dangerous. For the sake of the environment and of human lives and property damage, scrapping pipelines and thus forcing oil and gas onto more and more rail cars is definitely not a move forward.
21
Cutting off your nose to spite your face. The long-term environmental distraction of these pipelines is far more than enough to outweigh any temporary energy needs. Renewable energy is expanding at a rapid rate. There is no need to build more infrastructure to perpetuate dying energy sources.
11
People- oil is used for transportation, not industrial production. No internal combustion engines- .
1
I do not believe that the proposed pipeline Keystone pipeline will be for refined products.
1
As an Albertan I remember the time in 1989 when the decision was made to ship oilsands output rather than process and use the feedstock for our own manufacturing needs. As many of you are pointing fingers at everyone else (Trump, business, the oil business...) due to XL, I wish we would have maintained the processing capability here along with what would have been tens of thousands of jobs in oil related products. Admittedly the US coast may not receive the same benefit as we would have. Oil has to come from somewhere and from having drilled (yep, been an oil well driller) in the High Arctic, the Mackenzie Delta, the foothills, the plains, and the Bakken, and also being a student of any form of knowledge from any source...on balance this stranded asset has a financial value and a real politik one as well. Having it means that the US will never have to fear existent threats in the Straights of Hormuz or South China Sea, which will ultimately make fewer Americans less anxious in the end...you are in a better bargaining position for continuing to influence the world positively on a full stomach. So who do we put forth as paying for this security, and ultimately this lack of bloodshed, but Canadians, the oil companies, Trump, the neighbor's dog, the heinous...
And fracking to preserve US energy independence...really...every time we spudded in the Bakken region the water truck guy was busy filling peoples tanks because of the temporary aquifer pollution caused by us in 1981.
And fracking to preserve US energy independence...really...every time we spudded in the Bakken region the water truck guy was busy filling peoples tanks because of the temporary aquifer pollution caused by us in 1981.
4
That would make perfect sense if there was no such thing as global warming. As a resident of Alaska, I can assure you there is, and it's going to be a lot more disruptive than some missiles being fired in the Straights of Hormuz.
9
"If the Keystone XL Pipeline is ever completed, for instance, it will employ about 35 full-time workers, relying for its operation on a vast network of sensors, drones and the like."
The author's dishonesty is in keeping with the NYT's current policy on President Trump.
While true that any finished project these days will rely heavily on robotics, the author conveniently ignores the fact that the actual building of the pipeline will employ many deplorables for many years, and that includes deplorables of color, along with those of no or limited color.
These "real" jobs will support real families while the elites figure out how to "moderate" the effects of globalization so all those really well-paying jobs doing "energy audits" that my friends now have for "solar energy" companies can be upgraded in pay so that they do not need to work part-time at Walmart selling nails to some yuppie couple second-home owner who needs to put up a "welcome" sign on a house which used to cost $70,000 and now, with heated helicopter pad and sauna is worth $500,000, causing a re-assessment of the neighborhood and my buddy and his family forced to move yet again to a cheaper part of the area so he can pay taxes for his kids' failing schools.
On the bright side, smack has never been cheaper.
Just me speakin,' but we'll take the pipeline, for as long as the construction jobs last.
The author's dishonesty is in keeping with the NYT's current policy on President Trump.
While true that any finished project these days will rely heavily on robotics, the author conveniently ignores the fact that the actual building of the pipeline will employ many deplorables for many years, and that includes deplorables of color, along with those of no or limited color.
These "real" jobs will support real families while the elites figure out how to "moderate" the effects of globalization so all those really well-paying jobs doing "energy audits" that my friends now have for "solar energy" companies can be upgraded in pay so that they do not need to work part-time at Walmart selling nails to some yuppie couple second-home owner who needs to put up a "welcome" sign on a house which used to cost $70,000 and now, with heated helicopter pad and sauna is worth $500,000, causing a re-assessment of the neighborhood and my buddy and his family forced to move yet again to a cheaper part of the area so he can pay taxes for his kids' failing schools.
On the bright side, smack has never been cheaper.
Just me speakin,' but we'll take the pipeline, for as long as the construction jobs last.
8
pipe dreams
The people you rant about are the ones Trump appointed to his cabinet, minus any sense of social responsibility. Trump worships success but he doesn't share it. He certainly won't share it with you.
The most important battle of our lives, fighting the fossil fuel giants.
I will see you April, Bill McKibben, with hundreds of thousands of other Americans who want a safe future for our children.
Bill McKibben, Climate Hero!!!!!
I will see you April, Bill McKibben, with hundreds of thousands of other Americans who want a safe future for our children.
Bill McKibben, Climate Hero!!!!!
15
Solar, wind, tidal, etc. are policy-based sources of energy and all are heavily subsidized by taxpayers. Fossil fuels and nuclear energy largely are developed and delivered by private business and their energy is provided to the public through markets. When one compares policy-based energy to market-based energy that difference is relevant.
Accordingly the author's claim that support for oil pipelines is "backward looking," is a value judgment that is based on his support for the policy that non-fossil fuel, non-nuclear energy are preferable.
That is fine. Opinions abound, but before I take anything like this seriously, I need to see a cogent discussion of the basis for the policy and a roadmap showing how we get from here to the alternative energy nirvana, including how many more taxpayer dollars the trip will cost. One hint, if and when you choose to write that article, do not use ad hominem phrases like "science denier." Instead, lay out the science, pros and cons, so I can decide which party makes the best case.
Accordingly the author's claim that support for oil pipelines is "backward looking," is a value judgment that is based on his support for the policy that non-fossil fuel, non-nuclear energy are preferable.
That is fine. Opinions abound, but before I take anything like this seriously, I need to see a cogent discussion of the basis for the policy and a roadmap showing how we get from here to the alternative energy nirvana, including how many more taxpayer dollars the trip will cost. One hint, if and when you choose to write that article, do not use ad hominem phrases like "science denier." Instead, lay out the science, pros and cons, so I can decide which party makes the best case.
9
Why not stop thinking of you and think of the empty future you are choosing for your kids and grandchildren
3
Except that's not true. Gas and oil do get subsidize. Lots of them.
2
I think that fossil fuels are subsidized as well and that subsidies for "clean" energy sources are quickly decreasing. Without subsidies, the cost per kilowatt hour of solar energy is very competitive with fossil fuel-generated electricity. For areas where rooftop solar panels work well, there is the added benefit of energy generation occurring close to where it is used. Electrical grids and large pipelines are good targets for those that wish ill to our country.
1
More money is being invested in alternative sources of energy than in the fossil fuel industry these days. That tells you the future right there, as hard-headed investors see it. Trump is indeed taking us away from our future. He is like someone trying to sell you a team of horses just as the internal combustion engine starts to take off. Or touting a smoke-signal kit as cellular phones come on the market. SAD. For all of us.
18
Whenever I hear that solar is great for jobs I think of that Milton Friedman story. Friedman travels to China, witnesses a canal being dug and as why the workers are using modern tractors and earth movers, and instead are using shovels. The government host explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
If it takes more people to install solar v gas, it says something negative about the relative efficiency and cost. And that negatively impacts the 300 million users of power in the US,
If it takes more people to install solar v gas, it says something negative about the relative efficiency and cost. And that negatively impacts the 300 million users of power in the US,
4
60 % of energy production buildout last year was wind and solar in the US. That's why they take so many jobs. Solar buildout is country wide. Gas plants take longer, and more labor required to build per megawatt of capacity.
And China, btw, is the largest wind turbine producer and installer, and the largest solar installer , dwarfing us installation megawatts. And they ain't using spoons.
Their solar panel manufacturers are state of the art automated facilities- and have helped US job growth !
And China, btw, is the largest wind turbine producer and installer, and the largest solar installer , dwarfing us installation megawatts. And they ain't using spoons.
Their solar panel manufacturers are state of the art automated facilities- and have helped US job growth !
1
Bill McKibben is exactly right - because that same image is in MY head every time I hear Trump speak of the jobs and of "making America great again" :
It is the famous photograph of the steel workers all lined up eating their lunch on the beam of a half built skyscraper.
He wants to return to this world: dirty sweaty men "building things" while their wives are at home cooking. Possibly there would be a few black or brown people sweeping and cleaning up behind the "real men", because this is the only world he understands, and too many of his supporters feel the same way. They fear what they don't understand, they fear progress. Instead of seeing it as a challenge to be met they see it as an offense. I remember hearing a radio interview with a female Trump supporter in her 70s and she said she wished it was like it was back in the 50's. No ability to adapt.
It is the famous photograph of the steel workers all lined up eating their lunch on the beam of a half built skyscraper.
He wants to return to this world: dirty sweaty men "building things" while their wives are at home cooking. Possibly there would be a few black or brown people sweeping and cleaning up behind the "real men", because this is the only world he understands, and too many of his supporters feel the same way. They fear what they don't understand, they fear progress. Instead of seeing it as a challenge to be met they see it as an offense. I remember hearing a radio interview with a female Trump supporter in her 70s and she said she wished it was like it was back in the 50's. No ability to adapt.
20
Save your breath. This president embraces every foul idea for his war on America.
7
You are 1OO% correct. Thanks
2
The concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased in every year since 1959 when modern measurements began. Also, the growth rate of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere has gradually quickened. The concentration of atmospheric CO2 in 2015 was the highest ever recorded, and the growth rate of CO2 in the atmosphere was the highest ever recorded. Again, the concentration of atmospheric CO2 in 2016 was the highest ever recorded and the growth rate of CO2 in the atmosphere was the 2nd highest ever recorded.
The problem can be understood by thinking of a bathtub that is filling with water even though the plug is out. The water is flowing into the tub faster than the drain can empty water from the tub.
Simply leaving the flow of water coming into the tub at a given rate is not enough, the tub will keep filling. What must be done is to lessen the flow of water into the tub so much that the drain will hold the level of water in the tub constant or lower the level of water.
The problem can be understood by thinking of a bathtub that is filling with water even though the plug is out. The water is flowing into the tub faster than the drain can empty water from the tub.
Simply leaving the flow of water coming into the tub at a given rate is not enough, the tub will keep filling. What must be done is to lessen the flow of water into the tub so much that the drain will hold the level of water in the tub constant or lower the level of water.
3
Yes, Donald is channeling Jackson. One pushes the Native Americans West and the other makes sure they are pummeled. All this for a pipeline that will be run by 35 bodies and some drones...and then rust. If China is smart, they will move swiftly into the vacuum that our backward "winner" (not "leader) is creating for their solar, wind and other alternative energy. Donald's furious pen is making news now, but the sun will come up in our new world order and leave a long long dark shadow on him.
7
And I agree. Hopefully the grandiose T will be impeached for his crimes against humanity.
5
Can trump spend taxpayer money as he sees fit? For example (my earlier comment addressed this topic), a recent poll suggests 63% of the American people do not want a wall built between the US and Mexico. Can trump go ahead and spend the money needed to build the wall regardless of taxpayer objection?
3
The short answer is "no." He may have budgetary discretion to study/promote/plan a wall, but such a many-billion-dollar project would require Congress to authorize and fund it.
"On Pipelines, Donald Trump Looks Backward"
Duh...
Trump was elected to "look backwards" by voters who "look backwards" and is supported by money that "looks backwards".
Looking backwards is what reactionaries and other conservatives do...
Duh...
Trump was elected to "look backwards" by voters who "look backwards" and is supported by money that "looks backwards".
Looking backwards is what reactionaries and other conservatives do...
24
...and what the Koch Industries have staked their fortunes on. This is their ROI for all the billions of dark money they have pumped into the system for several decades.
2
I have a conflicted view on this. I originally come from an oil-rich nation. And as an economist, I completely understand the role that energy security will play over the next generation. At a certain level, America needs to frack, to provide cheap gas, and to transport bit domestic oil & gas round the monopoly board. This just has to happen.
That has terrible implications for the environment. Fracking, for example, challenges water security, which may be as important as energy security. What is the point of having a nation if you can't support it with basic services?
And of course, renewable energy is the future. You know, the future, when apes rule the Earth?
A dilemma. Thankfully we have highly intelligent, far-sighted leaders, to balance these unbalancing things. Or not. We just elected a narcissistic child to power, as though the expertise required to govern a nation is as trivial as any other reality TV dramatic reveal.
"And here we have contestant Trump, whose answer to energy policy is to start a trade war with China.
Good grief.
That has terrible implications for the environment. Fracking, for example, challenges water security, which may be as important as energy security. What is the point of having a nation if you can't support it with basic services?
And of course, renewable energy is the future. You know, the future, when apes rule the Earth?
A dilemma. Thankfully we have highly intelligent, far-sighted leaders, to balance these unbalancing things. Or not. We just elected a narcissistic child to power, as though the expertise required to govern a nation is as trivial as any other reality TV dramatic reveal.
"And here we have contestant Trump, whose answer to energy policy is to start a trade war with China.
Good grief.
15
Thank you for this informative article. It seems to me the real answer behind all these initial Trump actions is "because Obama did it" rather than any real rationale.
15
This is a worthy and reasonably carefully argued op-ed, but Bill McKibben is the wrong person to be making it. There is...oil...on his hands for having stirred the Keystone XL into the pipeline "issue of the century" and as a result the whole mess was covered with excessive controversy and political frothing.
Let's be clear: The Republicans picked Keystone XL as something they could beat over Obama's head. In turn, McKibben picked it as a target because he sensed he could get people upset and get memberships and support. Neither motive was entirely pure, both were fair targets for questioning.
At the time McKibben was called to the White House early on to discuss the issue, he said that his movement was going to defeat fossil fuels "one pipeline at a time". Why? What would be gained other than symbolic victories and making it more difficult, and more dangerous, to transport oil products?
The oil companies can't force us to use fossil fuels and, in turn, the environmentalists can't force us to use solar and wind. We need to move forward toward renewables through of consensus. If it could be done in revolutionary, let's change tomorrow!, style, then it might be a worthy attempt. It can't be accomplished in that manner. Therefore, simply blocking methods of transporting oil are off target.
Obama's rejection of Keystone XL was mainly the Republicans fault. They politicized the issue so there was nothing to lose by turning it down and a lot to lose if approved. Nice job.
Let's be clear: The Republicans picked Keystone XL as something they could beat over Obama's head. In turn, McKibben picked it as a target because he sensed he could get people upset and get memberships and support. Neither motive was entirely pure, both were fair targets for questioning.
At the time McKibben was called to the White House early on to discuss the issue, he said that his movement was going to defeat fossil fuels "one pipeline at a time". Why? What would be gained other than symbolic victories and making it more difficult, and more dangerous, to transport oil products?
The oil companies can't force us to use fossil fuels and, in turn, the environmentalists can't force us to use solar and wind. We need to move forward toward renewables through of consensus. If it could be done in revolutionary, let's change tomorrow!, style, then it might be a worthy attempt. It can't be accomplished in that manner. Therefore, simply blocking methods of transporting oil are off target.
Obama's rejection of Keystone XL was mainly the Republicans fault. They politicized the issue so there was nothing to lose by turning it down and a lot to lose if approved. Nice job.
4
McKibben pinpoints exactly why the Russians put a full court press on skewing the results of this election. The soviet republic has a fossil fuel portfolio that wont pencil out over renewable energy alternatives today without a whole lot of strongarming and yes by advancing a whole pile of "alternative facts". The country that gave the world the transistor, the semiconductor and Moore's law will now be ceding a pivotal trillion dollar green energy economy opportunity to the Chinese. We'll instead be busy linking arms with Russia in leading with sludge solutions (dug up in new, strangely warmer places) to solve the world's energy needs. We're not only looking in the rearview mirror, its difficult in the haze to see exactly where interests of the soviets end and ours begin. We need an independent, bi partisan investigation into exactly how we arrived at this point, and this should clearly be emphasized at the gathering on April 29th.
57
My hope is that any pipeline crossing any waterway will be done visibly overhead encased in a beautiful pedestrian bridge with containment pools to the sides in the event it would leak. It would asinine to do it any other way. And, I'm not about to take the word of any man whose idea places the pipe where the public cannot monitor it.
5
Fossil fuels are already too expensive to extract and transport if the true costs of the inevitable environmental damage to the local water, air and wild/humanlife are factored in. As the lady in the picture says "You can't drink oil" and there is only a limited amount of potable water on the planet. Like clean air, it is essential for life. Fossil fuels are not...
And then there is Climate Change, the elephant in the room that our new President chooses to ignore and thereby accelerate by his actions. China will now take the lead creating a clean energy industry, jobs and businesses that could have taken root here if we had a President and Congress that looked out for the good of all instead of the interests of the fossil fuel industry, wall street and elite stockholders of the moneyed class.
They are taking us all over the cliff...
And then there is Climate Change, the elephant in the room that our new President chooses to ignore and thereby accelerate by his actions. China will now take the lead creating a clean energy industry, jobs and businesses that could have taken root here if we had a President and Congress that looked out for the good of all instead of the interests of the fossil fuel industry, wall street and elite stockholders of the moneyed class.
They are taking us all over the cliff...
12
I am not a fan of the pipeline either, but please explain "It’s sun and wind that are going to be our dominant sources of power as their prices continue to plummet." Solar provides less than one percent of our needs today, according to the Energy Information Administration. Solar can't grow that much, and the sun doesn't shine at night. Price is not the issue. Jobs are certainly not the issue. Perhaps too much popular reliance on solar has gotten us into this mess.
2
McKibben is right: Trump is promoting a nostalgia for the past; he has no future vision other than that he will "fix" things. His inauguration speech was so dark and hateful and did not even try to paint a picture of a beautiful utopian future, just that he would end the "carnage." It is surprising to me how much Trump's and Republican's greed and vengeance overshadows everything. The only thing that seems to matter to them is the good fortunes of their crony corporations. Given their positions on pretty much everything, it is impossible to believe that they care about our children and what kind of world they will live in.
The only silver lining in this disaster of a president is that Trump will find out how hard we will fight back. We will not surrender this earth and our human dignity--ever.
The only silver lining in this disaster of a president is that Trump will find out how hard we will fight back. We will not surrender this earth and our human dignity--ever.
10
With any luck Veterans will continue to support the Natives, the real Americans, like they did in December:
http://bit.ly/VeteransAndNativesAtStandingRock
We immigrants have treated the real and original Americans miserably and we continue to fail them.
We should be helping them address drug addiction, unemployment and alcoholism, and it's the perfect pairing with Veterans who similarly are some of our greatest Americans and we've failed them miserably too.
http://bit.ly/VeteransAndNativesAtStandingRock
We immigrants have treated the real and original Americans miserably and we continue to fail them.
We should be helping them address drug addiction, unemployment and alcoholism, and it's the perfect pairing with Veterans who similarly are some of our greatest Americans and we've failed them miserably too.
26
Looking to the future, US energy independence is critical. Why, by the wildest stretch does it make sense to build pipelines where the source is Canada, delivered to the Texas coast and then for export. Hopefully future energy will be clean and renewable, but at least a minor critical fraction of our needs will be satisfied by fossil fuels. We need to drill what oil we, in the US, need and sequester the rest for future generations. If the US needs the
Canadian oil, let them refine it and deliver the product to the Northern US. But the US must not aid Canada in doing something foolish --shipping energy to other countries to create air polution.
For our major future energy needs, we need to put ultimate efforts into real clean energy. The idea of shipping oil overseas to enhance global warming focuses solely on the profits for big oil companies.
Canadian oil, let them refine it and deliver the product to the Northern US. But the US must not aid Canada in doing something foolish --shipping energy to other countries to create air polution.
For our major future energy needs, we need to put ultimate efforts into real clean energy. The idea of shipping oil overseas to enhance global warming focuses solely on the profits for big oil companies.
45
Koch owns controlling interest in Keystone pipeline oil.
2
And Trump has stocks in the construction companies...conflict of interest: congress, senate, helllooo? anybody home????
2
Mr. McKibben is incorrect when he states "The number of workers in our labor-intensive solar industry alone now surpasses those employed extracting coal, gas and oil combined." According to the DOE report (2017 US Energy and Jobs Report) discussed in the article he links to, the number of solar workers is just under 374,000 while the number of workers extracting fossil fuels is 468,000. And if you include not just extraction but also refining, transportation, construction, electricity generation, etc for fossil fuels, then total employment rises to roughly 1.1 million people versus the 374,000 for solar.
8
One fact McKibben doesn't mention is that many of the jobs in the solar industry are involved with rooftop solar installation. These jobs are comparatively low paying, not remotely close to oil industry compensation.
In all likelihood, many of the solar installers are illegal "immigrants". As Trump cracks down on employers hiring illegal workers, wait to see if the solar industry isn't one of the first to squeal (along with farmers, of course).
In all likelihood, many of the solar installers are illegal "immigrants". As Trump cracks down on employers hiring illegal workers, wait to see if the solar industry isn't one of the first to squeal (along with farmers, of course).
3
So?? Kill the future and its kids in order to employ the present. Good idea especially since the future will be dead of toxins anyway. Smart??
4
Dream on Kurfco. Solar is a mix of labor pools of non- skilled and skilled trades. Lots of union participation on sites.
BTW you can add many additional jobs for tge transport and manufacture of solar equipment.
BTW you can add many additional jobs for tge transport and manufacture of solar equipment.
1
Donald Trump (the developer) is fond of eminent domain. Just ask the state of New Jersey.
7
Relic of the past: correct. Rearward looking vision: check. Complete lack of grasp of economics, environmental science, and (ironically) politics: you betcha.
But buried in the article is the image of China stepping forward as a world leader in environmental policy. And yesterday's ignorant and insolent rejection of TPP will probably cement China's status permanently as THE regional hegemonic political power. America first? Really?
He's not been in office a full week and the interests of the country have been set back decades.
But buried in the article is the image of China stepping forward as a world leader in environmental policy. And yesterday's ignorant and insolent rejection of TPP will probably cement China's status permanently as THE regional hegemonic political power. America first? Really?
He's not been in office a full week and the interests of the country have been set back decades.
33
Add to that the withdrawal of funding for international organizations and its looking like "make America insignificant again"
7
One of the more annoying alternative facts surrounding these pipelines:
Energy Independence!!!
Where does XL terminate? A mid-continent refinery with interstate distribution?
Abundant and inexpensive fossil fuel for America (ignoring the environmental impact for the sake of this argument.)?
Absolutely NOT.
Terminus and refining in Galveston for overseas sales.
Any benefit to Americans?
Great benefit to oil companies.
Energy Independence!!!
Where does XL terminate? A mid-continent refinery with interstate distribution?
Abundant and inexpensive fossil fuel for America (ignoring the environmental impact for the sake of this argument.)?
Absolutely NOT.
Terminus and refining in Galveston for overseas sales.
Any benefit to Americans?
Great benefit to oil companies.
44
Private money building private infrastructure. There's no public money involved. I'm not sure I see a problem with that. This isn't a government jobs program. It's a conduit for a raw material that Americans consume a lot. Pipelines aren't a new thing.
6
Let us consider who really won this election: the Koch brothers. As for Trump, he is a sideshow, and a disposable demagogue in their master plan.
The NY Times has already, and admirably, provided coverage of the Koch brothers game plan during the election season:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/us/politics/a-key-senate-race-shifts-...
Now the Koch brothers are cashing in on their political investment.
The NY Times has already, and admirably, provided coverage of the Koch brothers game plan during the election season:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/us/politics/a-key-senate-race-shifts-...
Now the Koch brothers are cashing in on their political investment.
70
I was reading another article from another newspaper and it said that Trump may have stock in Energy Transfer Partners,.wouldn't that be grounds for impeachment??
4
Donald seems to be taking the business perspective of making as much money off the land as possible. Foolishly short-sighted, but what do you expect from him.
3
Whether the pipelines make economic sense, and what type of energy will be relied upon in the future, could be determined only through market forces. When you have federal land and the federal government leasing the land out to be used for this or that purpose, and one of the purposes is construction of a pipeline that will transport gas to regulated utilities, you are pretty far removed from market forces.
7
The real threat to the USA (and the rest of the world) is not so much trump as it is his supporters. Though they are a minority of voters, 46% is not a small minority. In general, they,like trump, are ignorant, vicious, poorly educated, and hateful. They are a real problem and we need to find a way to deal with them. Some may respond to reason but even so, that leaves a lot of the others.
A current example: trump wants to use our money to build a wall of no practical use but of enormous expense. His own recently appointed cabinet member, retired General Kelly expresses no enthusiasm for the concept. 63% of the American people oppose the thing.
This is only the beginning. trump and his supporters will, if not checked, undo the USA as we thought we knew it.
So, the bottom line on all this is, how do we stop what's happening?
A current example: trump wants to use our money to build a wall of no practical use but of enormous expense. His own recently appointed cabinet member, retired General Kelly expresses no enthusiasm for the concept. 63% of the American people oppose the thing.
This is only the beginning. trump and his supporters will, if not checked, undo the USA as we thought we knew it.
So, the bottom line on all this is, how do we stop what's happening?
6
More like 25% of all eligible voters. So roughly 1/4 of the voting age population inflicted this on us. I don't know whether to be mad at the 25% that constitute Trump voters, or the 45-some % who couldn't be bothered to vote.
3
The oil from the XL pipeline is not even going to the USA but a free trade zone in TX. Out od this free trade zone it will be sold on the world market. The US will reap no financial gain from this oil, except for the 45 people running the pipeline.
29
Nostalgia, blind patriotism and ignorance are all kin, a dizzy family that unfortunately epitomizes Trump’s base. These are people who don’t realize they’re shooting themselves in the foot supporting a president whose views, as this editorial makes clear, are dangerously divorced from the reality we live in. However, the good, not fake news is that you can’t fool all of the people all of the time or insult the common man’s intelligence forever. This is why the Trump administration is from Day One a ticking time bomb. Every falsehood makes it tick a little louder as people see the photos and read the verifications that correct the lies and inept decisions. Americans know how to smell a rat. It will take time, but in the end many of the people who voted for Trump will turn their backs on him. The sooner IGHBT, the “I Got Hoodwinked By Trump” movement starts the better.
2
Mr. Bill McKibben. In your third paragraph you mention that the pipeline will employ 35 full time workers when it is finished. I couldn't help but notice that you neglected to tell us how many people the pipeline would employ while it is being built. Wouldn't that create many jobs?
3
Temporary jobs
14
All construction jobs are "temporary jobs". Building an airport, Hoover dam, a skyscraper, roads, bridges -- all completed by workers doing "temporary jobs".
2
Most construction work is a continuous sequence of temporary work. You build one bridge, then another, then another.
What a breath of fresh air -- a reasoned, informative, truly astute article.
Americans like Bill McKibben and the late Rachel Carson -- and even, yes, Julia Butterfly Hill -- inspire us. They inspire us by putting their noses to the grindstone for the purpose of getting us to think (instead of dominate).
Being proud of America is hard right now. But the McKibbens and Carsons and Hills in our history do make it possible.
Americans like Bill McKibben and the late Rachel Carson -- and even, yes, Julia Butterfly Hill -- inspire us. They inspire us by putting their noses to the grindstone for the purpose of getting us to think (instead of dominate).
Being proud of America is hard right now. But the McKibbens and Carsons and Hills in our history do make it possible.
93
Isn't it treason when a president signs laws that undermine the health and safety of the country? Trump obviously lied taking the oath and should be impeached as quickly as possible.
25
Like King Canute commanding the waves to stop, Donald Trump's efforts to save the fossil fuel industry are doomed. He may build a pipeline here or there, but so long as there is natural gas in the ground, the coal industry will continue on its downward trajectory. Oil will take longer to displace, but as cellulosic-based biomass technologies come on-line and begin producing liquid fuels for transportation, demand for conventional petroleum will decrease as well.
We knew this sell-out to the fossil fuel interests was coming. We must resist Trump's efforts to move forward with these pipelines tooth and claw, and not willingly cede even one inch of sacred ground to the despoilers of Mother Earth.
We knew this sell-out to the fossil fuel interests was coming. We must resist Trump's efforts to move forward with these pipelines tooth and claw, and not willingly cede even one inch of sacred ground to the despoilers of Mother Earth.
24
Send your comments to the Army Corps, and your donations to Standing Rock tribes.
http://standwithstandingrock.net/standing-rock-sioux-tribe-welcomes-publ...
http://standwithstandingrock.net/standing-rock-sioux-tribe-welcomes-publ...
4
Mr. McKibben is accurate on so many levels about this backwards-leaning, fake news loving, anti-progress president. In five short days he has unleashed so many wrong-headed ideas it has become dizzying. Like the Greenpeace sign hanging above the White House says: RESIST! (Please.)
55
The irony with your comment is that President Trump is pro-progress! He is creating many jobs for hard working Americans apparently unlike yourself. No mater what the author may say about how many jobs there will be after the pipeline is finished, you cannot deny that there will be many more jobs during production of the pipeline. You liberals are only being supplied with the far left news sources such as this! We also could benefit quite well from this pipeline. Transporting the oil is a vital step in getting the oil from where it is to where it needs to be. I hope you can come out of this liberal microcosm of a news source and be informed of all the news before coming to a decision.
1
Cole, one major leak and the Ogallala Aquifer, the largest in the country, could be fouled. There are many potential sources of energy. There is no substitute for potable water. The Ogallala is not only important for drinking water, but for crop irrigation and the raising of livestock, too. Try using oil for that...
2
Why do so many people think that wind and solar power can provide our electricity today?! They absolutely can't. Solar power is only generated when the sun shines, wind power when the wind blows. In California, on a typical summer day, the peak electricity demand is in the late afternoon when air conditioners are running flat out to cope with the highest temperatures of the day. When is peak output from solar panels -- roof top and industrial? About noon. Wind? Typically blows in the morning, disappears midmorning and returns weakly in late afternoon.
Until there is battery or other storage that can hold power generated when available for use when needed, we could add solar and wind power without limit and still not have any of this power when peak demand occurs.
McKibben's worldview is a "someday" worldview. It is not now.
Until there is battery or other storage that can hold power generated when available for use when needed, we could add solar and wind power without limit and still not have any of this power when peak demand occurs.
McKibben's worldview is a "someday" worldview. It is not now.
22
Perhaps you mean why do so many people thing that wind and solar can provide *all* our electricity today. Obviously wind and solar are producing quite a lot of power today. But let's say that w&s only work when the sun shines or the wind blows. That's still power that fossil fuels don't have to produce. It's not all or nothing and there's nothing in McKibben's piece that says he thinks so.
4
While it's true that wind and sun cannot provide all the power we need today, that doesn't mean we should abandon plans to harness these energy sources.
No single source of energy today can provide 100% of our needs.
But every megawatt of energy produced by wind and sun is a megawatt that doesn't have to be produced by fossil fuels.
Since the wind and sun can provide unlimited energy with no carbon emissions, and fossil fuels are inherently limited to what is in the ground, why disparage the use of unlimited energy sources?
No single source of energy today can provide 100% of our needs.
But every megawatt of energy produced by wind and sun is a megawatt that doesn't have to be produced by fossil fuels.
Since the wind and sun can provide unlimited energy with no carbon emissions, and fossil fuels are inherently limited to what is in the ground, why disparage the use of unlimited energy sources?
5
There is an efficient aluminum based battery being developed on the other side of the Pacific.
4
Oil and gas are essential, to energy now and to petrochemicals for pretty much forever. Getting them from where they are extracted to where they are needed is a core process, and for the US that means moving North to South and West to East. The same holds true of electricity from wind and sun - the environmental crazies are unlikely to let a lot of wind farms near their precious playgrounds - see the Kennedys re. Cape Cod. That means big wind farms in the Midwest and Plains, and big transmission lines to power the snowflakes iPads in Cambridge and New Haven and Philly. so get with the reality that infrastructure, to move goods, energy and people is pretty central to our lives, and that infrastructure means metal and concrete and hard work fabricating it all, despite what protesters in pink bunny caps and crude but sincere signs might hope.
15
Well said John F.
1
We don't need petrochemicals for fuel. We can grow renewable grasses to make liquid fuel. Corn takes more oil to grow it, than it substitutes oil used in gasoline. It's just a money maker for farm conglomerates. Corn is a hazard to the planet.
2
As you may know, Texas is a big producer of wind energy. Building infrastructure to get that electricity out of there is a big job. Perhaps big enough to employ all of those workers who left failed fracking fields. Time to trade your cowboy hat for a bunny hat.
6
We don't need the pipeline.
We need a national infrastructure jobs program.
90+% of the oil refined from this toxic sludge will be exported. It benefits only Canadian and American big oil. Us big oil does not need more profits on which they will pay no taxes. All pipelines leak!
There are many substantive projects that need to be undertaken. Projects that will benefit the entire nation.
Keystones is not one of them.
Has Drumpf divested himself of his stock ownership in the parent company?
If he did not do so prior to his ex. order it constitutes a clear conflict and he should be charged.
We need a national infrastructure jobs program.
90+% of the oil refined from this toxic sludge will be exported. It benefits only Canadian and American big oil. Us big oil does not need more profits on which they will pay no taxes. All pipelines leak!
There are many substantive projects that need to be undertaken. Projects that will benefit the entire nation.
Keystones is not one of them.
Has Drumpf divested himself of his stock ownership in the parent company?
If he did not do so prior to his ex. order it constitutes a clear conflict and he should be charged.
100
Infrastructure programs don't create jobs in the aggregate. They just divert private sector capital and activity to the government sector. The argument has been made that "we are in a liquidity trap." This is nonsense - nobody has any liquidity.
http://www.aei.org/publication/henry-hazlitt-on-the-fallacy-of-governmen...
https://mises.org/blog/infrastructure-spending-does-not-grow-economy
http://www.aei.org/publication/henry-hazlitt-on-the-fallacy-of-governmen...
https://mises.org/blog/infrastructure-spending-does-not-grow-economy
1
Robert--NONE of this oil is American oil. And, none of this oil is destined for the American market. It comes from Canada, and will pollute our water and soil, all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico, where it will be shipped to other countries. The public is being fed the usual shovel full of cowsht, by trump, the king of excrement.
37
I am well aware of that...as my post indicates. It is not oil. Not until it is refined from the tar sands sludge that will be sent by Canada. It would be refined in the US, sold to various entities and exported.
I have no idea what the financial arrangements are between the Canadian and US oil companies.
The crumbling American infrastructure must be addressed. If people have jobs working on those projects that is a win-win.
We can spend six trillion dollars on illegal unnecessary wars but we're worried about where the the money comes from to repair the country? Bull.
I have no idea what the financial arrangements are between the Canadian and US oil companies.
The crumbling American infrastructure must be addressed. If people have jobs working on those projects that is a win-win.
We can spend six trillion dollars on illegal unnecessary wars but we're worried about where the the money comes from to repair the country? Bull.
2
" it’s unclear whether President Trump can simply wave away the environmental impact review that the Army Corps of Engineers has begun on that project."
If President Trump can't, Congress can.
Mr. McKibben is looking to a future with energy shortages (the wind isn't blowing and the sun's behind 5000 miles of rock).
If his preferred energy sources are the right ones (which they, to some
extent of course are, part of the mix) then he should be inmvesting his
money in them.
If President Trump can't, Congress can.
Mr. McKibben is looking to a future with energy shortages (the wind isn't blowing and the sun's behind 5000 miles of rock).
If his preferred energy sources are the right ones (which they, to some
extent of course are, part of the mix) then he should be inmvesting his
money in them.
I don't know that we will ever know what Don the Con is contemplating, since determining the direction this two-faced liar is looking is impossible. He calls himself an 'environmentalist', but promotes environmentally unfriendly options. He refuses to look at alternatives, except for 'alternative facts'. This will be a long, agonizing four years.
24
You're forgetting about 2018 midterms
3
In New York State, McKibben has lobbied hard against any development that he deems environmentally unfriendly. This includes fracking, mining and resorts. He represents an intellectual elite who chose to drive through the ubiquitous, grinding poverty of the North Country and Southern Tier in their hybrid vehicles seemingly oblivious to the need for jobs and development. Preserving the environment at all costs is paramount. The suffering of the working class is for those less fortunate.
Keystone is a project whose impact would be more symbolic than substanative. Our national and cultural soulmate, Canada, wants it built. One million barrels of oil a day less from the despotic regimes of Iran, Nigeria or Venezuela for generations really means something. The US would burn the oil in a far more environmentally friendly way than the Chinese. The project would employ American and Canadian workers.
You are just plain wrong about Keystone, Mr. McKibben. Develop some balance in your positions. You may find that more people will support your vision of a greener future.