Now, if only the big wigs at the NY Times would reduce their own “carbon footprint” by turning the heat down to 50 degrees during the winter and up to 80 during the summer…better yet, why not simply turn the heat/AC systems off and open the windows?….along with reducing all fossil fueled Times travel, including distribution of their paper edition? Anyhow, here’s the editorial board
The State Department’s latest environmental assessment of the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline makes no recommendation about whether President Obama should approve it. Here is ours. He should say no, and for one overriding reason: A president who has repeatedly identified climate change as one of humanity’s most pressing dangers cannot in good conscience approve a project that — even by the State Department’s most cautious calculations — can only add to the problem.
It is these long-term consequences that Mr. Obama should focus on. Mainstream scientists are virtually unanimous in stating that the one sure way to avert the worst consequences of climate change is to decarbonize the world economy by finding cleaner sources of energy while leaving more fossil fuels in the ground. Given its carbon content, tar sands oil should be among the first fossil fuels we decide to leave alone.
The same problem delivery of the NY Times’ dead tree edition augments. And the fossil fueled travel used by its reporters.
In itself, the Keystone pipeline will not push the world into a climate apocalypse. But it will continue to fuel our appetite for oil and add to the carbon load in the atmosphere. There is no need to accept it.
Climate apocalypse!!!!!!1!!! We’re dooooooomed! But not doomed enough for the Times to give up its own use of fossil fuels and lower their own “carbon footprint.” Yeah, we’re basically talking about big shot Progressives who Know Better than you little people, and you should just accept that they Know Better and that your cost of living will rise dramatically, all why they jet off to exotic vacation spots to carp about hotcoldwetdry.
Don’t forget that the other big paper, the Washington Post, supported Keystone XL.
