Spectra Energy (and others) Plan to Expand Pipeline to Feed Gas to DownEast LNG (Maine) for Export! – Natural Gas Watch.org


Spectra Energy (and others) Plan to Expand Pipeline to Feed Gas to DownEast LNG (Maine) for Export! – Natural Gas Watch.org.

This would not occur if the natural gas had been assigned a stiff Carbon Tax.

About hypergeometric

See http://www.linkedin.com/in/deepdevelopment/ and http://667-per-cm.net
This entry was posted in bridge to nowhere, carbon dioxide, Carbon Tax, climate, climate change, climate disruption, consumption, denial, economics, environment, ethics, finance, geophysics, global warming, methane, natural gas, physics, rationality, reasonableness, risk, statistics, temporal myopia, the right to know. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Spectra Energy (and others) Plan to Expand Pipeline to Feed Gas to DownEast LNG (Maine) for Export! – Natural Gas Watch.org

  1. EarthGuard97 says:

    I love the environmental theme you have going on in your blog, I’m trying to promote mine. If you don’t mind, would you mind sharing it if I do the same for you?

    • EarthGuard97: It will depend upon the theme. I will not agree to mutually promote. I don’t blog for any kind of promotional purpose, nor do I blog to advocate a specific cause. I blog to convey science and climate mitigation policy. Occasionally I’ll make a post about some random topic that interests me, as I did regarding the Disney post.

      So, I’ll look at your blog, and if I see something worth recommending, I will. But I gotta say, while your blog is good, it is not really aligned with my own themes.

      • EarthGuard97 says:

        My blog focuses on current events, social and environmental concepts and thoughts such as the modern existence of slavery and racism, Rachel Dolezal formerly of NAACP and her situation, etc.

        • Yes, as I said, those issues aren’t terribly central to my concerns.

          Indeed, a I perceive problems with addressing climate change solutions and policy from a progressive political viewpoint is that these get wrapped up with other progressive agenda items, and packaged, and thus are unacceptable to some conservatives. For climate, this tends to occur with ideas about climate justice for example.

          Now, I know that people of color and the poor are quite likely to be the most affected by the ramifications of climate change, and already are. And they have the least responsibility for creating the situation. Facts are, per the background of Laudato Si which were mentioned here, 40% of the CO2 emissions are generated by the 400 million most wealth individuals on Earth. Accordingly the 400 million most wealth on Earth should pay for that damage, at present, and historical damage, and that is the proper call. Also, there are mistaken ideas of how to help the poor and disenfranchised on the planet. Many see fossil fuels as necessary for and to that. I consistently maintain that’s silly and stupid: Fossil fuels demand the existence of extensive supply networks for them, and only the fossil fuel companies and their delivery companies make out when these are used. Instead, local wind and solar, village by village, make a lot more sense.

          However, the risk and impending damage from climate change is severe and real. The message progressives need to learn is that we cannot afford to wait for the perfect solution for this. This is a civilization-threatening risk. There needs to be triage. We need to make choices. Moreover, I have found in my engagements with progressives that saying that the poor of faraway lands will suffer disproportionately makes them, typically and certainly comparably wealthy, view the matter as just another cause among a plethora of others. That is not helpful, even if the causes are worthy.

          Instead, people need to understand that the risks are immediate, very real, and will impact them. Soon. Not just their kids and grandkids. And, I suspect, although the effects for the poor and disenfranchised of the world will be severe, especially in places where it will be too hot to work, countries having extended supply chains are particularly susceptible to climate-related disruptions. This will have impacts on living, reduce wealth, and, unfortunately, instill some panic. All these could have been avoided if we had, collectively, been more proactive in our planning and response.

          But, we are where we are. We need everyone on board, conservatives as well as progressives. Without them we aren’t going to solve the problem. And the repercussions of failing to do that are just too monstrous to allow it, even for the wealthy on Earth, if only because, as things are, for better or ill, without the wealthy population, everyone is worse off.

          Thanks for your interest. When you have posts which are in line with the point and interests of this blog, as I wrote before, I’ll consider linking them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s