Canadian conservation crusader David Suzuki wins the Environmentalist toddler award for this blog post arguing that we need to reduce fossil fuels instead of discussing how oil and gas is best transported.
Debating the best way to do something we shouldn’t be doing in the first place is a sure way to end up in the wrong place.
Suzuki doesn’t like the ongoing debate about whether transporting oil and gas by pipeline is better than transporting by train. The problem for Suzuki is how that discussion distracts from the really important work of getting rid of fossil fuels altogether.
“Rapidly increasing oil and gas development and shipping ever greater amounts, by any method, will mean more accidents, spills, environmental damage – even death. The answer is to step back from this reckless plunder and consider ways to reduce our fossil fuel use.”
Suzuki doesn’t think the extra jobs and economic activity is worth the damage done to the environment and that such growth at the expense of increased carbon emissions, rail accidents and pipeline leaks is so harmful that we must move toward so-called “clean energy” instead.
One question for the purist Mr. Suzuki: If there are dangers from oil and gas transport by rail (which was plainly evident when 47 people died and a whole town was practically destroyed in Quebec) how many more people are in danger of illness and death if they can’t heat their homes with oil and natural gas?