tells me that McVay, while he may have a background in environmental
studies, also has a predisposition to defend an industry that is his
livelihood. This makes his perspective about as reliable as an asbestos
salesman telling me that all those cancer studies are taken out of
Of course, to
his credit, the man hes taking shots at, Robin Meyers, is likely no
more versed in environmental impact than your average minister. Meyers
language may have been harsh, but it was not biased by the need for
personal gain; that tends to tip this readers favor in his direction.
own agenda is easily qualified by his comment that people like Robin
can cause severe economic harm and hardship for their fellow human
beings if their rants are followed before they are exposed for following
That statement implies that in one
swift move mankind will cease the operation of a 100-plus-years-old
infra structure and immediately
begin using a new one simply because of a couple of hippies. Only the
ethos of the masses can dictate change, and it will not happen
overnight. He need not fear his industry collapsing.
cant help but feel that McVay is being shortsighted when viewing the
relationship between climate change and the industry he holds dear. Even
if hes right, the one thing he cannot attest to is the unlimited
nature of petroleum and its by-products. Because oil is in everything
from plastics to pesticides, its in our interest to make it last as
long as possible.
doesnt mean that his industry dies; if anything, it means it lives
longer. A shift to vehicles that run on renewable energy might not
change whats happening in our environment, but it will ensure we have
oil to produce the things we need in the future, everything from
artificial limbs to Ziploc bags.
goes on to say, Haste makes waste, and foolish decisions need to be
avoided before all of the facts are evaluated with regard to man-made
global warming or other environmental concerns.
actually agree with this statement. But the foolish decision is the one
where we waste a vital, extremely versatile and necessary product by
dumping it into the tanks of our cars.
if we could conclusively prove that there is no environmental impact
from burning fossil fuels, we cannot ignore the precious and limited
nature of this commodity. We must do everything in our power to make it
last as long as possible.
Kool-Aid analogy isnt a fair one. This isnt Jonestown. Meyers and
people like me only want the preservation of life. Theres no cyanide in
our Kool-Aid just a desire to help the future of humanity.
dont believe that fully exploiting a limited resource does anything
other than leave us ill prepared for when that resource becomes scarce.
Sometimes great discussions happen over a drink. Why cant that drink be Kool-Aid?
Brandon Wertz, Norman