If someone else plans on doing something unethical, the fact that it will be done anyway does not justify your doing it along with them.
Last Friday, the U.S. State Department issued an environmental review of the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline -- and it puts the U.S. one step closer to approving the project by claiming that the overall environmental impacts of the pipeline would be limited. (With the publication of the report, a 45-day public comment period begins; comments can be addressed to [email protected]).
Now is a good time to recall President Obama's State of the Union address, delivered just a couple of weeks ago:
...for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it's true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it's too late.
As the Sierra Club and the NRDC both point out, there is ample reason to think that that's false -- that without the Keystone XL pipeline, the tar sands would stay in the ground. But suppose the State Department is right that "approval or denial of the proposed Project is unlikely to have a substantial impact on the rate of development in the oil sands, or on the amount of heavy crude oil refined in the Gulf Coast area." Does that mean that it's OK for the U.S. to proceed with the project?
No.
Suppose you and your neighbor had a plot to steal a third neighbor's magnificent and valuable jewelry collection. You start to have qualms about the plan, but your co-conspirator tells you that he is going through with it on his own even if you won't help out, and there's nothing you can do about it. Does the fact that the jewelry will be stolen without your participation justify your participating in the crime?
The idea is ludicrous, but that's exactly the logic that the State Department is using. They acknowledge that contributing to global warming is wrong, but the fact that TransCanada will mine the tar sands and ship the oil anyway is supposed to excuse the U.S.'s participation. However, when a person or a government performs an action, they are morally responsible for that action. Substantially adding to global warming is wrong. Building the Keystone XL pipeline is wrong.
Indeed, extracting oil from the tar sands is wrong. We should be exerting political pressure to stop production, not aiding and abetting it.
Recent Comments