Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
NewsOpinionReaders Respond

America's failure to invest in alternative energy sources will come back to haunt future generations

ConservationUpstream Oil and Gas ActivitiesAlternative EnergyNatural ResourcesRenewable EnergyEnergy Saving

It is unfortunate that commentator Charles Campbell's recent criticism of the current administration's handling of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline was so supercilious ("D.C.'s Keystone Kops," Jan. 30). He made valid points: Wind and solar power are inconstant and must be supplemented. Their installations can be intrusive and demand lots of space. And the broader question of our energy problem is enormously complex.

However, that does not justify our failure to invest in alternative energy sources the way other countries have. A serious build out of renewable energy would produce employment that would make the promises of the Keystone XL oil pipeline look laughably small.

Mr. Campbell does not even mention geothermal, an energy source which is not inconstant. It is little used, but that is in part because, like so much else, we have ignored its possibilities, just as we have largely ignored reducing our energy consumption through conservation.

For decades, American auto makers have obstructed legislation to make truly energy-efficient cars. It has taken the Japanese and Koreans to force us to play catch-up. We still give trucks a pass. And we invest in pipelines rather than in public transportation.

For decades, the housing industry insisted on building mansions out in the countryside far from schools and workplaces. Green appliances and green housing will not offset the driving and school construction this requires.

Smart growth, like the change to more efficient autos, takes time. We should have taken serious steps long ago. And conservation must reach down to the individual citizen. We need a campaign to call on every citizen to conserve energy every day, in every way. Our current policies are only hastening the arrival of the time when oil will be too expensive both economically and politically.

Mr. Campbell laments the fact that for 40 years we have not drilled in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. But if we refuse to learn from the BP disaster in the Gulf, drilling in the land of the Valdez could bring us more of the same.

The more energy we enable ourselves to use, the more we will consume. We take the easy way out, ignore the fundamental changes that must be made, and leave it to our children and our grandchildren to pay the costs.

Guy Hollyday

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
ConservationUpstream Oil and Gas ActivitiesAlternative EnergyNatural ResourcesRenewable EnergyEnergy Saving
  • Our government is broken [Letter]
    Our government is broken [Letter]

    Canada has a shale oil supply that could have reduced U.S. reliance of oil imports from the Middle East, provided thousands of American jobs and ultimately lowered the price of gasoline for American citizens. But President Barack Obama has held the project hostage. Not the House of...

  • The real reason Obama hasn't approved Keystone [Letter]
    The real reason Obama hasn't approved Keystone [Letter]

    There are so many falsehoods and inaccuracies in your editorial that I cannot rebut them point by point ("The Keystone delay," April 22). I would rather present the facts about why the Keystone pipeline should have been approved years ago and why President Barack Obama's...

  • Keystone delay is all politics [Letter]
    Keystone delay is all politics [Letter]

    Here is what President Barack Obama said on Good Friday when he announced that he was again, after four years, delaying a decision on the Keystone XL Pipeline until after the election:

  • The Keystone delay [Editorial]
    The Keystone delay [Editorial]

    Our view: Choice to temporarily defer a decision on controversial oil pipeline is a rational, albeit politically convenient, one for the White House

  • Keystone XL is one more hole in a sinking ship [Letter]
    Keystone XL is one more hole in a sinking ship [Letter]

    On what basis did the U.S. State Department conclude that the Keystone XL pipeline project is relatively benign in regard to greenhouse gas?

  • Climate change toadies
    Climate change toadies

    While reading the front page of The Sun the article on the loss of amphibians ("Alarming U.S. decline in environment's sentinels," May 23), I heard on the radio that Congress is trying to assure construction of the Alberta tar sands pipeline.

  • Oil spills and Keystone
    Oil spills and Keystone

    Our view: Pipeline spill in Arkansas a reminder of the risks posed by Keystone XL — and the little value the project poses for the United States

  • Who would follow our example on Keystone?
    Who would follow our example on Keystone?

    While many have long seen America as the global bad boy, everybody likes Canada. If Uncle Sam tucks his pack of Marlboros under his T-shirt sleeve and plays by his own rules, the Canadian moose -- or whatever their Uncle Sam equivalent is -- always wears his blue blazer and school tie and...

Comments
Loading