“We built the 1,700 mile Alaska-Canadian Highway (ALCAN highway) through some of the world’s most rugged terrain in less than a year. We built the Empire State Building in 410 days; the Pentagon, we built it in 16 months. Mr. President, there is NO reason that Keystone should have been studied for six years.”
Mr. President, today I stand in support of the Keystone Pipeline Project.
As an Alaskan, I feel it’s important to talk about this bill and the importance of American energy infrastructure. I live in a state with one of the world’s largest pipelines. In 1973, after bitter debate, similar to the debate about Keystone, Congress passed a bill that led to the construction of the trans-Alaska pipeline system– what we in Alaska call TAPS.
It almost didn’t happen.…
“It is time to welcome the good news about climate science–the exaggeration of warming and harm by too-hot climate models. It is past time to hurl ad hominem at those intellectuals who reject neo-Malthusians on theoretical and empirical grounds.”
“Ad hominem—is that all you got? I happen to hold my views because I believe in them. Is there something wrong with that?” Such was my response to a professor who complained about an opinion-page editorial I published in the Daily Oklahoman: “Rob Bradley: Is Sourcewatch wrong? We simple folks in Oklahoma just like to know who butters your bread.”
And another comment:
…So no bias at there being your boss is Koch, huh? Sure. we TOTALLY believe you are not carrying water for the Koch brothers and that if you had a totally different opinion, you wouldn’t loose that kushy job… I have a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.
“Although biomass is a renewable resource, much of it is currently used in ways that are neither renewable nor sustainable.”
– Christopher Flavin and Nicholas Lenssen (Worldwatch Institute), Power Surge. New York: W. W. Norton, 1994, pp. 176–77.
“We write to raise strong concerns about the November 19th, 2014, memo from Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation Janet McCabe (McCabe memo), which would credit use of woody biomass for energy with reducing emissions, when it actually increases them…. Burning biomass instead of fossil fuels does not reduce the carbon emitted by power plants. In fact, as EPA itself acknowledges, burning biomass degrades facility efficiency and increases day-to-day emissions over emissions when fossil fuels are burned alone.”
– Letter from Dr. Viney P. Aneja et al. to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, February 9, 2015 (reprinted below).…