Oil is a problem. It threatens our environment, causes us to turn away from renewable sources of energy, and leads to conflicts around the globe. The day when our world does not burn a single drop of the stuff will be a glorious day indeed.
But the reality is that oil remains the lifeblood of modern society. And while environmentalist activists have the right idea when they protest pipelines like the Dakota Access Pipeline, this is not the correct approach to take. While there are legitimate concerns about the pipeline, pipelines remain the safest method of transporting oil.
Protestors have targeted Dakota Access both for environmentalist reasons and because the pipeline may harm the nearby Standing Rock Indian Reservation’s sacred sites and water. On Sunday, the Army announced that it would be delaying the pipeline and will discuss alternative routes with both activists and Native American leaders.
But let us suppose that no alternative route is found and the pipeline is cancelled. Does anyone actually think that oil companies will stop producing the oil which would have been transported through this pipeline?
Of course not. The oil will be transported anyways, but oil companies will now use trucks and trains instead of pipelines. And while pipelines can leak if things are done incorrectly, they do not explode. You may remember that 2013 incident when an oil train derailed and exploded in a Canadian town, killing over 40 people in the process. And oil trains have continued to explode, causing environmental damage and threatening lives.
The environmentalist protestors have the best intentions in fighting the pipeline, and there is certainly merit in the idea that pipelines should be examined more carefully to prevent leaks from contaminating groundwater. Many Salt Lake injury lawyers have spoken of countless cases of pipelines causing damage in Utah. But shutting down the Dakota Access pipeline will not actually stop oil from being transported out of North Dakota, nor will it do anything to reduce our society’s demand for oil.
Instead of fighting pipelines, environmentalists should commit to measures which will actually help reduce fossil fuel consumption. For example, environmentalists should be leading efforts to promote a carbon tax which will make oil and gas more expensive and thus less desirable. And as the Trump administration openly discusses cutting back on climate change research and rambles about creating more coal and oil jobs, the green movement needs to fight harder than ever to educate the public about the real, dangerous effects of a warmer planet.
Green activists may cheer and proclaim victory in the aftermath of the Army’s announcement. But while there are legitimate concerns about how the pipeline construction has ignored the voices of local Native Americans, this is not the clear cut victory for environmentalism that we might suppose. Oil will be continued to be transported by less safe means and harm the environment, the Army’s decision could be easily reversed by the incoming Republican government, and environmentalists could lose political capital because pipelines such as Keystone are popular with the general American public.
The green movement is going to have a rough few years, and that means the need to pick and choose their battles carefully. Fighting over the Dakota pipeline is not that.