"Except for the point, the still point, there would be no dance, and there is only the dance." ~ T.S. Eliot in "Burnt Norton"

Sunday, April 21, 2013


In light of our recent discussions on ecology and theology, we wanted to further explore the example of the Keystone Pipeline. Please watch the follow news clip, and consider the following discussion questions.

1. How do you feel about the Keystone Pipeline?
2. Do you believe its implementation is for the common good?
3. Do you think the Pipeline should be allowed to be built?
4. Which do you think is the more significant outcome, the potential environment ramifications, or the ability to provide cheaper oil for citizens, and lessening our dependence on the Middle East?
5. Do you think the construction of the Pipeline falls in line with Catholic Doctrine?

Please read the following article concerning Pope Francis and the environment and consider the following discussion question.

6. Moving forward, how do you think Pope Francis will play a role in environment issues such as this?

25 comments:

  1. This is a very controversial topic in politics so I'd not like to get into the ethics of the pipeline (although I think its construction is inevitable as it was passed under bi-partisan support in the Senate) but more or less into its relevance with Catholic doctrine (after all this is not a politics class). I don't think that the construction of the Pipeline would be in the Church's' best interest as we've seen with John Paul II. I believe that the Church has set up its doctrine to protect the life, and this includes the environment. The church has opposed deforestation in the Amazon as well as the pollution of water and air. One of the major concerns of the Pipeline is that oil spills and carbon emissions could increase. While the verdict is still out on those claims, the thought of any of those occurring would rule out the Church's support on the pipeline.
    As for Pope Francis, I really don't think his immediate concerns will be with the environment (he seems more concerned about the poor and the weak). Over time I do believe he could end up taking similar stances that JPII had especially considering he is a South American Pope. As stated above deforestation in South America (particularly Brazil) is a very heated topic and the church already has a position of being opposed to deforestation. Carbon Emissions in Latin America are increasing would also be a subject where the Pope could have significant influence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you are completely right when you say that one of the Church's goals is to protect life, and therefore the environment. We might tend to think that this pipeline will impact the environment so negatively since it will be on American soil. Another important think to consider might be the environmental impact that comes as a result of shipping oil from foreign countries over long distances. Doubtless, it still comes back to lessening dependence on oil in general, rather than figuring out where to get it from.

      Delete
  2. I am very happy that this group chose to take on the pipeline. I am highly against the keystone pipeline. The video actually frustrated me a lot because I believe that they are 100% incorrect. I also believe that they do not know what they are talking about and they do not understand the negative effects of fossil fuels. My major is based on the environment and there is no science disproving global warming or global climate change. The pipeline is not for the common good, it will do far more damaged than it will help. The construction of the pipeline goes against the Catholic Doctrine because it will ruin the ecosystem and the environment. The reporters in this clip just seem to be a group of angry people that do not know the facts of what they are discussing.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tiba,

      I glad you liked the prompt topic. I agree the that video had a clearly biased stance when discussing the pipeline. It was difficult to find a clip that was not leaning one way or the other in terms of the issue. However, hopefully you found their position thought provoking even though it seems that you did not agree. Can you elaborate on why you believe the pipeline to be against Catholic doctrine?

      Delete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I’ll begin by saying the world essentially runs on oil. This is an unavoidable reality that is not rooted in any political ideology or opinion. Food, clothing, newspapers, videogames, books, transportation, trade, all of these things require oil to be moved from point A to B (and to an effect, can influence the costs of those things, but that is another story). That is simply the world we live in. Given the State Dept. last month released an audit on the project (which stated it would have surprisingly little impact on climate change), and given that it has the potential to provide many with work to put food on the table, particularly in this economy, and lessen our addiction to foreign oil and potentially lower fuel prices, I support the construction for the pipeline...unless we find a way to make a combustible engine run on garbage, ’la Back to the Future 2. I think you CAN argue that the construction can be for the common good. That being said, I do believe that we must be responsible with the environment if such an endeavor is to be undertaken to ensure no spills or catastrophes occur. From the Catholic perspective, I think the question of the environment varies based on who you ask. I do understand the idea of respecting life and the environment entire, and I do understand the idea of humans being stewards of the Earth; with the latter, with power comes responsibility. There must be a balance in this regard. (For now) we need oil, but we must be very prudent about how to go about obtaining it in relation to the environment. Would such a balance be good for all? As for the Pope, I'm not sure what his stance will be, or what his stance is, as he seems more focused on sociological aspects of Christianity and the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes the world does run on oil but shouldn't we look for other solutions? Should we build the pipeline as a temporary fix to lessen dependance while we build more efficient means of power? In relation to the common good one must think of globalization in this aspect and that many countries depend on shipments of oil for their own economies and so the poor in those countries could have jobs and make wages and for the governments to operate etc. Wouldn't it be for the greater common good to not allow the pipeline so that other countries may sustain their economies?

      Delete
  5. Matt, I understand what you're saying that the world essentially runs on oil but I think the point from an ecological perspective is that it doesn't have to. In our worlds history, it didn't "run" on oil until recently so why has the necessity run so deep that we must destroy our environment to maintain the common good. I certainly understand the argument that says we are increasing the standard of living for all people, including the lowest amongst ourselves. However that accepts the necessity of oil which I am not sure is true. Also, another interesting question that I think should be pondered is what do you and others think about his choice of Pope Francis and if that in particular has anything to do with his possible concern for the environment?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I worry about the pipeline because of the harmful emissions and water pollution the oil sands from the pipeline will cause. It may be more convenient and possibly cheaper than buying oil from the middle east; although the Natural Resources Defense Council says it will not be cheaper. Also, the proposed pipeline will pass through a seismic zone that had a 4.3 magnitude earthquake. If an earthquake happens again, you can't help but question the pipelines durability. That could cause an environmental disaster. I don't think we are looking out for the common good because if we stop getting oil from the Middle East, China will still use the oil; as they said in the video. So, if our goal is to "protect the earth", does that mean protecting only the U.S. and the land we live on, or does that extend worldwide? I think that Pope Francis will be pro-environment. The article outlines a few quotes where Francis discussed protecting and caring for creation. I doubt Francis will weigh in on what is happening with the pipeline in the U.S., but I could see him being opposed.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I understand Matt's perspective that the world does run on oil. I believe that the cons outweigh the pros. It will pollute the environment because it will be transferring tar sands oil (which is supposed to be more corrosive). Another main issue is that it is actually more expensive just as Jon has said. The pipeline is going through areas like Quebec, Ontario, New Hampshire, etc. So what happens to the wildlife in these places? We're supposed to be protecting our environment but this project is putting both animals and humans at risk. This keystone pipeline is not for the common good. It is up to humans to take care of the environment and world which we have been given, it is a gift not something to be taken for granted. The pipeline is just one example of how humans are using and abusing that gift. So no I do not believe the Catholic Doctrine falls in line with the pipeline.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To respond as to whether or not I approve of the Keystone pipeline, the answer is yes. First off, because I believe environmental protection agencies and organizations will monitor the pipeline extremely closely. Furthermore, the Keystone pipeline, while being hotly debated, is already underway. Additionally, un till Americans or American organizations find an alternative to fossil fuels and make it mainstream, the pipeline might be a good option. In response to Pope Francis, I think its refreshing that we might see the pope make the environment one of his top priorities. He is quoting as having referenced "all creation," however while this illuminates he could be environmentally conscious, it is too soon to ascertain whether this will be his crusade.
    Furthermore, due to Keystone's imminent construction, I believe the church should focus on helping the pipeline because it can therefore press help to ensure that the environment effort remains important.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess to play devil's advocate to your points, you say that until we find an alternative to fossil fuels to make it mainstream, the pipeline might be a good option. However, what is the necessity of either of these options. Before oil, humanity was still able to survive. What are the aspects of our society that run on oil now and possibly fossil fuels later that are so imperative that we need to have the pipeline before an alternative fossil fuel is found?

      Delete
  9. It is true that today's world's prosperity is contingent on the efficient mining and usage of oil. However, our understanding currently tells us that this is but a temporary solution: oil is not exactly recyclable, and our wells will soon run dry. I suppose the prospect which scares me about the Keystone Pipeline is that of the risk it presents: naturally it will cause ecological damage due to the methods by which the oil is extracted as well as the construction of the pipeline itself, but its presence itself presents a risk to the environment. Although there are many regulations applied to such mining industries, the materials with which they work are inherently volatile and accidents can and will occur. As we discussed in class when talking about AI, technological advancement is increasing quite rapidly, which encourages me to think that we as a species will be able to find a newer, less dangerous, and more efficient method of energy production. However, in the short term, I think that the Keystone Pipeline is directly contrary to what I think the Catholic ecological edict would state. I fear, however, that I must defer to ecological and theological experts on the matter. My statement is rather opinionated, but I am vehemently oppposed to the construction and utilization of the keystone pipeline, and I hope that Pope Francis will be as well.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I understand that the Keystone Pipeline is a very controversial issue but in my opinion I feel that if it is going to create jobs in our country then it should be done. Our country has very high unemployment rates right now and anything we can do to create jobs will be good. Yes I believe that its implantation will be for the common good. I don’t think we should be worrying about the animal that it is going to effect and focus more on the family that are on welfare and can’t put a meal on the table because they don’t have jobs. I believe the more significant outcome is the ability to provide cheaper oil for citizens and lessening our dependence on the Middle East. These are two issues that have been recurring for the past 20 to 25 years. Anything that can lighten the tension, in my opinion is good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alex, I understand what you are saying. However, at what cost are we going to be providing for a small betterment of the common good? If we continue at this rate, we might be able to create a minimal increase in jobs now but in several generations our environment will have become so depleted that complete areas will become uninhabitable. We may tarnish the possibility of existence in certain places for our great grandchildren and down the line for lower unemployment today. In my opinion, that's a trade which certainly sounds risky.

      Delete
  11. I think the Keystone pipeline is something that we should consider. The oil is going to go some where why not here. I know that there are many environmental concerns about it, but I would rather the US have control over it and have control over the effects on the environment, than Another country who may not have as strict regulations as we do. I domand dont belive that this is for the common good. I think that many people will benefit from it but we should not continue to be dependent on oil.and if we are to build it, environment concerns should be at the top of the list. Lessening our dependence on foreign oil will be better for the US commom good. And I do not think that building the pipeljne falls under the catholic doctrine. I think that Pope Francis will have a strong environmental influence. When the church begins to show more of an envirmental ckncern the followers of the church will begin to do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What stood out to me in this clip is the argument that the pipeline violates no ones rights and that the protestors are protesting against the pipeline being built because it violate some right. This same analysts goes on to say that these people "love nature and hate human beings." I'd like to first say that his statement is preposterous. I believe that throughout our course of discussion in class we have found that love of nature is in some way love of other people. We are forever connected to the earth and connected to what it provides. The argument here is one of dominion over domination. Yes, building the pipeline would be more convenient for americans to get the oil they rely on. At the same time this is a large amount of infrastructure being built over a large amount of land. I feel that building the pipeline is a good move both politically and could pose better for the environment than current measures. The amount of fuel burnt in the transport of oil across seas daily is possibly causing greater damage to the environment then building a pipeline would in the long run. I believe that the environmental ramifications need to be considered and taken seriously but I also feel that it is in the interest of our way of life to have the pipeline built in order to lighten the burden of costs on american people. Whether or not this is in line with Doctrine I cannot say. I believe our dependence on oil is too great and must be reconsidered, but I don't think the building of a pipeline is detrimental to the Catholic teachings.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Since we run on oil, the pipeline is probably necessary. However I do not think it is for the common good because in the long run, I feel like the pipe puts too many things at risk. The implementation might be good for the U.S, however, once something goes run, it will harm more than just humans. Unless we have a perfect plan to deal with the worst outcome, I don't think this pipeline should be implemented. Compare to the destruction of the environment, our dependency on the Middle East does not seem to be that huge of an issue. I do think that protecting the environment is more important than "cheap oil for citizens."

    To me, building the pipeline is abusing the environment. I don't think abusing the Catholic doctrine will support such action.

    ReplyDelete
  14. There is a close proximity between stewardship for the environment and stewardship towards fellow humans. We have discussed extensively the impact of envionmental depletion on social justice issues. in light of the Keystone Pipeline, we see a condition in which negative environmental impacts may damage our already crumbling outreach of the poor and marginalized. It is on this rationale that Pope Francis may pursue an ecological agenda in his Papacy.
    Another key element to consider is the difference between infrastructure abd fossil fuels. Separating these two elements, we may isolate the ongoing debate on American fossil fuels access without adding in the fiscal, political, and job-related issues associate with building infrastructure.

    Lastly, there is a new movie coming out called Elysium which touches on this topic. The trailer shows the idea that environmental depletion separates the poor from the wealthy and depletion of the earth automatically creates issues of social justice. It would be interesting to cotinue the debate on these epic terms which are future-projected.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I believe that the pipe line is necessary for cheaper oil. I am not completely opposed to this pipe line, due to the hope it will create cheaper gas prices. However I am aware of the possible environmental ramifications of this pipe line. Asking if the pipe line for the common good it a tricky question. If we are less dependent on the middle east, and get cheaper oil prices, than I am sure this if for the common good. However if the pipe line creates issues such as oil leaks than the pipe line does more damage than good. So for me something is only for the common good if its benefits out weigh its risk. I personally consider the benefit of the pipe line will out weigh its risks. Although I am in favor of this pipe line, I do not believe it generally follows the ecological ideas of Catholicism, just because it is not preserving the earth, in which the way we should. I am honestly not sure the role the pope will play in environmental issues, however I am interested to see his reaction.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I do not agree with the implantation of the pipeline because I do not think the benefits outweigh the negative. I agree with the ecological stance that we need to preserve our environment and protect nature. Global warming is a serious issue and this would set up future generations for deep trouble. After watching this video, I feel like the reporters gave a biased opinion about the topic and don't necessarily understand the consequences. I believe cheaper gas prices and being less dependent on the middle east is aimed for the common good, but I think it's time for our country to stop relying on gas because it is a limited resource and eventually we will run out. We might as well preserve nature and not harm our environment more than we already have. I think Pope Francis will be influential to the catholic community with his stance on preserving the environment.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I believe that the pipeline is important for the sake of oil prices to drop due to the fact that many Americans seem to be struggling these days. When it comes to the actual implementation of the pipeline, it may not be for the common good because of the potential ecological damages that it could cause. However, i feel as if the majority of people will agree at this point financially that the benefits outweigh the negatives. I do not feel as if the pipeline falls within the Catholic Doctrine however. I do not know what the Pope's actions towards this will be, however i'm sure they will follow that much of the catholic faith.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think the implantation of the pipeline have more negative effect rather than its benefit. The implantation of the pipeline will cause a lot of serious problem to in environment and ecology. yes, the benefit of it is to have the cheaper gas price but it is not worth to do if we compare it with the harmfulness it will cause even the technology to protect the environment has been improved. In term of having cheaper gas price, I just want to give my thought about this issue, that is, America, the powerful country from the past to now, has the intact territory in term of fuel fossil. America has its own strategy for over 200 years by using other countries’ resource. It is really good strategy when it also creates the job for people in those countries. Come back to the pipeline issue, at this moment, when the protecting environment has become urgently, the implantation of pipeline should not be done. And it does not follow the Catholic Doctrine.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I worry that the Keystone Pipeline is an easy solution to our growing deficit and increasing unemployment rate that will ultimately have a tremendous negative impact on our future generations. I believe that the Keystone Pipeline will be built regardless of the negative effects it will bring to the environment. As a politics major, I truly recognize when Congress takes the easy road to appease constituents despite it being a short term solution. While it may lower oil prices and allow the United States to be less dependent on the Middle East, this Congress will be leaving future generations in a desperate situation.
    Ecology plays a huge role in theology. We, along with the trees and animals were created by God and therefore we must respect his creation. Pope Francis places emphasis on this issue, reminding us to “care for one another and to be loving custodians of creation.” I doubt he would be in favor of the construction of the pipeline.

    ReplyDelete