Having read Janet Southcott's article in last week’s Peak [“Viewpoint: Say no to the wolf in sheep’s clothing,” December 7] on the proposed natural gas pipeline through Powell River, it struck me that our society has a huge conflict of interest to resolve.
If an individual person had such a conflict, they would likely be frozen with anxiety and indecision, and very likely seeing a psychiatrist.
On the one hand we are told daily that we have maybe 12 years to halve our global carbon emissions or an out-of-control climate catastrophe capable of destroying our civilization, and perhaps the major part of life on this planet, will ensue. On the other, the fossil-fuel industry just carries on planning new projects as if there were no tomorrow.
In terms of carbon emissions, natural gas is only 25 per cent less harmful than crude oil.
The principle underlying carbon offsetting is that it doesn't matter where on the globe emissions are cut, the effect is the same over time. The atmosphere mixes and distributes gases in constant circulation so one would expect the same to be true for the carbon emissions themselves.
Are we kidding ourselves in thinking that exporting the natural gas is exporting the problem?
William Lytle-McGhee
Climate Action Powell River
