Within the energy policy debate, it’s vital that we maintain a level of credibility and seriousness that promotes the smartest policies moving forward. In doing so we promote economic growth, American energy independence, and improve lives across the country. Recent columns have introduced frivolous terms and ideas into the debate, but we must maintain focus on creating jobs, boosting economies, and providing Americans with affordable energy sources.
Part of what we strive for at GAIN is providing balance to the energy debate that can at times become clouded with narratives that are not always based on facts. We did just that this week after Michael Foster, a man who is currently on trial in the state of North Dakota facing criminal charges for tampering with the Keystone 1 pipeline, made the argument in an opinion article that his actions were taken with regard for his psychological well being.
Read our statement from GAIN Spokesman, Craig Stevens, below:
“This week the infrastructure industry has been faced with two unknowable, unquantifiable garbles of jargon that threaten to diminish our energy policy debate into a theatre of the absurd. ‘Pre-traumatic stress disorder’ and ‘potential indirect impacts’ have entered the lexicon of individuals and groups who are seeking to curtail the development of North America’s natural resources. What is even more stunning than their mere use in the public discourse is level of seriousness with which they are being given. The U.S. and its neighbors need millions of barrels of fossil fuels per day to meet the energy and transportation needs of our shared economy. By attempting to shut down or thwart the development of pipelines as a means of transporting these critical fuels, energy opponents are forcing North Americans to get their fuel from foreign countries, via less environmentally sensitive means, at higher costs, and without the added benefit of employing North American workers. Policymakers and others should give these naysayers their reasonable due, which is nil.”