We are Jewish folks who joined more than a thousand others in getting ourselves arrested in front of the White House this past summer protesting the Keystone XL Pipeline. Some of us are rabbis; many of us wore kippot that day; all of us did what we did because it felt, among other things, like a mitzvah.
Before the project was delayed last month, the pipeline would have carried crude oil from the Canadian tar sands across 1,700 miles and six states. The extraction of tar sands oil generates more heat-trapping climate pollution than other oil. Climate scientist James Hansen has said that fully exploiting the tar sands would essentially spell "game over" for our climate.
It would have been nice for us to know -- as our Catholic, Methodist, Quaker, United Church of Christ, and Unitarian Universalist sisters and brothers knew -- that our larger religious community supported our stand. But on the Keystone XL Pipeline, the major Jewish organizations were mostly silent.
Only the American Jewish Committee spoke out -- in support of the pipeline as "a crucial step in strengthening U.S. energy security."
In other words: this pipeline would be good for the Jews. Even the world's dirtiest oil, if it came from Canada, would theoretically displace oil from the Middle East. So a tar sands pipeline seems good for Israel and the U.S. And what serves the immediate interests of Israel and America, must be good for the Jews.
We dispute the AJC's argument outright, because the pipeline's oil was destined for export anyway; because putting this expensive tar sands oil on the market would not reduce the flow of profits to Middle Eastern oil producers; because tar sands oil only deepens the United States' addiction to oil, the vast majority of which will continue to come from elsewhere; and because tapping Canadian oil with a particularly harsh carbon footprint that drives more extreme climate change will, in a generation or two, actually create greater insecurity for both the U.S. and for Israel.
But we have a bigger question: Is climate change the sort of issue where the best, first concern our people can raise is whether it's good for the Jews?
The heat-trapping greenhouse gases released by our burning of fossil fuels has already raised the global average temperature 1.4 degrees over the past 150 years, causing stronger storms, devastating droughts and outbreaks of disease all over the world. And the temperature is going up faster and faster. Scientists are clear that the concentrations of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere cannot stay long above 350 parts per million for life on Earth to proceed as we have known it; we're already up near 400, and rising.
Every single Jewish soul is a human being who lives on Earth, and who depends for sustenance on rains in the right season and the continued bounty of the land. The Torah itself and our Jewish calendar are rooted in Middle Eastern agricultural seasons which would be permanently disrupted by climate change. The modern State of Israel is located on Earth, where its people continue to depend on a stable and life-giving climate -- and where projections suggest longer droughts, and more regional insecurity, in the near future.
Jewish people, like all people, hope for our children and grandchildren to live on Earth, in a world that is not more characterized by flooding, hunger, or suffering than the one we inherited from our parents.
We are people who affirm that anyone who saves a single life saves a whole world, and already, the World Health Organization estimates that 300,000 people around the world are dying from effects of climate change every year, most of them in developing countries.
And what of the one-third of all species of plants and animals that may not adapt fast enough to a warming climate? What kind of Shabbat could our people celebrate in commemoration of God's creation of the world, if our weeks are spent witnessing the extinction of huge swaths of that Creation?
We are heartened that our protest, joining a chorus of many caring people, succeeded in scuttling the Keystone XL pipeline -- for now. But the struggle -- to stop this project, to halt tar sands development, and above all, to address the climate crisis -- continues.
In this critical moment, confronting irreparable damage to the only Earth any of us have ever known, it's high time for Jewish leaders to stop wondering which climate-polluting projects may be in some short-term Jewish interest.
Climate change hurts everyone human, today and in the future. Who are we, if we are not able to say, in one voice, that that couldn't possibly be good for the Jews?
Joelle Novey, along with Rabbi Fred Scherlinder Dobb, Rabbi David Shneyer, Jonah Adels, Phil Aroneanu, Laura Bellows, Lisa Jo Finstrom, Robert Friedman, Elizabeth Gaines, Johanna Galat, Richard Graves, Glenn Hurowitz, Joshua Kahn Russell, Lawrence MacDonald, Jeff Mann,
Geri Maskell, Karen Menichelli, Sam Novey, Lore Rosenthal, Harriet Shugarman, Joe Solomon and Basia Yoffe were among 1,253 people arrested at the White House in August and September protesting the Keystone XL Pipeline.
www.ajc.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=ijITI2PHKoG&b=2818295&ct=11590679¬oc=1
Still not a word about climate change. If anyone knows of major Jewish organizations that responded differently, post them here!
the rest of us in the meantime are of course screwed.
I applaud your action against XL.
You write:
'Climate scientist James Hansen has said that fully exploiting the tar sands would essentially spell "game over" for our climate.'
Dr Hansen recently gave an interview (Jun 23 2011) to Treehugger's Jacob Gordon.
'One of the most venerated scientists of our time, James Hansen is the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, a position he's held for three decades. Long before climate change was a household term, Hansen was one of the first to talk about its dangers. In recent years, Hansen has grown increasingly outspoken about the moral imperative to act, and has been arrested several times for demonstrating against issues like mountaintop removal. In our interview, Dr. Hansen talks about his support for nuclear power, his proposed carbon fee, the role of the climate contrarians, and plenty more.'
http://www.treehugger.com/treehugger-radio/nasas-james-hansen-on-climate-change-and-intergenerational-justice-podcast.html
The point being, that so many people are not able to change their thinking to accomodate AGW. Just about every economic principle we have been taught, is now challenged by climate change. The same goes for security, and everything else that we have relied on in the past.
This is no excuse for inaction, though it explains it. Every action that increases emissions for the purposes of short term profit - or energy security - or anything else, will now carry with it extreme impacts that are directly contrary to our interests. Unless people can jettison their prejudice, and look at this issue without an ideological taint to their thinking, it is going to be very likely that our countries and civlisations will not survive.
GOOD WORK GREENS !
Try and learn some facts just occasionally.
Will the oil be unburned ?
I doubt it.
Shell has predicted that 50% of the world's energy will come from renewable sources by 2040.
Wind power is growing at the rate of 30% annually, with a worldwide installed capacity of 198 gigawatts in 2010.
Global photovoltaic installations have surpassed 40 GW.
Solar thermal power generates 354 megawatts at the SEGS power plant in the Mojave Desert.
The world's largest geothermal power installation is the Geysers in California, with a rated capacity of 750 MW
A second issue is that Middle Eastern countries pose a threat to Israel's existence every day. Without oil money, that threat would be greatly reduced. Global warming is a very severe threat, but is not as imminent as the threat posed by hostile military or terrorist attack.
I am all for green energy and trying to prevent and slow global warming. Unfortunately, the political and economic situations are such that dependence on oil will not change overnight. Accusing an entire religion of selfishness and basing that accusation off of bad economics and unsubstantiated claims is terribly unfair.
Israel does not currently face existential threats from military or terrorist attack.
BTW: we do not want to lower oil prices. Oil, and coal need to be phased out. This is necessary in any case because of increasing scarcity.
Given the small size of Israel, and the typical damage radius of a nuclear weapon, any Muslim or other unfriendly country with nuclear capabilities is an existential threat to Israel's existence.
In the long run, we want alternative energy that is cheaper than oil or coal prices. Right now, we are stuck with oil for the foreseeable future (although natural gas would probably be workable without too much effort). There is no question that oil dependence is politically motivated, and that the human race may very well die out as a result. I don't think this pipeline is a "good" solution; but, I do believe it to be better than the status quo. Current oil prices are MUCH higher than a free market would dictate because of OPEC. I would rather pay a lower price to an American or Canadian company than a higher price to an OPEC country, irrespective of the implications for Israel (and yes, I am Jewish, although not very religious).
anti-semtism in the USA and Europe than climate change. I hope you are as passionate about those issues because if not, Jews won't have to worry about climate change.
This is kind of like the constant drum beat that we need to get tougher on crime, when in reality the crime rate has never been lower.
Although, this has nothing to do with the subject of the article whose title I find inappropriate and unhelpful.
Burning oil in China, or in the US produces an equal amount of CO2 emissions for an equal amount of oil. The tar sands oil was going to be exported anyway.
Next?
We have the ability to develop new technologies, we just do not have a Congress. that is willing to fund its development but instead offer more profit opportunities to the oil companies.
A small increase in energy costs used to develop alternative energy choices would be a start. HOwever, the GOP/TP are determined to get their way and gift the oil companies at the expense of our planet, as evidenced by their actions..
We have much to build now, much to commercialize, and much to research.
Sure would be nice to have that $4T Bush wasted on his wars back right about now.
gee, Mike, my super-user friend, it sure seems like one of us is against differences of opinion. and why the angry photo if you claim to be always happy? you sure seem not-so-happy to read something that has a difference of opinion.
Thank You for making a positive contribution to life on earth!