To the editor:
Let’s face it, we all use fossil fuels.
There is also no argument with respect to obtaining fossil fuels. This process requires mechanical systems operated by humans. Such systems are subject to failure. This is clearly evidenced by recent events in the Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, the North Sea and Nigeria.
These two facts would have no bearing on our current situation were it not for the reality that we now have the potential to develop local energy resources. This ability to extract local energy coupled with the refusal to do so because of risk develops a moral dichotomy for those who continue to consume fossil fuels. So let’s just be clear about what "No Frackers" are saying. They are indicating that they are going to continue to consume fossil fuels and that since obtaining these fuels does involve some risk, they expect the poor and disenfranchised people in other parts of the world to assume that risk but not them. When one also couples this with the fact that we are expending immense amounts of energy to transport fossil fuels from around the world to our local area one can only arrive at one conclusion.
Expending immense amounts of energy to import fossil fuels developed thousands of miles away, coupled with the desire to make the poor and disenfranchised people of the world take risks with their environments but not ours, while we continue to lead extravagant lifestyles burning these fuels is the zenith of moral hypocrisy.
Michael S. Niziol, MD