Readers Write: (Jan. 8): Oil 'glut,' military might, end-of-life care, college sports

  • Updated: January 7, 2014 - 5:56 PM

If there’s more oil than we need, why not leave it in the ground?

hide

Illustration: Mailbox.

Photo: ., Tribune Media Services

CameraStar Tribune photo galleries

Cameraview larger

OIL ‘GLUT’

What should happen vs. what will …

The Jan. 7 Business section described a glut of oil in the United States. We are pumping out more than we can use domestically.

For 38 years, there has been a ban on the export of crude oil from the country. Now oil companies want that ban lifted so U.S.-produced crude can be sold on the world market. Given the clout of Big Oil in Congress, I presume the industry will get what it wants. Why? For the same reason anything gets done in Congress these days. Money. Big profits.

I have a solution: Stop drilling new wells. The reason we had the ban on exports was to preserve our resource for domestic use. The best way to preserve it is to leave it in the ground. It’s time to stop drilling and start fervently working on sources of renewable and clean energy.

BILL HABEDANK, Red Wing, Minn.

• • •

Mayor Ed McConnell of Casselton, N.D., thinks it’s time to have a conversation about shipping oil by pipeline (“Evacuation ends for North Dakota City near oil inferno,” Jan. 1). However, the same story offers what appears to be another way: It points out that the rail cars that contained the oil that burned after a derailment are designed to carry nonpressurized liquids. It states that many are being replaced, but it cites a member of the National Transportation Safety Board as saying that none of the cars carrying the crude through Casselton was of the newer, reinforced design.

Let’s update our rail cars before risking a disaster like the March 2013 Alabama pipeline ruptures that spilled 80,000 gallons of crude.

Jean Heberle, St. Anthony

 

MILITARY MIGHT

Yes, it’s valuable, but there are limits

I agree with much of what the writer of the Jan. 7 Letter of the Day (“A militarized United States has made the world a better place”) says about America’s role to preserve and promote the peace of our world in the 20th century. I, too, feel proud of a nation that can mobilize its resources, its collective will and even its fighting spirit to meet the enemy and prevail. Being an American practically means to prevail.

It’s helpful to know even now, as history teaches, that this nation is still capable of mobilizing to meet a danger to its existence. But history also teaches that it’s unhelpful and even dangerous to act like an occupying army and as the world’s police force after the peace is won, just because the world presents its dangers. Being chronically militarized is an unhealthy state of mind and, I would venture, even sets us up for defeat.

STEVEN MAYER, Minneapolis

 

END-OF-LIFE CARE

  • get related content delivered to your inbox

  • manage my email subscriptions

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

 
Close