[quote=So Boerd]
To make government "investment", which is really a euphemism for funneling money to donors, a neccessary condition is silly. This pipeline will reduce CO2.

So if you are saving up rather than investing, you are putting your own prosperity ahead of the environment. Wow. You're as bad as the oil fatcats.
[/quote]

The pipeline will reduce CO2? Okay. Sure. I'll believe you on that. Now, what relevance does that have to anything I said? Does it change anything about what I said? Not even slightly. Fossil fuels still damage the environment, and are still finite (regardless of how much is left, it's finite), and therefore still need to be replaced at some point in future, if only for humanity's benefit. Therefore, investment in alternate energy sources makes logical sense for humanity's collective wellbeing.

That logic is so fallacious it's not even worth responding to. 
1) I'm not actively damaging the environment. Perhaps, through inaction, I'm allowing it to happen, but I have little choice unless I wish to be an environmental campaigner, and I don't. By your logic, nobody has any right to disagree with any policy or any idea if they're not actively campaigning against it, which is, to put it plainly, [i]moronic[/i]. That's why everyone is allowed to vote, and the opinions of campaigners and politicians are not the only ones that are considered.
2) At what point did I criticise the "oil fatcats", as you phrased it? Precisely nowhere. You're not even arguing against my points, you've seen that I've said something about alternative energy and are accrediting a bunch of typical arguments to me, when I've said absolutely nothing that has any relevance to what you're replying with.