I found the Feb. 1 BDN OpEd by Paul Mayewski, director of the University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute, and Darryl Lyon, lieutenant colonel of the Maine National Guard, odd, disquieting, contradictory and alarming.
The article was titled “Maine is a leader in confronting climate change in the High North.” Nowhere in the piece was there mention of confronting climate change. Not confronting but capitalizing on climate change — economically and strategically — was the theme. The writers were intentionally vague about how Maine might both lead and profit from the opening of the Arctic, but the clear intent was to cheer lead for that opening.
They called the Arctic the “last frontier,” but they were calling for its exploitation, not its protection. If there is indeed a last frontier on Earth, wise leadership would demand worldwide treaties to leave it well enough alone. I would challenge the writers to tell us one place on this planet where economic and strategic interests have combined to cause anything but decimation — unless we assume that short-term power and profit is the goal.
Mayewski and Lyon stated the goals of Maine’s economic and strategic advancement in the Arctic should be led by an alliance of business, military, political and academic interests. Aren’t these the same interest groups that have caused and profited from climate change? And aren’t they the same interest groups that have made sure no real progress has been made on confronting climate disaster? Why would it be a good idea for the residents of Maine and the world to have the sustainability of this last frontier controlled by these interests?
Although specific mention of particular resources in the Arctic is carefully avoided by the writers, we all know the primary resources are fossil fuels, oil and gas. We also know how dangerous and fragile this environment is and that exploitation of those resources inevitably would lead to spills and contamination in an ecosystem already under considerable stress. Mayewski and Lyon call for peaceful, stable and conflict-free development of the High North. What does that mean? Does it mean Maine and the U.S. make claim to the resources first and restrict them from everyone else?
We also all know any real confrontation with climate change means leaving fossil fuels in the ground. A recent study at Stanford University has shown that the world could be powered by alternative, green energies by 2030. What we need is the political will to insist on that change. Unfortunately, that will is not likely to be found in a group of business, military and political leaders who, as we have seen again and again, are far more likely to exhibit their combined talent for environmental destruction.
The last alarming aspect of this OpEd was that Mayewski, a climate scientist, was working with the military to advance economic and strategic interests for business. I would feel far more trusting of academia if it were using its scientific insight to protect the environment rather than to exploit it. He casts himself in a role similar to the psychologists who advised on how best to torture victims. The question is not how best can it be done but whether it should be done. The question is not about feasibility but morality. The last frontier for humans on this planet is not a place but a mentality. The mentality we need to explore is choosing to live in harmony with limited resources and all other species. One earth, one chance.
Robert Shetterly of Brooksville is the painter of Americans Who Tell the Truth, a series of portraits of courageous Americans.
Apology
In my response to an OpEd by Dr. Paul Mayewski and Commander Darryl Lyon, I sincerely regret having used the language I did to describe the role of Dr. Mayewski in his climate work. The language was extreme, thoughtless and hurtful. I should never have said it.
I wrote: “The last alarming aspect of this OpEd was that Dr. Mayewski, a climate scientist, was working with the military to advance economic and strategic interests for business. I would feel far more trusting of academia if it was using its scientific insight to protect environment rather than exploit it. He casts himself then in a role similar to the psychologists who advised on how best to torture victims …”
No matter what political or environmental concerns I may have about development in the Arctic, they do not merit that kind of unnecessary and inaccurate innuendo. I apologize to him and anyone else harmed by that statement. Dr. Mayewski is a scientist and citizen of the highest caliber.