Question: Why do some insist on making the energy debate a zero-sum game? Going forward, the United States should be marshalling all of its energy resources and resist arguments that pit one kind of energy against another. Global energy demand is going to continue rising, drawing on existing and emerging sources and underscoring the wisdom of an all-of-the-above energy strategy.

Unfortunately, the point is missed by some. For example, in this post Mother Nature Network blogger Karl Burkhart lauds a proposed Wyoming wind farm while criticizing the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would bring oil from Canada's oil sands region to U.S. refiners. The headline, "How would you spend $7 billion," plays off similar price tags for the two projects, suggesting a choice must be made between them.... more »

Here's what we're reading today:

• ExxonMobil, Russia sign deal for exploration in Arctic Sea
• Feds unveil online tools to help drillers prepare and track offshore applications
• Columnist: Scrapping Keystone XL would be 'shortsighted'
• Lower 48 natural gas production sets shale gas-record
• Editorial: Understating effects of proposed federal regulations [subscription required]

Follow energytomorrow.tumblr.com for live updates on energy stories.

Here's what we're reading today:

• Editorial: backers of hydrofracking have it about right
• Canadian ambassador: anti-pipeline editorials omitted key study [subscription required]
• Former State official predicts Clinton will approve Keystone XL
• Western Australia gives go-ahead to Chevron LNG project
• House leadership takes aim at "job-killing" EPA proposals

Follow energytomorrow.tumblr.com for live updates on energy stories.

Some perspective on opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline and the energy from Canadian oil sands the pipeline would deliver to U.S. refiners. Politicians and activists bad-mouthing the latest environmental review of the pipeline project by the State Department are taking issue with three impact assessments, not just one.

Last week's report reiterated environmental reviews in April 2010 and this past April. The government now has said three times that the 1,700-mile pipeline would pose only minimal environmental risk during construction and operation.

Those who don't like the message went after the messenger. "By concluding that the pipeline will have minimal environmental impact, absent the expert opinion from our government's wildlife experts, it appears that the State Department has not... more »

Here's what we're reading today:

• Samuelson: Say yes to Canadian oil sands
• Pennsylvania sees tax revenue surge from natural gas activity
• Nearly 60 percent of Gulf drilling rigs idle
• Refiners plan return to normal operations after Irene
• Editorial: Obama should suspend EPA rule-making until economy improves [subscription required]

Follow energytomorrow.tumblr.com for live updates on energy stories.