Environmental Science (and related interdisciplinary programs like Sustainability Science and Environmental Studies) is a value laden discipline. Thus, having some familiarity with moral theory/analysis should be an important element of what it is to do environmental science. As a practical matter, our ability to approach and respond to environmental problems may become compromised in the absence of moral reflection. For example, Nelson and Vucetich argued in Sustainability Science: Ethical Foundations and Emerging Challenges (Nature Education Knowledge, 3[10], 2012), that the role of Sustainability Science will remain largely indeterminate if sustainability is not clarified as a moral concept. The same holds true for related disciplines (including environmental science) to the degree they also seek to identify and propose a sustainable path for society. Addressing specific problems like climate change can be hampered as well if we cannot clearly articulate our goals. For instance, given that the poor will likely be disproportionately burdened by a changing climate, do we not have an obligation to consider their well-being first as part of mitigation or adaptation efforts? Unfortunately, curricula development in Environmental Science appears to be moving away from embracing the moral dimensions of the discipline. This is reflected in changes made to the AP Environmental Science curricula over the past decade that emphasize the scientific process of understanding environmental problems at the expense of placing them in a social and moral context. With this in mind, I will attempt to develop an argument in defense of incorporating ethical theory/analysis as a foundational component of environmental science curricula and program design.