EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- One American Who Isn't For Sale
- Edward Snowden: Saving Us from the United Stasi of America
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- The Judicial Lynching of Bradley Manning
- Remembering Satyajit Ray’s Hirok Rajar Deshe: On Edward Snowden, Resistance and Inverted Totalitarianism
Popular content
Today's Top News
Greenpeace 'Shuts Down' Arctic Oil Rig
Environmental campaigners slip through security boats to scale Cairn Energy oil rig in dawn raid
Greenpeace claims to have shut down offshore drilling by a British oil company at a controversial site in the Arctic after four climbers began an occupation of the rig just after dawn.
Cairn Energy's Stena Don oil rig is scaled by Greenpeace campaigners to prevent it from drilling off the coast of Greenland. (Photograph: Will Rose/Greenpeace) The
environment campaigners said the four protesters evaded a small
flotilla of armed Danish navy and police boats which have been guarding
the rigs in Baffin Bay off Greenland since the Greenpeace protest ship Esperanza arrived last week.
The rigs are operated by the Edinburgh-based oil exploration company Cairn Energy, which last week prompted world-wide alarm among environmentalists after disclosing it had found the first evidence of oil or gas deposits under the Arctic.
Several multinational oil companies, including Exxon. Chevron and Shell, are waiting for permission from Greenland to begin deep sea drilling in the Arctic's pristine waters.
Campaigners claim this led to a dangerous rush to exploit one of the world's last major untapped reserves in one of its most fragile locations. The US Geological Survey last year estimated there may be 90bn barrels of oil and 50tn cubic metres of gas across the Arctic.
The campaign group said: "At dawn this morning our expert climbers in inflatable speed boats dodged Danish Navy commandos before climbing up the inside of the rig and hanging from it in tents suspended from ropes, halting its drilling operation.
"The climbers have enough supplies to occupy the hanging tents for several days. If they succeed in stopping drilling for just a short time then the operators, Britain's Cairn Energy, will struggle to meet a tight deadline to complete the exploration before winter ice conditions force it to abandon the search for oil off Greenland until next year."
The occupation comes after a nine-day stand-off between Greenpeace and the Danish navy, which has sent its frigate Vaedderen to the area, deploying elite Danish commandos on high-speed boats to patrol a 500m exclusion zone around the rigs.
Last week the Danes warned the Esperanza it would be forcibly boarded and its captain arrested if it breached the security zone. After Greenpeace launched its helicopter to take photographs, the security area was extended to include a 1,800m high air exclusion zone.
Greenpeace argues that the Arctic drilling programme is extremely perilous because of the sea ice and intense weather conditions in the region, and claims it is one of the 10 most dangerous drilling sites in the world. The Baffin Bay area is known as "iceberg alley". Last week, it filmed a support vessel trying to break up an iceberg using high pressure hoses.
It says the risks posed by this operation go "far beyond" the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico; in the Arctic an oil spill would destroy the region's vulnerable and untouched habitats, while the cold water would prevent any oil from quickly breaking up. Any emergency operation to tackle a disaster would encounter huge technical and logistical problems in such a remote area.
Cairn Energy was targeted by climate protesters who occupied the grounds of the Royal Bank of Scotland headquarters near Edinburgh last week. Cairn's offices in the city centre were smeared with molasses to symbolise oil.
The company argues it is there at Greenland's invitation, to help bolster and strengthen the island's economy. It also insisted its drilling operations obeyed some of the world's strictest environmental and safety regulations. "We've put procedures in place to give the highest possible priority to safety and environmental protection," it said.
It emerged last week that BP had withdrawn from applying to join in the Greenland oil exploration programme, a direct consequence of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Sim McKenna, one of the Greenpeace climbers on board the Cairn rig, said: "We've got to keep the energy companies out of the Arctic and kick our addiction to oil, that's why we're going to stop this rig from drilling for as long as we can.
"The BP Gulf oil disaster showed us it's time to go beyond oil. The drilling rig we're hanging off could spark an Arctic oil rush, one that would pose a huge threat to the climate and put this fragile environment at risk."
Morten Nielsen, deputy head of Greenland police, said the four protesters would be arrested and prosecuted. "The position of the Greenlandic police is that this is a clear violation of the law, the penal code of Greenland. The perpetrators will be prosecuted by the Greenlandic authorities," he said.
"But what we intend to do, how and when, is an operational detail it wouldn't be smart to advise Greenpeace about."
Speaking from the island's capital, Nuuk, Nielsen confirmed that the police had rescue vessels close by the protesters in case any fell into the water, which was only a few degrees above freezing. He denied the police and navy had been outwitted by the protesters setting off at dawn.
"We have to evaluate the downside of any interception," he said. "The highest value we have to preserve is life and if the result of intercepting the Greenpeace activists would bring the police or for that matter the activists' lives in jeopardy, we are not going to intercept right now."
In a separate development, two protesters on trial in Copenhagen for terrorism-related offences during the UN climate summit last December have been cleared. Of the nearly 2,000 people arrested, a small number which includes 13 Greenpeace activists, are still awaiting trial.
The original charges facing Natasha Verco and Noah Weiss included organising violence and significant damage to property and carried a maximum 12-and-a-half-year sentence. Those charges were subsequently reduced to less serious offences, but today a court in Copenhagen cleared the pair entirely.
Verco, who was arrested while riding her bike near the Copenhagen lakes and held in prison for three weeks, said: "I'm so happy, it's so wonderful... The whole experience has been appalling, terrifying, something I never expected. To be imprisoned for three weeks on the most ridiculous accusations, and then to have to wait for nine months to be acquitted, it's made me see Denmark very differently."
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
103 Comments so far
Show AllGo Greenpeace!
This is why I give $28 a month to greenpeace. Rock on. If you appreciate these types of actions, you should consider giving what you can.
I'm with you on that, eli_bunyan.
you have to admire the determination and courage of the greenpeace protesters. how many people would put themselves into this position knowing they will face severe consequences?
let's hope their endeavours will not be wasted and the region can be free of greedy, stupid, blinkered oil companies who give not a fig for the environment...............
"let's hope their endeavors will not be wasted and the region can be free of greedy, stupid, blinkered oil companies who give not a fig for the environment." There appear to be the powerful few that have control of this situation just like in about everything else around the globe. The greedy, and stupid do not know they are complete idiots and are doing just what they learned in their business schools. Looking for profit where ever they can. My hats off to Greenpeace even if they are pissing in the wind.
They are indeed watering the wind. These four will go to jail and the drilling will go on. The Navy now has an excuse to remove the Greenpeace ship as she engaged in illegal activities....BUT, HATS off to these boys as you say.
They do not give up!
"let's hope their endeavors will not be wasted and the region can be free of greedy, stupid, blinkered oil companies who give not a fig for the environment."
Hey, this region elected Sarah (dingbat) Palin as governor, don't get your hopes up.
"The occupation comes after a nine-day stand-off between Greenpeace and the Danish navy, which has sent its frigate Vaedderen to the area, deploying elite Danish commandos on high-speed boats to patrol a 500m exclusion zone around the rigs."
Here we have yet one more example of expanding worldwide fascism, with the Danish taxpayer funded government subsidizing a British corporation with government military operations.
It is worldwide fascism with governments' support of private corporations.
I wonder if the Greenpeace operatives will be assassinated.
Please Greenpeace dont take away my chance to get more oil fixes for my habit.
One has to be impressed with Greenpeace's track record. These sorts of actions are difficult to stage, and require planning and enormous discipline to pull off. I haven't heard of any big screwups. They target destructive activities, with an eye to having the biggest impact on public opinion they can. This requires political acumen as well as organizing ability. They must walk a fine line between alerting the public and alienating them.
It is difficult to maintain an organization's original sense of purpose and integrity over decades. So far, Greenpeace seems to have done fairly well at this, through leadership changes, defections, and the inevitable ebb and flow of events.
I was astounded recently when students in an environmental studies classroom in the US voiced doubt about Greenpeace, one of them saying, "Aren't they violent?" This, sadly, is the result of mainstream media treatment and right-wing attacks. To my knowledge, the only people ever hurt in Greenpeace demonstrations have been members of Greenpeace. The French secret service planted two bombs on the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland in 1985, resulting in the death of a freelance photographer.
This is why I support the organization, and send them some bucks now and then.
Now if they only could mount an action against the Belo Monte Dam, and the other 140 planned large dams in the Amazon...
http://www.internationalrivers.org/en/node/5756
" Arn't they violent ". Peace is war and green is black as used oil. One has to wonder how long before Greenpeace is labeled as being supported, financially by terrorists.
The corporate media always presents property damage as "violence".
Historic incidents of property damage that led to the American Revolution (which was not a revolution) such as the Boston Tea Party used to be praised in our school textbooks. Now the phrase "tea party" has been stolen by those right wingnuts who follow leaders who call property damage "terrorism".
Thanks for posting the link on the Belo Monte.
Please sign the petition with International Rivers and send it to every network you can think of
Just for starters - Heres a list of the organizations of indigenous people in the Amazon who are engaged, some for the first time, with civil and social groups crossing all lines in an international effort to get the rest of the world to pay attention - there are alternatives - its just that the vested interests won't see billions in returns on their investment.
In a parallel action:
http://xingu-vivo.blogspot.com/
VIVA A ALIANÇA DOS POVOS DOS RIOS E DAS FLORESTAS!
Itaituba, PA, Pan Amazônia, 27 de agosto de 2010.
Assinam esta Carta:
(Signing this letter - to President Lula)
Aliança Tapajós Vivo; Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre; Movimento Rio Madeira Vivo; Movimento Teles Pires Vivo; Movimento dos Atingidos por Barragens; Coordenação das Organizações Indígenas da Amazônia Brasileira; Fórum da Amazônia Oriental; Fórum da Amazônia Ocidental; Fórum Social Pan-Amazônico; Frente de Defesa da Amazônia; Comitê Metropolitano do Movimento Xingu Vivo para Sempre; Prelazia do Xingu; Instituto Universidade Popular; FASE-Amazônia; International Rivers; Associação Etno-Ambiental Kanindé; Instituto Madeira Vivo; Coordenação da União das Nações e Povos Indígenas de Rondônia, noroeste do Mato Grosso e sul do Amazonas; Rede Brasileira de Justiça Ambiental; União dos Estudantes de Ensino Superior de Santarém; Movimento em Defesa da Vida e Cultura do Rio Arapiuns; Terra de Direitos; Fundo Mundial para a Natureza; Fundo DEMA; Instituto Amazônia Solidária e Sustentável; Centro de Apoio Sócio Ambiental; Comitê Dorothy; Comissão Pastoral da Terra; Conselho Indigenista Missionário; Conselho Indígena Tapajós-Arapiuns; Grupo de Defesa da Amazônia; Federação das Associações dos Moradores e organizações Comunitários de Santarém, Federação das Organizações Quilombolas de Santarém;União de Entidades Comunitárias de Santarém; Sociedade Paraense de Direitos Humanos; Vivalt Internacional Brasil; Comissão Verbita Jupic – Justiça, Paz e Integridade da Criação; MMCC – Pará – Movimento de Mulheres do Campo e da Cidade do Pará; Fórum dos Movimentos Sociais da BR 163; MMTACC – Movimento de Mulheres de Altamira Campos e Cidade; Movimento de Mulheres do Campo e da Cidade Regional BR- 163 – Pará; Movimento de Mulheres do Campo e da Cidade – Regional Transamazônica Xingu; SOCALIFRA; Nova Cartografia Social da Amazônia; Grupo de Trabalho Amazônico Regional Transamazônico Xingu;Associação do Povo Indígena Juruna do Xingu – Km 17; Associação de Resistência Indígena Arara do Maia; Coordenação das Associações de Remanescentes de Quilombos do estado do Pará – MALUNGU; Sindicato dos Trabalhadores e Trabalhadoras Rurais de Santarém; Reserva Extrativista Tapajós-Arapiuns; Movimento Juruti em Ação; Fórum de Mulheres da Amazônia Paraense; Grupo de Mulheres Brasileiras; Articulação de Mulheres Brasileiras; Comissão em Defesa do Xingú; Associação dos Produtores Rurais da Volta Grande do Xingu; Aliança Francisclareana; Associação indígena Kerepo; Fórum dos Movimentos Sociais; Associação Indígena Pusurú; Conselho indígena Munduruku do Alto Tapajós; Associação Suíço-Brasileira Batista de Apoio na Amazônia (Missão Batista); Associação Indígena Pahyhy’p; .
As much as I love whales and the importance of protecting them, I am impressed with how after the Gulf gusher, Greenpeace has focused on offshore drilling. Thanks for this Greenpeace. Thanks for showing the world that at least some of us are still sane.
Why doesn't Greenpeace become a political party?
i really hope that was a joke.
why?
The only thing that is a joke is our current 'two party' system.
I'll definitely be voting for anyone greenparty/greenpeace/greeneconomy for the rest of my life. Obamabots tricked us.
You will vote for another form of trickery, with its own set of billionaires behind the scenes. You understand fakedemocracy in the two party system. Now you need to understand it in the terms of the party system itself. Without the exercise of direct democracy, there is only fake democracy.
sucka...
And, of course, Greenpeace' ship is powered by solar power? Wind power? Or "good old fashioned" diesel fuel?
Anyone supporting their action should pledge complete abstinence from oil. Don't you see? "You" are fueling the drilling. There would be no drilling if "you" didn't put demand on the oil supply. If you applaud Greenpeace, "be the first" to stop using oil, and don't be a hypocrite like the Greenpeace activists.
The same people who cheer on Greenpeace in this action will also be the first ones to complain about the cost of gasoline, rising electricity prices, or rising heating costs. Some of you people just "want it all". You cheer on Greenpeace because you don't want to feel guilty about destroying the planet, but your words are not saving the planet... your actions might... but most of you do not want to act. Words require no personal sacrifice. I want to see you all cheering on the next gasoline price hike, the next increase in utility costs. Come on people: cheer! ;-)
[Can't have it both ways]
While there certainly is hypocrisy among critics of our energy use, there are also people trying to wean themselves, and our culture, off of unsustainable practices. Yes, a cultural shift will be needed, and it is happening, in little pieces. Will it be enough? Hopefully the big ship can be turned.
For myself, yes, I have cut down on my fossil fuel use, and continue to look for ways to reduce it further. My bicycle has become a trusty prairie pony for me. The hot water heater is turned off in summer. And my path has led away from the dominant paradigm. This has cost me some friends, but gained others... Perhaps you yourself will someday choose to follow a slightly different energy-use path. The oil is running out, anyway. It is healthier to walk and ride whenever we can.
And when gas prices rise, you will certainly be able to see me cheering, as a price hike is overdue, as attested by the SUVs that continue to plow through the summer murk of my city's streets.
Personal disclosure: My only vehicle is a bicycle, and that's been the case for the last 8 years. Also, we use very little electricity and natural gas. I am not defending wasteful use of the resource, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy. What are the chances the "activists" got to the ship via airports and roads, using gasoline to bring them to the airport, jet fuel to transport them via airplane to the boarding of the ship, which then ran up to Greenland powered on diesel fuel, while hanging off the rig in tents made from oil? words. words. words. oh words are so cheap.
"My only vehicle is a bicycle, and that's been the case for the last 8 years."
Good luck riding that bicycle to the arctic to stop the further drilling of oil.
I've encountered your kind of politics before, as a kid growing up punk. Being "more punk than thou" meant attacking everyone for every violation they did by being a part of the system. It's a hopeless exercise in puritanism. There is nothing we do that can extricate ourselves very easily from this sick system. And even those that "live off the grid" are generally very privileged.
I often find that people who scream hypocrisy at every turn have a catholic background (or some religious upbringing) and still retain that brainwashing about original sin, so it's as if everything is hopeless.
By your logic, driving a a car to an organizing meeting to fight environmental destruction is pointless hypocrisy. By your logic, nothing will ever get done, so we might as well kill ourselves.
Good post. Michael Albert addresses this issue in a short lecture. The whole lecture is very good, but the part germane to your point starts about minute 29. He notes that the feminist movement came to realize that the "personal is political", meaning that "the personal dimension that we feel has political and social roots", now it has become the "political is personal",... "this is not a good inversion, meaning for some people that to be political is to change one's personal self, independently of anything else, it's a lifestyle problem." This is not to say that making personal changes in one's life isn't important, but "the reversal is that it becomes paramount"... and "leads to a tremendous judgmentalism." What matters is that you're part of a movement, not whether you're a vegan or personally live off the grid.
http://www.zcommunications.org/new-left-lessons-by-michael-albert
The problem is your over-privileged breeding and creating new 'consumers', not the drilling of oil. If you have less children (and stop immigration), demand for oil will drop all on its own. But the more people come here, the more get turned into consumers... every single one. Canada produces about a quarter million new consumers every year. The current 1.2 billion 'western' consumers have to shrink to under 200 million.
Your games are a joke. You cut off your nose in order to spite yourself. Oil is the lifeblood of our society. When the flow stops, so does society, and billions will die off. There is no way around it. I have no children. It's a conscious choice, because I have seen 40 years ago where this planet is headed. The breeders are creating future hell on earth for their children.
You continue to personalize all problems, and you completely miss the point. These problems are systemic and have to do with the structure of capitalism and the state, both physical and ideological. These problems are largely institutional. Personal lifestyle changes are good, but they won't change the institutional forces at work when it comes to climate change, energy use, food production, water use, etc.
Even if every individual could possibly stop using oil, that would be a drop in the bucket, literally, compared to the use of oil by the US military, industry, and the transportation sector.
the root case of these problems (environmental, alienation, wage-slavery, war, disease) is capitalism and the nation state. we need to develop a revolutionary consciousness that rejects all the values associated with capitalism and the western tradition of exploitation, expansionsim, and any other anti-nature, anti-labor, and anti-community force. In that sense, yes, we are talking about a personal spiritual transformation, one that can lead us to challenge institutional violence, hierarchy, and exploitation.
No malatesta, while the problems are indeed systemic, they have nothing to do with capitalism, but with human nature. Give anyone in the world $15,000 annual income and - unless held back by religious superstitions - show me which one of them will not go from a vegetarian diet to a meat diet, or from walking to motorized transport.
Sure, of course I agree with your thoughts about the military, which energy usage is never quantified.
Expansionism and the exploitation of the world around us, is bred into humanity. You will not change it. But the planet will in its own way. Shortly.
Without commenting on the rest of this thread, I agree with you Jonathan Edwards that the problem is really with human nature. Take the case of Greenland - as discussed in this article"
"Deepwater Horizon Fears Resurface as Rigs Probe for Oil Under Arctic Ice"
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/08/29
Greenland has a population of only 57,000. So, why oh why are they intent on opening up their seas for oil production? Why in the world can't they look for alternative ways of making a living, even if it means they may have to go without some junk in the name of "development"? They are already exploiting the fishing "resources" to the max.
I think either the so-called "sovereignty" of Greenland (from Denmark) is a bit of a sham or the people are really stupid and greedy to allow drilling off their shores when the whole world is watching the glaciers in Greenland with worry.
By nature, every human wants "more". Who wants to eat blubber all the time, when 'sovereignty' and wealth beckon? I always like to say that every action we undertake has two sides, a good and a bad. We don't always recognize the downside from the get-go, but in time it will be revealed. Everything with an upside has also a downside. Like Yin and Yan.
Very few people realize and recognize that 'less' - when you can make the choice from a position of comfort and financial strength, and not from poverty - is indeed more.
What we have right now is a fire in the building. Some propose to scream fire and have the mass of people all rush to the exit, trampling each other, instead of planning an orderly exit. We need an orderly exit which takes under consideration population, reproductive limitations, right to die for those who choose, legislation of energy consumption with potential rationing, a move away from the throw away society, which will require a move back into the agricultural society, because when things are more durable, there will be less jobs. If there is supposed to be a soft landing for humanity, there has to be a planned transition, not a disorderly panic.
"By nature, every human wants "more"."
You are wrong about that. Thousands of Indigenous peoples lived in an ecological balance with the land and didn't destroy it. Capitalism, Imperialism, Religion and Science are all systems of thought that have contributed to a relationship with nature which is about domination.
The first thing the modern revolutionary needs to do is to question the values of these pillars of Western Thinking. And then, we need to move towards a relationship with nature that is a respectful stewardship.
Great posts Malatesta! I was considering bringing up the schism between Philosophical Idealism and Philosophical Materialism; how the their two conceptions of human "nature" are fundamentally different, but I determined that I would be wasting my time...
"Give anyone in the world $15,000 annual income and - unless held back by religious superstitions - show me which one of them will not go from a vegetarian diet to a meat diet"
The indigenous people managed to live in balance with nature for 10,000 years in North America. Their ethos is radically different than the Western mindset. So you can't say it's just "human nature". You'll find everything in "human nature".
It's ironic that you give selling out a number (15k). That's the capitalist mindset I was referring to.
Actually, I believe what you say about the indigenous of North America is largely myth. Unlike the Europeans - which had developed better and better technologies to murder each other -, they lacked the innovation and technology to break out of the limitations the environment placed on them, and that is all it was. The indigenous tribes of North, Central and South America slaughtered and enslaved each other in much the same way as Europeans did, albeit with the primitive means at their disposal. The nostalgia is misplaced. Likewise, the indigenous in my Province used to drive the Bison over a cliff, and killed way more of them than necessary [resource exploitation]. Don't confuse inability to cause more harm due to technological constraints with "living in harmony with nature".
You are comparing the Stone Age tribes of the Americas with the Iron Age tribes of Europe.
Jonathan Edwards logic isn't logical!! I'd hate to have to spend time around this guy.
The feeling is mutual. Don't knock what you don't understand.
"The feeling is mutual. Don't knock what you don't understand."
So you can't stand to be around yourself either?
I understand these issues well enough to know that logic eludes you.
Maybe that bike saddle has done you some serious brain damage.
Are you always this nasty to people?
I have no need to ride my bicycle to the arctic to make them "stop the drilling". What a ridiculous proposition. I minimize my own demand for the resource, and if everyone did, world demand would drop, oil prices would drop, and it would become uneconomical to drill at this pace.
Instead of pointing out the hipocracy of environmental do-gooders, DO SOMETHING TO HELP CREATE A RENEWABLE-NON POLLUTING ENERGY SOURCE, EDUCATE OTHERS ON THE THREE RRRs, START AT YOUR LOCAL LEVEL!!!!! DUH, QUIT WASTING YOUR OWN ENERGY!!!!!
Maybe Greenpeace should stage their protests on bicycles? Get real!
Protests at oil platforms does not get people to consume less oil. Duh! It is worthless theatrics. If you want to reduce the necessity for drilling, you must convince people to use less of the resource and change their lifestyle. But guess what. If the entire western world + Japan would cut their energy use in half, it would still not suffice to save the biosphere. That's how screwed the planet really is.
Thanks for your insightful comments. People are so stupid. Where do you get your info from?
This is a comment from the poster boy of the generation of generalizations! Jonathan assumes many negative motives and seems to know the future is doomed! Therefore, Jonathan must work in one of my permaculture,organic and solar powered 're-education ' camps until he gets it! WE CAN SAVE THIS PLANET, and we will, in spite of scared and confused people like you!! GO GREENPEACE! GO CLIMATE GROUND ZERO ! GO RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK and every other group and individual fighting the good fight.
more "words". What are YOU doing, on a personal level? Give us an insight into your life and energy consumption.
And "scared and confused" people like me? Hardly. But my realism doesn't play well with the generation of 'gestures'. All you do is 'Earth Day', 'Earth Hour', and the like. Meaningless 'feel good' gestures that make absolutely no difference to anything. Instead of sabotage, perhaps suggest some real life workable solutions.
As for your solar... solar cells are expensive and have a short life as far as their power production is concerned. They are also weak. There is no form of power which will sustain 15 billion humans. No matter how you slice it. There is also no form of power which will sustain 7 billion, with at least 4 billion 'not' living in poverty.
Dear Jonathan Edwatds:
"Timing is everything" in comedy, and the same holds true for this action of Greenpeace. By stopping the work now, it will not be finished because of the ocean ice of winter. Yes, it took oil power to get there, but to slow down and impede the work was the point of this action.
I admire what they did and see the need too ,because apparently, those oil companies learned nothing from the BP experience.
An oil gusher in the Arctic areas? That would be the death of all of us for sure. Your generalizations have a certain"scheen," but deep down, your " plume" of logic escapes me.
Stardust. Do you have any idea how many offshore wells have been drilled? The problem in the GoM was not drilling, but being cheap on safety, and being unprepared. There were enough warning signs, hours ahead of the blowout, that things need to be stopped.
Yes, you see the need to stop the drilling. I hope you stick by those words when you see your utility and gasoline bills rising, and when people all around you permanently lose their jobs. Everything in our economy is tied to oil. It's like dominos, and there's no quick way out, because we have bred ourselves to capacity. You cannot sustain 7+ billion people without oil. You will see. Only people who have no idea of the importance of oil think that oil is merely a detriment. It is a blessing and a curse at the same time. If the planet would still be at 1 billion population, as it was a hundred years ago, I bet we could just shut all the wells down tomorrow. But we're not there. Up until the discovery of oil, human population was stuck between 500 million and a billion. When the flow of oil stops, it will drop below that, within a generation, because previously artificially fertilized soil will not yield as it has. A world without oil will be a catastrophe for humanity.
Dear Jonathan Edwards:
Much more logical this time around, so thank you. However, WHAT IF what you are thinking is not true? That old saying, "necessity is the mother of invention, " really is true. When people HAVE to do something they will. Looking back historically during WWII ,American people were able to mobilize quickly, because they HAD to!
What did it take for Japan to go from making crappy toys to beating out the U.S. in invention and creation? 30 or so years?
I know that there are thousands of oil wells in the world, and so many like in Nigeria and in South America have ruined the environment for a very long time, if not forever. How long ago was the Exxon Valdez...20 something years ago, and it's still a mess.
What if we did run out of oil overnight? It would be hard for a while, but people would adjust, and perhaps not happily, but the world would not fall apart. We have start up industries now with wind, solar and bio fuels ( unlike the U.S.corn lobby) I think it's Brazil that has been doing this for 15 years with sugar cane. Back to Greenpeace again, they are so necessary because they bring the attention to oil which is polluting our world.
Without oil, the world would be different, but since the Wall St. debacle, the world is certainly different too ( being one of the newly unemployed, I can attest to that!) However, you are right about the population of the world, and I don't think that wars ( which certainly decimite the population,) are any kind of cure. Too many people and an unequal distribution of basic living necessities is a problem which goes beyond oil.
Oil has grown industry and capitalism and certainly individual wealth, but as to improving the lot of human kind...well, the polluted, water, food supplies and wars for the coveting of it have certainly played havoc with everyone's life. But too, the damage to the environment is, and will be doing this too for a long time to come.
I do realize that BP was an example of greeed and incompetence, but sadly I don't expect much else from all the other companies and corporations. You're right too that we must have a replacement for oil, and this might be in many areas, like hemp, and natural medicines without the big pharmas polluting everything too.
But again, inventions come quickly through necessity, and oil was just the easiest way to go. Perhaps the next way will be more difficult, but for centuries people did prosper without oil, and if it all ended tomorrow, we would do it again, because we'd HAVE to!
"What if" I am wrong? Believe me, I hope with all my heart I am. The love of my life is 24 years younger than me, and the last thing I want for him is to suffer through a man-made hell.
As I pointed out, we didn't really get from 1 billion to 7 billion on the power of invention. We got to this point on the power of the discovery of a finite resource which fueled a lot of invention in the aftermath of the discovery. But the 6 billion growth is supported not by invention, but by the resource. When the oil lights go out, alternative sources will only be able to cover a fraction of the current energy needs, and there will be huge gaps for which there are no alternatives, as in the very basis of food production itself, in terms of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides.
I say that if/once we run out of oil, billions of people will starve to death, not because I wish harm on anyone, but because it will change our world in a fundamental fashion. Yields will drop. Transportation will become more expensive. Food will become more scarce and more expensive. Large scale moving of agricultural products around the world will probably come to an end. The people who now earn $1 or $2 a day will have nothing to afford this food with, and those who have the means will continue to consume more than their share.
The alternatives like wind and solar that you mention are inefficient and patchy, and do not fill the gaping energy hole which the lack of oil and natural gas will leave in food production. Can you think of any downside to wind and solar power?
You are right. Oil is polluting our world... and that is the direct result of human population growth. Had planetary population stayed around 1 billion as a century ago, we'd probably be using less than a quarter of the oil we are using, and have a much higher average (and equitable) standard of living. Human population growth makes it impossible to stay sustainable while also escaping our perception of poverty at the same time.
As to the rest of your post, I have nothing more to add, and agree with it (except the last part, the 'why' of which I already covered above... humanity would be fine at 1 billion, but not at 7).
Peace
With respect Jonathan Edwards, I am okay with Greenpeace and anyone else with the courage using as much diesel and oil as they like to fight for the Earth. They win the right when they risk their lives. Or are you suggesting that they chase arctic oil rigs on bicycles?