Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
BP Targets One of the World's Last Unspoilt Wildernesses
Environmentalists are angry at the energy giant's plans to drill for oil in a remote region of the Arctic
The Arctic is to become the "new environmental battleground", campaigners warned yesterday after BP announced plans to drill in one of the last great unspoilt wildernesses on earth.
Greenpeace and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) have vowed to confront BP's American boss, Bob Dudley, over the agreement with the Russian state-owned oil giant Rosneft to explore the Kara Sea, north of Siberia. The British energy firm was branded the world's "environmental villain number one" by Friends of the Earth (FoE) yesterday in response to its move to exploit potential oil reserves in the remote waters.
Environmentalists are dismayed that BP, which announced the deal on Friday night, has decided to set up rigs in an area of great biodiversity and treacherous weather conditions. The region is one of the few remaining havens left for a number of endangered species, including polar bears, walruses and beluga whales. And while the waters of the Kara Sea are relatively unexplored, they are known to house key fish species such as halibut, capelin and Arctic cod.
The controversial decision to open the area up to oil drilling comes after the Deepwater Horizon rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico last April. The disaster wrecked BP's reputation, and campaigners are concerned that the remote Arctic is even more susceptible to environmental disasters.
Speaking to The Independent on Sunday yesterday, Mike Childs, FoE's head of climate change, said: "BP, a number of years ago, were positioning themselves to be the greenest of the oil companies, promising to go 'beyond petroleum'. This latest move positions them quite nicely as environmental villain number one, given the huge impact they had in the Gulf of Mexico as well."
The oil giant "cannot be trusted" to drill oil in difficult waters, and any oil spill would be "completely catastrophic". He added: "The Arctic should be a no-go for fossil fuel extraction as it's one of the few pristine environments we have left. It's very fragile and we should be looking at ways to protect it, not seemingly trying to find ways of wrecking it."
Dax Lovegrove, head of business and industry relations at WWF-UK, said: "Oil spill response plans in the Arctic are even less adequate than we saw in the Gulf of Mexico. There is less infrastructure, like equipment to ring-fence oil spills and ships to skim off oil on the surface of the water."
Conservationists have previously complained about BP's work with Rosneft off Sakhalin Island in the north Pacific. WWF believes that the companies' constant seismic surveying has caused noise pollution harmful to the last 130 western grey whales, only 30 of which are female. Mr Lovegrove added that WWF will be "in direct contact" with Mr Dudley and Rosneft's president Eduard Khudainatov and reviewing its campaigning tactics in light of the deal.
Greenpeace is even more damning of the deal, which also sees BP and Rosneft take shares in each other worth a total of £10bn. Senior climate change campaigner Ben Ayliffe pointed out that the Greenland government last year refused to allow BP to drill in its Arctic waters.
"The Kara Sea is pretty much virgin territory," Mr Ayliffe said. "It's bad news. BP has a pretty average record of safety recently. We don't know if they've learnt anything from Deepwater Horizon."
Another Greenpeace spokesman warned yesterday that an oil spill in the Kara Sea could take nine months to clear up. "Imagine that same scenario in the Arctic where are thousands of miles from anywhere, where the drilling season is three or four months long. If you get a leak at the end of that cycle it could run for nine months before you could get back in the next year to try to stop it," said Chris Kronick.
BP is also pressing ahead with its joint venture partner Husky Energy in a $2.5bn project in Alberta, Canada. This involves extracting oil from what is known as tar sands, a difficult operation that releases high volumes of greenhouse gases.
Mr Ayliffe hinted that Greenpeace will campaign heavily on exploitation of the Arctic in 2011. "These two ventures mean it doesn't look like the leopard is changing its spots. After tar sands, BP is going into some of the planet's most pristine wilderness. Questions need to be asked of BP, like why should they be investing shareholders' money in such areas after spending $20bn on Deepwater Horizon."
The costs of the clean-up and compensation in the Gulf of Mexico are expected to reach at least $40bn. The anger over the disaster in the US has convinced BP that its best hopes for growth lie east rather than west.
The Government moved quickly to show its support for the Rosneft deal. The Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, attended the signing of the agreement and welcomed the move. He said: "BP, as we all know, is coming out of a difficult period in its history, but this partnership shows that BP is very much open for business."
Mr Huhne was accused of betraying his principles by environmentalists. "This is supposed to be the greenest government ever and the Lib Dems in particular have actively pitched for the green vote for years. They are U-turning on the principles they claim to have," said Spencer Fitzgibbon, Green Party spokesman.
FoE's Mike Childs said: "It is disturbing that Chris Huhne is not too worried about the potential environmental impact on one of the most fragile environments in the world."
BP boss Bob Dudley has sought to convince the media and environmentalists that BP is now a much safer company. On Friday he said: "BP is sharing the lessons we learnt around the world. You will see BP take these lessons into the heart of the company."
A BP spokesman said that it would be meeting environmental groups to address their concerns. But US congressman Ed Markey called for a review of the deal.
"Even following the largest oil spill in US history, and potentially billions of dollars in fines outstanding, the Russian Bear is apparently bullish about BP," said Mr Markey. "BP once stood for British Petroleum. With this deal, it now stands for Bolshoi Petroleum."
BP and Rosneft: The main players
Bob Dudley
BP chief executive
The Russian-speaking American succeeded Tony Hayward as BP boss.
Tony Hayward
Former chief executive
Terrible with the media during the spill, but started early talks with Rosneft.
Chris Huhne
Energy Secretary
The Government needed to give tacit approval as deal is vital for energy security.
Eduard Khudainatov
Rosneft president
Became president of the state-run oil group in September.
Igor Sechin
Russia's deputy premier
Vladimir Putin
Russia's Prime Minister
Dudley has had to make his peace with Putin, after he was forced to flee Russia over BP's joint venture with TNK.
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...

25 Comments so far
Show AllThe criminals are listed here. What's the world gonna do? Boycott BP? Boycott Russia? Boycott Alberta?
RT (Russia Today) has some good programs when it comes to the USA. But there has been absolutely nothing about the environmental implications of this deal in its news in the last couple of days. The last line of this news story is telling. Remember Khodorkovsky?
"What's the world gonna do?"
Drive less and use public transport?
I don't know where you live, prof, but public transportation, in my experience, as far as the u.s. is concerned is completely inadequate. And i include DC and surrounding areas as well as Philadelphia.
NYC is probably the most connected as far as public transport is concerned. Basically, your average size towns and cities are next to impossible to navigate publicly. It isn't even easy to go city to city or out of state.
I must respectfully say that your response, based on the reality of the moment, is a bit facetious. Besides, most of the oil goes to military operations, and BP has that contract.
Let us ask ourselves why the US has military bases in 175 countries around the world.
With 4% of world poulation America uses 24% of total world resources. WTF is wrong with us?
Exactly.
Okay. Beat us over the head with the bad news.
But then PLEASE tell us what you want to do!
Obviously we need to organize the entire world against these criminals in one mass petition drive!
How hard can it be to organize a coalition of every environmental group on Earth to fight these despicable environmental pariahs?
I am anticipating that the organization Avaaz will have such a petition soon enough. They are a very successful grassroots group and can be found at www. avaaz . org.
My only question is: WHAT gives them the right to defile this territory? When will the words of Chief Seattle begin to be taken seriously?: "The Earth does not belong to us, we belong to the Earth."
This may be the final battleground, I fear. I pray (And I don't do that often) that environmental groups pull out all the stops to prevent this travesty.
KUCINICH: Tnanks for the post and quote.
I conjure scenes staight out of "Indiana Jones' Raiders of the Lost Arc." All the money these sell-outs gain from forging yet more deals with the world's #1 champion of ecocide should turn right into noxious gas and reduce them to a cloud of nothingness.
So long as mammon rules (with lots of help from the warrior, Mars) these types of short-sighted amoral decisions will line a few pockets, while swelling the numbers (from multiple species) of the ranks of the damned.
RITA: Right on, too!
KP: Zzzzzzz! It's not as if we haven't heard this rant from you before (yesterday? the day before? last week? Five minutes ago?). I see you're "off topic" again so you can rehash your favorite doomsday scenario. But you've got a lifetime (short as THAT may be) to range off topic so that you can regurgitate your "ideas" before they slip away as quickly as your username. That's great that you "don't approve of mining the Arctic" but not too concerned because you "don't believe we'll ever see them get past some exploration.." Is that like the way the Deepwater Horizon never got operational or do you just expect to not be around? Before you go making predictions, why don't you check with Sue Rose? She should be able to help you see the Future. What good is a "psychic" on the board if they're not going to share their "wisdom"? If Ther (sic) is no other pending disaster of such a magnitude we humans have ever faced." Shouldn't you get a little help from the mind reader from Puerto Rico? Just asking...BTW, I think BP's plans are dangerous and stupid. But that won't deter you from engaging in your usual paranoid, libelous, slander, so...knock yourself out.
Thanks to Mark and Chris for giving out the names of the bosses.
If libs and progressives can get together on anything, it could be funding planned parenthood worldwide to slow the demand on resources
In addition, let's fund planned education and rational thought worldwide, to slow the spread of medieval religious ignorance, which seems to be all the rage nowadays.
The guy in charge of BP during the gulf blowout moved to the BP Russia Department.
GW deniers are going at it faster and more furiously than ever. They know the evidence is building fast against them (the evidence has been around for quite awhile, but YOU know that) but they need to keep their corporate masters in power, so they are fighting real science harder than ever.
Only a massive and continuous protest/boycott in the form of stopping, to whatever practicla degree we all can, the consumption of much of our fossil fuel use we can will begin to have any effect on BP or any other energy mega-corporation.
I work with idiots who label themselves as "experts" because they listen to Fox news and the self-assigned GW "scientists" who pooh-pooh the facts with corporate-bought "research"
As long as there are gullible ignorant fools like the people I work with we will never amass the support we need to stop the BP's of the world. But I believe with effort we can prevail. Let's start now by using mass-transit and DO NOT Drive any more than absolutely necessary. Easier said than done but its a start.
I can't be too surprised or outraged anymore at things like this. It's obvious and inevitable that drilling and mining (coal and nuclear) will continue all the way to the last drop before we turn to non-destructive sources of energy.
Nah, we won't get the chance. They will destroy the earth with their destructive ways or we will blow ourselves up before that happens. Their greed and lack of concern for humans and animals have no bounds. Glad I will be dead before the inmates running this asylum kill us off. I do feel very sad for people under 40 tho.
HEADLINES: BP "Targets"... Wilderness.
Seems in today's world this is politically incorrect!
It might incite violence!!
In today's looney world, oil drilling gets spun as "harmless". It's a matter of twisting scientific facts and data to make it look like drilling can go on and that "no animal will get hurt".
I see that no one here knows about Miracle II Soap. I've mentioned it belatedly in another comment section on a different article related to the Gulf.
This soap is an inspiration-derived product, so there is much talk of religious/spiritual things on the website. Before anyone groans too loudly, let me tell you of a recent experience. A neighbor in our small apartment community has trouble with her radiator. We live in a wet area of the northwest uphill from a protected wetlands. Technically, we are outside of the area within which one is prohibited from changing a cars' oil or other toxic fluids, but as I said we are uphill from it. The run off would eventually make its way down to more sensitive areas. One recent afternoon as it began to rain, I felt compelled to go outside to see the state of things before the rain got too heavy. Surveying the area I found a sheen of oil atop the water upon the ground covering about a 10' radius, all of it slowly sliding off down toward the street drains. I grabbed the Miracle II soap. A small squirt from the bottle consigned the sheen in a three to six inch radius to oblivion without any representation of remnants. The animals were back out and scampering around the parking lot the very next day whereas they had been absent for weeks.
Other experiences indicate that animals will drink from a water dish washed with Miracle II soap almost immediately whereas with regular soaps of all sorts, the animals wouldn't come near it for days at a time. We have the means to clean up our mess. This is not to say that with which BP is forging ahead is okay by any stretch, but that we can clean up and restore the Gulf, yet the government seems to be deaf about Miracle II. I've written officials about it, even for Prince William Sound after all these years, but none seem cognizant of its potential.
I don't know Miracle II Soap but I assume that it can only work on small scale clean ups. If it could work on large scale operations such as cleaning up the gush, BP would have picked up on it a long time ago. But on to the larger point. What you're saying on your last paragraph is a slippery slope towards forcing the individual to pay for a corporation's sin against Mother Nature.
As for government, most of the officials are in bed with BP, Exxon, Shell, etc... The bigger worry is that Big Oil could buy off another patent on Miracle II Soap or that product could go bye-bye and government will let them get away with it.