Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on April 10, 2015
Activists Who Scaled Shell’s Arctic-Bound Oil Rig Refuse to Leave
Six Greenpeace activists who brazenly scaled a Royal Dutch Shell oil drilling ship bound for the Arctic Monday say they are refusing to leave despite a legal injunction against them.
“The injunction is just the latest intimidation tactic on the part of Shell,” Aliyah Field, one of the six activists on board the ship, told ABC News through a satellite phone connection.
“We’re not going anywhere,” Field said.
Less than 24 hours after the activists boarded the ship 750 miles north-west of Hawaii, Shell filed a complaint in an Alaskan court, seeking an injunction to end what they call “illegal boarding.” The hearing is scheduled for this evening.
“Boarding a moving vessel on the high seas is extremely dangerous and jeopardizes the safety of all concerned,” Shell officials said in a statement released Tuesday, calling the protest a “stunt.”
The activists are protesting the Obama administration’s recent approval of Shell’s drilling lease for the Chukchi Sea in the Alaskan Arctic. The decision came just three years after a Shell oil rig ran aground in the Gulf of Alaska and the company was fined for pollution. Shell has already spent about $6 billion exploring the Arctic.
“We’re here to highlight that in less than 100 days Shell is going to the Arctic to drill for oil,” Johno Smith, one of the six activists on board the ship said in a statement on Monday.
“This pristine environment needs protecting for future generations and all life that will call it home,” he said.
The activists boarded the Blue Marlin, a transport ship carrying a 712 foot oil rig called the Polar Pioneer, at dawn on Monday morning, running up alongside the moving vessel in a small inflatable boat and scaling the side of the ship with ropes and ladders.
The maneuver was captured on GoPro cameras worn by the activists, who all have climbing backgrounds.
“These acts are far from peaceful demonstrations,” Shell said in a statement.
Greenpeace has boarded oil rigs in the past, most recently in 2013 when the group occupied a Russian oil rig, resulting in the arrest and imprisonment of over 30 activists. The activists were later released on amnesty after more than two months in jail.
The group currently on board the Polar Pioneer is camped on a catwalk on the rig, and is receiving supplies such as food, blankets and camera batteries from the Esperanza, a Greenpeace ship floating nearby. The activists maintain that they are not interfering with drilling, navigation systems or any ship operations and that the crew of the ship has not made direct contact with them.
“We’re simply here to send a clear message to Shell that they are not welcome in the arctic,” Field said.
12 Comments on "Activists Who Scaled Shell’s Arctic-Bound Oil Rig Refuse to Leave"
Perk Earl on Fri, 10th Apr 2015 6:54 pm
Can a gnat put a dent in a T-Rex? Probably not, but they can generate some ‘anti-arctic-oil-drilling’ press.
Good for them, because there never was any answer to what will happen to oil spilled in such frigid waters? I guess we’ll just have to find out when it happens; for TBTB to act real surprised when the stuff doesn’t break down and when all that wildlife dies.
“We were certain we could contain oil in the rare and unexpected incidence of a spill, and the extent the wildlife is having difficulty is not something we anticipated.”
Plantagenet on Fri, 10th Apr 2015 7:49 pm
You’ve got to admire the guts of the Greenpeace demonstrators who do this sort of thing. On the other hand, they are actually just kind of glorified stowaways—they aren’t actually stopping anything that Shell wants to do.
Davy on Fri, 10th Apr 2015 8:31 pm
I am into nature in a spiritualist way. I love the land. I love the weather. I care for the animals providing habitat instead of shooting them for sport. This means I am kin to these greenie folks. Where we don’t connect is with these activities? I want these folks to talk about liquid fuel crisis as much as the artic under threat. We will soon enough be in liquid fuel insecurity with scarcity. This will hammer society to the core. These greenie peace activities are part of the effort that will contribute to lower production and society’s end game.
It only takes a 10% drop in supply to put a whole economy at risk. This was proven out by the nationwide gas strike in the UK a few years ago. JIT does not adapt well to a 10% fuel supply disruption. If this goes on for more than a few weeks’ businesses shut down and grocery stores empty. People get pissed and the social fabric unravels. A 10% supply disruption also means around a 50% discretionary driving reduction to ensure emergency services have adequate fuel. A 50% discretionary driving reduction situation would leave commerce in ruins.
The point I am getting at is these greenies are not being honest with themselves and the sheeples. Their protest should include the side effects of leaving fossil fuels. Explain them like the side effect discussion at the end of the awful medical commercials we see on TV today in the US. These greenies should tell people what is really wrong with liquid fuels and that is accelerating depletion. They should mention what society will look like with only a very small liquid fuel shortage. If these greenies were honest with balance they would be explaining how society will fall apart when fossil fuels decline. I would cheer them on if they did this.
I hate the internal combustion culture we have. The world once was tolerably nice them came the automobile. In one generation more or less we have destroyed the world. The greenies are out bopping around the Pacific Ocean in their internal combustion craft making eco-waves. That sounds hypocritical to me. Should we not be acknowledging the dangers ahead and looking to mitigation and adaptation policies instead of making eco waves for a green BAUtopia? I bet if you asked these folks about our global world they would sound off how we need to move to a shiny AltE world with major carbon reductions. That is just another BAUtopian fantasy little different from the brownies over at Shell just different ends of the same BAUtopia.
If there is one thing we need now above all else that is honesty. When folks are facing the worst honesty is what can make or break the outcome. Good decisions need to be made and that requires honesty. We are facing such an ugly situation that we cannot afford mistakes. We need honesty with reality. These greenie peace folks are not honest with reality. They are delusional BAUtopians only green not brown.
Nony on Fri, 10th Apr 2015 8:46 pm
Put them in jail.
Apneaman on Fri, 10th Apr 2015 10:03 pm
I consider the leadership of Greenpeace to be corrupted by corporations, but, as Plant has pointed out, at least they have the courage of their convictions. What do you stand for Nony other than MORE?
Kenjamkov on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 1:13 am
Stowaway is a stowaway. Make them pay for their trip.
rockman on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 11:32 am
Davy – “I want these folks to talk about liquid fuel crisis as much as the artic under threat.” Exactly. First, after the Macondo blow out, what person isn’t fully aware of the risk from offshore drilling…anywhere? So they are doing nothing to advance awareness IMHO. And no one except the totally delusional would expect their efforts to change the situation. Shell Oil et al and the US govt want the well drilled. Which by extension the majority of the American public don’t object otherwise the politicians, fearing for their political lives, wouldn’t allow it.
Just like the artificial hype over the efforts to prevent the Keystone XL border crossing permit. The stated goal is to prevent the development of the Canadian oil sands. And with the record increase of imports via other transport methods that “goal” failed before the effort began. And for the same reason: support from both govts, the industry and the majority of the citizens.
So other the some free publicity for Green Peace and some potential to increase donations nothing of any substance is produced by the boarding antics IMHO. And there’s always some risk (though probably small) of loss of life or environment damage.
So I’m with Davy: it would be far more useful for GP to explain to the public the energy dynamics that are driving such extreme efforts like developing Arctic oil. That might not prevent such efforts but it would help the public understand that even if Arctic oil resources are developed it won’t have a significant impact on the POD…not even close.
It would be much better if GP used its bully pulpit to explain to the public the foolish expectation that drilling the Arctic, frac’ng the shales, etc. will bring about US “energy independence”. That way the public can better weigh the risk against a more realistic potential gain. As it stands now the public perception is that the risks of Arctic drilling are justified as a part of the effort to maintain BAU for the public. And as long as the public believes any effort will help protect their self interest they won’t oppose such efforts IMHO.
Apneaman on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 12:11 pm
If Greenpeace did what you suggest they would not be Greenpeace – they would be The Post Carbon Institute. And they would have to target a whole new demographic of donators. Privileged, guilt ridden, faux environmentalist, latte liberals are very generous donors. The well paid administration people at Green Peace are not going to fuck up their free ride for anything. The people climbing the rigs to hang banners or swabbing the deck of the Sea Sheppard are well meaning useful idiots. By every metric the environmental movement has been a huge failure. Small victories here or there, but in the end we all going down and much soon than was thought even a decade ago. Although many still like to pretend the real bad stuff is generations away – I wish! Anyone interested in how corrupted many of these organizations are can start here. You know, just in case your not depressed enough.
http://wrongkindofgreen.org/
Bob Owens on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 12:28 pm
Shell has wasted over 5 Billion $$s trying to drill in the Arctic. Will they never learn? Apparently not. 5 Billion will buy a lot of wind farms. This attempt will fail also. I hope they don’t have a well blow-out.
Apneaman on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 12:41 pm
Bob, Shell is falling for one of the worst cognitive biases we all, to some degree, suffer. It tends to be worse – often tragic – in big organizations and self destructs nations and empires.
sunk-cost fallacy
http://skepdic.com/sunkcost.html
The Great Wall of Texas: How the U.S. Is Repeating One of History’s Great Blunders
Today’s immigration debate has an eerie precedent in the mistakes that brought down great empires from Rome to Britain.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/07/the-great-wall-of-texas-how-the-us-is-repeating-one-of-historys-great-blunders/277617/
Apneaman on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 12:48 pm
When greedy overly confident people are desperate to hang onto the only thing they know the chances of a disaster are high. Here is a great read on Shell’s comedy of errors in the Arctic in 2012.
The Wreck of the Kulluk
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/04/magazine/the-wreck-of-the-kulluk.html?_r=0
rockman on Sat, 11th Apr 2015 2:37 pm
“Shell has wasted over 5 Billion $$s trying to drill in the Arctic.” Not sure where that number comes from but I’ll accept it for now. But that wasn’t what was spent just last year. Projects like the Arctic program take many years of investment before drilling the first well. So assuming Shell spent the $5 billion (if correct) over just the last 5 years it would represent less than 2% of their total budgets for that period. Which, in reality, means the Arctic program has taken less than 1% of their total budget.
Shell Oil has $TRILLIONS in Deep Water reserves around the globe. They just agreed to buy BG for $82 BILLION (debt and stock). In addition to the LNG assets the acquisition will also gain Shell a huge position in Deep Water Brazil oil production which is finally on the verge of coming online in several years. The Arctic project just represents a very small slice of a very big pie.
Good to keep such numbers in context. One has to RISK money in the oil biz to make money. And overall success is never determined by how much you lose on failed projects but how much you make on your successes. I’ve seen many more companies go under due to the lack of success then based on how much they lost drilling.
Just like the trivia about Babe Ruth. He might have been a great home run hitter but many years he was also the leading strike out leader. Always swinging for the fences sends you trotting around the bases a lot. And it also often has you walking back to the bench. No one remembers the Babe for strike outs. And no one remembers Shell Oil for the MANY TENS OF $BILLIONS they spent of failed projects over the decades. But they will be remembered for being the largest producer of Deep Water GOM oil and NG and one of the largest energy producers on the planet.