BP's pet reporter doesn't notice the oil slick

Posted by christian — 28 June 2010 at 3:12pm - Comments

Via the Dot Earth blog comes this particular exercise in car-crash PR. Maybe you've managed to miss the section of the BP website which contains the work of the 'BP Reporters' - corporate lackeys who are paid to produce puff pieces about Louisiana and how the company is responding to the oil spill.

There have been some absolute shockers - Ballet at sea is a wince-inducing 'favourite' in the office - but a new post where their reporter Tom Seslar flies over the gulf in a helicopter, without once sighting the oil spill - or at least, without referring to it.

He includes in his piece some cheerleading for the oil industry, which seems in pretty poor taste, given the circumstances -

It's likely there will be no alternative to the Gulf as a key source of American energy for decades to come. That's why it is so essential to protect it. Even the most severe critics of the oil industry tend to accept that reality.

Anyway, it's good fodder for some web video...

From The Rachel Maddow Show 

Its sickening how people just turn a blind eye to stuff like this :(

"Ballet at sea"? Reading through that makes me want to gag. "Balancing act" is pretty bad, too. It's like they're trying to make out that everyone's just making a fuss.

AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Come on Greenpeace, we can sink them!!!

BP (if they survive by that name), along with other energy companies around the world, will be major players in meeting the demand of us ordinary citizens for more energy and raw materials for manufacturing in the coming sixty to one hundred years or so.

The digital age does and will continue to demand energy and manufacturing consumption of approx. 200 to 300 % of energy requirements hitherto, even if societal consumption by India, China, Brazil and other emerging economies fails to expand beyond current demands, and even if technical developments reduce the energy consumption of non-analogue technologies.

The current technical difficulties experienced by BP are similar to the sea vessel failures of emerging mass oil-transport in the 1960's and 1970's. Development in the coming decades of deep ocean oil exploration, discovery, licensing, extraction, transport and commercial activity, will develop in line with scientific, technical and socio-political experience gained from today's industrial and commecial activity - which will inevitably include incident, accident and social upheaval.

Without such significant advances and the technical/political lessons that will be learnt, we cannot hope to meet the forthcoming energy needs of the worlds developed peoples.

This, and previous, less publicised, incidents, are just the start of a longer journey of energy and raw materials provision in an expanding commercial and consumer world. The know how gained from such incidents will be an important part of the huge development of technological solutions for dealing with the massive increases in CO2 emmisions and, presumably necessary, capture of these and other atmosphere-warming gases.

What do you reckon?

ChrisA.

Greenpeace UK Supporter.

HOW MANY OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE MR HEYWARD A GOOD SWIFT KICK UP THE BACKSIDE. FOR WHAT HE AND BP HAVE DONE.

Its sickening how people just turn a blind eye to stuff like this :(

"Ballet at sea"? Reading through that makes me want to gag. "Balancing act" is pretty bad, too. It's like they're trying to make out that everyone's just making a fuss. AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! Come on Greenpeace, we can sink them!!!

BP (if they survive by that name), along with other energy companies around the world, will be major players in meeting the demand of us ordinary citizens for more energy and raw materials for manufacturing in the coming sixty to one hundred years or so. The digital age does and will continue to demand energy and manufacturing consumption of approx. 200 to 300 % of energy requirements hitherto, even if societal consumption by India, China, Brazil and other emerging economies fails to expand beyond current demands, and even if technical developments reduce the energy consumption of non-analogue technologies. The current technical difficulties experienced by BP are similar to the sea vessel failures of emerging mass oil-transport in the 1960's and 1970's. Development in the coming decades of deep ocean oil exploration, discovery, licensing, extraction, transport and commercial activity, will develop in line with scientific, technical and socio-political experience gained from today's industrial and commecial activity - which will inevitably include incident, accident and social upheaval. Without such significant advances and the technical/political lessons that will be learnt, we cannot hope to meet the forthcoming energy needs of the worlds developed peoples. This, and previous, less publicised, incidents, are just the start of a longer journey of energy and raw materials provision in an expanding commercial and consumer world. The know how gained from such incidents will be an important part of the huge development of technological solutions for dealing with the massive increases in CO2 emmisions and, presumably necessary, capture of these and other atmosphere-warming gases. What do you reckon? ChrisA. Greenpeace UK Supporter.

HOW MANY OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GIVE MR HEYWARD A GOOD SWIFT KICK UP THE BACKSIDE. FOR WHAT HE AND BP HAVE DONE.

About Christian Hunt

me.jpg

Sea ice geek, former web editor at GP.

Follow Greenpeace UK