Drilling for oil and hosing down icebergs

Posted by jamie - 26 August 2010 at 4:41pm - Comments

As images and video come in to the office from the Esperanza, the one thing that has amazed everyone is the lengths to which Cairn Energy will go (indeed, must go) to prevent icebergs colliding with its drilling operations. Iceberg Alley is so named for a reason, and there's some footage here of one method for dealing with them: hosing them away.

There's also a chance to see the Stena Don rig close up as well as the Stena Forth drilling ship, and get a sense of what it's like to be out in the Arctic seas near Greenland.

Oh dear, Exdonor is peeved because Greenpeace objects to deepsea oil drilling. As if the Mexican Gulf oil spill wasn’t enough, and that was near civilisation. Apart from the sheer stupidity of towing or spraying icebergs, the enormous ecological damage from a leak up there would be disastrous. It will be interesting to see if Cairn Energy plans to drill a relief well, which should have been done by BP in the Mexican Gulf.

Of course we’re dependent on oil. Governments and the fossil fuel companies have colluded to keep it that way. There’s no easy replacement for oil yet, but there will be. A carbon tax would be a great start on that road, but after all the endless talks and conferences it still hasn’t happened in any meaningful way.

As for Knud Seblon decrying the loss of income from a sealing ban, let’s face it, industries do die or shink. It’s only recently that here in Australia there might finally an end to logging of old-growth Tasmanian forests. And most of the world has moved on from such awful practices like whaling and killing dolphins.

I say good on you, Greenpeace and Esperanza, keep up the good work.

I have simply signed up to say that, regrettably, after many years of supporting Greenpeace and regularly donating I have decided to stop and have cancelled my standing order. I joined up in the era of anti-nuclear testing and I still support action against that and do not favour renewal of Trident. I continue to be dubious about nuclear power despite the conversion of some in the environmental movement to this as the least worst option for the future.

The reason I am no longer supporting you is because of your biassed, exaggerated and ill-informed stance against the oil industry as a whole. While it may be chiming with an emotional chord in the public mood, ask any of them who say they're against drilling in remote regions if they're also willing to give up all the benefits they derive from oil, I doubt they'll back you up. Of course we need to find alternatives, of course there is a pressing need to take action against global warning, but the attempt to say "No more drilling now!" is premature, arrogant and narrow minded, all the things I didn't think Greenpeace were.

I am sorry to be leaving you after all this time and I hope you stop and think about your sentimentalisation and sensationalisation of the debate, but I somehow doubt it. Facts tend to get in the way of a good rant don't they? Your loss is the gain of another deserving movement, that for prisoners of conscience.

Farewell.

Denmark and Greenland efforts to maintain a better society was in a very short time passed by Greenpeace, which struck a previously low-income group( sealhunter) interest below the belt, and make a global elimination of their profession through in a country with a very high cost of living levels. It was very hard to the Greenlandic children and youth.Maybe responded to help theese families . Greenpeace have never come with new alternatives for new income for theesre families

While I somewhat agree with the post by Exdonor that instantly changing from oil products is not viable, I do firmly believe that the more and more risky exploration for what oil remains is a strong indication that alternative sources for the majority of our power should be a priority.

Anyway, the main reason for my post is the sheer outrage I've felt from reading the Cairn Energy homepage. We never expect oil exploration companies to be the most ethical of organisations, but this link is frankly incredibly irritating:

http://crr2009.cairnenergy.com/key-issues/climate-change.html

In particular the phrase:

" In the Arctic in particular, impacts from climate change create challenges for oil exploration and production."

So the fact the ice cap is melting is really making their job a lot more difficult. Shouldn't that be a sign something's not quite right?!

I think the sooner the oil runs out the better The planet and its life may finally begin to recover, people will have no choice but to ditch there cars and walk for once like there legs were made for!, A new industry and jobs will surelly arise from clean energy solutions and clean transport. we survived millions of years just fine without oil power and cars. It is as though the human race is addicted to a drug this last century, and that drug is oil! Its about time for rehab.

Oh dear, Exdonor is peeved because Greenpeace objects to deepsea oil drilling. As if the Mexican Gulf oil spill wasn’t enough, and that was near civilisation. Apart from the sheer stupidity of towing or spraying icebergs, the enormous ecological damage from a leak up there would be disastrous. It will be interesting to see if Cairn Energy plans to drill a relief well, which should have been done by BP in the Mexican Gulf. Of course we’re dependent on oil. Governments and the fossil fuel companies have colluded to keep it that way. There’s no easy replacement for oil yet, but there will be. A carbon tax would be a great start on that road, but after all the endless talks and conferences it still hasn’t happened in any meaningful way. As for Knud Seblon decrying the loss of income from a sealing ban, let’s face it, industries do die or shink. It’s only recently that here in Australia there might finally an end to logging of old-growth Tasmanian forests. And most of the world has moved on from such awful practices like whaling and killing dolphins. I say good on you, Greenpeace and Esperanza, keep up the good work.

I have simply signed up to say that, regrettably, after many years of supporting Greenpeace and regularly donating I have decided to stop and have cancelled my standing order. I joined up in the era of anti-nuclear testing and I still support action against that and do not favour renewal of Trident. I continue to be dubious about nuclear power despite the conversion of some in the environmental movement to this as the least worst option for the future. The reason I am no longer supporting you is because of your biassed, exaggerated and ill-informed stance against the oil industry as a whole. While it may be chiming with an emotional chord in the public mood, ask any of them who say they're against drilling in remote regions if they're also willing to give up all the benefits they derive from oil, I doubt they'll back you up. Of course we need to find alternatives, of course there is a pressing need to take action against global warning, but the attempt to say "No more drilling now!" is premature, arrogant and narrow minded, all the things I didn't think Greenpeace were. I am sorry to be leaving you after all this time and I hope you stop and think about your sentimentalisation and sensationalisation of the debate, but I somehow doubt it. Facts tend to get in the way of a good rant don't they? Your loss is the gain of another deserving movement, that for prisoners of conscience. Farewell.

Denmark and Greenland efforts to maintain a better society was in a very short time passed by Greenpeace, which struck a previously low-income group( sealhunter) interest below the belt, and make a global elimination of their profession through in a country with a very high cost of living levels. It was very hard to the Greenlandic children and youth.Maybe responded to help theese families . Greenpeace have never come with new alternatives for new income for theesre families

While I somewhat agree with the post by Exdonor that instantly changing from oil products is not viable, I do firmly believe that the more and more risky exploration for what oil remains is a strong indication that alternative sources for the majority of our power should be a priority. Anyway, the main reason for my post is the sheer outrage I've felt from reading the Cairn Energy homepage. We never expect oil exploration companies to be the most ethical of organisations, but this link is frankly incredibly irritating: http://crr2009.cairnenergy.com/key-issues/climate-change.html In particular the phrase: " In the Arctic in particular, impacts from climate change create challenges for oil exploration and production." So the fact the ice cap is melting is really making their job a lot more difficult. Shouldn't that be a sign something's not quite right?!

I think the sooner the oil runs out the better The planet and its life may finally begin to recover, people will have no choice but to ditch there cars and walk for once like there legs were made for!, A new industry and jobs will surelly arise from clean energy solutions and clean transport. we survived millions of years just fine without oil power and cars. It is as though the human race is addicted to a drug this last century, and that drug is oil! Its about time for rehab.

Follow Greenpeace UK