Meet the Arctic 18

Posted by nick_gp - 9 June 2011 at 12:05pm - Comments

The 18 activists in jail for boarding Cairn's rig to demand the spill response plan

Our delegation of 18 from the Esperanza and Arctic Sunrise were arrested on board the Cairn oil rig Leiv Eiriksson on Saturday. Four days later they are still in jail.

They boarded the rig to ask for Cairn’s secret Oil Spill Response Plan. After weeks of Cairn hiding the plan and making limp excuses for it we decided to go directly to the rig because if it’s anywhere that would be the one place where it could be found. The delegation was not allowed to see the plan and Cairn still refuses to make it public. All 18 were arrested and taken by helicopter to Nuuk in Greenland.

They’ve been charged with trespassing and breaching a security zone, fined 30,000 dkk and will be deported for their action in defense of the Arctic.

As always, our activists are prepared for the consequences of direct action. It’s a measure of their commitment that they’re willing to risk their freedom and back here on the ships we’re proud to call them friends and crewmates. We’re doing everything we can to secure their speedy release and have passed on messages of support from friends and family.

Please add your message of support below:

Article tagged as: arctic, arctic18, cairn, climate, climate change, go beyond oil, oil spill

Comments Commenting is now closed

Well done all of you. Such a great cause and we are all very proud of what you are doing xx

By Fiend - 9 June 2011 at 4:34pm

Bad news for GP & Arctic18

"What a result! There's a judge who is not only learned but sensible and straight-talking too"

....so much so that he has today slapped an injunction on GP to stop pestering Cairn in their lawful pursuit of black gold (or gas more likely, according to GEUS, Greenland is a Gasland province..., not too many oil spills from gas I'd say). Also, the same understanding judge has imposed a €50k fine for every day that Cairn are held to ransom by GP bandits.....look on the bright side though, he has limited any resulting penalty to €1million!

Hope you all get/go home soon

By dig it man! (all up) - 9 June 2011 at 6:01pm

They aren't particularly fond of free speech over at Greenpeace International are they?

I post this link to show Cairn were right, and it keeps getting deleted.

"The “BMP Emergency Management Programme, Hydrocarbon Activities, Greenland” is a confidential document in order to protect personnel, telephone numbers, emergency storage buildings etc."

http://www.bmp.gl/petroleum/emergency-response

By Daithesci - 9 June 2011 at 6:43pm

I followed the link posted by Diathesci, which seems to suggest that GP are barking up the wrong tree. At a single reading of the document on the link site I can see that the TROLL Diathesci is trying to disseminate misleading information. The document is published by The Bureau of Minerals and Petrolium, which is a GREENLAND GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION. They do indeed state that the BMP Emergency Management Programme is a confidential document, but that merely tells us that the BMP plan is confidential. THE DOCUMENT MAKES NO REFERENCE WHATSOEVER TO CAIRN AND I CHALLENGE DIATHESCI TO DEFINE THE PLACE WHERE IT SAYS THAT CAIRN'S EMERGENCY PLAN IS CONFIDENTIAL. The GP campaign is aimed at getting CAIRN to publish its emergency plan, not that of the BMP. Diathesci makes no worthwhile contribution to the debate taking place on GP. The moderators should ban this nasty little mealy mouthed TROLL.

By Irvin Bowley - 10 June 2011 at 4:29am

To the wonderful 18! Thank-you so much for your bravery in standing up for what's right - few people could have such fearlessness...you have the support of thousands of people across the globe, so don't feel alone...we're with you in spirit...

By FreeSpirit - 10 June 2011 at 7:02am

Hi Irvin,

Ironies of ironies! I say:

"They aren't particularly fond of free speech over at Greenpeace International are they? "

You don't seem to be a fan of free speech either..!:
"The moderators should ban this nasty little mealy mouthed TROLL. "

Isn't it a problem when people's viewpoints are *so* fragile that they cannot accept even the smallest amount of criticism? If your views are robust then open debate should not be a problem. I'll leave it to other reader's to decide who is trying to shut down criticism....

Cairn have consistently said they can't/won't release their plan because the Greenlandic authorities don't want them to. The link I posted conclusively proves that - even you admit it. GP have obtained a lawyers opinion saying that Cairn could, if they wanted to, release their own document; note that they have *no* legal compulsion to do so. However this would leave Cairn going against the wishes of their hosts - just to please those who illegally disrupted their activity. Back on planet earth - they are hardly likely to do so. It would be like finding squatters in your lounge, who then demand to see the TV guide so that they can be more comfortable squatting.

The link, when combined with the drill plan - also freely available on the Greenland Gov'ts website (as are the environmental assessment, and the social impact study - show that Cairn's plan forms part of the BMP's plan. They are essentially each other. The drill plan outlines which organisation is liable for which part of the plan. The spill plan, Cairn's responsibility, is part of the wider emergency plan, of which (understandably) the BMP has over all control.

The sit-in on the oil rig was pointless. The 18 people who are in jail are there because of a wild goose chase.

By Daithesci - 10 June 2011 at 9:51am

Hi Irvin,

You may be interested in the oil spill outline in this document: (c400 page .pdf)
http://dk.nanoq.gl/Emner/Landsstyre/Departementer/R%C3%A5stofdirektorate...

From Google Translate:
[Quote:]
"Preparedness for oil spills
The licensee has in the dossier submitted a contingency plan for oil spills, this is found satisfactory by the BMP. The contingency plan for oil spills contain an action plan, description of resources handling of oil spills, description of relevant legislation, environmental and education and
contact information. Also describes the contingency plan for oil spills, how the licensee's preparedness to operate internally between holder and their subcontractors as well as how licensee must communicate with emergency management in Greenland.

The collecting has taken up the Coastal Zone Atlas ("Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas"), including plans for placement of equipment and manpower DMU has prepared for the BMP. Kystzoneatlasset describes various regions sensitivity to oil pollution and ability to protect vulnerable areas, anchorages, etc. Oil Spill Response Limited (OSRL) is a subcontractor of the licensee's oil spill preparedness.

The company is part of the "Global Network Response", which is a cooperation between several major international oil spill response organizations. Rights of oil contingency plan describes the resources collecting and OSRL can insert depending on the extent of any oil spills.
The licensee also as part of its plan forwarded a list of equipment and material kept clear of the three levels of action and a timetable for how quickly the equipment and crews can be mobilized if a spill occurs.

Requirements on preparedness for oil spills....

6.9.7 Control of oil spills from burning oil on the open sea, only after the guidelines prevailing in the relevant application form (BMP 2011 - Application for the use of in situ burning vid an oil spill), indicating that burning as the starting point must be at least 10 km from the Greenland base line.

6.9.8 When a specific oil spill must BMP sought approval for the burning of oil at sea. For this purpose application In-Situ Burning Application Form in Greenland Waters developed by NERI see Annex 8 The application will be assessed against the criteria that the overall results in less environmental harm than if the fight is limited to trials of mechanical assembly or no control.

6.9.9 Control of oil spills with dispersants may only happen with dispersants, which are approved by the BMP / DMU. BMP / DMU has approved
means "Slick Gone NS (Dasic International Ltd.).. Other means than this must be approved before commissioning.

6.9.10 When a concrete spills must BMP sought approval for the use of dispersants. For this purpose application Dispersants Application for the Greenland Waters developed by Denmark Mikjøundersøgelser, see Annex 9 The application will be assessed against the criteria that the overall results in less environmental harm than if the fight is limited to trials of mechanical assembly or no control.

6.9.11 contingency plan for oil spills includes a monitoring program initiated in the event of a major oil spill (Tier 3). This program will consist primarily of oil content in water and sediment. This program should be initiated immediately after any major oil spills."

[End of quote].

The interesting thing to me is the 'Burning at Sea' thing. What GP have not taken into account (or probably conveniently ignored) in regards to clean up of any disaster is that in cold weather oil gets thicker. It clumps together making it easier to burn, something that was impossible in the Gulf of Mexico due to the warmer weather.

By Daithesci - 10 June 2011 at 12:53pm

The Greenpeace activists are heroes because they are putting themselves at personal risk in defence of what is right. I'm with you all in spirit.

By George T - 10 June 2011 at 2:19pm

I think all 18 of you, and also Hannah & Luke, should be given the highest honors on Planet Earth for your bravery... What exactly is the highest honor a soldier for the Planet can be given? Not sure. Let's make it up now. I hereby award you 18 "Medals of Eden." Thank you for your work protecting the planetary Garden called Earth. The divine Life Support system for every species. If Greenland deports you, that is their shame, not yours. Congratulations warriors of peace.

-KijJiT the FoX

By KijJiKeTchMe? - 10 June 2011 at 2:56pm

1 person agrees

THERE HE GOES AGAIN. Further attempts by DIATHESCI to confuse and baffle us with reams of misleading and irrelevant verbiage.

NO DIATHESCI. THE GPU DOCUMENT AND CAIRNS DISASTER PLAN ARE NOT ONE AND THE SAME THING.The heading PREPAREDNESS FOR OIL SPILLS implies that is a contingency for MINOR SPILLS. IT IS NOT A DISASTER PLAN. Once again Diathesci stands exposed as a disseminator of information that is deliberatly calculated to deflect from the central issues of the debate.In fact Diathesci treats this forum as a game, as witnessed by the way he/she signed off on one of his/her posts by saying THANKS FOR PLAYING.

Viz a viz FRAGILE VIEWPOINTS. Please note that my name appears at the end of my posts. I am sufficiently confident in my opinions to sign them. Perhaps Diathesci would like to declare the strength of his convictions by doing the same.

I say again that Diathesci makes no worthwhile contribution to the debates on the GP website. His sinister purpose is to represent the interests of the oil industry. He is a mealy mouthed obnoxious TROLL and the moderators should ban him.

By Irvin Bowley - 10 June 2011 at 2:59pm

Hi Irvin,

Oh dear. You sound angry. And desperate. What have I done to upset you? Ohh Yeah. I know. I proved you wrong.

My Dear Irvin, If you ignore official government documents then I'm afraid nobody but a psychiatrist is going to shake you from your 'interesting' viewpoint. The funny thing is: I've provided evidence. You haven't. But I'm the one you want banned.

Let's summarise:

1) Cairn have a legal right to drill
2) Their spill plan is acceptable to the relevant authorities
3) The Greenlandic government have the final say in Greenlandic waters
4) The Greenlandic government want their spill plan confidential
5) Cairn as they are drilling in Greenlandic waters are abiding by those rules
6) GP want Cairn to break those rules just to please the same type of idiots who sit in on oil rigs for no good reason. (Don't hold your breath).
7) Between the sources I've linked to, Oil Response Ltd's site and Cairns site, there's enough info to get pretty detailed picture of any response plan - there isn't much more to know.
8) It must be concluded that GP's efforts wrt the plan are just PR bluff and bluster, to gain more money from subscribers.

By Daithesci - 10 June 2011 at 4:20pm

DIATHESCI THE TROLL REARS HIS UGLY HEAD AGAIN Repeating the same dreary mantras on behalf of his oil industry masters and readers please note HE STILL DOESN'T HAVE THE BALLS TO SIGN HIS POSTS WITH HIS REAL NAME.

So who is Diathesci? My guess would be that he/she is some hack journo in the pay of the oil industry big batallions. In other words a brown nosing lackey. Crawl back into your hole you mealy mouthed TROLL. We all know you for what you are and what your agenda is. Your words are spurious and your existance is meaningless compared with the brave people who put their lives on the line for a cause they truly believe in. I say again, you make no worthwhile contribution to the dbate on the GP website and the moderators should ban you.

By Irvin Bowley - 10 June 2011 at 5:36pm

LONDON (Reuters) - Cairn Energy (LSE: CNE.L - news) won a court injunction against Greenpeace on Thursday, in a move that should enable the company to continue its search for oil in the Arctic without further disruption from environmental protesters.

The British oil and gas group said the district court in Amsterdam had ruled in favour of legal action designed to deter protesters who have tried twice this year to delay drilling off the Greenland coast by boarding vessels.

"Cairn Energy notes the judgement by the District Court in Amsterdam that it has decided to grant an injunction against Stitching Greenpeace Council (Greenpeace International), requiring Greenpeace International to refrain from disrupting Cairn's lawful operations offshore Greenland," the company said in a statement.

The court also imposed a penalty of 50,000 euros (44,375 pounds) per day of up to a maximum of 1 million euros where Cairn's operations are disrupted as a result of failure to comply with the ruling, the company added.

Following BP's Gulf of Mexico oil spill, concern about the difficulty in tackling offshore spills has increased and environmental campaigners have made Arctic drilling a key battleground.

The track record of companies suing protest groups is a chequered one, with court action often serving to garner publicity and sympathy for the campaigners.

Cairn filed the lawsuit in the Dutch courts because two of Greenpeace's ships, the MS Esperanza and the MS Arctic Sunrise, and the Greenpeace non-profit foundation itself, are all registered in the Netherlands.

Under the lawsuit, Cairn was seeking fines of up to 2 million euros a day if Greenpeace again disrupt its activities off the coast of Greenland, where drilling must take place within a narrow summer window due to harsh weather conditions.

By Anonymous01 - 10 June 2011 at 7:55pm

Hi Irvin,

You do make me laugh. I'm not sure if that's intentional (I suspect it is), but you do anyway. Good job.

My Lords and Masters, from their hollowed out volcano where they continually plot for world domination, have authorised me to make the following announcement:

"Irvin is too good for us. He has seen through our shallow plan for world subjugation by Oil Pollution and detected our subversive agent Daithesci. We give in. You win."

Well done Irvin. You da man.

By Daithesci - 11 June 2011 at 8:41am

P.s. My name, and even my photograph, is in the above facebook comments section. You are too good for me Irvin - my secret cover is blown.

By Daithesci - 11 June 2011 at 8:44am

Well, surprise, surprise.Here comes Daithesci with more of his condesending bullshit attitude. If your OIL INDUSTRY TROLL cap fits, wear it.

By Irvin Bowley - 11 June 2011 at 2:00pm

I'd like to second, and appluade Irvins comments, Daithesci is a troll, and should be treated as such, i.e. don't feed the troll. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

His arguments have been disproven, and sound like they originated from the Cairn PR department, he's clearly only hear to wind people up, and he has no made no useful contribution to the debate.

@Daithesci, do us a favour and go away.

By candleflame99 - 13 June 2011 at 10:18am

Hi Candleflame99,

You say: "His arguments have been disproven,"

Which ones? Points 1 to 7, are statements of fact. It follows that point 8 is true as it's the logical conclusion from points 1 to 7.

I'm afraid to say it's GP who have been mistaken, and 18 people have lost their liberty (plus 30,000 dkk each) because of their mistakes.

Wishing it ain't so does not make them right.

By Daithesci - 13 June 2011 at 4:23pm

With the 30,000 dkk (£3,500) each in mind i wonder which of the 18 will be the first to sue Greenpeace for sending them there on false information?

By Daithesci - 13 June 2011 at 5:05pm

@Daithesci

You real are a talented PR guy aren't you?

I just want to ask...why are you doing it in a place meant for praise to the 18?

Do you know the meaning of the word respect?

Well, you definitely don't know about respect for the environment do you?

By Benjy - 14 June 2011 at 9:59am

You did a great job guys :)

By Benjy - 14 June 2011 at 10:00am

Hi Benjy,

"...You real are a talented PR guy aren't you? I just want to ask...why are you doing it in a place meant for praise to the 18? Do you know the meaning of the word respect? Well, you definitely don't know about respect for the environment do you?"

I'm not a PR guy, but as to why I'm commenting here - I checked the site for a page called something like "Oops! Sorry Guys! You're in Jail for Nothing!", and there wasn't such a page - so here will have to do.

Strangely enough my criticism of this fiasco is probably more valuable than all the misguided "pats on the back" they get from you eco-zombies. At least it gives GP, who are losing their way massively, some idea as to what's gone wrong.

Oil drilling is risky *wherever* it's done. But if you don't like the risks of oil drilling - Don't Use 5000hp Oil Powered Boats!

By Daithesci - 14 June 2011 at 11:34am

Just when we thought the air was safe to breathe here comes the TROLL Daithesci stinking the place up again.And he's off on one of his favourite rants. He previously accused GP of hypocracy because they use oil in their boats and I note thate he makes the same inference in his latest post. I wonder if he has noticed his own hypocracy in using this site to slag off GP. How ironic. How pathetic. And how clearly he reveals the poverty of his arguments. I say again and again. Diathesci is a mealy mouthed obnoxious TROLL. He makes no usefull contribution to the debate on the GP campaign and it is high time that the moderators banned him.

By Irvin Bowley - 14 June 2011 at 4:50pm

Dearest Irvin,

Have a looky here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jun/13/environmental-activism...

and a looky here: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10724605

GP has lost its way. You sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "nah, nah, nah" does not make it different.

This campaign was an utter fiasco. You sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "nah, nah, nah" does not make it different.

Wake up my child. Wake up.

By Daithesci - 14 June 2011 at 7:36pm

Guess who?

Bases his arguments on a false premice

Supports them with half truths

Draws conclusions that support his arguments but bear no relationship to reality

No prizes for guessing the answer. Its.............Daithesc.

By the way Daithesci, I won't follow the links you posted. I did so on a previous occasion and found that the result complied exactly with the above 3 question quiz. When I pointed out the errors in your claims all you do is bluster and add more half truths and distortions.

I have a suggestion for you. You have all the attributes for a political career (mealy mouthed and slippery as an eel) so why not put your views to the test in an arena that is tailor made for you? You could stand against the green party in the next election. Offhand I can't think of any party that would want you as a candidate so you will have to start your own. What would you call it? Perhaps the supporters of GP could help you out with a few suggestions.

PS. What, no reply to the hypocracy charge?

PPS Still not signing your articles with your name.

By Irvin Bowley - 14 June 2011 at 9:43pm

Hi Candleflame99. Lets take a look at the 7 'proofs' provided by Daithesci and the conclusion he draws from them.

1) Cairn have a legal right to drill.

Response. So did BP

2) The Cairn spill plan is acceptable to the relevant authorities.

Response. So why did the judge in Holland think it relevant to ask Cairn "Why don't you publish your plan right now." He went on to say that BP must regret not having their plan scrutinised because someone might have spotted that they had skimped on a second valve that would have been crucial in the circumstances. He also said that transparency could only strengthen the plan. And we can only assume that the BP plan was acceptable to the relevant authorities.

3) The Greenlandic Govt have the final say in Greenlandic waters.

Response. What relevance is that if a disaster on the scale of the Deepwater Horozon occurs.

4) The Greenlandic Govt want their spill plan to remain confidential.

Response. GP are interested to know about CAIRN'S disaster plan. They have not raised any issues about the Greenlandic Govt's plan. It was BP who dealt with the Deepwater Horizon disaster, not the American Govt.

5) As Cairn are drilling in Greenlandic waters they are abiding by those rules.

Response. Whose rules were BP abiding by?

6) GP want Cairn to break those rules.

Response. This little rule was made up by Daithesci.

7) Between the sources I've linked to - Oil Response Ltd and Cairn - there is enough information to get a detailed idea of any oil response plan.

Response.The point of GPs campaign is to get Cairn to publish their disaster plan. You wont find it by following Daithesci's links.

8) It must be concluded that GPs efforts are just PR bluff to gain money from subscribers.

Response. That is Daithesci's conclusion. The only real conclusion that can safely be drawn from the above is that Daithesci is a mealy mouthed obnoxious TROLL who should be banned from posting on the GP website.

PS. He's also a hypocrite and he's afraid to sign his posts in the way that people who have the courage of their convictions do.

By Irvin Bowley - 15 June 2011 at 3:21am