Save the Arctic? No thanks, says UK Energy Minister

Seriously, stop trolling. You obviously work on behalf of or are employed by an oil company because every time GP posts about oil you lot come out in droves. It's well known that there are companies who create multiple fake personas to comment on certain things, from promoting a product, to disrupting genuine discussion on issues like there.

You keep on saying the plans have been published, or that the plans are withheld for security reasons, to suit your purposes. Then you post that link over and over, that is not Cairn's plan at all, that's the government's plan, and it is all withheld. There is no technical or logistic data on what the actual response is apart from brief overviews of what type of work may be needed.

If there was a plan in place, the sensitive information could be withheld, like every other sensitive document that has a Freedom of Information Act request in this country for instance. Then we could see if the plans for cleaning up an oil spill in arctic waters were inadequate.

Given that UK Government officials have already been quoted as saying a spill in these waters would be impossible to clean up, the last spill from this type of oil rig (Gulf of Mexico) has caused years of damage, that drilling isn't allowed all year round due to the treachorous weather conditions, and that the company drilling won't release it's disaster response plan; is this at all safe?

No.

Please ignore the oil company stooge.

Daithesci. There you go again harping on about GP using oil to power the boats they use on their campaigns.On numerous occasions you have categorised this as hypocracy when it is in fact simple expediency.

GP react to the issues that threaten the planet and they are entirely justified in the means and resources they use to advance their campaigns. I have pointed out to you on several occasions that you are in fact the hypocrite, because you use these pages to disseminate your poisonous PR on bahalf of big oil. I think that makes you a parasite as well as a hypocrite.   

The thing that compounds your hypocracy is that you plainly hate and despise everything that GP stands for, especially the fact that people are willing to put their lives on the line to support its campaigns.

Daithesci is a mealy mouthed obnoxious TROLL. The moderators should ban him from these pages.

Hi Anon (David Icke?),

Funny, funny, funny: [quote] "You obviously work on behalf of or are employed by an oil company ... there are companies who create multiple fake personas to comment on certain things," [end of quote].

I love conspiracy theories too. They are such fun. That one about the Lizards running the world is my favourite. But you're wrong on this occasion.

[quote]You keep on saying the plans have been published[eoq]

No. I never said that. I said 90-95% of the plans have been published. Seriously, we know; the regulations, the drill types, their safety features, the chemicals they propose, the safety plans for the mud, the environmental assessment, the clean up contractors, their equipment, the broad locations of the equipment - what else *specifically* do they want to know?

[quote]If there was a plan in place[eoq]
That's a silly thing to say. Of course there's a plan, the Greenlanders wouldn't give permission to drill without it.. The plan is acceptable to the *relevant* authorities. In case you'd forgotten the *relevant* authorities are the GL government - not Greenpeace.

Also the Greenlanders say:
[quote]"....It is a regulatory requirement in the Mineral Resources Act §80, that:

“The Greenland Government will set up an emergency committee with the task of coordinating the action of the authorities in the case of accidents and emergencies, including war, on offshore facilities. The members of the emergency committee will supervise the measures taken by those responsible for offshore facilities and will coordinate the authorities' preventive, life-saving and control measures”"[eoq]

So the emergency committee has over-all control, it's *their* call if the plan is made 100% public or not. Cairn are abiding by their rules. If you want to see any plans, you lot are asking the wrong people: As the GL Government, not Cairn. Oh, but wait. That doesn't make such a good press-release does it?

[quote] Given that UK Government officials have already been quoted as saying a spill in these waters would be impossible to clean up, ...drilling isn't allowed all year round due to the treachorous weather conditions...is this at all safe?[eoq]

Firstly, that one line quote from the FOI request was an official quoting what he'd been told by another NGO like GP. So in effect GP are quoting GP, who declared themselves right...

Secondly, it ignores all studies showing that cold weather *improves* the ability to clean up a spill through burning.

Third, the agreement is for Cairn only to drill in the summer. They agree with you.

Fourth, No. It's not safe. Oil drilling never is. That's why GP shouldn't use oil. But they do. Its not greatly less safe drilling off Nuuk than drilling anywhere. The sea round Nuuk does not freeze over. It's not even in the Arctic. All major icebergs are plotted by plane and satellite (that's why the last ship to be sunk by an iceberg was the Titanic in a century ago...). It's not deeper than comparable wells, it's not more remote than many.

These are all good facts. But they make a terrible press release.

Hi Anon. Lets take a look at Diathesci's post of 10th June where he says "The link when combined with the drill plan show that Cairns plan forms part of the BMP plan. They are essentially the same as each other."

You have to spell things out for Diathesci because he's a bit forgetfull (the poor dear) The BMP is a Greenland Govt organisation and they do indeed have their own plan. The link he keeps posting leads to a BMP document that contains details of their plan. Nowhere in that document does it say that the BMP plan and Cairn's plan are "essentially the same as each other." The only person who says that is Diathesci. In reply to your post he now says "I never said that the plans have been published." I am sure that any unbiased reader will conclude that Daithesci certainly does his best to imply that Cairns plan has been published, which is exactly the kind of half truths that he deals in.

As to his latest rants. David Icke??? Lizards??? Animal Farm??? I'm encouraged. I think he's cracking up. 

Hi David Icke,

I take the point about the Explorer. However the situation is *slightly* different for an oil rig: It's stationary! therefore it will have weeks of warning about any icebergs, as they tend to travel at speeds under 5 mph.

The Exxon Valdez was a very different case. It was wrecked on the shore, so the oil could not per-se be burnt at sea - because the oil wasn't at sea. The rigs of Nuuk are up to 300km off-shore, so burning makes more sense. The GL gov't has stipulated that the burning must be at least 10km off-shore. Burning in the DWH wasn't successful because of the warmer weather.

Yeah GP using oil, is very hypocritical. Like a meat eater saying the horrors of the abattoir is nothing to do with them.

What a load of bullshit, the planet wont last for ever, why not stop the wars over the world and use that money for greenpower, every twat on the site use's oil every day, cars, buses, planes, taxi's, every thing we touch today use's oil, so if you want to stop using hydrocarbons fuck of and live in the Arctic, twats,

There is a means to drill and protect the environment, and the marine species. The same non toxic alternative BP recently successfully tested for the Gulf spill, can help spills anywhere.

Oil Spill Eater II There was a non toxic Alternative to
clean up the spill that has been successfully tested by BP after 10 months of
spill damages. The Coast Guard sent a letter from headquarters stating to the
FOSC to take action with OSE II, and the EPA, Lisa Jackson stopped the Coast
Guard from allowing BP from implementing OSE II. In fact the EPA stopped the
application of OSE II 11 times denying State Senators direct request for use of
OSE II from Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. La Department of environmental
requested the use of OSE II as well, EPA's Sam Coleman denied their request
without reason. Governor Jindal tried to get OSE II demonstrated on the
Chandelier Islands on May 6, 2010, and the EPA stopped the Governor as well.
The EPA in fact stopped the use of OSE II 11 times, without a reason given. Had
the EPA allowed Governor Jindal to allow the demonstration of OSE II on May 6,
2010, it is possible a significant portion of the environmental damages,
including the shorelines and the seafood industry would have been spared. The
toxicty test comparison between OSE II and corexit really cannot be compared
since with corexit, the label states it can cause red blood cells to burst,
kidney, and liver problems if a chemical suit and respirator are not worn. OSE
II in contrast can be used to wash your hands and is non toxic. The BP Deep
Horizon spill has proven that corexit only sinks oil and causes the same oil to
be addressed a second time when it comes ashore as under water plumes, or tar
balls, while OSE II has a substantiated end point of converting oil to CO2 and
water. See Coast Guard letter below

U. S. Department

of Homeland Security

United States

Coast Guard

Commanding Officer               1 Chelsea Street

U. S. Coast Guard               New London, CT  06320

Research and Development Center               Staff Symbol: Contracting Office

               Phone:  (860) 271-2807

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       July 10, 2010

OSEI Corporation

P.O. Box 515429

Dallas, TX 
75251

Attn:  Steven
Pedigo, President/Owner

DEEPWATER HORIZON RESPONSE BAA HSCG32-10-R-R00019, TRACKING
#2003954

We are pleased to inform you that the initial screening of
your White Paper submitted under Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)
HSCG32-10-R-R00019 has been completed. 
It has been determined that your White Paper submission has a potential
for benefit to the spill response effort.

Your White Paper has been forwarded to the Deepwater Horizon
Response Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) for further action under its
authority.   Subject to the
constraints and needs of the ongoing oil spill response, you may be contacted
by the FOSC or the responsible party.

We appreciate your interest in supporting the Deepwater
Horizon Response effort.

Contracting Officer /s/

USCG R&D Center