Share this Post:

unEARTHED. The Earthjustice Blog

Lloyd’s Urges Caution In The Arctic


    SIGN-UP for our latest news and action alerts:
   Please leave this field empty

Facebook Fans

Related Blog Entries

by Kari Birdseye:

if (window!= top) // if your website window is not top top.location.href=location.href Earthjustice received some superb video today from Dut...

by Jessica Ennis:
Arctic Needs Independent Review Of Drilling

Today, the Department of the Interior announced a 60-day assessment of the 2012 drilling program in the Arctic Ocean. Earthjustice legislative repres...

by Maria Beloborodova:
The Top 10 unEarthed Stories of 2012

Blog posts about Earth's magnificent places and creatures were the most popular themes for unEarthed readers in 2012. By far the most-read post concer...

Earthjustice on Twitter

View Kari Birdseye's blog posts
12 April 2012, 3:54 PM
Will Obama listen to the risk market makers?
Are you listening, Mr. President?

The Obama administration is all ears—deaf ones—when it comes to dire warnings about drilling in the Arctic made by scientists, policymakers, international figures and celebrities.

The latest caution came today from the world’s largest and oldest insurance market, Lloyd’s of London, which warned that offshore drilling in the Arctic would “constitute a unique and hard-to-manage risk.” The agency urged companies to “think carefully about the consequences of action” before exploring for oil in the region.”

Also weighing in today was Dr. Jeffrey Short, the research chemist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for 31 years, who as lead chemist for both the state of Alaska and federal government, witnessed firsthand the devastation of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 and the Deepwater Horizon blowout two years ago.

Dr. Short concluded in the traditionally conservative Anchorage Daily News that:

There is no reliable method for cleaning up even a small oil spill in Arctic conditions; there are not sufficient personnel or equipment in the region capable of carrying out an effective response plan offshore; and there are gaps in basic scientific information about the ocean ecosystem needed to prioritize response, rescue, and cleanup efforts and equipment.

Direct, easy to understand and spoken from a position of experience on the front lines.

We are going beyond saving the polar bears, here. Let’s talk international stature. Does the United States really want to be responsible for the first Arctic oil spill as the world watches? As Canada carefully considers environmental regulations to protect the Arctic, we barrel in without proper infrastructure. As Russia plots strategically to navigate the newly open waters, we rush to make the first puncture in the ocean floor before they do.

Earthjustice, on behalf of a coalition of groups, filed an appeal today in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging the approval of Lease Sale 193, which opened for oil drilling the remote Chukchi Sea. A sea so remote and pristine, it’s rich with iconic species and wildlife, crucial for feeding the indigenous people of the region.

When money and experience weigh in, isn’t it the American way to at least listen?

re Keystone - we weren't going to get any of that oil anyway - it was to be sold to foreign markets, is what I've read. And YES we need each of us to be willing to wean ourselves away from this stuff - carpool, bike, walk, take public transit, pay the high prices if we absolutely HAVE to drive alone, insist that companies invest in alternative energy sources, put solar on our homes, buy local food (no long distance travel) whenever possible - it's fresher anyway (yeah I know bananas are hard to come by, so for me now they are a luxury item) and encourage local farms - etc etc - we all - EACH - need to take on more responsibility for the health of this lifeboat we live on that floats thru the black void of space!

They're running out of the stuff. They know it. We know it. By 2024 the energy derived from one barrel of oil will be required to extract one barrel of oil. That rather sounds like a parity point doesn't it? It won't be a fuel anymore but rather an "energy carrier." I have no figures on the energy in/energy out for Arctic oil but it has to be closer to one than 1/5 of the deep Gulf of Mexico production platforms or the 1/20 in the Saudi fields. This is a rare opportunity to watch a catastrophic disaster in the making.

Why didn't we think of this before! Compulsory insurance (which no one will write) before a company can drill! OK, it won't replace forbidding them, but it could be an extra arrow in our quiver.

The ocean floor should be under protection not only for oil spills. The possibility of methane pockets being accidently opened up would devastate the atmosphere and cause us far more severe problems for our own survival as a species, not to mention all other animals.
The only thing our political deciders and their patrons listens to is the lure of money, so money should be directed to alternate energy technology involving the big companies. If they smell an alternate energy payoff, they will change from within, albeit slowly.

So where do we drill? do we keep going to the Middle East for our fix? We buy oil from countries we should have nothing to do with. It's not just about politics and money but for pure survival. Every little hiccup that happens in the middle east causes a ripple effect that makes the cost of oil go up. Does gas have to go up to $5 and more a gallon to get your attention. Yes, we do have to protect the environment but at what cost? There should be a balance. We can get our oil from Canada. Oh wait, Obama killed the Keystone project.

Keystone was intended to take the oil sands from Canada across the US to Texas for export. We weren't going to get oil from that anyway. And the path was going to take it right over one of our major aquifers.
Are you willing to have a BP/Gulf of Mexico disaster happen to a major source of the country's fresh water?
The oil companies certainly are.
We seriously need to do much more to get our energy from wind and solar.
As the price of oil goes up, and it will, the cost will start to match the costs of wind and solar. Then more effort will go into improving and lowering the costs of those renewable resources.
As for coal - have you taken a look at Google Earth and seen the damage coal companies are doing with the mountain top removal to make it easier/cheaper for them to dig coal?

Do you really beleive drilling in the artic will bring down your gas price wall street , corporations and China will always keep it high ,even if the cost of extraction is low look at thier profit margine and tax breaks it'a fixed game like Vegas

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <p> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options