Showing posts with label habitat. Show all posts
Showing posts with label habitat. Show all posts

06 May 2010

The Topic on Our Minds

Oh, the oil spill.

I’ve been avoiding writing about it, because it’s almost like, what can you say? I’m not surprised by it. Some people have expressed to me their disbelief that such a thing could occur: we thought the oil rigs were safe! I’m not sure what universe they’re living in, but I was never under the impression that they were safe. Have they been saying that on the news? I mean, when you think about it, what about an oil rig makes you think “that sounds like a brilliant idea”?

“Since 2001, 858 fires and explosions have broken out on oil and gas industry facilities in the Gulf of Mexico, killing more than 55 workers, according to the US Minerals Management Service.” - BBC

Yeah.

And of course, the irony is that this happens at the same time that Obama, supposed liberal hope of the future, approves offshore drilling. Hardy har har. It’s almost too coincidental to believe. It’s almost like his opponents went and caused an oil spill just to make him look like an idiot. Or that some group did it to raise opposition for off shore drilling. Or maybe it is a conspiracy to drive the price of oil up… by dumping half of what’s left into the ocean, there will be less of it? And then they will be forced to open the Atlantic to drilling because they will claim, like the flat out liars they are, that this will lower the prices again.

Here is part of a statement from Oceana that I think sums it up nicely:
Despite the oil industry’s statements, events like this one will happen again unless we act to prevent them. It is time for the U.S. to recognize that the risks of offshore drilling far outweigh any benefits. We must stop ignoring government studies showing clearly that expanded offshore drilling does nothing for the consumer: it does not lower the price of gasoline and it will not make us energy independent. As we watch the response efforts in the Gulf, and try to imagine the sheer magnitude of oil gushing from the bottom of the ocean with no end in sight, it is clear that our ability to find oil far outstrips our ability to respond to a blowout.

I think this is so hard to write about because it hurts, so, so, terribly. The sheer amount of devastation that comes from a spill like this- the lasting devastation- the loss of wildlife, of habitat, of livelihoods for thousands who depend on the sea for their incomes- it’s hard even to comprehend. And what is even harder to wrap your mind around is the fact that people want it to continue. People want underwater drilling to continue. People are willing to take the risk of THIS MUCH DAMAGE just so we can have a pittance more oil. Because that’s all you’re going to get out of the earth, at this point. There are only so many dead dinosaurs we can dig up.

The fact that the US government would be willing to spend billions of dollars chasing the pipe dream of additional oil, rather than say, oh, I don’t know, cut back on the amount of oil used, proves to me (as if I needed more proof) that the government does not have our best interests in mind. It has the interests of the lobbyists that pay the most. And those would be the oil companies. When I read the statements from legislators saying things like “we need this oil” and “with more research, this will never happen again,” I’m so angry I can’t even see straight. Both are blatant lies.

I think what disturbs me even more is the support American people have given to the concept of drilling offshore. There was an opinion piece in the college newspaper just last week arguing in favor of using more oil. This just makes no logical sense. There is no more oil, and the sooner we get that into our heads the more chance we’ll have to avert complete disaster. In the article the student argued that it is her lifestyle choice to use more oil, and that no one should be able to take that away. Which is fine, except that her lifestyle choice has caused tragedies like the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. All of our lifestyle choices have. If you drive a vehicle, if you use ANYTHING made out of plastic, if you have power in your home, if you eat anything in a grocery store, if you buy anything from a store, it doesn’t matter if it’s the greenest hemp reusable bag out there, it used oil. And using oil causes oil spills. There is NO WAY AROUND IT. None. Don’t want oil spills? End the use of oil. Period. It belongs in the ground. It was there for a reason in the first place.

Sadly, people are delusional. I was having a conversation just the other night with two very intelligent young men- who were still arguing that it’s ok, we’ll find a technical fix long before oil runs out. But this is not the case, because we simply don’t have the time. Time’s up. Time to make a change. Time to end dependence not just on foreign oil, but on all oil. NOW. Because if you think this oil spill is a disaster, wait until you see what happens where there is simply no oil left- when people start starving to death because there are no more oil based fertilizers to make crops grow, when there are no more trucks to transport food, when suddenly oil is so scarce that our entire economy collapses under the increased price of literally everything- because that’s where we’re headed, people. There’s no way out. Not so long as we allow the status quo to remain.

Not so long as we ignore the fact that the US government is more interested in appeasing lobbyists than in the future health and safety of the entire US population.

One last note from the news, and the only person in the news I’ve actually agreed with: "That's what's sad about this opportunity," says Lisa Margonelli of the New America Foundation. "We're going to expend a lot of energy towards these moratoriums when we could be addressing the underlying problem, which is the oil consumption itself."



Read more...

18 February 2010

Suspicious Statistics

I read an article a while back (The Ubiquitous Matrix of Lies) that brought something to light I had always known but never really thought about. Companies make claims all the time, without any of us really expecting them to mean anything. So often you see billboards that say things like “best beer ever” or “#1 in the US”, which, if you look at the products being advertised, seems very unlikely. But no one is fussed by this, it’s just the way things are. Companies can make all kinds of claims and no one questions them or pays much attention to them.

As I was driving into work this morning, I passed a Waste Management truck. Waste Management does all sorts of things, but mostly they haul trash and other waste away from businesses and towns and that sort of thing. The side of this particular truck said, “Our landfills provide 17,000 acres of wildlife habitat.” Or something very close to that, I was driving rather fast.

Now, this kind of baffled me. Landfills… wildlife habitat?

…

Sorry, that was a pause while I attempted to make sense of that. I looked it up on the Waste Management website (Waste Management Wildlife Habitat Council), and apparently what they mean is that after landfills are full, they cover them over and plant things on top. I’ve seen covered landfills, but usually they just have grass on top, due to the fact that there are vents all over it to let the methane out. The smell is usually pretty horrendous. Sometimes I think they build schools on top and that sort of thing. Apparently now they’re building wildlife habitat, which is all well and good, we could use more wildlife habitat. It’s the landfill bit that’s got me a little perplexed. Somehow it just doesn’t seem like a great idea.

I’m not saying that we shouldn’t use landfills for SOMETHING. And wildlife habitat seems to be a better suggestion than most. I’m glad Waste Management is concerned about wildlife habitat. I’m just suspicious when I see messages purporting that a company is environmentally friendly on the side of a truck hauling trash. Their whole company is founded on hauling waste- they are (to my knowledge) the largest such company in the US. And I, personally, do not believe we should be producing all this waste, no matter how much wildlife habitat we build on top of it. I’d rather have the wildlife habitat intact in the first place, thanks ever so much.

But I suppose it’s technically not Waste Management’s responsibility to reduce the amount of waste produced- all they do is haul it after it’s been created. But, I have to ask, if it’s not their responsibility, whose is it?


Read more...