…While the Oil Gushes

June 1, 2010

The term “deep water” usually means you’re in trouble and “horizon” is what lies ahead. So the ill-fated drilling rig Deepwater Horizon is aptly named.

Doom has arrived on our shores and our prospects are tacky with tar balls.

The geyser of crude, a mile down in the Gulf of Mexico, exposed America for what it is: bent over a barrel of oil.

bp blame — Cartoon by Nate Beeler – Washington Examiner (click to purchase)

The party that defiantly and happily chanted “drill, baby, drill” at their 2008 convention has been content to obsess about the Joe Sestak job offer story in lieu of drilling, baby, drilling. Why aren’t they defending their bumper sticker? With glee they’ve been chasing the hope something illegal happened in the White House so they can pounce on possible political gain in the middle of the potential loss of our Southern shoreline to sludge. Republicans, with their 30-year menagerie of sound bites railing against government interference with business, have not surprisingly stayed away from direct action on this front. Except for Governor Bobby Jindal, who now publicly wants federal help instead of shaking his fist against the stimulus and then posing in photos handing out those government checks.

That size-of-South-Carolina amorphous blob of crude is the realization of Republican values: no regulations for drilling our way out of an energy crisis. It’s the rainbow connection!

Rand Paul, the new darling of the right-wing, “shrugged” and said accidents happen, and criticized President Obama for being “un-American” for coming down too harshly on BP. Then the old darling of the right-wing, Sarah Palin, whose husband worked for BP for 18 years, didn’t recuse herself from discussing the issue as a paid Fox News contributor because of a potential conflict of interest. Instead she accused Obama of being the one in bed with the oil companies. Which is so ridiculous it’s like Sarah Palin being the person to accuse Obama of being in bed with the oil companies.

Overnight, on Day 39, cable news put up neon graphics that it’s Day 39! Now the press is paying attention. CNN ran stories about how this spill is going to hurt BP’s image as a green company. Because this spill is a PR issue like terminal cancer is a problem with morale.

Suddenly 25 times more oil is coming out of the blown well than BP initially reported. The press needs someone to blame. BP, Transocean and Halliburton get passed up for the government response. There is no response that would have saved the Gulf. But context doesn’t matter. We need a bullhorn moment to broadcast. That’s Obama’s failing: no bullhorn. Bush’s bullhorn was”¦well bull (Osama Bin Laden will die of old age). But we need to see the leader of the free world not being thoughtful ““ we need action. We need Obama to clean off some tar-covered birds! Why isn’t he in a flight suit err wetsuit!? He’s clearly not doing enough!

The oil companies in this snap shot are in arrested development. In the 1930’s some estimated we’d run out of oil in 10 years. Yet here we are. They’ve innovated to find more oil and effectively kept innovation from making them obsolete. It’s a marvel of modern lobbying, marketing and engineering. But are we out on the streets protesting them? No, we’re having a Tea Party about government tyranny.

The BP spill exposed that we’re still commuting in eight cylinder singly occupied vehicles, hopped up on plastic goods and scoffing at high-speed rail projects. Our government is representative ““ we haven’t clamored to get off oil. If anything we’ve threatened to riot for having to pay too much at the pump. Because of our myopic need to not alter our way of life ““ the Deepwater Horizon has altered our way of life. There’s a state-sized slurry of death floating around in the ocean and it’s just the price of doing business.

Calls for more drilling in the wake of the BP Oil Spill are as sound as a junkie shooting up into an abscess.

Louisiana Congressman Charlie Melancon said that these are not just Louisiana’s wetlands but America’s wetlands. And I would add that it’s not just endangered pelicans covered in debilitating oil ““ we all are covered in debilitating oil.

“””“

Tina Dupuy is an award-winning writer, editor and columnist for Cagle Cartoons. Follow Tina on Twitter @TinaDupuy.

Want to run Tina’s column in your publication? Contact Cari Dawson Bartley. E-mail [email protected], (800) 696-7561.

tina dupuy

Comments

14 responses to “…While the Oil Gushes”

Rob

June 1, 2010

For all of you out there in America and across the globe who have fought so hard to tackle the hideous enemy of our planet, namely carbon emissions, that bogus science named "Climate Change" or "Global Warming", here is some really bad news for you to process.

Okay, here's the bombshell. The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, since it first started spewing volcanic ash, it has, to this point, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past twenty five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet. Not only that, this single act of God has added emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.

I know, I know…. (have a group hug)…it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up til midnight to finish your kid's "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, going on vacation to a city park instead of Yosemite, nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs …well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just the past weeks.

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in only one week totally erases every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And, those hundreds of thousands of American jobs you helped move to Asia with expensive emissions demands on businesses… you know, the ones that are creating even more emissions than when they were creating American jobs, well that must seem really worthwhile now.

I'm so sorry. And I do wish that there was some kind of a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud but the fact of the matter is that the brush fire season across the western U.S.A. will start in about two months and those fires will also negate your efforts to reduce carbon emissions in our world for the next two years.

So, grab a Pepsi, give the world a hug, and make it a nice day!

AUTHOR UNKNOWN

Reply
MoIorn

June 1, 2010

Rob, I don't really get what you are trying to say. Half the things on that list make sense purely from a money saving perspective and just because things are hopeless, doesn't mean that we have to give up.

Reply
AUTHOR UNKNOWN

June 2, 2010

Sunsets: priceless.

Forests and pristine landscapes: priceless.

Fresh water, fresh air: priceless.

"Emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions." Estimated by… Exxon? Glen Beck? Sarah Palin? Bozo the Clown?

Crap like this comes a dime a dozen. There's a reason why it's called Spam, and why gutless wonders won't put their names to it.

Reply
hemstead

June 2, 2010

AUTHOR UNKNOWN???

There’s a reason why it’s called Spam, and why gutless wonders won’t put their names to it.

Does that make you a gutless wonder?

And by the way it was Joel Rogers who said that you could basically bring our economy to a halt and not even begin to put a dent in the reversal of green house emmisions. Joel Rogers is head of the apollo alliance a green movement. So no it wasn't Exxon? Glen Beck? Sarah Palin? Bozo the Clown?

Do your research and choose a name next time. And if you meant to do that isn't that like shooting yourself in the foot when you are trying to make a point?

Reply
Stug

June 2, 2010

"it has, to this point, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past twenty five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet."

– How so? Whatever successes we have had in limiting CO2 emissions is that much more not added to the natural CO2 balance in the atmosphere. Same goes for brush fire season. The CO2 emitted by volcanic eruptions and brush fires would have been added anyhow, and a similar equivalent would have been sequestered in the oceans or by plant growth. The same cannot be said for what we add by burning fossil fuels that would have remained sequestered had we not dug them up and burned them.

No, I'm not advocating that we stop burning all fossil fuels immediately, that isn't realistic. But it should reemphasize the fact that we need to continue our efforts to find an energy source that is not a net CO2 producer. Idiotic screeds such as the one Rob's unknown author has put out are akin to saying that since a tornado destroyed a building, we shouldn't build any more. They are defeatist. Essentially saying that "Hey, you didn't achieve your goal on the first try, might as well give up." Well, if those are your conservative Republican values, you can keep them. Not all of America is quite that pathetic.

The rest of the list was equally idiotic:

"the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids" – as opposed to paying $60 to fill your gas tank so you can carry a soccer ball in the back of your SUV, makes sense.

"buying fabric grocery bags" – saves oil, reduces litter, keeps non-biodegradeble material out of landfills.

"sitting up til midnight to finish your kid’s “The Green Revolution” science project – I'm not sure how the author thought this would reduce CO2 emissions, but then, he doesn't seem too bright to begin with.

"throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies" – saves oil, reduces the amount of phosphates and other chemicals introduced to the local environment, reduces your family's exposure to these chemicals.

"using only two squares of toilet paper" – another of those idiotic things that conservatives like to pretend liberals do

"putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir" – saves water, reduces your water bill.

"selling your SUV and speedboat" – nobody who wanted an SUV or speedboat did this, and those who did sell them probably don't regret it as they're saving plenty on fuel and maintenance, so its a moot point.

"going on vacation to a city park instead of Yosemite" – anyone that did this did so because they couldn't afford to go, not to save on CO2 emissions, it's a shame too, everyone should visit our national parks and see what the country looked like before we paved it.

"nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle" – saves oil, saves money, increases physical fitness, reduces CO2 emissions.

"replacing all of your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs" – saves money over the long run.

"all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just the past weeks" – No, all of these things continue to provide the benefits beyond CO2 reduction that they always have, and they still help reduce the amount of CO2 released.

"The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth’s atmosphere in only one week totally erases every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon"

– What does the release of volcanic ash have to do with CO2? As I said, the author doesn't seem too bright. If anything, the ash will help to reduce GW some for a few years. And what is is with the need to pretend that liberals see CO2 as an "evil beast" instead of merely an emission factor that needs to be controlled? It says something about the intelligence level of the audience at which the screed is directed.

C'mon Rob, post the one from the P&G executive again. The one where he admits that he doesn't know anything about Obama and then, instead of correcting his ignorance, he lists 20 or so reasons it scares him. If we can get enough people to read posts like that and the one above, that emphasize how mired the GOP mindset is in fear, ignorance, defeatism and futility, then maybe you'll get Obama elected to another term.

Keep up the good work. 🙂

Reply
geoff

June 2, 2010

hemstead: the "AUTHOR UNKNOWN" was a direct response to some more of Rob's pointless spam.

Never heard of Joel Rogers before, and I don't care if he "said that you could basically bring our economy to a halt and not even begin to put a dent in the reversal of green house emmisions." Germany and Denmark and a whole lot of other countries have been working at reducing greenhouse emissions, their economies don't seem to be doing too badly. I would guess that you either took him out of context or are trying to misinterpret his statment. Just stopping your economy (i.e. "bring it to a halt") isn't going to do much, that's clear. You have to do something like shift away from your present sources of fuel. Instead of throwing your money at Exxon and the Arabs, why not follow the lead of countries like Denmark (there is no Green Party in Denmark because the conservatives there are so conservative) where they figure that investing in technology makes sense.

And if you would bother to read, my question had nothing to do with your Joel Rogers citation, but asking where Rob's anonymous source came up with the idea that “Emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.” Looks like something Cal "just knows" (i.e. pure, unadulterated BS).

Reply
Stug

June 2, 2010

“Emissions to the earth estimated to be 42 times more than can be corrected by the extreme human regulations proposed for annual reductions.” Estimated by… Exxon? Glen Beck? Sarah Palin? Bozo the Clown?

"And by the way it was Joel Rogers who said that you could basically bring our economy to a halt and not even begin to put a dent in the reversal of green house emmisions. Joel Rogers is head of the apollo alliance a green movement. So no it wasn’t Exxon? Glen Beck? Sarah Palin? Bozo the Clown?"

– So your saying that Joel Rogers made the estimate quoted? I doubt it, it seems more likely that Rob's anonymous author made it up out of whole cloth, particularly when considered beside actual facts. The Icelandic volcano was putting out between 150,000 and 300,000 tons of CO2 per day, the European aviation industry puts out about 344,109 tons of CO2 per day the eruption, and the subsequent grounding of the airlines netted a reduction in CO2 emissions of between 40,000 and 200,000 tons of CO2 per day. I found a nice pretty graph with bold colors to make it easy for our conservative posters to understand. (Sorry, couldn't resist.)
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/planes…
Further, according to the USGS, volcanos emit on average, including undersea volcanos, is 145-255 million tons of CO2 per year, compared to emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 30 billion tons. "Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)!"
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php
So, unless Iceland is about to disintegrate in one enormous and sustained eruption, Rob's unknown author is about as credible as "Glen Beck? Sarah Palin? Bozo the Clown?".

Reply
ArtW

June 2, 2010

"Barack Obama took the Republican slogan "drill, baby, drill" as his own today, opening up over 500,000 square miles of US coastal waters to oil and gas exploitation for the first time in over 20 years.

The move, a reversal of Obama's early campaign promise to retain a ban on offshore exploration, appeared aimed at winning support from Republicans in Congress for new laws to tackle global warming." – Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent, Wednesday 31 March 2010

Well . . . at least his timing is impeccable.

Reply
hemstead

June 2, 2010

Geoff and Stug,

I may not be extreme on the whole Global Warming issue, however I have to say that I think it is smart for us to be looking for other practical energy sources besides oil. We need to remove our dependency on the Middle East if only for the fact that it creates "rediculous" politics.

As far as Stug's comment about volcanic ash actually causing a global cooling, I agree. Everything else he mentioned I would adhere to so far as common sense dictates. I like LED light bulbs no matter how much they cost because they last forever and don't have mercury in them. I use the fabric bags when I shop because I can't stand having a ton of plastic bags around that are not useful for even my garbage cans.

I prefer not to see one person, all by themselves in a huge gas guzzling SUV. Give me a volkswagon diesel engine and some bio-diesel fuel and I'll have a much cleaner burning fuel efficient vehicle. We just need to focus on the things that work and quit wasting time in areas that don't make sense.

But this is where my idea of what the government should do is more focussed on incentives and refereeing and not getting into business themselves.

As far as Joel Rogers goes my point was that you do have people on the green side making statements that as much as admit that we could stop all cars, close all energy plants that run on coal, and basically bring our current economy to a complete halt and you wouldn't even begin getting us back down to pre-1990 CO2. Still a paraphrase but closer to what I remember him saying. I am not advocating such drastic measures and also agree with Stug about every little bit done is less "waste" from my standpoint. So, although I am not as overtly concerned about CO2, I am extremely passionate about using the resources we have wisely, and polluting our air and water as little as possible. Let's do something to make it a "practical reality" and I won't object one iota. I've been doing the research for my family personally and will continue to do what I can that makes sense.

Reply
ArtW

June 2, 2010

hemstead: "I like LED light bulbs no matter how much they cost because they last forever and don’t have mercury in them"

I do agree with much of what you wrote. Unfortunately, most people are switching to the, now common, spirally shaped "energy saver" bulbs (CFL) that DO contain Mercury. These bulbs are fine when intact, but emit a fine powder, which when broken contaminates the air with mercury vapor and if it gets on the skin, can allow the poison directly into the body. What happens when these things get tossed into the garbage like traditional bulbs by uneducated (or unconcerned) consumers? These bulbs are supposed to be recycled in specialized centers . . . but do you really think the masses are going to do that? At some point soon, there will be millions of burned out and broken CFL's hitting our landfills.

Reply
Cal

June 2, 2010

Tina Dupuy. The new Queen of the non-sequitur. Since Republicans favor drilling for more oil they are chasing Joe Sestak to find something illegal to hang around the White House’s neck. Or should I say, to “put their boot on the White House’s throat?” Tina may have trouble chewing gum and keyboarding at the same time but it doesn’t mean others can’t multitask.

We still need oil, Tina. We need a LOT of oil. In fact, we need all we can get our hands on. Therefore, “drill, baby drill” is a very valid bumper-sticker slogan to express that need. As I asked Susan in another thread yesterday, “Are you suggesting we stop or curtail drilling to avoid ever having another ecological disaster? Have you ever considered your quality of life without oil?” You have a lot to say about this one well and how Republicans are somehow either directly at fault or at a minimum closely tied to it but you aren’t addressing the implications of what you’re saying. It’s another in a never-ending series of rants about Republicans which does nothing to address the critical importance of how to stop the leak, the critical role oil plays in our lives, or what to do until we have effective alternatives to take its place. But you do have whining and finger pointing down to a fine art even if your expository writing skills leave much to be desired. But hey, some leftwing kook site like FishBowlLA hired you and other leftwing kooks have given you awards for your leftwing rants. I guess that makes you as well qualified to opine on this subject as any other. It sure hasn’t stopped you from running your mouth on everything else you understand equally “well.”

I’m biting my tongue on oil and women’s makeup. Biting hard…

Common sense on energy and global warming from hemstead. Nice! Use our resources wisely but stop "freaking out" over CO2 emissions. Well said.

Reply
Cal

June 2, 2010

Rob. Excellent article. The point is crystal clear. For those who’ve made “going Green” a quasi-religion, their prophet just died. It’s all been an exercise in futility. If MoIorn was right, no one would be worried about “going Green.” We’d just be recycling to save money, etc. But for many on the Left this is almost a spiritual endeavor and they truly believe by putting in bamboo floors and using recycled tile (no matter how much more it costs) they’re “doing their part to save the planet.”

I’m all for picking up litter, recycling, and keeping our air and water fresh and clean. But the idea that cutting US emissions by 17% (we’ve already reached 12% w/o any draconian regulations) is going to do anything is ridiculous. In fact, if the warmers are right, a couple more big volcanoes outta just about do us in as a species. Speaking of alarms, when is the ten-fifteen years to stop global warming up? Is it already too late? I know it’s hot in Florida. Okay, it’s hot in Florida EVERY summer but still…

Nice to see AUTHOR UNKNOWN do exactly what he accused you of doing. Gutless wonder indeed.

Reply
Murray

June 7, 2010

If I read Rob's point correctly, he is not trying to say we shouldn't do little things to reduce carbon just because there are bigger sources, as much as he is pointing out that as far as we know, this whole global warming thing is about nature, and not about us, no matter how much we may puff up our impact on the planet.

When Lief Erikson, that Viking explorer who reached America in about 1000AD, got to what is now Nova Scotia, he found grapes. It was then much more mild there than it is today. Shortly after his trip an 800 year mini-iceage started (incidently wiping out the fledging norse settlements in Greenland). What was that warm period due to? Too many cooking fires?

I also happen to be all for getting rid of our dependancy on foreign oil, and for finding long-term solutions for oil, period, since no matter how much of it we discover it is ultimately a finite energy source. Fact is we have a lot of oil in our own country, including new, large fields recently discovered in North Dakota, not to mention the Alaska fields that have been sitting vacant for years. But Nooooooo we can't touch them, thanks, in no small part, to the efforts of people like Tina. I wonder if she would really like to go back in time 500 years, before the industrial revolution, and live like that, when her lifespan would not have much exceeded 40, and she would have been too busy working constantly just to eat, clean, etc to have to worry about such philosophical issues.

Reply
Cal

June 8, 2010

Murray. I chuckle when I read liberals say conservatives want to take us back to the 18th century because we want a return to reverence for the constitution and traditional values. And yet when they wail about the evils of oil all I can see is AlGorithm living in a mud hut rather than his new mansion, flying around on his private jet, using more electricity than 20 homes, and enjoying all the conveniences of modern life. He’d be suicidal if he had to live w/o products that use oil. Most of life’s best things are directly or indirectly tied to oil. The condemnation of corporations and “big oil/big pharma” etc., are so illogical and irrational as defy description. These products have given us a standard of living never dreamed of by the richest kings in history! Our “poor” live better than many of these nobles lived even 200 years ago and to listen to them you’d think they were evil to the core!

Let’s have a calm, rational discussion about developing a plan to transition to alternatives by say 2030 or 2050. In the meantime, let’s drill everywhere we can as safely as we can. Let’s maximize nuclear and natural gas. Let’s focus on a clean landscape with fresh air and clean water. And let’s move away from ideological schemes like cap and trade to punish one type of business in order to promote another. Let’s _improve_ our standard of living and quality of life, not decrease it out of some sense of hand-wringing guilt over being Americans blessed with a great way of life.

Today is my last day of the school year. I’m not sure how often I’ll be here but I’ll try and drop in when I can.

Reply