dagblog - Comments for "Obama's Arctic Hypocrisy"

One exploratory well in the

NCD — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 19:44:39 +0000

In reply to Obama is President of the U.S

One exploratory well in the Chukchi Sea nothing to do with guns or tobacco.

We don't know what 'input' Obama had from the oil industry, we do know they, and the Alaska state gov't, 'declared war' over his decisions on ANWR wilderness/coastal plain and his restrictions in Chukchi Sea.

The basic premise of those

HSG — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 13:31:36 +0000

In reply to Take the showdown with Russia

The basic premise of those defending the President's decision to authorize Shell to drill in the Chukchi Sea and to employ more icebreakers in the Arctic is that we need to respond economically and militarily to the increased Russian presence in the Arctic. It is therefore ironic in the extreme that those same Obama defenders criticize me for calling for an economic and military response to the increased Russian presence in the Arctic.

-----------

I'm moving on from this particular blog unless somebody raises a new line of inquiry or challenge. But - dear friends and foes (metaphorically only of course) - no need to worry, I'll be posting something new soon. Don't forget everything posted here and lots more besides is at www.halginsberg and enjoy your Labor Day weekend!

Obama is President of the U.S

HSG — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 13:21:47 +0000

In reply to I know the site is by the

Obama is President of the U.S. which includes 350 million people and among them the owners and executives of tobacco companies and gun manufacturers. I would greatly prefer that he and Congress especially did not take their preferences into account when making decisions about regulating tobacco and guns. Likewise, decisions about how to slow global warming and preserve the Arctic are probably best made without the input of those whose actions are most responsible for the former and putting at risk the latter.

I don't believe that asking

barefooted — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 05:50:32 +0000

In reply to Barefooted - The snarky tone

I don't believe that asking what you mean by military leverage over other countries constitutes a "gotcha" question. But since you do, it will just have to sit there unanswered.

The issue of the need for icebreakers in the Arctic is not only complicated, but long-term. It's the closest thing to truly unchartered territory that we've seen in decades, and it's wide open. There are eight countries in the Article Council: Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the US - our voice in what happens is but one, but is among the most important for environmental standards. The scientific work alone is unimaginable, as the marine life was until fairly recently underneath layers of ice. "Recent" is relative, of course, and the US is far behind. Do you think Russia is concerned with environmental pollution or undeveloped nations? The BBC reports:

At the beginning of August, Russia renewed its claim for ownership of one million square kilometres of the Arctic shelf; a claim which a few years back saw Moscow make the rather theatrical gesture of planting its flag on the sea bed.
Although other Arctic nations, such as Denmark and Canada, will challenge this through the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the US cannot because President Obama has failed to persuade Congress to sign up.
Law of the Sea Treaty:
Negotiated in the 1970s, and adopted in 1982. The US has yet to sign up.
Designed to establish a comprehensive set of rules governing the oceans.
Calls for technology and wealth transfers from developed to undeveloped nations.
Requires signatories to adopt regulations and laws to control pollution of the marine environment.
Also establishes specific jurisdictional limits on the ocean area that countries may claim, including a 12-mile territorial sea limit and a 200-mile exclusive economic zone limit.

And finally, here's what the White House has to say.

I know the site is by the

NCD — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 04:27:35 +0000

In reply to NCD - here are a few

I know the site is by the energy industry. I said it was a different take. I assume the restriction to one well is correct, as is the $7 billion invested in getting to drill one exploratory well.

Obama is President of the U.S. not the Sierra Club, of which I have been a member for over 20 years. He has other constituencies to consider and we are talking about one well. There are a lot more still operating off Santa Barbara.

Oil companies and revenue are important to the state of Alaska as I pointed out, and Obama has set aside more coast from drilling there than any other President to my knowledge.

Take the showdown with Russia

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:26:29 +0000

In reply to Barefooted - The snarky tone

Take the showdown with Russia over Donbas and Crimea, and expect there's much less we can do about it except encourage Putin to go away through others spheres. Letting Shell drill is a military tactic, not an economic giveaway.

NCD - here are a few

HSG — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 02:04:00 +0000

In reply to Obama has previously

NCD - here are a few sentences from the Sierra Club's Executive Director Michael Brune's response to Obama's decision last month:

President Obama’s decision to grant Shell the final drilling permits goes against science, the will of the people, and common sense.

. . .

To preserve his climate legacy, President Obama must change the course on Arctic drilling set eight years ago by former President George W. Bush, and not perpetuate it. The President should cancel the lease sales scheduled for 2016 and 2017 and remove the possibility of drilling in the Arctic Ocean leases from all energy plans going forward.

Your quote comes from the Houston Chronicle's fuelfix.com which is described by talkingbiznews.com as "an energy industry website".

I find the Sierra Club to be far more credible on this issue than an energy industry website. Do you?

Obama has previously

NCD — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 01:50:41 +0000

In reply to Thanks NCD for your response.

Obama has previously protected the huge Alaskan Bristol Bay watershed from oil and gas drilling, and early this year he declared the Alaskan Arctic National Wildlife Refuge a Wilderness Area, which precludes drilling on the eastern North Slope or in the Brooks Range with or without Congressional approval, see Republicans Declare War, WaPo.

And on the Chukchi Sea drilling a different take than yours:

Obama administration delivers big blow to Shell’s Arctic drilling plans

Posted on June 30, 2015

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration delivered a major blow to Shell’s Arctic drilling plans on Tuesday, by ruling that wildlife protections bar the company from simultaneously boring two wells into the Chukchi Sea this summer.

The decision will force Shell to scale back its hopes of completing two exploratory oil wells in waters north of Alaska this summer and is another setback for the firm that has spent seven years and $7 billion trying to find crude in the Arctic Ocean.

Barefooted - The snarky tone

HSG — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 01:44:00 +0000

In reply to I don't generally pay

Barefooted - The snarky tone you employ in this comment and elsewhere in response to my blogs tells me that you are not interested in a conversation about the costs of drilling and icebreaking in the Arctic and how we can avoid them or, at a minimum, reduce them. Instead, it certainly appears to me that you are looking to undermine my entire argument, and by extension me, with a "gotcha" question. If I am wrong and you are interested in a dialogue in which we agree 1) to respect each other's positions, so long as they are backed with evidence, 2) to listen to counter-arguments, and 3) to be willing to reconsider our positions if the evidence so warrants, I will be happy to respond to your question.

I don't generally pay

barefooted — Sat, 05 Sep 2015 01:13:02 +0000

In reply to The US should not sit back.

I don't generally pay attention when lay people attempt presidential speech writing. Especially when their opinion is placed in blockquotes as though to lend authenticity and substance to something clearly not a quote.

Unlike me, here, quoting you:

Instead, we should leverage our economic and military power to close the theater to all […]

What sort of military leverage do you have in mind regarding Russia, et al, and their Arctic agenda?