E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSLONDON -- Energy companies should not drill for crude oil in Arctic waters because the environmental risks are too high, Total SA Chief Executive Officer Christophe de Margerie told the Financial Times on Wednesday.
The newspaper, which operated behind a pay wall, described de Margerie's comments as the first time a major oil company has publicly criticized offshore exploration in the Arctic.
The risk of an oil spill in such an environmentally sensitive area was simply too high, according to de Margerie.
"Oil on Greenland would be a disaster. A leak would do too much damage to the image of the company," he said.
Earlier this month, Gazprom OAO delayed the start of oil production at its Prirazlomnoye field, the first Russian Arctic offshore oil deposit to be developed, due to safety concerns.
A report from the National Snow and Ice Data Center shows the Arctic's melting ice is resulting in the lowest sea ice levels since satellites started tracking the measurements in 1979. NBC's Brian Williams reports.
The Arctic is seen as a key source in the next decade for Russia, the world's largest oil producer.
Plans to drill for crude in the Arctic have raised concerns among environmental activists, who launched protests last month at the offshore platform that operates the Gazprom project.
Shell admits Arctic drilling defeat, for now
Earlier this month Royal Dutch Shell PLC had to abandon hope of drilling into oil reservoirs in the Chukchi Sea off Alaska after its containment dome was damaged during tests.
Environmentalists pointed to those setbacks as more evidence that offshore drilling in the Arctic is too risky.
Sen. Mark Begich, (D-AK), discusses what a delay in Arctic drilling means for the future of oil prices and exploration in the U.S.
"Letting Shell do top-hole drilling and other preparatory activities when they are clearly not ready to respond to an oil spill is like telling a drunk driver that as long as he stays off the freeway everything should be OK," said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska director of the Center for Biological Diversity, after Shell won approval to carry out additional preliminary drilling off Alaska -- this time in the Beaufort Sea.
More environment news on NBCNews.com
The remoteness, the extreme cold and the threat from ice floes crushing equipment pile more costs on top of those imposed by restrictions on drilling during hunting and breeding seasons and requirements for expensive emergency equipment to be on standby.
And industry executives acknowledge that the economics of Arctic exploration is also shaky.
NYT: China joins nations seeking treasure in warming Arctic
Nevertheless, Shell and other international oil and gas companies are moving into the Arctic because of increasing resource nationalism and dwindling production in their traditional heartlands of the Middle East, South America, the United States, the North Sea and elsewhere.
Persistently high oil prices are also making the huge engineering challenges of working in such a hostile environment look more worthwhile. In addition, the climate change that burning hydrocarbons contributes to has pushed back the ice, opening up access to, and markets for, the hydrocarbons there.
Arctic sea ice reaches new low, shattering record set 3 weeks earlier
The prize of success could be huge. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that some 30 percent of the world's undiscovered natural gas and 13 percent of its oil is waiting to be exploited in the Arctic.
Reuters contributed to this report.
More world stories from NBC News:
- Libya leader to NBC: Film had 'nothing to do with' US Consulate attack
- China brings 1st aircraft carrier into service, joining 9-nation club
- Two baby gorillas rescued in Congo; escalation of smuggling feared
- Taiwanese ships clash with Japanese coast guard over disputed islands
- Robbers try to blow up ATM, but blow up entire bank instead
- Class wars: 'Gate-gate' scandal swamps UK PM
- Religious pilgrimages: a multi-billion dollar industry
- Ancient land of 'Beringia' gets protection from US, Russia
- Stay informed: Sign up for our newsletter
Follow World News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Oil is like sex. You can never get enough of it.
Drill baby drill until you kill planet Earth and all the people and animals too.
Along with all of our other mineral/ore resources, etc. We have become a very greedy world of people.
Drilling for oil in the arctic is pure insanity. There WILL be a major spill disaster, it is only a matter of time. It is simply not possible to design drilling equipment of any materials yet invented or any current metallurgical alloys which will endure the rigors of that extreme cold without something breaking. It is just physics.
And when the disaster happens, man will not be able to work in that cold to clean it up. It was difficult enough to partially clean up the Gulf oil spill (only about 1%-2% of the oil spilled into the Gulf was actually cleaned up), and that was in a tropical climate and warm water. Drilling in the arctic? Absolute, unadulterated insanity! The people of the world will come to regret the decision to drill there.
Oil is like sex. It is only dirty if it's done right.
We do not have the capability to destroy the planet .... only ourselves.
Something new for the right to blame on Obama. The GOP won't like this... Since when have they been concerned about the environment. If there's oil there, drill baby drill.
Drill baby drill? You are in direct conflict with the oil companies that are saying, "No, don't drill baby!"
It'sAboutTime...you sound like a cry baby. For 3 years all we heard was everything was Bush's fault or the economy Obama inherited's fault. Obama, like a true community organizer, took absolutely no responsibility for anything except personally taking out Bin Laden.
Put money first over our planet, humans are the least intellegent species on this planet distructful greedy what other species destroys there home
So now add CEO's of giant oil companies to the list that Republicans will disparage. Just a long list of groups conspiring against Republican ideas: environmentalist, scientists, public workers, the media, union workers, women, gays, minorities...who would have thought an oil giant would added to the list?
hs321
First, your comment is irrelevant to the entire article. However, since it has gone there. For OVER 3 years, the right has ignored the economic climate that was passed along from former President Bush to President Obama. The right blames Obama for the entire deficit (one example) ignoring that President Bush was responsible for 11 trillion. Thats not BLAME, that's fact. There's no crying in politics, although Boehner has it down to science.
As for OBL, I have yet to see one quote from Obama taking credit for it. If A GOP President would have been in office, this would have been on EVERY single re-election ad in the world.
As for this article, the GOP doesn't care about the environment.
What in tarnation is that wimp in the white house doing lettting russsia steal our oil up there? About 150-200 welll placed nuclear devices would teach them russskies a lessson about what it's like to go toe to towe in Nuclear combat.
You are uniquely qualified to speak only for yourself when passing judgment on the intelligence of the human species. I'm wondering if your name implies a certain longing for those days of yesteryear when you could have parlayed your fleeting school days into a passing knowledge of proper English, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.
For your children, your country, and all of humanity....Drill baby Drill!!!!!
Quite true. We only have the demonstrated ability to make it unfit to sustain a great many complex lifeforms and ecosystems.
makes me wonder
Every species on this planet is greedy. Without it, their self interests would not be served, and would perish.
About time maybe you need to wake up and listen to more than the liberal propaganda at the Union hall. Don't worry about the environment and drilling in the Arctic, the Chinese will give you a 1 finger salute. As far as Obama & OBL, that is all that the left has bragged about since he was taken out (if that really happened). Proof you ask? 1 Seal being prosecuted for writing a book at may expose the Obama lies, just like what is happening now with the embassy attacks on 9-11 & 9-12.
I don't care what Obama has or hasn't done, the negative is that he has no respect for this country. What was the 1st thing he did in office? He took down the American flag and replace it with his own, called his cabinet Czars
Oh look! Hydrocarbons made available by the hydrocarbons we've already used. If we use more, will that reveal more? Let's see!
Sorta like winning a jackpot at a casino slot machine and then pouring it all back into the machine to try and win more. Greed just takes over.
These sites cannot utilize traditional drilling methods. It all has to be done under the sea ice. An underwater drilling site totally encapsulated would have to be constructed. No oil company has the technology or expertise to construct it.
Oh yes.. everything that happens in Union halls is liberal propganda. Unions have become just as corrupt as corporations with lobbyist in their backpocket. As for the Chinese, they also have laws restricting people to having only 1 child. Last time I checked, this is not China. Although, they do own 1 trillion+ of our debt. We have PLENTY Of sources at our disposals to reduce our dependency of OIL of any kind. Maybe we should invest in those??????
Show me one quote from Obama taking credit for OBL. As my memory recalls, Obama personally called Dubya from situation room to THANK him for what his administration did that lead to the capture of OBL. So if credit must be given, lets start with Clinton, Dubya, Obama, and our seals for the capture of OBL shall we.
Oh yes, Obama lies about everything... Yep, everything and disrespects America.
We are better off letting oil companies drill now. We a better off having a Democrat write the rules for this drilling. You have to understand that this oil will be taken now or in 30 years. And in 30 years who knows how desperate we might be for oil to heat our homes. At least now we can balance the need for oil and the need to take precautions and hold oil companies accountable. But the future is uncertain and oil shortages could make people and government agree to drilling practices that we would never allow in the present.
In just a few years it won't be under the sea ice during the summer.
And now, as Paul Harvey would say, for the rest of the story:
The national debt on 12/31/2000 was 5.66 trillion. That's what Bush inherited from Clinton. The national debt on 12/31/2008 was 10.7 trillion. The difference is 5.04 trillion, which is what Bush added in eight years. The national debt is now 16 trillion, which means Obama has added 5.3 trillion in less than four years, or more than double the rate that Bush added debt. That's not blame. That's facts.
Hey while we are wrecking the environment, maybe we can use Antarctica for farming resources, since obviously sometime in the near future it's going to be a tropical paradise, like Hawaii.
The risk of not drilling is higher... We'll all be dead in 150 years so what shape the planet is in won't impact us.
I call B*LLSH*T
Nobody posting and nobody period, is offering their gas station attendant $2 more per gallon to properly compensate for the gas they put in their car. So this IS NOT POLITICAL.
Republicans conveniently ignore science because, well, 'It makes them more Republican.' Democrats pay attention to the science and then do nothing about it personally. Because, you know, inconvenience. I'm not preaching from a pedastool, because I don't voluntarily pay more either.
Point is, everybody should hope for an environmental disaster from an oil spill as soon as possible. And hope it is as devastating as possible, yet also hope it can be fixed with a lot of work. THEN you'll see a whole sudden interest in paying attention and actually doing something about it.
This is a case where you better give the world cancer, because its the only way they are going to find a way to cure it.
denver bill 2
Obama also inherited the worst economy since the great depression. He inherited two unfunded wars, massive tax cuts that were unfunded, and medicare part D that was unfunded. The bills for all of this were not going to stop coming in just because Bush left office. The American people are going probably going to have to pay for these for the next 20 to 30 years.
And what has he done with it? Bush drove the car into a ditch, and Obama has spent his entire first term sitting in it and spinning the wheels.
What does Shell know - if Palin says drill, we should drill. I got a pipe line I'd like to drill her with :)
Why attack Bush when God gave us Sarah Palin?
I still think Bush was just a bad Acid Trip - I hear that stuff stays in your brain forever.
"Energy companies should not drill for crude oil in Arctic waters because the environmental risks are too high"
And the response from BP, EXXON, SHELL and the others was "...good, more for us, besides... the Russians are going to do it anyway...".
Here's a thought... what do you use for currency when we reach the point that it doesn't matter anymore?
"Energy companies should not drill for crude oil in Arctic waters because the environmental risks are too high, Total SA Chief Executive Officer Christophe de Margerie told the Financial Times on Wednesday."
Gee, I wonder if he's opposed because his company doesn't have any leases in the Arctic? Or perhaps by limiting oil production his company will make more money?
His financial incentive to limit competition makes his comments highly suspect.
J_P_PatchesPal_1 "I still think Bush was just a bad Acid Trip - I hear that stuff stays in your brain forever."
I wonder if Obama's admitted cocaine use is affecting HIS brain?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/BothSidesAllSides/Story?id=2773754&page=1#.UGMbPo1lRT0
More accurate numbers are this
Jan 21st 2001 = 5,728,195,796,181.57
Jan 22nd 2009 = 10,618,718,703,374.78
Sept 24h 2012 = 16,017,841,062,517.08
BUSH = 4,890,522,907,193.21 in 8 yrs
Obama = 5,399,122,359,142.30 in less than 4 yrs
denver bill 2:
We have enough nuclear capability to make this planet unable to recover.
How long is it going to take for the people to "get it". Our political system is broke and in shambles. It doesn't matter who the figure head fed to us on a silver platter by our bettors voted in is; the 1% is in charge of this country, not the people.
I disagree. If we set off every nuclear weapon on the planet today, the earth would still be spinning on its axis and revolving around the sun. Life as we know it might not recover, but something else would take its place. Just ask the dinosaurs. The earth (like The Dude) abides.
Perhaps we don't have the capability to literal destroy the planet (depending on your definition of destroy), but we can sure as hell take a considerable number of species with us.
a honest CEO. thats a first. would get my business anytime but i never heard of them. ill boycott anyone who drills in the artic. we only get one world. we cant afford to keep letting it get destoryed like this.
Debi-1314897--yes, the planet would recover--after all, it eventually recovered from the Permian Extinction..........
Did anyone read the article? It's to difficult to drill there. That's why they don't want to do it. This is not the answer to cheap oil. It will cost more because of the great expense. They also don't want the fines that come with the spills and since there is a high probability of one happening they are adding that to the cost. It's not economical. It's not a matter of 'letting them' drill there - it's more of a 'can they?'.
Yes Lisa C, the Permian Extinction involved 57% of all families and 83% of all genera.
We have never experienced 100% extinction, so who knows if the planet would ever recover.
Jeffrey D Parks : Oil is like sex. You can never get enough of it. Drill baby drill until you kill planet Earth and all the people and animals too.
Go ahead and have sex until your partner is dead. Then we will charge you with ... slaughter.
Obama has done everything FDR did except create work programs but that he has put forth the frame work for bills that got shut down by an obstructionist congress. He has done exactly what has worked in the past.
For those who apparently are unaware-the Alaska pipeline comes from the Arctic where they have been drilling for years. Why would this be any different?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyqYY72PeRM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxMInSfanqg ---gotta love this one SPIN & SPIN
www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEXNM
www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJtm0rnbm10 --- @ 5:32 mins in is epic
Yep its all Bush's fault ***rolls eyes***
What history books have you been reading? Roosevelt was elected in 1932. Everything he did resulted in an economy that sputtered forward until 1937, then slid into a deep recession that was only cured by World War II. Does that mean we can look forward to a deep recession in 2013, and World War III in 2017. Oh boy! I'll have to sit on my hands to keep from clapping.
The difference of the fact is; Accounting. Obama decided to include the Iraq & Afghanistan war spending, the full Pentagon budget and the outsourcing to military contractors on the budget. He then increased war spending by increasing the Afgan war, the anti-terrorist drone attacks and often not reported, increased Covert Missions.
You also need to look at the arithmetical curve to include population increase, wage/cost of living increases and all other inflationary measures. Ending welfare and food stamps, closing down Planned Parenthood is not going to cure America's budget problems.
For those who are commenting about the national debt, we should not take the numbers as a face value. There are more story behind it and we should no the facts before we put a blame to the person. To be clear, Pres. Obama did not rack up the $16 trillion national debt. The national debt is already $10.6 trillion when he came to the office. Today, we have $16 trillion ($16,017,841,062,517.08 as of 9/24/12 to be axact) national debt, that's a difference of $5.40 trillion.
Now, majority of you will blame the Pres. on the $5.40 trillion debt. It is understandable but the question is, did his action alone lead to the $5.40 trillion additional debt? My answer is NO. Do you hear the word "cumulative effect?" There are policies from the previous administrations that continues today without the President control that contribute to this debt.
1. Iraq and Afghanistan War - how many trillion we spend after Pres. Obama took office. Did he created this expenses? NO. Is he supposed to be blamed to amount it added to the national debt?
2. The Bush tax cut - how many trillion of loss revenue this tax cut created? Well, this supposed to create new jobs which in turn balanced off the tax loss from the new stream tax revenue (the famous Republican trickle down effect economics). Is this really work? Look at what happen after that. Now, do we blamed the President for all the loss revenue that cause by this policy?
3. Interest payments - how much the government pays in interest to the $10.6 trillion debt before Pres. Obama took office? If we don't have that debt, we should not be spending that money therefore, we don't need to borrow more money.
Hi Debi-1314897 Good point! And it took a whole lot of millions of years to come back--I don't remember how many millions of years off the top of my head. When people say "Oh the earth is resilient, it will repair itself from whatever we do to it!" (I've heard people actually say that!) I just sweetly but with just a hint of sarcasm say "Yes, after all, it bounced back from the Permian Extinction!" I grieve for what my grandchildren are inheriting--I'm 61, and have 4 grandchildren. Things really do NOT look good at this point.
®¿® A honest oil man? WOW!
Look past the interpretation to the actual words...
Would be a first as a Presidential candidate in the US!!
Honest? Patronizing is more like it. Yeah, real brave of him. He runs a company that, for whatever reason (probably deciding that now is not the time to expend funds on this type of venture, given the current administrations disdain for all things about the oil industry), and criticizes what his competitors are doing. He knows that if he is guessing wrong then his company will be at a bid disadvantage. So, why not sound benevolent and try to win some goodwill from people who want to shut down the entire industry? Yeah, real honest?!
Nah. Didn't harm Exxon or BP and their oil will be polluting the area for decades. There's still oil in Prince William Sound a few inches down, but no one cares anymore.
But hey, don't worry, boys. The Arctic will be ice-free soon and you can drill to your hearts' content. We're all so allergic to even thinking about alternatives, we'll be addicted to oil for a very long time yet! Your companies have a bright future.
Now I KNOW the world is coming to an end. the day an oil CEO actually admits drilling somewhere is too risky?? I didn't think that was possible.
This guy's membership to the right-wingers club has been officially cancelled!
Total isn't an American company.
"A leak would do too much damage to the image of the company," he said. i am guessing that image/profit damage , rates higher in his mind than does environmental damage. however, i do not know him, so maybe i am doing him a disservice. i am influenced by the " use everything NOW, to heck with the future" mindset i see that seems to be prevalent these days.
Wow am sure this guy will be fired soon for telling the Truth.....
Since when is an oil compamy"s CEO worried about risk to the environment?
trust me, within days you will read this guy was fired by his stock holders and will never ever work again if he lives that long
This guy is an Arab and just doesn't want to let the world have access to oil that would free us from the dependence we have on Middle Eastern countries. I think anything would be better than what we have to put up with now, our governments kissing their behinds for oil.
He's French you ignoramus!
No need for name calling, buddy. Just wanted to get a point across.
sammysamples, your "point" was completely valueless, so why would you want to get it anywhere?
pointless is right
Sammy's mind - Anything that isn't the USA is all the same so that explains why he thinks he can just write off calling a frenchman a middle easterner.
I wonder if Sammy has any clue how much oil we "export" onto the world market. He probably thinks that the Keystone pipeline will actually help our oil needs..... Not just transport it to Texas where it can be exported and sold on the the world market via the Gulf of Mexico.
Anyone forward this to Romney yet?
The thing that gets me about these articles is that these so called "experts" only give you their slanted view. I'm sure there are many others on the other side who state the opposite, that it is safe to drill and they did studies that would prove it. Everything we do in this world has a price for and you have to weigh the cost on whether it's a good risk or bad.
It's the oil company experts themselves that are saying it's too dangerous. Look what happens in the Gulf of Mexico whenever a hurricane approaches: they evacuate all the oil platforms until the weather clears. In the Arctic it would be ice that threatens the platforms, and it happens every winter. Even with a warming climate many areas are ice free for less than six months, meaning drilling and production platforms would have to be brought in, set up, operated, and then removed with only a few months of productive activity per year.
Yes... the other experts... like the "experts" that the Tobacco industry paid back in the day to refute that smoking caused lung cancer. We all know how that worked out. But I'm sure that the experts that the oil companies pay big money to will surely be objective and call like it really is right?
What happened to doing things the old fashion way, oil, gas and many other options are not reserve limited if you replenish instead of filling old wells with concrete.
Bottom Line:
Make it happen , make america/world better, God will destroy the world soon anyhow, Vote Romey/Ryan for a better usa/world
" God will destroy the world soon anyhow"
Pardon us if that little gem keeps us from taking anything you post remotely seriously. Just when you think the right has reached the bottom of crazy, someone starts digging.
To 'not-a-troll' You're confused. What God said in Rev. 11:18 was that He would destroy THOSE who destroyed the earth. Personally, I hope that the human race will wake up and start taking care of the earth properly so that He won't have to. To TracyS: "Just when you think the right has reached the bottom of crazy, someone starts digging" I got a good laugh out of that one! I think it applies not only to extreme right, but extreme anything.
Not a Troll is obviously nuts! Anyone who thinks Romney as president would make for a better tommorrow is outta their mind! Or he is just trolling hence the username.
not a troll...but an idiot?
http://now.msn.com/mitt-romney-says-its-a-problem-that-airplane-windows-dont-open#scptmd
Romney is right, you should be able to open the windows on a airplane and for that matter a space ship and a submarine, make it happen-vote romney ryan-we want brains in the white house, not someone who only got a college diploma because of his race(why he wont release his transcripts?)
troll
I hope somebody opens the windows in Romney's private jet.
Not a Troll is typical right wing lunatic... can't even be honest about what he is... a TROLL
What a second, why would a money grubbing oil company discourage drill for more oil????? Oh yeah! More oil means prices would drop!
dm
Well that hasn't worked the last three years. We have produced more oil (while using less) each of the last three years, yet the price goes up.
More oil simply delays the inevitable switch to something else. Wouldn't it be better to start developing alternative energy sources now instead of putting it off until we're in crisis? Waiting that long will cost us far more in the long run.
And yes, we are producing more oil now than in the past decade and I've not seen gas prices go down. Just the opposite. How long until $5 gas is the norm? My guess is about 3-4 yrs.
at the rate things are going... I think 3-4 yrs is a stretch for $5 gas Ag99. Probably more like 1-2 yrs. Greed knows no boundaries or limits
I was just wondering how long until the Chinese figure out it’s cheaper to go
after it for themselves ultimately bypassing the middle man. This about pre-shaping
public opinion! This is about greed and holding onto what they have! They could
give a Sh1t about the environment!
Finally, someone with the guts to tell the truth.
Let's hope it catches on!
Simply solution, let global warming continue at it's present pace thus melting all of the arctic ice. This would allow them unrestricted access to these oil fields.
yeah but then they would have to wait like 2 years
Comprehend what you read people, this has nothing to do with politics, environment, etc. Just business.
" damage to the image of the company " He is not talking of the environment, he is expressing his concerns for the company should an oil spill occur. There is still bad sentiments to Exxon up to this day and to BP on the recent gulf oil spill. Same could happen to the company.
"Environmental risk of drilling in Arctic too high, CEO of oil giant Total says"
... and a 100 mpg gasoline fuel system is not profitable CEO's of oil giants should say.
in 1996.... the window sticker on a new car with 2.2 Liter engine says 23/25 city 27/29 highway.
Guess what, consumer demanded more power, to go faster, demanded a big bad azz vehicle to haul what, ... ATV, boats, home center stuff, that you don't see them hauling during the weekly commute.
Big displacement engine with low MPG was the result. People do not want government oversight but for one, this is where I would have wanted them to be looking at, but somehow fell asleep on the wheel. We have government agencies that keep track of this things. MPG average should be at 60 right now with a modest 2 mpg increase requirement every year if government imposed that demand in 1996 or earlier. Oil production + price is controlled by OPEC then and still now.
We have the technology to make the combustible
engine obsolete. The Oil trade is no different than the diamond trade, it's a
controlled market. Were is the logic in having a car with 700 plus HP. factory built. Then get into the high end cars that have 1000 plus HP. One day, not in my life time, interstate highways will have to be interstate rail systems. We hear it all the time, we need more oil, no, we need fewer cars and a better transportation system. Look up Tesla Model S. it's not about being able to produce electric cars that out preform a gas car, it all about money.
Boromir, no we don't. I am sorry but that is laughable. We have an energy source that will fit inside personal vehicles? That can be easily transported?
When you understand the trickle down theory of technology/ economics, you'll get it. iPhone 5, will be followed by iPhone 6, even if they already have a iPhone 10 in the wings. Backtrack what you think is new today and you will see it's new at all. Everything has to run a course based on profit.
"combustible engine?" I certainly hope they can make that obsolete!!!
People... please do research on what a barrel of oil, about 42 US Gallons, produces so you understand, the price of oil is just a fraction of what drives the market price for gasoline.
We need to build new more efficient refineries so we are not held hostage by refinery operators when a hurricane, a storm, or other natural causes shutdowns a refinery. It is primarily a law of supply and demand and the cost of refining oil.
www.eia.gov
You might try to tell that to actual people who had their lives threatened inventing a better fuel system as to put the market. Try a little Texas history.
Wolf, Please elaborate.
mhr83
http://www.rexresearch.com/ogle/1ogle.htm
One example and quite lengthy.
I worked in the oil exploration industry from 1988-1997 and in fact co-founded an oil field equipment company and co-owned two patents based on our tehnology. The invention mentioned above, Ogle's vapor recirculator was spoken about in very derogatory terms by the engineers I worked with, whom were employed by all the big names from the time (i.e. Texaco is not around any longer) were so afraid that technology such as this would be developed. I sat in meetings with geophysicists where the topic of PEAK OIL was discussed openly and without reservation; however, the bent of the conversations were on how to make sure to maximize profits before that happend. Never were they open to discussing "alternative" fules or energy sources such as solar and wind.
Back on topic; this executive is spot on. The conditions of the arctic as well as this quote from the article basically tell why it is INSANE to do deep sea drilling in the Arctic:
The Russians will be more than happy to drill there, and even happier to sell the oil to us.
I thought we were going to get all the oil from Iraq like Bush said. Wait, we didn't get any?
No, Bush never said a thing about the oil.
You might want to Google that one Rex.
Look at the production contracts to come out of Iraq, it is clear the US never intended to take any oil from Iraq that wasn't bought on the open market.
I recalled Cheney and Rumsfeld said we will be welcomed as liberators and Iraq will somehow offset the cost of war effort.
They will all drill and spill soon enough -- don't worry you deniers and right wingers. That's right, take a deep breath, relax, and thank God for taking care of us.
Fine! So just leave it for the Chinese, Japanese, Russians, and Indians to pump.
I far as I know this area is in the open sea and someone is going to go get it, might as well be us.
That's like saying the Chinese and Africans are going to kill off all the tigers, Elephants and rhinos anyway so we might as well let our American hunters in there to kill them all first.
I want to give this CEO a gold medal for not being blinded by greed and actually giving a S**T about the planet/our future. This is truly a great man with a positive vision. This is a rare moment in which I greatly respect a 1%-er.
This CEO is not worried about the environment, he has just witnessed how much it cost BP for the Gulf oil spill and realizes how much more, given the risks, that a similar spill would cost in the Arctic.
Hey folks....how does THREE TRILLION barrels of oil sound? Right out by Wyoming.....Green River Formation. Larger than all known Saudi reserves!
@xsnake:This "oil" shale has been know about for over 100 years. The problem is, the shale doesn't contain pumpable crude oil, only a waxy substance called kerogen. The amount of energy required to extract and refine kerogen into something useful is greater than what would be gained. It's not economically feasible at this time ($100 a barrel oil). It also would require strip mining vast wilderness areas. That's a much more valuable resource than all the shale below it.