Cleaning up after "environmentalists..."

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Because they can't or won't clean up their own mess

Shell oil forked over the cash to repair environmental damage that "environmentalist" protesters did to the environment. They're so concerned about the environment that they destroy it.

For further irony, these people were using all sorts of products derived from petroleum in their protest of an oil rig.

Yeah. I don't get it, either.

 

[Avid]

The reason is that they do not really care so much about the environment as they wish you to believe. It was these very people, when they were kids, that threw that McDonald's bag out the window of the car, and it rolled over Iron Eyes Cody's feet.

(Point of trivia: "Iron Eyes" Cody was actually Espera DiCorti, born to Italian immigrants in Louisiana - 1904. The second generation Italian may have done as well playing mafioso characters, but had this persona instead - try picturing him in a double-breasted, pinstriped suit... See?)

http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/ironeyes.asp

 

[iluvatar5150]

Because they can't or won't clean up their own mess

Shell oil forked over the cash to repair environmental damage that "environmentalist" protesters did to the environment. They're so concerned about the environment that they destroy it.

For further irony, these people were using all sorts of products derived from petroleum in their protest of an oil rig.

Yeah. I don't get it, either.

Not that I have any love for most environmental protesters, but your argument is pretty weak. "The damage to the park was minimal," and watching the video, I'd guess it to be no more extensive than the damage caused by mowing your grass or chopping down some shrubs in your yard.

 

[brewmama]

They (environmentalists), certainly have a lot to answer for. They got rid of asbestos in buildings which would save untold number of lives, (including in the World Trade Towers,) they got DDT banned (on false premises), which sentences countless people to death from malaria and other diseases, they fought against improving and repairing the levees in New Orleans, they restrict the water available in forest fires, etc, etc.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Not that I have any love for most environmental protesters, but your argument is pretty weak. "The damage to the park was minimal," and watching the video, I'd guess it to be no more extensive than the damage caused by mowing your grass or chopping down some shrubs in your yard.

It was so "minimal" that they didn't have the resource to clean it up.

Then there's the fact that they're protesting an oil rig in plastic kayaks wearing nylon life vests.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It was so "minimal" that they didn't have the resource to clean it up.

Just because they didn't have the money to clean up their litter doesn't mean their litter did any real damage. IIRC, the story said the cleanup costs were something like $10,000. For a commercial diving and excavation operation, that's chump change.

Then there's the fact that they're protesting an oil rig in plastic kayaks wearing nylon life vests.

I didn't say the protesters weren't stupid. But the production of plastic only accounts for about 4% of global oil consumption and in the US, crude oil isn't used for manufacturing plastics at all.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

Just because they didn't have the money to clean up their litter doesn't mean their litter did any real damage. IIRC, the story said the cleanup costs were something like $10,000. For a commercial diving and excavation operation, that's chump change.

Well, they still should have paid to clean it up. Why should they get a free pass on cleaning up their mess? Just because

I didn't say the protesters weren't stupid. But the production of plastic only accounts for about 4% of global oil consumption and in the US, crude oil isn't used for manufacturing plastics at all.

They are also wearing nylon vests. And kayaks are probably made from polyethylene which comes from things that these rigs dig up.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Well, they still should have paid to clean it up. Why should they get a free pass on cleaning up their mess? Just because

By talking about how little it cost, I didn't mean to imply that Shell should've been responsible for that cost. I was merely trying to highlight how little there probably was to actually clean up. I would have had no problem with making the protesters clean up their mess. My guess is that it was just easier and cheaper for Shell to buy a little bit of goodwill by offering to take care of it than it would've been for them to point the finger at the protesters. From a marketing/PR perspective, $10,000 for a gesture that tells people, "See, we're not really that bad" is probably a no-brainer.

They are also wearing nylon vests. And kayaks are probably made from polyethylene which comes from things that these rigs dig up.

I know. My point was that the plastic-product argument is a red herring, because very little of the oil that's produced actually goes towards making plastic products. You can be against expanding drilling and still be ok with the production of plastic products.

Additionally, from what I can find, the protesters were more concerned about where this rig would be drilling, rather than the fact that it was drilling at all.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wi...ers-stop-shell-oil-drill-rig-seattle-31773661

 

[DaisyDay]

They (environmentalists), certainly have a lot to answer for. They got rid of asbestos in buildings which would save untold number of lives, (including in the World Trade Towers,) ...

Wait, what? The World Trade Towers were built with asbestos back in the 60s (finished in 1970).

When the Twin Towers collapsed to the ground on September 11, 2001, a massive cloud of smoke, dust and debris released these hazardous asbestos fibers and other toxic substances into the air. Asbestos fireproofing materials from 20 stories of the towers came showering down on New York City. According to reports from the EPA, the implosion from the towers "pulverized asbestos to ultra-fine particles."

The World Trade Center Health Registry estimates about 410,000 people were exposed to a host of toxins including asbestos during the rescue, recovery and clean-up efforts that followed 9/11. People most affected by asbestos at Ground Zero were people assigned to rescue survivors. These workers were among the first on the scene and the last to leave the wreckage. Search and rescue workers and others responsible for cleaning up the debris in the months after the towers collapsed were also exposed to asbestos.
Source

they got DDT banned (on false premises), which sentences countless people to death from malaria and other diseases,

What were the false premises?

...they fought against improving and repairing the levees in New Orleans,

They fought against one particular plan. The US Army Corp plan was flawed.

The Army Corps requires floodwalls to be designed 30 percent stronger than they need to be to hold back the water. And the design documents show the Corps calculated that would be true for the wall as a whole. But Bea says for this section of wall, the weak soil layer meant the margin would have been zero....

...Two engineers — Billy Prochaska and Louis Capozzoli — with "Team Louisiana," a separate investigation funded by the state, agree and say the wall was destined to fail. Gordon Boutwell, an engineer with Soil Testing Engineers Inc., who works in the New Orleans area, also concurs.
Source

...they restrict the water available in forest fires, etc, etc.

Cite?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

By talking about how little it cost, I didn't mean to imply that Shell should've been responsible for that cost. I was merely trying to highlight how little there probably was to actually clean up. I would have had no problem with making the protesters clean up their mess. My guess is that it was just easier and cheaper for Shell to buy a little bit of goodwill by offering to take care of it than it would've been for them to point the finger at the protesters. From a marketing/PR perspective, $10,000 for a gesture that tells people, "See, we're not really that bad" is probably a no-brainer.

After reading this I am fully on the side of Shell Oil. DRILL BABY, DRILL!

 

[brewmama]

Wait, what? The World Trade Towers were built with asbestos back in the 60s (finished in 1970).



What were the false premises?

They fought against one particular plan. The US Army Corp plan was flawed.

Hmm, who is right?

https://cei.org/op-eds-and-articles...ht-have-prevented-world-trade-center-collapse

 

[abdAlSalam]

http://blog.ucsusa.org/who-is-respo...-producers-of-industrial-carbon-emissions-314

Yet another case of reactionary false equivalency!

The truth of the matter is that individual consumption is a complete red herring. The environmental degredation caused by these climate protestors is negligible in comparison to the system that they are fighting against. One might as well chastise abolitionists for wearing cotton shirts!

 

[Armoured]

They (environmentalists), certainly have a lot to answer for. They got rid of asbestos in buildings which would save untold number of lives, (including in the World Trade Towers,) they got DDT banned (on false premises), which sentences countless people to death from malaria and other diseases, they fought against improving and repairing the levees in New Orleans, they restrict the water available in forest fires, etc, etc.

Asbestos in the WTC would have saved lives? Do go on.

 

[DaisyDay]

Hmm, who is right?

https://cei.org/op-eds-and-articles...ht-have-prevented-world-trade-center-collapse

The scientists or the conspiracy theorists? Oh, that's a tough one!

 

[brewmama]

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=354

The scientists or the conspiracy theorists? Oh, that's a tough one!

So my link quotes NIST, and yours quotes, well nobody. Ok, I'll go with the scientists too, which proves me right.

 

[Panzerkamfwagen]

http://blog.ucsusa.org/who-is-respo...-producers-of-industrial-carbon-emissions-314

Yet another case of reactionary false equivalency!

The truth of the matter is that individual consumption is a complete red herring. The environmental degredation caused by these climate protestors is negligible in comparison to the system that they are fighting against. One might as well chastise abolitionists for wearing cotton shirts!

There is the whole matter that their protest didn't make any difference, aside from people mocking them.