Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Why It's Not OK for Palin to 'Drill Baby, Drill'

By Silja J.A. Talvi, Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Posted December 1, 2008.


Dr. Riki Ott has a special response to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's heavy push for oil drilling in the Arctic.
225book28cover
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

 

Dr. Riki Ott has a special response to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's ardent push for oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

From her hometown in Cordova, Alaska, Ott is sending the former vice presidential nominee a copy of her book, "Not One Drop: Betrayal and Courage in the Wake of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill" (Chelsea Green Publishing, 327 pages, $21.95).

In the same package, Ott will include several rocks from Prince William Sound. Rocks covered with oil. The same oil that bled out of the Exxon Valdez tanker in 1989, gushing its black poison into a pristine Alaskan landscape. Although nearly 20 years have passed since the largest oil spill in U.S. history, there are still at least 55 tons of oil buried in Prince William Sound, but there's a noticeable absence of political sloganeering on this front.

That's why Ott, a marine biologist who earned her doctorate at the University of Washington, has come up with the "Why It's Not OK To Drill, Baby, Drill Tour," celebrating the release of her book. The visionary environmental leader and self-described "fisherm'am" talked to the P-I.

Dr. Riki Ott a marine biologist who earned her doctorate at the University of Washington, is celebrating the release of her book "Not One Drop" with a "Why It's Not OK To Drill, Baby, Drill Tour," and sending a message to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

Silja Talvi: What do people who live around Puget Sound have in common with you who live around Prince William Sound in Alaska?

Ricki Ott: Anybody who lives on such a beautiful shoreline should have the same heart- and soul-level connection to the environment around you. … Up in Cordova, we feel a strong connection to the Puget Sound. … We are very linked as the fishermen, native people, recreational users of water bodies. We are the ones who bear the brunt of these industrial accidents.

Talvi: What were you doing when you first realized that Exxon Valdez had begun to spill into Prince William Sound?

Ott: I had been asked the night before to give a teleconference to the community of Valdez … on the positive and negative effects of the oil industry they depend on for their livelihoods. This was 1989, and (the local government in) Valdez was beginning to realize that an oil spill was possible despite what the corporations said, and that such a spill would be devastating. … I was talking to them on behalf of fishermen, on behalf of people who made a living from the land and the water … (Ott was a leader of Cordova District Fishermen United).

At 9:16 p.m., in the middle of my talk, Exxon Valdez -- fully loaded with 53 million gallons of crude oil -- took off from the tanker terminal. After the talk, I went home … and went to sleep.

By 5:30 a.m., over 10 million gallons had already escaped into the sea. At 7 a.m., Jack (Lamb, the acting president of CDFU), came to my door to tell me we had had "the Big One." We just scrambled into disaster mode.

Talvi: This summer, the U.S. Supreme Court slashed the initial $5 billion that Exxon was to pay to $507 million. How do the oil spill survivors feel about this?

This is a crucial question for our times right now, and not just for us in Cordova and Alaska, but for the world. What is environmentally sound development? We've got to get to the point where our human rights count, our lives count, and our little communities count more than corporate profits. How is it that corporations like Exxon, using our land and labor, are still able to shove injured communities under the carpet and roll right on with their profit-making machine while we're committing suicide, going out of business, watching our fish die, and losing our homes?

You write in Not One Drop that the damage and loss caused by the oil spill was far more toxic than the obvious damage to the environment and the local economy. You write of "invisible losses." Can you elaborate?

The truth is that Cordova gutted itself after the spill, especially after our fish runs collapsed in '92 and '93. The stress manifested itself in all manner of horrible things, including substance abuse, alcohol abuse, domestic abuse, depression, PTSD, isolation, divorce and suicide.

Talvi: Do you feel like you're finally recovering?

Ott: Yes. We've made amazing progress in rebuilding and helping each other. … Also, we, like other people, were duped too long into believing that it's all about making money. … What corporations are doing, the way they're doing it, (trashes) lifestyles, cultures and ecosystems around this planet … (and) we the people can make it stop. We have to believe in that.

<i>AlterNet is making this material available in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107: This article is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.</i>

 


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: oil, anwr, sarah palin, ricki ott, not one drop

Silja J.A. Talvi is an investigative journalist and the author of Women Behind Bars: The Crisis of Women in the U.S. Prison System (Seal Press: 2007). Her work has already appeared in many book anthologies, including It's So You (Seal Press, 2007), Prison Nation (Routledge: 2005), Prison Profiteers (The New Press: 2008), and Body Outlaws (Seal Press: 2004). She is a senior editor at In These Times.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Sarah, the Anti-Christ
Posted by: Blacktiger on Dec 1, 2008 2:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Get rid of her Alaska, she will drag you down with her flip-flop. She cuddles up to the same "witch hunters" that put children into the street!!!! She has no clue how to be a "good christian"!!!! Shame her into the polluted ocean, where her filthy mind is at par with her body.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sarah, the Anti-Christ Posted by: mopar1938
» RE: Sarah, the Anti-Christ Posted by: Blacktiger
» RE: Sarah, the Anti-Christ??? Posted by: harryf200
» Sarah, the Anti-Christ - hardly Posted by: 2thepoint
I hate to say this but you people need to face this reality.
Posted by: maxpayne on Dec 1, 2008 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As long as we're not gonna remove the ban on hemp or put wind and solar first along with repairing our languishing public transportation infrastructure or rewarding conservation, frugality, or even reusing, then drill drill drill is gonna happen whether you like it or not. And if that means destroying the environment, TOUGH ! You did not fight hard for those alternatives and even allowed outlawing good ideas and solutions so you are to blame !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ok, but some clarifications. Posted by: maxpayne
Prince William Sound
Posted by: --dave on Dec 1, 2008 5:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 1973 I had the privilege of kayaking for a month on Prince William Sound and briefly on the Gulf of Alaska. It is impossible for me to describe the majesty and unique beauty of this remarkable place, teeming with life and especially large marine mammals and sea birds. Whales of various species, porpoises, seals, river and sea otters regularly inquisitively approached our kayaks and our campfires on pristine beaches out of curiosity and always in a friendly, almost welcoming manner. The Exxon oil spill, therefore, was dismaying to learn about, heartbreaking to see it not go away decade after decade, and infuriating to see it go unremunerated by the monstrously greedy oil company.

This and similar environmental negligence should be treated as crime against Life, and no less than a treasonous war crime, because it is a war on the environment that sustains us and all Life. While Exxon Valdez most affects the local natives, residents, and the fishermen such as those whom we met and traded hot coffee with for fresh fish and fascinating stories *out on The Sound* who worked 16- hour shifts during the salmon run, we are all hurt by this crime and ultimate judgement that so favors the obscenely profit- grubbing oil company to the detriment of incredibly hard-working local fishermen, other Alaskans, as well as would-be recreational users, like I am, of this now polluted jewel of an environment entrusted to us apparently undeservedly. We can only expect to see more of such wanton criminal destruction as long as we remain and are encouraged to remain addicted to petroleum as an energy source. Ultimately we ourselves are responsible.

Promote alternative energy that does not produce harmful combustion by- products, and save petroleum for such nobler uses as pharmaceuticals and recyclable plastics. Make *record quarterly profits again* oil companies clean every rock on every beach, and restore the populations of mergansers, murrelets, puffins, sea otters, and seals to their previous populations and to the immaculate habitats that have been theirs since long before their futures darkened as Mankind crossed the Bering land bridge some fifteen thousand years ago.

Places such as Prince William Sound can teach us how we are but a small branch of the Tree of Life, and help us learn, in our collective ignorance and apathy, that such places are priceless resources simply to see and experience, and not just exploitable sources of mineral wealth or so many board feet of lumber, or even nets of fish.

It has been observed that the overall reflectivity of the Earth's oceans has changed due to oil spills; such is the scale of their impact. Thanks, Dr. Ott, for your generous and so appropriate gift to Governor Palin (who reads everything in front of her), and for the courage and effort to be a qualified voice for the wilderness, especially for a place close to my heart. As Thoreau stated, In Wildness is the Preservation of the World.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Prince William Sound Posted by: willymack
» RE: Prince William Sound Posted by: --dave
This comment has been removed from the site due to non-compliance with AlterNet's community policies.
honeybell4
Posted by: kmcd on Dec 1, 2008 7:21 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always wanted to go to Alaska -- and planned on a trip in the near future.

After watching and listening to Palin for 2 months -- and reading about their Senator who was convicted of a felony and nearly got elected anyways -- I have no desire to go to that state. Now or ever.

If Palin is the best Alaska has to run their government -- someone who takes over $200 million in earmarks and then doles out $1200 to every Alaskan because she believes in "sharing the wealth from Alaskan oil -- if that isn't socialism, what is? And then has the nerve to call a presidential candidate a "socialist" -- and spew hate such that hate crimes against the Obama escalated after Palin's speeches, according to the CIA. Palin should be sued personally for libel and hate crimes against a presidential candidate.

If Palin represents Alaska -- the people, the communities, the state -- I won't be giving Alaska a single cent.

While we have been building the infrastructure of Alaska for decades and decades through our federal taxes -- and they elect politicians who are scrapping the bottom of the barrel and so willing to decimate the environment and wildlife up there -- I say we should put some economic sanctions on Alaska. Don't take any tours to Alaska, stop buying Alaskan salmon, and/or any products out of Alaska.

Sure -- I bet a lot of Alaskans will say, "Fine with us -- we don't need you!" But remember when Americans stopped buying the Idaho potato? Ouch. And we might be doing you folks a favor in Alaska because the "fake" Alaskans like the Palins might just move on to another state.

When Alaska starts paying more attention and votes in some officials who have some ethics and integrity -- maybe, just maybe the Lower States will give you a fresh look.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Alaska is a welfare state... Posted by: cheryljohns
Why Palin's addicted to oil
Posted by: jgrossnas on Dec 1, 2008 8:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Palin represents just about everything wrong with U.S. politics- she's a soul-less idiot who lacks real ideas except for some religious fundamentalism and succeeds only because she can connect with crowds through phony populism (the way Bush once did).

The reason that she loves oil is because that means a huge flow of money from the big companies. She's short-sighted though so she's clueless about global warming or how this system still makes us beholden to many foreign countries with larger oil supplies (which is something that her running mate did realize). She also forgets recent history, brushing a disaster like Valdez under the rug.

Who needs common sense and practicality when you have a slogan like 'Drill baby drill!'?

Luckily, dropping gas prices have tempered the public's lust to drill more (for now at least) so li'l Sarah's gonna have to come up with something else. What else does she have to latch onto as an issue otherwise? "The Bridge to Nowhere?" Expect to hear more about her being a 'maverick,' mostly from herself and for reasons that don't make any sense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A copy of her book?
Posted by: outlander55 on Dec 1, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ott needn't bother sending a copy of her book to Palin. There are probably no pictures and I am sure that the grammar will be too difficult for Palin to understand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A copy of her book? Posted by: harryf200
Ott and Talvi
Posted by: Baukunin on Dec 1, 2008 8:37 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Talvi's byline is always a welcome sight.

Dr. Ott has been the voice of fishermen in Price William Sound for decades. She shares a unique ability to cut to the core of an issue and to explain complex relationships with a clarity that few other writers and speakers, including such as Helen Caldicott, William Greider, Thomas Frank, Michael Lewis and Naomi Klein, are fortunate to possess.

Talvi has focused on prison issues that share the same poisonous core as do oil production and transport, the perversion of profits over people.

The persistence of oil in an ocean environment is simply astounding. When analyses of sea floor oil pollution was done after the Exxon spill, a chemical signature was discovered that showed oil released from a Valdez tank farm during the 1964 Prince William Sound earthquake was still damaging the fishery ecosystem.

Late in the presidential campaign, McCain seized on an issue which he had always opposed, OCS drilling. Much of the U.S. public, reeling under previously unexperienced gas price escalation, joined him the chant of "Drill, Baby Drill!" Essentially every bit of industry sloganeering he parroted was untrue. They said we had no spills associated with Katrina when there were over 700 spills from pipelines and holding facilities. They said there were no major spills affecting the U.S. after the Santa Barbara spill 40 years ago, when the blowout of Ixtoc I in the Gulf befouled the Texas coastline with almost 40 times the discharge of the Exxon Valdez. They claimed OCS oil would be a solution to escalating gasoline prices when the expansion of such drilling would not have an effect for at minimum a decade. McCain kept shortening the time frame involved to get such production on line until he was alleging to rabid crowds that it would be only months before such a environmentally dangerous policy would relieve pump prices. In truth, only a tiny fraction of U.S. consumption requirements could possibly met by such exploitation.

Palin is equally as dangerous as is the industry. She regularly lies about the certain impact of ANWR petroleum extraction. Fostering offshore drilling in the Arctic for which industry lobbies will endanger the entire ecosystem of the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas.

We need desperately to aggressively protect our environment. Hopefully voices of activists such as Ott will reach the public and provide the vision needed to approach that goal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why it's not ok
Posted by: EinMD on Dec 1, 2008 10:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Put aside environmental concerns for a second. It bugs me, but lets talk brass tax.

The reason why it's not ok because it's not a solution - it's a wasted effort.

Why is this even an issue? Because gasoline cost $4 a gallon during the summer. Unfortunately most of the people out there don't even understand why because they are willfully ignorant.

The fact is we can drill all we want but unless you conservative wing nuts want to pay to have a refinery put in your own back yard it's not going to do anything. Not in the short term. Not in the long term.

Up until gas was $4 a gallon we used about 20 million barrels a day. At maximum capacity, we are able to refine 17 million a day. The average new refinery costs about $10 billion and takes about 5-7 years to make. We'd need six of the largest refineries in the United States just to catch up with our demand as of last summer - seven of them if you factor in what demand WILL BE by the time they are built. You know damn well that Exxon isn't going to pay for it. So that leaves you and your tax money and do you think that added cost is going to raise or lower the cost of gas?

Even if we were to drill in all available areas in the country the US Department of Energy Information says that the increased supply would only change the price of gasoline by a nickel...in fifteen years.

and in the mean time, that extra oil's gotta be refined somewhere. Since we can't do it here, we'll have to ship it to some country that can do it for us. Do you think that extra expense is going to raise or lower gas?

Now, after all that do you honestly think that Exxon is going to sacrifice the $1500 a second they were making last year? Do you honestly think that the oil industry is going to spend spend seventy billion dollars building refineries to make their gasoline cost LESS and reduce their overall profit margin? If so, you're obviously a idiot.

In short, all you proponents of this bullshit 'drill baby drill' meme are morons. You're too caught up in your own party's talking points to actually do any research on the topic. You just keep waiving your 'country first' signs and cheering for those crooks you keep putting in office. But if you really loved this nation you'd start doing the research to find out WHY gasoline prices skyrocketed over the last five years and then dipped down to nothing right before the election.

But you won't do that. Because you neo-con whackadoons don't give a damn about facts. You never have.

Best of luck to you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why it's not ok Posted by: Blacktiger
» RE: Why it's not ok Posted by: jareilly
» RE: Why it's not ok Posted by: violawall
» RE: Why it's not ok Posted by: EinMD
The polar bear is as good as extinct already. And the Arctic Ocean is loaded with dioxins.
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Dec 1, 2008 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And the other megafauna in ANWR likewise, due to global warming that is
already "in the pipeline."

Those polar animals need a polar climate to survive. In particular, the polar bear
needs an ice covered ocean from which to hunt. The arctic sea ice could be
completely gone by 2015. The seals hunted by polar bears could go through a
population explosion then crash without the polar bears. The seals could go
extinct when they eat up all of their food because, without the bears, there will be
too many seals. There are already fewer polar bears.

The melting of sea ice that has already happened means that there is less ice to
reflect sunlight back into space. Open water absorbs much more sunlight than ice.
That is one of those natural threshholds [tipping points] that we have already
crossed in our rampant destruction of the environment and climate. We cannot
undo the damage now. Sea ice will keep on melting.

Because of global warming, it doesn't really matter to the polar creatures any more
whether we drill in ANWR or not. Because our need for oil is so great, ANWR
doesn't matter to the price of gasoline either. ANWR is a moot subject, no longer
interesting. You should quit caring what happens there because it is all over but
the funeral. There is a much more pressing problem: Will the HUMANS survive
or go extinct because of global warming?

Read:
summary of Six Degrees

'Six steps to hell' - summary of Six Degrees as published in the Guardian
23 April 07:

6ºC ....shortened... end of the Permian period, 251 million years ago. By the end
of this calamity, up to 95% of species were extinct. The end-Permian wipeout is
the nearest this planet has ever come to becoming just another lifeless rock drifting
through space. ....shortened... most of the world’s plant cover was removed in a
catastrophic bout of soil erosion. Rocks also show a “fungal spike” as plants and
animals rotted in situ. Still more corpses were washed into the oceans, helping to
turn them stagnant and anoxic. ....shortened...

One scientific paper investigating “kill mechanisms” during the end-Permian
suggests that methane hydrate explosions “could destroy terrestrial life almost
entirely”. Acting much like today’s fuel-air explosives (or “vacuum bombs”),
major oceanic methane eruptions could release energy equivalent to 10,000 times
the world’s stockpile of nuclear weapons.

Whatever happened back then to wipe out 95% of life on Earth ....shortened... If
they tell us one thing above all, it is this: that we mess with the climatic thermostat
of this planet at our extreme – and growing – peril.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alaskan oil and global warming
Posted by: PaulK on Dec 1, 2008 11:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Alaskan oil and natural gas adds carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in two ways. First, carbon gets burned. Second, there's a high extraction cost.

Palin and crew will have to expend $45 billion to build their new natural gas pipeline. That's $45 billion in gasoline to drive the construction vehicles, and in petroleum energy to build the construction vehicles and the pipes.

And then something could go wrong. A million gallons of oil could leak out of the North Slope and into the Arctic Ocean, where the sheen would turn the ocean surface into a giant heat-absorbing surface in summer. Not a good idea.

We need to get into the habit of saying, "Sign a treaty, leave the carbon in the ground. We'll be all right without it, we'll just do something else to generate energy."

(no, not nukes. They have an enormous energy cost over their life cycle, but they have such big subsidies that it's still profitable.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hangups
Posted by: willymack on Dec 1, 2008 12:10 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We're hung up on ideas and concepts we should've outgrown a long time ago. A few of them include our imaginary superbeing in the sky, to whom we pray and use as an excuse for foul deeds, the notion that some people are "better" than others, therefore entitled to more of Earth's bounty, and are to be accorded special priviliges and immunity to the Law of the Land, the inevitability of population increase, and the fact that we should go on consuming oil and other combustibles in a reckless fashion, heedless of overwhelming evidence that doing so will almost certainly lead to a global tragedy. Better education and better THINKING are what's called for, folks, not more of the same.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Doh!
Posted by: FreeAmerica on Dec 1, 2008 12:22 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So let me get this straight. You hate Palin, but you are using her and her name to sell your book? Weak dude. That is severely lame.

I also have to question why you live on the sound with an obvious impact both through your habitation and fishing, but advocate that no one else should exploit natural resources? hipo-what?

I will assume by the presence of your book that you have given up gasoline and other fossil fuel, plastics, lotions, pharmaceuticals and all of the other ways that oil has made our life better that it was in 1800. If not, you would be a money grubbing hypocrite trying to make a buck off of palin's name. Again, weak dude.

More to the point, oil naturally occurs in our oceans. It seeps through cracks and is ever present. Certainly man needs to be careful, and obviously they are. You have to reach back to 1975 to make your point.

What global warming, what crisis? Even the UN and NASA are acknowledging that we are in a cooling period. Maybe Mother Jones missed that. It started like 6 years ago.

When talking about climate change you should look into the Younger-Dryas Stadial. Now THERE is global warming.

For you climate experts that never heard of it, the temps spiked up and down almost 10C in about 45 years at the end of our last glacial period. There were no evil SUVs, gasoline, or other paper evils that y'all harp about. It happened. Look it up.

Since almost every species on the planet today is over 10,000 years old, they had to survive that, methane burps and all. What catastrophe?

As far as fossil fuel use, lead by example. We can cut gasoline consumption by 50% by just not selling it to democrats that don't want the stuff anyway. Once they see the 1800s lifestyle isn't so romantic as it looked from the outside, they will gladly start the volvo back up and turn on the heater.

Good luck with your foolish book. Hopefully palin makes you rich like the "obscenely profit- grubbing oil company". That is the point, right?

Think before you do people!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Doh! Posted by: violawall
» RE: Doh! Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Doh! Posted by: Obi_DonKenobi
» RE: Doh! Posted by: Obi_DonKenobi
» RE: Doh! Posted by: Obi_DonKenobi
Sarah Palin's Reality????
Posted by: Blacktiger on Dec 1, 2008 3:12 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Republicans of the USA,should be ashamed of the present bad examples, and distance themselves very far away from them including Sarah Palin. Her reality is turning Alaska into the refugee capital for "rapturers" and those left behind!!! Give me a break!!!As for your SUV's do you know where they are mostly made??? Do you know that when you buy one you are responsible for the Big Oil Companies run on your special places? Do you even know what special places of which I speak??? Alaska's North Slope and offshore, both of which are sensitive ecological areas. Then there is the North Dakota, Montana, Utah, areas also very sensitive. Don't rale at me when I tell you the truth you will not see, look to your own selves. I have no car, don't want nor need one. My heat is water, my hydro is powered by water. So if you all want to impress me about Republicans, follow in the steps of Dr. Ron Paul, but you would be better off to stand strongly behind the President Elect and support him in all he strives to repair before he can even start to make changes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Stupid projections about whether climate change is human caused or not
Posted by: watergrl69 on Dec 2, 2008 7:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Science has already proven that the planet is warming. No one knows exactly what the future holds. But we do know this: the burning of petroleum releases huge amounts of CO2 into the atomosphere, along with a basketful of other toxic chemicals. The health of our planet and its inhabitants has been severely compromised since the Industrial Age, as more and more virulent chemical cocktails are released into our freshwater, oceans, and atmosphere.

Gasoline is poison, so are plastics. So, why wouldn't we want to change our way of living, regardless of whether we are the cause of the earth's warming? Why wouldn't we want clean energy? Why should we settle for chemicalized crappy-tasting food and water, birth defects and learning disabilities in our children, and polluting industries in our midst?

Arguing about climate change and global warming is a waste of time. We should be focusing on protecting open space, public lands, our lakes and oceans, and creating alternative energy systems BECAUSE we care about our quality of life, and the beauty and diversity of Planet Earth.

People, Riki Ott did not write this book for Sarah Palin--she wrote it for you. She lives at the edge of Prince William Sound because it is a clean, safe place on earth. And it needs protection because, like all places of natural beauty and abundance, this place is threatened by development. Riki (and others) are at the forefront of individuals who are DOING SOMETHING to prevent the desecration of wild country.

Many who live in Alaska have come to exploit it in one way or another. Mining, petroleum, fishing, and the military--these are the extractive industries that have always drawn those who want to make money, and often care less about (or don't pay attention to) their environmental impact. That's why you find in Alaska so many 'bubbas' who just want to get on their ATVs or snowmobiles with a firearm to do what they consider is their god-given right--kill an animal. Yet, most of these people are as urban or suburban as the average American, and has no material need to kill one of Alaska's wild animals.

Every Alaskan is drugged on free money, and most have been seduced into believing that oil development is their salvation. 2008 saw every Alaskan man, woman, and child receiving more than $3200, just for being in Alaska. Wonder how many people are using the money for their Hawaii vacation? Few Alaskans have even seen much of Alaska, even fewer Alaskans have been to the Arctic Refuge. When your hand is in the pot, it's easy to say you support drilling for oil.

Senator Lisa Murkowski was WRONG when she said, "All Alaskans are environmentallists." No, actually few Alaskans are environmentalists. We have had to live through decades of Ted Stevens and Don Young, and the Murkowskis, who consider 'environmentalist' a 4-letter word.

In answer to how these clowns continue to get elected, it's all about the money. They are bullies in Congress, and they have managed to pull in millions and millions for Alaska--the greatest pork state in the Union. So, I guess Alaskans vote for them, figuring they'll bring in more free money to our socialist welfare state. The military (we have several bases and lots of troops) vote for them because they keep the military well-endowed in Alaska.

I hope it comes to an end, then maybe the bubbas will leave this state, and those left can appreciate the most spectacular natural resource we possess--unspoiled scenery and wilderness, and the nation's largest repository of clean air, clean water, and naturally bound-up (frozen) carbon.

Once we start melting (and we already are), we're going to need more than a few more than a few more oil wells and Sarah Palin's $50 billion (more like $100 with cost overruns) natural gas pipeline to save America. This is a tired 20th century idea that needs to die--and quickly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Starving to get active
Posted by: suspirafan on Dec 2, 2008 1:51 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
forwarding the Care2 petions and sending a check now and then just isn't enough for me any more. I've allways had a deep spiritual connection with nature but as a relative newbie activist I get overwhelmed at times with the different causes that are out there to choose from to give my time to. Please suggest some organizations that use their resorces to the best advantage. Thanks! Peace on Earth

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Starving to get active Posted by: --dave
PALIN=TOXIC WASTE
Posted by: sherman on Dec 2, 2008 6:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that about says it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't use her name
Posted by: Jeanne on Dec 3, 2008 8:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It makes me want to not read the article.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement