  Aerials of clean up operations at the Deepwater Horizon site, Gulf of Mexico. Credit: BP
By Julio Godoy
IDN-InDepth NewsViewpoint
BERLIN (IDN) - If the world needed a symbol of the dimensions of the environmental catastrophe the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico embodies, then it was this: Dozens of pelicans, the archetypical bird of the area, oil-soaked, condemned to dying before our eyes. Before us, helpless spectators, horrified by British Petroleum's deeds.
It has been said that the spill in the Gulf of Mexico is to the oil industry what the accident of Chernobyl was to the 'Soviet' nuclear power. If this is true, then there is no reason for optimism: Almost 25 years after the Ukrainian disaster, nuclear technology continues to be in use as if nothing had happened -- worse still, governments, international institutions, electricity providers, and constructors all over the world are pressing for more nuclear reactors to be built.
They even argue that nuclear power is indispensable -- for environmental reasons. Allegedly, the technology is carbon free, and therefore a crucial component of the energy mix of the future to reduce greenhouse gases emissions and to forestall climate change.
In fact, and though cynical as it may sound, the oil spill is an opportunity not to ignore: The disaster could be the argument environmental activists in the U.S. missed to finally open the eyes of the citizenry on the risks associated with its present way of life: Burning oil and other fossil fuels should sooner rather than later disappear from public life, because of the risks they represent in the entire chain of production and consumption, from the very first drill to the last exhaust fumes.
However, it seems as though Barack Obama, not so long ago hailed as the messiah, as the one visionary leader who could convince the U.S. people to finally come to terms with its global environmental responsibility as the world's worst polluter, is as short sighted as his predecessors.
Instead of seizing the chance offered by the catastrophe to ban further drillings in high sea and urge his people to revise their way of life, he has preferred to wait and waver. Obama sounds unconvincing even when he states that he is "furious" about BP's incapacity to stop the spill.
The same goes for the world at large. Europeans (or Mexicans or Angolans, for that matter) have no reason to be self-righteous on oil. British Petroleum's disastrous spill is but one of the numerous environmental and social catastrophes linked to oil exploitation and consumption.
Royal Dutch Shell has been destroying the Delta Niger since decades, and continues to do so despite the criticism and opposition by local leaders and international organisations. Despite its terrible environmental liabilities, Shell even enjoys the green fig leaves provided by its partnership with the World Conservation Union, the world's largest environmental network.
SANS SCRUPLES
Other European companies drill for oil in the North Sea -- and let leak tens of thousands of tons of it in the Atlantic Ocean every year. The French oil company Total exploits oil fields in countries such as Myanmar. Total's predecessor, the infamous French state-owned oil giant Elf Aquitaine, used to fuel -- no pun intended -- corruption and even civil wars in Angola, Congo Brazzaville, Gabon, and elsewhere in Africa.
European companies have never shown scruples whatsoever while dealing with dictators -- provided, they reign over oil fields.
Many European consumers also have no second thoughts when it comes down to burning oil. You only have to check the figures of the so-called sports utility vehicles licensed before and after the climate change debate in Germany, France, Spain, and Britain.
These heavy fuel-consuming all-terrain vehicles now drive in the streets of Paris, Berlin, and London, as if their drivers were suddenly suffering from the collective delusion of living in remote rural areas, and not in highly developed cities.
That the growth in the numbers of these automobiles now racing in most cities in Europe correlates with the mounting debate on climate change suggests that many people want to grab the last opportunity to drive such a car before it is too late.
By perpetrating such a stupidity, they seem to follow the famous maxim of the infamous French king Louis XV: 'After me, the deluge!' They obviously ignore that Louis' ill-advised policies damaged the power of France, weakened the treasury, discredited the monarchy, and led to the French revolution.
That's precisely the point: People in the industrialised world do not accept that a revolution in their ways of consumption is necessary to stop climate change, because the consequences of their actions will only be clearly identifiable in the near future.
In addition, despite all the talk on generational justice, many people still consider the present system legitimate and are not willing to make any "sacrifices". Social psychologists call these two factors low-threat salience and system justification. Compounded, these two factors make collective education highly difficult.
But oil spills such as the one in the Gulf of Mexico make both the consequences of our behaviour palpable today – and undermine the alleged legitimacy of the present system. That's why the oil spilling in the Gulf of Mexico cannot be seen only as BP's or Obama's. It is the oil of us all. (IDN-InDepthNews/10.06.2010)
Copyright © 2010 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters
-----
The writer is a freelance journalist. This article appears in his regular column ‘Stray Thoughts' in the June 2010 issue of Global Perspectives (www.global-perspectives.info), a monthly magazine for international cooperation, produced by Global Cooperation Council -- a non-governmental organisation campaigning for genuine cooperation and fair globalization -- in partnership with IDN-InDepthNews.
Julio Godoy’s previous IDN articles:
http://www.indepthnews.net/archiv.php?von=2010-01-01%2000:00:00&bis=2010-06-10%2000:00:00&searchtext=Julio%20Godoy&searchtype=undefined
|
