By Ryan Maue.
Free publicity:
Bill McKibben’s Call to Action: “I want to tell you about an upcoming action — it looks set to turn into the biggest civil disobedience protest in the history of the North American climate movement. It will take place at the White House from August 20-Sept. 3, and we need your help spreading the word. But I want to explain the reasoning behind it in some detail, because for me it helps illustrate how some of the debate about Obama is unproductive.”
President Obama has recently been criticized by former VP Al Gore in his rambling Rolling Stone article. But apparently that’s been “unproductive” and some damage control is in order. McKibben has the perfect solution in order to lobby the President to kill the Keystone Pipeline: “We asked people who had Obama buttons in their closets to bring them and wear them — many of us still remember the shivers that ran down our spines when he said, on the eve of his nomination, that with his election “the rise of the oceans would begin to slow and the planet begin to heal.”
The opposition to the Keystone Pipeline is not terribly difficult to figure out. But McKibben deftly summarizes the ultimate stakes that liberal environmentalists face:
But there’s a bigger problem here too. Those Alberta tar sands are the biggest carbon bomb on the continent — indeed, on the whole planet, only Saudi Arabia’s oil deposits are bigger…if you could burn all that oil at once, you’d add 200 parts per million co2 to the atmosphere, and send the planet’s temperature skyrocketing upwards. Any serious exploitation of the tar sands, says Hansen, means it’s “essentially game over” for the climate. So, high stakes. And don’t think that the Canadians will automatically find some other route to send their oil out to, say, China. Native tribes are doing a great job of blocking a proposed pipe to the Pacific; Alberta’s energy minister said recently that he stays up nights worrying that without Keystone his province will be ‘landlocked in bitumen.’ Without the pipeline, said the business pages of Canada’s biggest paper, Alberta oil faces a ‘choke point.’
So, the Call to Action is summarized on a website, where you can go to sign up to join the effort: Tar Sands Action
Get your best business attire, your Obama buttons, and get ready to join Danny Glover, Naomi Klein, and NASA scientist James Hansen at the White House, and help Obama “get his environmental mojo back!”
================================================================
From a political point of view, with gas prices soaring and the President in complete reelection/campaign mode, blocking the pipeline would be a huge political gift to any GOP nominee.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What’s McKibben’s problem? The rise of the oceans has not only slowed, it has stopped.
“if you could burn all that oil at once ….” How would we do that? We cannot!
“… , you’d add 200 parts per million co2 to the atmosphere …” So the scenario is fiction.
” … , and send the planet’s temperature skyrocketing upwards.” … and plants would grow faster, for at least a few years .. and then the temperature would gradually fall.
Has anyone calculated what the affect would be if it was burnt, in situ?
How long would it take?
Would oxygen depletion be a problem?
How long is “at once”? Is it less than a day?
How long would the area be in production, if exploited as expected? Decades, I would expect.
It’s a new idea for a sci-fi film.
If blocking this vital pipeline gets America free of President Obama and his wacky ideas about climate and CO2 then go ahead but I do not like playing into the arms of Hansen, and his wacky ideas, seems wrong as well.
Pay the native Canadians more for the route of the pipeline. Money talks and they also drive cars and trucks so need the fuel.
Tell you what… when I heard that 0bama had said that, a shiver ran down my spine, too… but undoubtedly for a different reason. I was well and truly terrified that an absolute MORON was about to become the President. I have seen nothing to change that assessment. Nothing. The only good thing is that his incompetence has reduced that amount of damage he could do.
As a resident of Alberta, and someone employed in a secondary oil-related industry (NDT, which for Alberta means a lot of oil industry work like pipelines), I see what is happening. Tens of thousands of people are literally in limbo, waiting to hear what is going to happen. Jobs are scarce where they should be plentiful. And don’t believe Hansen’s ridiculous wet dream about natives blocking a pipeline to the coast. If that’s in our interest, it WILL happen. Our Prime Minister is an Alberta man.
China will buy our oil, and not all of the insane ranting (er, demonstrating) or stupid antics or greenpeace watermelon signs hanging from our tallest buildings will stop us from selling it to them. This is an industry, not a stupid little game like windmills or solar panels. Billions of people owe their way of life, or their life itself, to the product we pump out of the ground, or dig out with giant earthmovers, or frac out of the rocks themselves.
“Climate Movement”. Yeah, hansen, keep it up. You’re your own worst enemy. You have just confirmed that it’s political. Science doesn’t have “movements”, but politics does. Nothing says ignorance (and anti-science) like trying to block the supply of energy.
“[…] many of us still remember the shivers that ran down our spines when he said, on the eve of his nomination, that with his election “the rise of the oceans would begin to slow and the planet begin to heal.“
==============================================
(re: the bolded)
Some people put w-a-a-y too much faith in politicians…
(re: the italicized)
… but in this case, the oceans’ rise has slowed, so we can all move on now. Mission accomplished and we don’t have to spend another nickel on it.
So, what amounts to a 50% rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration will now
send the planet’s temperature skyrocketing upwards.
What is this magical figure the temperature rocket might reach? We can’t even find agreement on what a doubling of CO2 will mean, if anything let alone what half of this will. I think a 50% rise might well be quite pleasant for both the plants and people like myself who endure 300 days a year of cold and rain.
It’s funny to watch somebody thinking China will have nothing to burn if they don’t let them use America oil.
I think they’ll be happy if America saves that oil because it’ll be there ready for them to use aftrer they buy America.
A few months ago McKibben was in Vancouver holding a protest about bringing oil to the coast. I saw it on the news. There was a large group of people with him. I counted about 6 people. Maybe the camera wasn’t setup for a wide angle shot.
Anthony
I don’t understand this article . WUWT is for or against the pipeline. I myself am in favor of the pipeline.
Clean Tech Sector Heading for a Major Crash
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Renewable-Energy/Clean-Tech-Sector-Heading-for-a-Major-Crash.html
@ur momisugly Iggsy 0132July12. I take that a cessation in the rise of the Ocean concurrent with the election of POTUS is proof that correlation is not confirmation?
All those protesters, all that unnecessary so called “Carbon Footprinting”. Utter waste of time and money and electricity/gas etc. Stay at home and chill out.
200 extra parts per million CO2 by destroying all oil/tar sand deposits will do diddley squat to the climate, it will however make trees/vegetation grow faster and if the biofuel scam is stopped there will be food for this planet and other ones as well. Build more efficient petrol engines and scrap silly electric toy cars and wind farms and develop Thorium based Nuclear Power plants and we can survive the heat/cold that this planet throws our way. Oil reserves will last for ages if controlled and Arnie sells his Hummer! Nothing so far has exceeded previous centuries extreme [and natural] weather events. 24 hour breaking news and Green Hysteria needs unplugging and soon.
Financial Post: U.S. foundations against the oil sands
The Tides Foundation has spent $6-million to fund green lobbies
By Vivian Krause
14 oct 2010, updated 27 Jan 2011
Like most protests, the one against oil tankers has all the look and feel of a Canadian grassroots movement. The campaign against Alberta’s oil sands also seems to rise out of the people, but the interesting thing is that there are very few roots under that grass. Money comes in from a small core of U.S. charitable groups. One of those groups — the U.S. Tides Foundation of California (Tides U.S.) and its Canadian counterpart have paid millions to at least 36 campaign organizations. (See list below.)…
http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/10/14/u-s-foundations-against-the-oil-sands/#more-6315
Don’t expect rational thought, activism and protest is like a drug to these people.
Examine McKibben’s claim that burning all the oil sands would add 200 ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere… (And leaving aside how many years it would take to access all of that, plus the fact that it would displace other energy sources to a certain extent, not just add to them.)
Canada’s oil reserves are 175 billion barrels. Source: EIA http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=CA
One barrel is 42 gallons. Just to bound the problem, assume that each gallon of oil is refined to one gallon of gasoline. [It isn’t, of course, this will overestimate emissions.] Burning one gallon of gasoline creates about 9 kg CO2.
This means the entirety of Canadian reserves, if combusted, would create a maximum of around 76 Gt of CO2. [One gigatonne = 10^9 tonnes = 10^12 kg.]
I’ll want to compare to IPCC figures which are in terms of the mass of carbon, not carbon dioxide, so let’s compute the mass of carbon in 76 Pg of CO2 as 12/44*76 GtCO2 = 20 GtC.
IPCC’s AR4 WG1, figure 7.3 (the global carbon cycle, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/figure-7-3.html ) shows approximate atmospheric content of 760 GtC; as that is equivalent to around 380 ppmV CO2 (neglecting non-CO2 compounds), each 2 GtC represents about 1 ppmV of CO2.
Bottom line: burning *all* of Canada’s oil reserves, not just tar sands, would produce about 20 GtC in emissions, increasing atmospheric pCO2 by about 10 ppm. Doesn’t seem to match McKibben’s 200 ppm.
Corrections?
Ref. Coldfinger
It’s a Religion. It’s real, scientific, 150% RELIGION! They know that if they don’t stop this or that or whatever that they’re going to Hell. I find it very interesting. Most are against any formal, established faith except their own. And many are athieists, too. Shame so many of their tracts and bibles are in our public schools. Understand Pope Gore I is appointing bishops by the busload these days and selling indulgences as fast as he can print them.
Dear Moderator,
I’ve just seen an advert for 1millionwomen.com.au.
This is a new development in the carbon tax media campaign.
The by line is something slushy about women caring enough to
save the planet from climate change. I kid you not.
Clever move.
Do you think we skeptics could get the ladies on our side?
…if you could burn all that oil at once,
Gee. Where do I apply for an admission ticket?
These people have never heard of rail for transporting oil? Sure, a pipeline would probably be the least expensive option, but rail lines already exist that head east, south, and west. Use all three; certainly the success of this project doesn’t hing on constructing a pipeline, does it?
http://www.canadamapxl.com/rail-map.html
Slowing the sea level rise .. well there’s at least one promise kept.
McKibben is just plain wrong about “Native tribes are doing a great job of blocking a proposed pipe to the Pacific”.
Aboriginals tap into oil sands
http://www.financialpost.com/news/Aboriginals+into+sands/5086631/story.html
“… economic development corporations will help the combined income of Aboriginal households, businesses and governments reach $24-billion in 2011, and ballooning to $32-billion in 2016. “
Will Jon Henson have the moral fiber to take a leave of absence from work and stop drawing a taxpayer paycheck? Probably not. The enlightened, like him, can live rich and fat at our expense. The rules for the enlightened are different.
Hmm, I remember the shiver when he promised greatly higher electricty prices. My wallet remembers the soaring gasoline prices that came with his election.
Climate is just a smokescreen for the protest. The ultimate goal is world socialism and redistribution of wealth.
Reading this nonsense made me feel as if I had wandered onto the set for a silly anti-science but scary movie… What planet does McKibben inhabit?
RobertvdL says:
July 12, 2011 at 2:27 am
It’s just a sign that Anthony and his other authors are in favor of discussing nearly all aspects of the climate debate. As long as McKibben stays away from linking chemtrails to climate disruption, he’ll remain a good chuckle or two here.
I don’t understand why you addressed your comment to Anthony, the post is by Ryan Maue and it looks like he just copied a press release or flyer. Or a Huffington Post web page. The “Posted on” byline simply records who made the post, they aren’t screened by Anthony.
Nor do I understand the flyer’s “It will take place at the White House.” If I go, can I get the Lincoln bedroom or does McKibben have first dibs on that?