Editor's note: Jim Wallis is on a tour of the Gulf Coast with an interfaith group of leaders sponsored by the Sierra Club. For live updates from his trip please follow @jimwallis on Twitter.
Here we are in New Orleans
Your comment #2. Piling rocks and debris or plastic concrete over a high pressure well would not even come close to slowing the flow. Furthermore bombing the well would only worsen the problem. The relief well solution with a bottom kill is the best solution. Please don't spout off regarding a subject for which you have no technical understanding. Highly technical hydraulic issues must be contended with to kill the leaking well. From an economic standpoint the value of the wellbore is insignificant compared to the cost of the present operations. Preserving the mechanical integrity of the wellbore is critical to killing the well and ending this crisis.
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
Praying on the Gulf? When are we going to learn? We must stop asking God to do our homework for us.
Prayer must be in the form of a commitment. If we are really committed to doing something then let's act. Those who can need to use public transportation. We need to demand clean energy legislation as well as an expansion of public transportation. We need to support moratoriums on deep water drilling - Not only in this country, but throughout the world. We must take positive steps to reduce pollution, including carbon emissions. We must recycle. We must develop alternatives to Filthy fossil Fuels, including solar, wind, geothermal, and biofuel that does not interfere with food production. I'd also encourage people to log on to Sapphire Energy/Origin Oil and AlgaeVenture Systems to find out the latest in algae technology.
MOST IMPORTANT, this Novemember, we must elect leaders who are committed to phasing out fossil fuel and saving both the environment and the planet.
Unless we commit to an action plan, don't bother praying. You aren't fooling God. We are wasting both our and God's time.
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
Your comment #2. Piling rocks and debris or plastic concrete over a high pressure well would not even come close to slowing the flow. Furthermore bombing the well would only worsen the problem. The relief well solution with a bottom kill is the best solution. Please don't spout off regarding a subject for which you have no technical understanding. Highly technical hydraulic issues must be contended with to kill the leaking well. From an economic standpoint the value of the wellbore is insignificant compared to the cost of the present operations. Preserving the mechanical integrity of the wellbore is critical to killing the well and ending this crisis.
Praying on the Gulf? When are we going to learn? We must stop asking God to do our homework for us.
Prayer must be in the form of a commitment. If we are really committed to doing something then let's act. Those who can need to use public transportation. We need to demand clean energy legislation as well as an expansion of public transportation. We need to support moratoriums on deep water drilling - Not only in this country, but throughout the world. We must take positive steps to reduce pollution, including carbon emissions. We must recycle. We must develop alternatives to Filthy fossil Fuels, including solar, wind, geothermal, and biofuel that does not interfere with food production. I'd also encourage people to log on to Sapphire Energy/Origin Oil and AlgaeVenture Systems to find out the latest in algae technology.
MOST IMPORTANT, this Novemember, we must elect leaders who are committed to phasing out fossil fuel and saving both the environment and the planet.
Unless we commit to an action plan, don't bother praying. You aren't fooling God. We are wasting both our and God's time.
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
This is the 9/11 of ecological opportunism. We're alarmed once the disaster hits us, but have been quite willing to cast a blind eye while US corporations have drilled elsewhere continuously for decades in the heartlands of indigenous territories with the same destructive impact and consequences. What we're witnessing in the gulf right now is just the daily reality of indigenous peoples around the globe where corporations involved in oil and mineral extraction, mountaintop removal, etc. pollute and lay their once pristine lands to waste, effectively decimating whole ways of life and causing all kinds of health and psychological problems while the criminal perpetrators exit scot free with their resource plunder and profits which we in the first world overwhelmingly get to enjoy. It is this connection that must now be made if global power is ever to be contested and held accountable by ordinary people.
Praying on the Gulf? When are we going to learn? We must stop asking God to do our homework for us.
Prayer must be in the form of a commitment. If we are really committed to doing something then let's act. Those who can need to use public transportation. We need to demand clean energy legislation as well as an expansion of public transportation. We need to support moratoriums on deep water drilling - Not only in this country, but throughout the world. We must take positive steps to reduce pollution, including carbon emissions. We must recycle. We must develop alternatives to Filthy fossil Fuels, including solar, wind, geothermal, and biofuel that does not interfere with food production. I'd also encourage people to log on to Sapphire Energy/Origin Oil and AlgaeVenture Systems to find out the latest in algae technology.
MOST IMPORTANT, this Novemember, we must elect leaders who are committed to phasing out fossil fuel and saving both the environment and the planet.
Unless we commit to an action plan, don't bother praying. You aren't fooling God. We are wasting both our and God's time.
Praying on the Gulf? When are we going to learn? We must stop asking God to do our homework for us.
Prayer must be in the form of a commitment. If we are really committed to doing something then let's act. Those who can need to use public transportation. We need to demand clean energy legislation as well as an expansion of public transportation. We need to support moratoriums on deep water drilling - Not only in this country, but throughout the world. We must take positive steps to reduce pollution, including carbon emissions. We must recycle. We must develop alternatives to Filthy fossil Fuels, including solar, wind, geothermal, and biofuel that does not interfere with food production. I'd also encourage people to log on to Sapphire Energy/Origin Oil and AlgaeVenture Systems to find out the latest in algae technology.
MOST IMPORTANT, this Novemember, we must elect leaders who are committed to phasing out fossil fuel and saving both the environment and the planet.
Unless we commit to an action plan, don't bother praying. You aren't fooling God. We are wasting both our and God's time.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
July 8, 2010 7:46 AM EDT
BP (NYSE: BP) officials are discussing the possibility of stopping its gushing Gulf oil well by July 27th, the day the company is expected to report earnings.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/BP+...
Now just how crass is that!!!
#1: The government and BP want to save the well, at the expense of the Gulf of Mexico and its people. Who thinks drilling 2 "relief" wells will stop anything?
#2: The Army Corp of Engineers could have piled rocks and plastic-concrete mix on top of the leak from day 1, and stopped this tragedy long ago. Also a spare 2000lb bomb of TNT could have caved in the well, stopping or slowing it, causing a reasonable hole to fill in with rocks and concrete.
#3: The BP well should be confiscated by the Government, and its oil later used by America to pay for the damage. Instead, the Government will continue to pay $2 billion/year to BP for DOD use at the very least.
Do not sit on your hands, or supplicate to the oil machine. Boycott BP and fund clean energy from the oil companies. $20 billion/year would be a start.
Your comment #2. Piling rocks and debris or plastic concrete over a high pressure well would not even come close to slowing the flow. Furthermore bombing the well would only worsen the problem. The relief well solution with a bottom kill is the best solution. Please don't spout off regarding a subject for which you have no technical understanding. Highly technical hydraulic issues must be contended with to kill the leaking well. From an economic standpoint the value of the wellbore is insignificant compared to the cost of the present operations. Preserving the mechanical integrity of the wellbore is critical to killing the well and ending this crisis.
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
Please join, share and link.
This event is emphasizes the need for transformation of values, lifestyle, technology, and intentions. Even deeper is prayer from a place of care that changes creation the person praying (or perhaps being prayed).
Your comment #2. Piling rocks and debris or plastic concrete over a high pressure well would not even come close to slowing the flow. Furthermore bombing the well would only worsen the problem. The relief well solution with a bottom kill is the best solution. Please don't spout off regarding a subject for which you have no technical understanding. Highly technical hydraulic issues must be contended with to kill the leaking well. From an economic standpoint the value of the wellbore is insignificant compared to the cost of the present operations. Preserving the mechanical integrity of the wellbore is critical to killing the well and ending this crisis.
Unfortunately, this article is grounded on false presuppositions. It would be nice if reality were that if we all cut back on consumerism a little and worked hard on developing our alternative energy sources, we'd be able to stop the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere and the enviornment would be much safer. Unfortunately, this is based on the assumption that the actions of the EU, the US, Japan, Australia, etc. will determine the future of the world.
This is clearly not the case. Over the last 2 years (07 to 09, the US emissions of CO2 into the atmosphere dropped 10% and the world emissions are estimated to have increased by close to the same amount. The reason for this is clear; China has been increasing its emissions about 10% per year, and now clearly outstrips the United States. It is estimated, unless China economy stops its expansion, the CO2 emissions from China will be twice that of the US and the EU put together.
With all due respect, there is some hubris in the idea that the West has unique responsibility for the state of the globe. And, I believe it's also mistaken to think that countries must accept deadly poverty instead of using cheap energy to get out of poverty. People have been willing to risk death to get out of poverty for centuries, and I do not believe it is within our power to change human nature.
Real government oversight can decrease the chance that stupid actions like the self-destructive actions of BP (I know enough about what happened to use those words with confidence) are significantly decreased. Conservation and care with resources are also reasonable. But, these are second order actions: they will not change the state of the world much. What developed countries can do is fund fundamental research into areas that might produce technologies that will provide alternative cheap sources of low entropy energy that have much smaller effects on the environment. Included in this would be funding of synthetic biology, mesoscopic physics, plasma physics, high temperature superconductivity, chemical energy storage, energy storage in capacitors and the like. If we do that, we might have solutions in 20-50 years. If we pretend that turning the thermostat up in the summer and getting a hybrid car will have a real impact, we'll be lying to ourseves.
