Greenpeace is in the news for shutting down an oil exploration rig off the coast of Greenland. In what is an act of trespass if not outright piracy, activists have climbed onto the rig in an effort to cease all activity. This stunt is just the latest attempt by Greenpeace to deny the modern world the energy it needs.
The world currently runs on a combination of fossil fuels - coal, natural gas and oil accounts for almost 87% of global energy with nuclear power and hydroelectric providing 6% each. Renewable energy sources - solar, wind and tidal account for just 1% of today’s global energy.
Greenpeace and other radical green groups oppose all fossil fuels and nuclear power too. That’s 93% of all power used in the world that Greenpeace wants to shut down and replace with immature and inefficient renewable technologies. It’s a pipe dream, a physically impossible to achieve utopia that Greenpeace chooses to ignore as they rage against our way of life. The math does not add up, there is no simple way to convert the world away from fossil fuels with today’s green technology.
As you read this you are consuming energy, but if Greenpeace had its way you’d be living in the dark ages, literally. The organization has performed publicity stunts to shut down coal plants in the UK, to protest the Alberta oil sands developments, they have occupied a nuclear plant in Sweden and wherever there are new fossil fuel production facilities being built, radical protesting greens are not far away, if they even allow the construction to begin at all.
In the US, the Sierra Club boasts that it has stopped production of 100 coal power stations. No amount of wind turbines or solar panels can replace the lost capacity of 100 coal plants. In fact, every wind turbine needs back-up power from a traditional source for when the breeze is uncooperative.
The question is what Greenpeace would replace our current energy with, but beyond sweeping generalizations; it has no answer. It’s not enough to simply deny us the means of living a civilized life while claiming that the sky is falling. They need to get out of the way and let the world generate the power it needs, preferably with nuclear plants that emit no pollution; real pollution, that is, not harmless but demonized CO2.
Greenpeace et al are good at highlighting the problems caused by energy production; in fact they rely on it for fundraising, but they are short on solutions. So next time you see a bunch of spoiled middle-class kids on a gap year climbing something to protest the energy the world needs, remember they want to deny you the power you need to live, work and play a normal life.
Greenpeace is great at outrage for profit, but that’s all. If they were serious about saving the planet, they would drop their opposition to nuclear power as one of the original founders did and scrap the polluting diesel powered ship currently terrorizing a Greenland oil rig.
***Note***: Thanks to Examiner.com remapping their site, some or all links in this post are broken.
I think I know what you’re getting at, mitchel44. a form of Ironic punishment for people who hate carbon. hell, just ship them up here to Alberta, and leave him in some shitty little abandoned farmhouse out in the middle of nowhere..you know..one that wasn’t built with those pesky fossil fuels made ;), and then make them walk to the closest town to pick up their stuff, and they cannot buy any petrolium-based product like plastic or anything like that.
And if we happen to pick one that the firefighters use for practice, then I guess we can blame it on global warming if anything happens.
Have they been operating in the Gulf of Mexico lately?
They really, Really need to get to China, NOW! And start shutting down construction of all those coal plants the Chinese are building.
… but they are Cowards, so it won’t happen.
New forms of crime demand new forms of punishment.
I say after conviction for “carbon crimes” they get a carbon free punishment. No item that has used any fossil fuel in its production or distribution may be sold to or utilized by the criminal for the period of their sentence.
30 days carbon free should be enough to convince them to rethink their position. I can just see them standing naked in a snow bank outside the courtroom here in the middle of a cold February winters day.
How did they get to Greenland? Solar powered or sail powered boats? I want to know!
Greenpeace pretends by force to impose its point of view, that is completely wrong, as it is perfectly shown in this article.
Being wrong is bad, but pretending to use violence is even worse.
Both goals and methods are bad.
Just an opinion, of course.
I am not a pirate, and I don’t make use of violence to impose my ideas.