Comments on: Chevron’s Oil – Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea.

By: Marnie

Marnie — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 03:39:21 +0000

Saw this on HuffPost. Your making it to the big time.

Also reminded me I had been too long away.

By: nswfm CA

nswfm CA — Sun, 15 Feb 2009 00:25:19 +0000

Here’s what I’d do: Assume they are full since it’s all so top secret. If that volcano blows, that’s the maximum they’re likely to lose.

Then, write to the CEO and copy the list of industry analysts that cover Chevron and let them know that nothing seems to be getting done to protect their asset of millions of barrels of oil and copy that you’ll send the copy to the analysts if you don’t hear from them in a couple of days. Fax the letter to the CEO’s office and let them know you’ll send it to the media outlets at the same time as the analysts. Then you’ll get someone to pay attention–when it hits their (Chevron’s) pocket book.

By: Daugher of an Exxon Exec.

Daugher of an Exxon Exec. — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 11:11:30 +0000

As someone privy to Exxon’s nefarious and malevolent intentions in manipulating governments around the world in order to appropriate the world’s resources for their own profit, I strongly object to your comparison of a polar bear’s carnivorous instincts and Exxon’s brand of corporate self-interest.

The two are NOT comparable and your comparison is wholly unfair to polar bears. Polar bears do nothing to warrant your ugly and misplaced comparison.

Not all corporations will do anything to maximize profits. (Most corporations stop short of murdering their competition for example even though it would maximize profits.) Exxon, on the other hand, IS deserving of the term evil, because it is run by carefully a chosen upper management team of men who share a disdain for the natural world and future generations. My father used to laugh about dragging the Exxon-Valdez trial out and brag about paying off governments to ignore oil spills all over the world.

By: Cook Inletkeeper

Cook Inletkeeper — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 06:27:53 +0000

Thanks AKM, and apologies for my slow comment. But yes, I sat in a briefing last week where the Coast Guard and Chevron both refused to say how much oil remained in the tanks. All they would say is that the volume of two 270,000 barrel storage tanks was “less than 50%.” So, with 42 gallons per barrel and assuming 49%, that’s over 10,000,000 gallons of oil sitting at the mouth of Drift River, where the lahars from the 1989-1990 Redoubt eruption caused major flooding, emergency unloading and evacuations, etc. As you note, the Homeland Security rationale falls on its face when Alyeska releases tank volumes EVERY DAY. So, once again, Cook Inlet is the forgotten step child. No high powered tug escorts for laden tankers, when Price William Sound and Puget Sound both require them (don’t forget the Seabulk Pride tanker grounding in 2006 – see http://www.inletkeeper.org/2005/IssuesAndAdvocacy/Seabulk%20Pride%20Incident%202006.htm). And Cook Inlet remains the ONLY coastal waterbody in the nation where Chevron and other legally dump billions of gallons of toxic waste into our rich fisheries each year (we’ve had to spend precious resource to sue them in federal court to stop this archaic practice, but Chevron makes more money by foisting the cost of treatment on the back of our public water resources – http://www.inletkeeper.org/energy/production.htm). And what did the Coast Guard say when a supply boat went down last month next to Chevron’s Granite Point platform, with 40,000 gallons of diesel aboard and hundreds of gallons of hazardous chemicals? “It’s a drop in the bucket and not a serious concern.” See http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/655303.html. Don;t get me wrong, the Coast Guard does great work. But when it comes time to stand up to the largest and most powerful corporations in the world, our state and federal agencies treat Cook Inlet as a corporate colony. So, as we prepare for fishing season, it’s business as usual in Cook Inlet. But we’ll keep pushing this string, and hope others here will get incensed enough to speak out. A good first step is an email to Larry Hartig, Commissioner at ADEC, asking why Alaskans don;t have a right-to-know how much oil threatens our salmon fisheries: larry.hartig@alaska.gov

By: Moose Pucky

Moose Pucky — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 02:28:18 +0000

@yukonbusgrma

Wonder if that will be affordable rural broadband… or just rural broadband business as usual that’s priced too high for many!?

By: Moose Pucky

Moose Pucky — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 02:23:51 +0000

Y’all can start your own diaries on the Daily Kos—also, too.

Moose Pucky’s ramblings can be found at:
http://akmk.dailykos.com/

By: yukonbushgrma

yukonbushgrma — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 00:16:44 +0000

CRFlats (12:15:38) :
re: stimulus $$ in AK – I was happy to see $$ left in for rural broadband … some of us out in the boonies still have dial-up and can’t access all the goodies …

By: LiladyNY

LiladyNY — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:47:29 +0000

“Only when the last tree has been cut down; only when the last river has been poisoned; only when the last fish has been caught; only then will you find that money cannot be eaten.” American Indian Proverb

By: LiladyNY

LiladyNY — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:42:51 +0000

Re: wired differently – Keep on carrying on! Epic rant. I couldn’t agree more!

By: CRFlats

CRFlats — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:15:38 +0000

Thanks, it was a working trip. Got face time with all of Alaska’s delegation. It’s mayhem back there. Will be interesting (but probably not in a good way) to see how the stimulus $$ are spent in Alaska. Would feel better if more confident in our leadership here at home. Would really like to see the $$ for school construction left in the package. Sure seems like it would stimulate jobs as well as be good for the kids. The construction season is so short here in Alaska that a one month delay can mean what till next year. What gets left out of “Stimulus” will go thru the long process of Appropriations, and the rules there are complicated. Alaskan projects will get special scrutiny, no doubt.
Anyway, good to be home.