Oil Era Benefits vs Climate Change

The judge presiding over the case of San Francisco and Oakland vs Chevron, Exxon, BP, Shell, and Conoco has given everyone homework: evaluate the benefits of the oil industry for the economy as opposed to climate change. *Evil cackle*

Here's a quote: “We needed oil and fossil fuels to get from 1859 to the present,” Judge Alsup stated. “Yes, that’s causing global warming. But against that negative, we need to weigh-in the larger benefits that have flowed from the use of fossil fuels. It’s been a huge, huge benefit.”

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am very much happy to enroll myself in the oilprice.com community for updates on whats happening around in this sector. I would be actively participating in any of the seminars and lectures going to be held in this area.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kolavennu K K Chand said:

I am very much happy to enroll myself in the oilprice.com community for updates on whats happening around in this sector. I would be actively participating in any of the seminars and lectures going to be held in this area.

Welcome to the community @Kolavennu K K Chand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

coverage of that "Climate Tutorial" reminds me of Kurosawa film

http://www.climatedepot.com/2018/03/22/climate-trial-a-bloody-nose-for-global-warming-alarmists/

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2018/03/warmism-gets-courtroom-thrashing/

https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/03/22/climate-tutorial-judge-alsup-chevron-liability/

Should be fun to watch. Not overly concerned about governments trying to milk oil companies - that cow does have horns and hoofs

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

The judge presiding over the case of San Francisco and Oakland vs Chevron, Exxon, BP, Shell, and Conoco has given everyone homework: evaluate the benefits of the oil industry for the economy as opposed to climate change. *Evil cackle*

Here's a quote: “We needed oil and fossil fuels to get from 1859 to the present,” Judge Alsup stated. “Yes, that’s causing global warming. But against that negative, we need to weigh-in the larger benefits that have flowed from the use of fossil fuels. It’s been a huge, huge benefit.”

This could get amusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially if decides to grade the homework.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Courtesy of @anasalhajji on TWR: https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/apxus-judge-throws-out-climate-change-lawsuits-against-big-oil/

just like dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" kept on probing the electric wire fence, lefties and "climate warriors"  won't stop after this thought-out decision (round of applause or standing ovation to Judge Alsup). Keep bringing examples of hypocrisy and gaps in the "science" to win public support - because w/o it won't be easy to stop deindustrialization and downward spiral of self-destruction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Judge Alsup is my new favorite judge of all times after Carl Barbier. Waiting on Judge Keenan in New York now.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should take in mind that if weren’t for the oil and gas, the wind turbines they use,  clothing, shoes, solar panels, and pretty much anything else would be way more expensive.

What the environmentalist think it's going to replace oil? grains oil? taking the grain from cattle and people to make bad quality products? yeah sure... I mean the oil industry may change who controls it, who milks it and how they control and milk it, but as an industry is not going to die. And a few environmentalists are not going to kill it, the only thing that has the chance to pull out Oil&Gas in the energy world is Nuclear. End of the story

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 5/28/2018 at 6:17 AM, Marina Schwarz said:

The judge presiding over the case of San Francisco and Oakland vs Chevron, Exxon, BP, Shell, and Conoco has given everyone homework: evaluate the benefits of the oil industry for the economy as opposed to climate change. *Evil cackle*

Here's a quote: “We needed oil and fossil fuels to get from 1859 to the present,” Judge Alsup stated. “Yes, that’s causing global warming. But against that negative, we need to weigh-in the larger benefits that have flowed from the use of fossil fuels. It’s been a huge, huge benefit.”

 

They could sue it maybe for other reasons, but sue oil companies because of climate change is the equivalent to sue a car or phone manufacturer because someone died driving while texting. Their business is not the emission of CO2 their business is extracting oil and gas from the ground make various products and sell them.

It's not the Oil Companies fault that most greenies and pseudo-environmentalists decide to hate the only energy sources that can actually play significant role in worldwide energy development (Nuclear, Hydro, Tidal and Geothermal)

The rise in global energy emissions is not oil companies fault, is fault of the greenies that think that Wind and Solar are any relevant, how Germany demonstrated with their incredibly expensive, 400 billion Euros program called energywende which it by now generate only 3.6% of all German energy needs.

The anti-nuclear activists were the one who decided that Germany should shut off all of their nuclear powerplants by 2020, as results the Germany consuming in natural gas rise from 2015 at 74,600,000,000m3 per year to 2016 85,000,000,000 m3 per year to 90,200,000,000 by 2017. And the oil consumption rise in 2016 from 2,370,000 bbl/day to  2,447,000bbl/day

If there's someone to blame is the greenies and lefties that do not have any real knowledge about statistics or how the energy world work. Wonder how much it will take until someone demands Tesla and solar panel manufacturers because of the environment damage caused by all the cobalt and nickel mining or the corruption involved in lithium extraction in south America salt-flats,  and the quite toxic substances required to make solar panel that end in 3 world wastelands.

Here we can see at the top an In-Situ Oil sands extraction site destroying the environment in Alberta Canada, and at the bottom an environmentally friendly open pit cobalt mine in the Congo protecting the environment from the menace of fossil fuels

36063056_1124620104344919_6895892425512845312_n.jpg

Edited by Sebastian Meana
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Sebastian Meana said:

They could sue it maybe for other reasons, but sue oil companies because of climate change is the equivalent to sue a car or phone manufacturer because someone died driving while texting. Their business is not the emission of CO2 their business is extracting oil and gas from the ground make various products and sell them.

Precisely. BP got sued for the right reasons after Deepwater Horizon. These lawsuits are stupid. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites