"Just stop oil"

[Ahleckz]

You guys moaning about them haven’t even engaged with their cause. You see a headline and froth. This suggestion that they are against all oil isn’t true. They are against new drilling and new licenses being granted. Which seems entirely sensible to me. Should we be granting new licenses?
We don’t need new oil if we move to other sources.

They aren’t trying to take away your cars, your central heating or your sunflower oil to fry your bacon.

So vandalism is ok? As well as stopping Ambulances? That's a free pass. OKAY, sure.

Direct action and protest is ok. Yes. And it always should be.
Blocking ambulances is not. I’ve said in a few posts that blocking roads isn’t right. But we’re talking about tomato’s on glass and paint on a window here.

Where are these new oil wells being opened?

UK confirms new oil & gas licensing round and lifts shale ban

The UK government has lifted the moratorium on shale gas production in England and confirmed its support for a new oil and gas licencing round.

www.offshore-energy.biz

I would be very surprised if most of the biggest contributing nations give a damn what the UK does or does not do...we arent that important

I agree, but some smaller countries look up to us and expect us to help them. Especially those commonwealth countries who are at particular peril due to rising seas.

What about blocking fire engines and ambulances? Would you brush it aside if a loved one, that could've been saved in hospital, died in an ambulance?

No matter what type of energy this country decide to invest in for our future, you'll get activists violently protesting against it. Solar farms, wind farms, sea wind farms, coal mines, gas, nuclear, there have been protests against all types of energy and not one solution from any group. Using them for fuel would be a great start.

Assessed that above. I clearly referred to paint on glass and windows…

Ok, you’re advocating burning people who disagree with your views. That’s -
a sensible approach.

 

[Hagar]

They target the free democracies because they are allowed to. Anywhere else they would be beaten, jailed or shot.

 

[Tombstone]

Nobody disagrees that we need to move on to more environmentally friendly energy supplies.

But at the moment that technology isn't available. Yes there are some energy methods that are more environmentally friendly. But these methods haven't gained the standard that we need them to be at before we can shut down our current supplies.

These environmentalists tend to be the typical reactionary people. They complain about something but offer no viable alternative. If they could they would shut off all the power right now that isn't from renewables. It would kill 100's of thousands of people. But they don't care. They don't care about a solution.

It's interesting that they never mention other countries causing the most pollution in the world, unless someone else suggests it to them. It shows they are small minded. If they were true to their cause they would realise that getting those other countries to reduce even a small bit would have a bigger impact than their activities in the UK.

Its the hypocrisy that bugs me, they continue to bang on the "we must not use fossil fuels" drum but are happy to use those same fuels whenever it suits their desires. Its all do as I say not as I do

 

[Ahleckz]

Its the hypocrisy that bugs me, they continue to bang on the "we must not use fossil fuels" drum but are happy to use those same fuels whenever it suits their desires. Its all do as I say not as I do

They aren’t saying that at all. They want a stop on new licenses. Why are you misrepresenting them?

Just Stop Oil – End Fossil Fuels By 2030

We can't save our burning world with a firehose of oil and gas. The 1.5°C limit is only possible if we stop burning fossil fuels. Not reduce. Not abate. Stop.

juststopoil.org

Just Stop Oil is a coalition of groups working together to ensure that the government commits to ending all new licenses and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK./

 

[Tombstone]

They aren’t saying that at all. They want a stop on new licenses. Why are you misrepresenting them?

Just Stop Oil – End Fossil Fuels By 2030

We can't save our burning world with a firehose of oil and gas. The 1.5°C limit is only possible if we stop burning fossil fuels. Not reduce. Not abate. Stop.

juststopoil.org

So its purely future licenses then? They are not protesting to say that we should stop using fossil fuels ? If they arent against the current usage of fossil fuels then fair enough, if their aim is the "halting of new fossil fuel production" and not the "halting of fossil fuel production"

 

[GGizmo]

Actually the tech is there. It just needs investment to actualize but the energy companies would rather rake in profit.

Also they can't influence other countries. They can influence ours.

I will say that there have been other methods in the past that have worked at a very low level for vehicles etc, hydrogen, even the old chip fat oil (and other ideas) etc. Though every time these ideas meet the public arena they gets crushed.

But the technology that seems to be the accepted methods aren't up to the standard it needs to be.

They can influence other countries. Tell that to Peter Tatchell, and others, recently in Qatar.

I will add that its not just these people who are off with the birds. These business people keep pushing electric vehicles are another lot of delusional people. EV's aren't practical, yet.

Nuclear power will become the main power of the future.

 

[Vulcan]

You guys moaning about them haven’t even engaged with their cause. You see a headline and froth. This suggestion that they are against all oil isn’t true. They are against new drilling and new licenses being granted. Which seems entirely sensible to me. Should we be granting new licenses?
We don’t need new oil if we move to other sources.


Direct action and protest is ok. Yes. And it always should be.
Blocking ambulances is not. I’ve said in a few posts that blocking roads isn’t right. But we’re talking about tomato’s on glass and paint on a window here.

Yes, they should be granting new licenses given there's now a shortfall due to the war.

And it's criminal damage, not protest. You can't do whatever you want under the guise of "protest".

 

[Tombstone]

They do say "Let’s get on with ending our reliance on fossil fuels completely" , so my assumption was that they were against all fossil fuel usage, not just new fossil fuel

 

[Ahleckz]

So its purely future licenses then? They are not protesting to say that we should stop using fossil fuels ? If they arent against the current usage of fossil fuels then fair enough, if their aim is the "halting of new fossil fuel production" and not the "halting of fossil fuel production"

Yep, just future licenses.
It’s all on their website. I accept they probably need a rebrand exercise and a name change to “Just Stop New Oil” is probably a good idea!

FAQs – Just Stop Oil

about just stop oil What is just stop oil? Just Stop Oil is a coalition of groups working together to ensure that the government commits to ending all new licenses and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK. What does just stop oil want? We demand that...

juststopoil.org

 

[Tombstone]

Yep, just future licenses.
It’s all on their website. I accept they probably need a rebrand exercise and a name change to “Just Stop New Oil” is probably a good idea!

FAQs – Just Stop Oil

about just stop oil What is just stop oil? Just Stop Oil is a coalition of groups working together to ensure that the government commits to ending all new licenses and consents for the exploration, development and production of fossil fuels in the UK. What does just stop oil want? We demand that...

juststopoil.org

So does that mean that your stance is the same as that, that new fossil fuel is the issue but to use fossil fuels, as it is currently, is ok? Or that we shouldnt be using fossil fuels currently?

 

[Diddums]

You see a headline and froth.

No, I see work shy, time rich, wastes of skin and bones sitting on motorways preventing people from getting on with their daily lives. That's what I see. I see needless destruction and vandalism of private property by a bunch of hypocrites who have been proven time and time to enjoy the very comforts of life that they're condemning.

I don't think anyone's arguing that our dependency on oil should be reduced, but the means to their end is what's rightfully ******* everyone off. Go protest at no. 10 or something where they can implement change, or better still, go to Beijing and do it there as China's one of the world's biggest polluters. Will they do it though? No, of course they won't, because it'd be too much of an inconvenience for them to actually take proper action, so instead they clog up a country's motorways which is one of the world leaders in green initiatives, because it suits them.

So no, the whole "you see headlines and froth" is a load of tosh, I froth because I see a bunch of useless hyptocrites doing the absolute bare minimum in the comfort of their nicely heated homes to somehow justify their pathetic existence.

 

[Diddums]

In fact I think we should start a Gofundme to send them to Johannesburg, all expenses paid, to go clog up the roads there and make their point. Let's see how many of them actually commit.

 

[Mason-]

No, I see work shy, time rich, wastes of skin and bones sitting on motorways preventing people from getting on with their daily lives. That's what I see. I see needless destruction and vandalism of private property by a bunch of hypocrites who have been proven time and time to enjoy the very comforts of life that they're condemning.

I don't think anyone's arguing that our dependency on oil should be reduced, but the means to their end is what's rightfully ******* everyone off. Go protest at no. 10 or something where they can implement change, or better still, go to Beijing and do it there as China's one of the world's biggest polluters. Will they do it though? No, of course they won't, because it'd be too much of an inconvenience for them to actually take proper action, so instead they clog up a country's motorways which is one of the world leaders in green initiatives, because it suits them.

So no, the whole "you see headlines and froth" is a load of tosh, I froth because I see a bunch of useless hyptocrites doing the absolute bare minimum in the comfort of their nicely heated homes to somehow justify their pathetic existence.

hear hear!

 

[Ahleckz]

So does that mean that your stance is the same as that, that new fossil fuel is the issue but to use fossil fuels, as it is currently, is ok? Or that we shouldnt be using fossil fuels currently?

I don’t really have much of a stance. I’m more annoyed by the misrepresentation of their argument and the “fake news” being pedalled by the media about this group.

Ultimately though, I think I probably agree we shouldn’t be expanding our oil fields but I’m happy using the oil we have but should be moving to renewable and nuclear as a move away from oil where it’s not necessary.

I’m not an eco warrior, far from it. I work in the car industry and my field is particularly acute to severe downturn if/when electric cars come to a critical mass. I fly regularly, for leisure. I am a tofu eater though! I do think we need to use less oil and fossil fuels where we can and should concentrate on new future tech rather than relying on oil.

If they were advocating for no oil usage at all I think the accusations of hypocrisy would be fair, but they aren’t saying that. Also, no one is perfect unfortunately. I’m against animal cruelty, j still eat (some) meat for example.

 

[Ahleckz]

No, I see work shy, time rich, wastes of skin and bones sitting on motorways preventing people from getting on with their daily lives. That's what I see. I see needless destruction and vandalism of private property by a bunch of hypocrites who have been proven time and time to enjoy the very comforts of life that they're condemning.

I doubt any of them are going to personally benefit from the granting of new drilling licenses. I doubt those who are throwing paint at a window have a vested interest in the licence granting process. After all, that’s what they are protesting. Not oil. But don’t let the facts get in the way of a rant!

Needless destruction, come on! A bit of paint or tinned tomato’s on glass or some chocolate frosting on a wax work isn’t destruction.

Nb - I’m not for them blocking the roads.

 

[V F]

Direct action and protest is ok. Yes. And it always should be.
Blocking ambulances is not. I’ve said in a few posts that blocking roads isn’t right. But we’re talking about tomato’s on glass and paint on a window here.

Which is usually one step away from lobbing bricks through windows. These people know they can get away with it as there is no deterrent.

 

[Kenai]

Their first big mistake was going with a tag line that evidently doesn't actually align all that well with their objectives. 'Stop new oil' would have probably worked better in communicating their desire to stop development of new oil facilities.

I feel like they'd have had more people supporting them, or at least less people hating them, if they were clearer that what they want is us to avoid expanding oil production with new facilities/wells - that's actually an entirely reasonable suggestion that most people would back I think, we absolutely should be pushing the government to make sure our future energy plans are rooted in nuclear/sustainable/renewable rather than throwing money at 'good old oil' for another 20 years.

With people more sympathetic to the underlying objective, they'd need vastly less abrasive/destructive protest methods to build a relatively decent support for their cause.

They're too far gone now, people assume they want to ban anything and everything to do with oil, past, present and future and with their increasingly extreme protesting, they've lost the goodwill to be able to explain that their objective/demand is not as extreme as their tagline or protest methods are.

 

[Tombstone]

I don’t really have much of a stance. I’m more annoyed by the misrepresentation of their argument and the “fake news” being pedalled by the media about this group.

Ultimately though, I think I probably agree we shouldn’t be expanding our oil fields but I’m happy using the oil we have but should be moving to renewable and nuclear as a move away from oil where it’s not necessary.

I’m not an eco warrior, far from it. I work in the car industry and my field is particularly acute to severe downturn if/when electric cars come to a critical mass. I fly regularly, for leisure. I am a tofu eater though! I do think we need to use less oil and fossil fuels where we can and should concentrate on new future tech rather than relying on oil.

If they were advocating for no oil usage at all I think the accusations of hypocrisy would be fair, but they aren’t saying that. Also, no one is perfect unfortunately. I’m against animal cruelty, j still eat (some) meat for example.

If their issue is purely new licenses then I'm fine with that, thats fair enough. I still disagree with all of their methods, at best its terrible tactics and is ultimately countereffective to their aims. If however their issue , or if any of them say, that they are against all fossil fuel usage, then thats a different matter. Thats when it falls into hypocrisy, like the youths who protest against plastic usage and then pop along to Glastonbury and leave a whack load of plastic bottles and paraphernalia behind them.

As for meat...in the words of Ron Swanson, if a meal hasnt got meat in it, its a snack

 

[Tombstone]

Their first big mistake was going with a tag line that evidently doesn't actually align all that well with their objectives. 'Stop new oil' would have probably worked better in communicating their desire to stop development of new oil facilities.

I feel like they'd have had more people supporting them, or at least less people hating them, if they were clearer that what they want is us to avoid expanding oil production with new facilities/wells - that's actually an entirely reasonable suggestion that most people would back I think, we absolutely should be pushing the government to make sure our future energy plans are rooted in nuclear/sustainable/renewable rather than throwing money at 'good old oil' for another 20 years.

With people more sympathetic to the underlying objective, they'd need vastly less abrasive/destructive protest methods to build a relatively decent support for their cause.

They're too far gone now, people assume they want to ban anything and everything to do with oil, past, present and future and with their increasingly extreme protesting, they've lost the goodwill to be able to explain that their objective/demand is not as extreme as their tagline or protest methods are.

Quite right...whomever is running their strategy has completely ballsed it up. They havent been clear on the message they are wanting to deliver, the people they've chosen to deliver the message and the methods of delivery themselves have in fact alienated the very people that they need to get onside. As a campaign strategy, its hugely flawed and a shambles. They really could have been a strong pusher in a successful move toward change but they've blown it with terribly poor tactical decision making.

 

[Tom_ed1987]

If their actual objective is to only stop new drilling & licenses (in the UK presumably), then their cause makes even less sense.
The opening of a new well vs keeping an older one producing could very well result in a net negative in terms of total energy required - new wells can be more efficient than the existing, better located etc. Indeed it's in the oil companies interest that this is the case as the result is more profit to them.

Accepting the fact that humanity currently requires X amount of energy to exist & that we're talking about global climate change, not local pollution issues - what difference does it make whether it's sourced from an old well or a new well in the UK or elsewhere - they seem to deliberately ignore the demand side of the energy equation & act like the oil companies are equivalent to the infinite donut machine feeding Homer Simpson; the more oil they have permission to extract, the more we will collectively use... Should they not be campaigning along the lines of highlighting realistic ways to reduce humanities total energy need or where energy can be sourced from other more renewable sources?