22/04/10: This morning’s news that the BP oil rig has collapsed is a tragedy for both people and planet. 11 workers are feared dead whilst the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon, located 50 miles away from the Louisiana coast, could release more than 1,135,600 litres of crude oil a day into the water. Such is the enormity of the incident both in terms of actual and potential human impact and damage to the environment, it can be classed as ecocide. Applying international war crime laws, this would be categorised as a War Crime: stretching over 200 kilometers, causing damage to the environment which will last more than a season and severely impacting both human and natural resources and assets ironically during peace time no-one is accountable. The gap that needs to be filled here is a legislative one. Under the recent proposal for a new international criminal law of ecocide, BP would be liable to prosecution for the extensive “damage, destruction to or loss of ecosystems”.
When implemented , the international crime of ecocide will legally bind corporations such as BP to take full responsibility for the damage, destruction to or loss of ecosystems caused by their activities. Where a large oil spill causes large, long term or severe ecosystem destruction, ecocide prosecution will attract imprisonment of the CEO and liability for restorative justice. Such a law will deter and act as a strong incentive to halt all such potentially damaging projects. However, the law of ecocide is not yet in place, and so the burden of eco-responsibility does not yet exist.
Oil companies use Reference Scenarios. BP announced on the 13th of April at their AGM that they support the belief that world energy demand will increase to 40% by 2030 and fossil fuel from their company and others like them will provide 80% of that energy. If this scenario is to be believed (which BP do) then it suggests that no laws will be put in place to stop the ecocide. BP, in their commitment to this scenario, is in effect signing a death warrant for the Earth and all of humanity.
Yesterday’s explosion of BP’s flagship offshore project may just provide an opportunity for BP to re-consider and look to a different scenario, one where the crime of ecocide is enshrined in law.
Interesting – eminently sensible. Good luck Higgins et al.
‘BP announced on the 13th of April at their AGM that world energy demand will increase to 40% by 2030 and fossil fuel will provide 80% of that energy. Following this scenario, a 6% increase in temperature is inevitable. BP, in their commitment to this scenario, is signing a death warrant for humanity.’
Odd that governments, for all their pledges and greenwash, appear tremendously relaxed about such activity from the oil giants.
There is undoubtedly a connection between this “relaxation” and the extent to which corporate lobbying has placed pro oil/pro profit/anti-environmental legislators into power. We keep telling ourselves that the situation we find ourselves is not so bad, and that we will figure something out eventually but the truth of the matter is that we are in a bad situation and we have not even begun to slow down. As long as we remain a populace that tolerates leaders with oil all over their hands i.e. the Bush family, we can rest assured that we have not seen the worst of ecocide.
” BP announced on the 13th of April at their AGM that world energy demand will increase to 40% by 2030 and fossil fuel will provide 80% of that energy. Following this scenario, a 6% increase in temperature is inevitable.”
This is not only about BP or any other oil company. Prevention is better than prosecution.
The key issue here is the demand scenario and the proposed solution to meet it. First, demand: Energy consumption by individuals in terms of the embedded energy in products they consume and their personal transportation is driving this demand. We need to reduce this demand by being aware of choices and making energy efficient ones.
While population increase and societal development of the thirld world will no doubt increase demand, the limitless supply of energy “on demand” experienced in most societies may be a luxury we can no longer afford in any society.
Second: Fossil fuels supplying 80% of the energy demanded. Why so? It is time to exercise wisdom in choices. Alternative energy supplies are perfectly suitable for many of our needs. Localised generation by solar or wind power rather than reliance on the central grid; walking or using public transport rather than driving the car; eating products grown locally rather than from across the world, minimising packaging…
We are addicted to easy energy, and this is the root cause of ecocide. It is up to us to prevent it. We all make choices every day. Make them good ones.
Dear Alison,
For the better part of your story I have to disagree. Do you know if a product is sealed by ecofriendly materials or not?
Demand is being created. Just look at the politicians in power; do you think those big companies just let ecofriendly producers in?
That would ruin their businessmodel!
What I want to say is, that the drug addict is an addict because of the supplies. He didn’t want to be a drugs addict (most don’t). He became one, because of easy supply of drugs, in this case cheap oil, from the Middle East.
We have to change, that is surely true. But what are the alternatives?
At home I’m eating locally produced vegetables, because I can. I’m eating a lot of vegetarian stuff. Because I can. I’ve switched to an electricity-supplier that can guarantee me 100% gren electricity. But I cannot replace my gasstove without getting into a big hassle to find an alternative. They are slowly coming up, yes. But very slowly. And my car can’t yet be replaced by a cheap second hand electrical powered one.
I mean, if businesses keep their focus on fossils, there is little you can do by yourself. You can, but it goes slow. Very slow. Slow enough for Big Oil to reach for their 6% temperature increase. Catch my drift?
You need to fix your poll counter. I voted 240 times for Tar Sands.
Wayne, the poll counter has only accepted your vote once – but we appreciate your support for the Tar Sands!
Establishing Ecocide is an imperative we can not ignore. The earth is our cradle and grave, our Mother and provider. If all we do is destroy, deplete and deny her rights, we will be in effect responsible for killing the source of our life.
Every cloud has a silver lining … yes, even this dreadful oil spill. A deep artery has been ruptured, and this should be an opportunity to maximise force against the oil companies, as they suffer the weakness from public opinion. The face of greed is for a moment visible, this is a chance to point the finger and make it hurt.
We have a chance for those pioneering new technologies in energy to jump into the lime light and show that there is a better way and that this kind of ecocide can be prevented by using sustainable energy sources. This is the time to strike, when the prey is exposed and wounded.
We’ve got to get this idea of ecocide in the mindset of everyone.
I’ve been trying to raise awareness and some money to donate to cleanup efforts by hand silkscreening “Ecocide in the Gulf” tshirts, but oftentimes encounter a similar reaction:
“Isn’t that too strong a word?”
It doesn’t seem people quite understand the seriousness of the situation in the Gulf of Mexico and don’t grasp how ecological collapse can and will effect them.
It’s time the term “ecocide” makes it into everyone’s vocabulary and it’s time we find a way to make such crimes punishable by law.
………………..
Save the Gulf from ECOCIDE!!
http://deadquickgulf.blogspot.com