Just Stop Oil

[st albans fox]

at the moment their demand is that we stop issuing new licenses to drill for oil or gas.  i wonder if they would disband if this happened ???

[Innovindil]

3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

at the moment their demand is that we stop issuing new licenses to drill for oil or gas.  i wonder if they would disband if this happened ???

Nah they'd move base to Russia or Saudi and convince them to give up the oil and gas imo. 

[kenny]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I'm curious - what company would that be?

Dale Vince would be one.

 

Interestingly lots of the cash is coming from the USA and much of it came from oil. 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, kenny said:

Dale Vince would be one.

 

Interestingly lots of the cash is coming from the USA and much of it came from oil. 

Ah, right.

 

Well, the infrastructure Mr Vince deals in needs to be put in place worldwide to prevent dreadful consequences anyway, so if he makes a bit from it, I'm not personally going to lose sleep. The thing getting done is the important part.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if at least some of JSO were patsies in the pocket of those wanting to continue the status quo, though.

[Wymsey]

 

 

[LCFCCHRIS]

Is it feasible to stop oil licenses? Would it mean we slowly destroy our economy and end up with much lower standard of living and poverty? 
Those are the most important questions to me, if there’s an alternative that can be implemented slowly then fair enough. 

[Captain...]

9 hours ago, Dunge said:

. We know what they’re arguing for. We know why they’re doing it.

You see I don't think you do. So prove me wrong, what is the reason behind these protests?

[kenny]

1 hour ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Is it feasible to stop oil licenses? Would it mean we slowly destroy our economy and end up with much lower standard of living and poverty? 
Those are the most important questions to me, if there’s an alternative that can be implemented slowly then fair enough. 

It's not.

 

The solution for cleaner energy still uses hydrocarbons in the manufacturing process. Electric cars are still full of lubricants and plastics.

 

Steel production relies on coal.

 

Better it's done locally than stopping it in the UK and shipping it round the world.

[kenny]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Ah, right.

 

Well, the infrastructure Mr Vince deals in needs to be put in place worldwide to prevent dreadful consequences anyway, so if he makes a bit from it, I'm not personally going to lose sleep. The thing getting done is the important part.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if at least some of JSO were patsies in the pocket of those wanting to continue the status quo, though.

Reminds me of This other eden by Ben Elton.

[Dunge]

2 hours ago, Captain... said:

You see I don't think you do. So prove me wrong, what is the reason behind these protests?

Primarily, they want to stop licences for new oil wells, specifically in the North Sea. And to achieve that they’re spreading orange powder on snooker tables.

 

But the problem isn’t specifics. It’s that they’re putting people off the entire environmental movement. Not me, but others. This is a problem of perception, and that perception of people doing these things isn’t going to change. The people you need to convince, when they say “bloody eco tw*ts” aren’t going to listen to you replying “actually…”

 

The sheer amount of work done, persuading, cajoling, dragging climate change up the ladder of political importance and these muppets are undoing it so they can “say they did what they could”. It’s all ego, no brain.

[Nod.E]

43 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Primarily, they want to stop licences for new oil wells, specifically in the North Sea. And to achieve that they’re spreading orange powder on snooker tables.

 

But the problem isn’t specifics. It’s that they’re putting people off the entire environmental movement. Not me, but others. This is a problem of perception, and that perception of people doing these things isn’t going to change. The people you need to convince, when they say “bloody eco tw*ts” aren’t going to listen to you replying “actually…”

 

The sheer amount of work done, persuading, cajoling, dragging climate change up the ladder of political importance and these muppets are undoing it so they can “say they did what they could”. It’s all ego, no brain.

I think I agree but at the same time feel it only serves up a lazy excuse for those we need to convince. They'd deny climate change with or without these morons.

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, LCFCCHRIS said:

Is it feasible to stop oil licenses? Would it mean we slowly destroy our economy and end up with much lower standard of living and poverty? 
Those are the most important questions to me, if there’s an alternative that can be implemented slowly then fair enough. 

What, exactly, will happen if we continue as we are and the global average temperature keeps rising?

 

With respect, it's like someone said earlier - a lot of folks either don't know or are in denial about how the Earth can change, and how quickly and drastically (and nastily) it can reassert an equilibrium.

 

We don't have golden bullets or obviously good options here and transitioning at the speed necessary will cause a fair bit of economic upheaval, but the alternative failure will be so, so much worse.

 

3 hours ago, kenny said:

It's not.

 

The solution for cleaner energy still uses hydrocarbons in the manufacturing process. Electric cars are still full of lubricants and plastics.

 

Steel production relies on coal.

 

Better it's done locally than stopping it in the UK and shipping it round the world.

Solutions that produce steel without coal have been discovered and are being implemented.

 

In any case, we do still need oil for producing plastics and lubrication, but not for energy generation, so drawdown should be insisted upon.

 

3 hours ago, kenny said:

Reminds me of This other eden by Ben Elton.

Ha! Well, Mr Elton's depiction of civilisational collapse being flawed aside, unless the entire global scientific corps is somehow corrupt or incorrect, this transition from oil, gas and coal to better forms of energy generation is needed - and soon.

 

1 hour ago, Dunge said:

Primarily, they want to stop licences for new oil wells, specifically in the North Sea. And to achieve that they’re spreading orange powder on snooker tables.

 

But the problem isn’t specifics. It’s that they’re putting people off the entire environmental movement. Not me, but others. This is a problem of perception, and that perception of people doing these things isn’t going to change. The people you need to convince, when they say “bloody eco tw*ts” aren’t going to listen to you replying “actually…”

 

The sheer amount of work done, persuading, cajoling, dragging climate change up the ladder of political importance and these muppets are undoing it so they can “say they did what they could”. It’s all ego, no brain.

I'm sorry mate, I see the point here and it's a valid one but IMO if things do go horribly Pete Tong and then people are looking to hold other people accountable while yelling "who killed the world?", JSO and those who just looked at them and allowed them to colour their viewpoint regarding what needs to be done will be equally high on that list. Both will have contributed equally to the dreadful circumstances that resulted.

 

40 minutes ago, Nod.E said:

I think I agree but at the same time feel it only serves up a lazy excuse for those we need to convince. They'd deny climate change with or without these morons.

For a lot of them, I would agree, yeah, hence the response to Dunge above.

[Dunge]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

What, exactly, will happen if we continue as we are and the global average temperature keeps rising?

 

With respect, it's like someone said earlier - a lot of folks either don't know or are in denial about how the Earth can change, and how quickly and drastically (and nastily) it can reassert an equilibrium.

 

We don't have golden bullets or obviously good options here and transitioning at the speed necessary will cause a fair bit of economic upheaval, but the alternative failure will be so, so much worse.

 

Solutions that produce steel without coal have been discovered and are being implemented.

 

In any case, we do still need oil for producing plastics and lubrication, but not for energy generation, so drawdown should be insisted upon.

 

Ha! Well, Mr Elton's depiction of civilisational collapse being flawed aside, unless the entire global scientific corps is somehow corrupt or incorrect, this transition from oil, gas and coal to better forms of energy generation is needed - and soon.

 

I'm sorry mate, I see the point here and it's a valid one but IMO if things do go horribly Pete Tong and then people are looking to hold other people accountable while yelling "who killed the world?", JSO and those who just looked at them and allowed them to colour their viewpoint regarding what needs to be done will be equally high on that list. Both will have contributed equally to the dreadful circumstances that resulted.

 

For a lot of them, I would agree, yeah, hence the response to Dunge above.

You’re looking at it the wrong way with regard to how history will judge people. That doesn’t matter. You have to get people on side now who base their decisions significantly on emotion. You’re not going change humanity in a few years to look at things your way so you have to appeal to them on their terms. Just Stop Oil are achieving the opposite.

[leicsmac]

19 minutes ago, Dunge said:

You’re looking at it the wrong way with regard to how history will judge people. That doesn’t matter. You have to get people on side now who base their decisions significantly on emotion. You’re not going change humanity in a few years to look at things your way so you have to appeal to them on their terms. Just Stop Oil are achieving the opposite.

I agree that people need to be brought onside in the right way now.

 

I'm just noting that if shit goes sideways, there will be accountability and it won't just be JSO accountable.

[Captain...]

8 hours ago, Dunge said:

Primarily, they want to stop licences for new oil wells, specifically in the North Sea. And to achieve that they’re spreading orange powder on snooker tables.

 

But the problem isn’t specifics. It’s that they’re putting people off the entire environmental movement. Not me, but others. This is a problem of perception, and that perception of people doing these things isn’t going to change. The people you need to convince, when they say “bloody eco tw*ts” aren’t going to listen to you replying “actually…”

 

The sheer amount of work done, persuading, cajoling, dragging climate change up the ladder of political importance and these muppets are undoing it so they can “say they did what they could”. It’s all ego, no brain.

Fair enough summary, a lot of people don't realise it's about a specific issue not just a general stop oil protest. Perhaps they should have called themselves No New Oil. Most people also associate them with XR and get the 2 sets of protests mixed up blaming JSO for blocking roads which was actually XR. Some of the early tactics, defacing portraits 

 

There is certainly a failure in branding and clearly getting the issue across, but ultimately I am not against their current tactics of targeting sporting events, causing enough disruption to make their point but not enough to completely ruin the event.

Edited 7 July 2023 by Captain...

[dsr-burnley]

Actually they're opposed to no new licences for North Sea oil, not no new drilling, so I'm told.  The idea being that all existing drilling sites will shut down as their licences come up for renewal.  So it will mean no North Sea oil at all (not from the UK anyway), fairly soon.

 

Or that's what I'm told they're after.  They're a bit vague, presumably deliberately so.  Are we expected to believe that if they achieve their ambition of no new licences, they will fold their tents and steal into the night?  Or will they come up with a new set of demands?  Surely the latter, but if so, it makes it impossible to agree to meet their demands.

[Dunge]

1 hour ago, Captain... said:

Fair enough summary, a lot of people don't realise it's about a specific issue not just a general stop oil protest. Perhaps they should have called themselves No New Oil. Most people also associate them with XR and get the 2 sets of protests mixed up blaming JSO for blocking roads which was actually XR. Some of the early tactics, defacing portraits 

 

There is certainly a failure in branding and clearly getting the issue across, but ultimately I am not against their current tactics of targeting sporting events, causing enough disruption to make their point but not enough to completely ruin the event.

For what it’s worth I do see merit in some of their tactics. To have a single smaller goal is often better to work to and achieve than the massive “stop climate change”. Of course if and when they did achieve it they’d move on to a new goal, but that’s for down the road and could actually serve to manage public opinion well.
 

But targeting British people’s leisure? They’ve just got that completely wrong and the longer they refuse to change course the more they damage the causes.

 

 

*Essentially I think it stands to reason they have a wider agenda but that it’s about focusing on a particular cause now, which I can appreciate as a plan.

Edited 7 July 2023 by Dunge

[Captain...]

1 hour ago, dsr-burnley said:

Actually they're opposed to no new licences for North Sea oil, not no new drilling, so I'm told.  The idea being that all existing drilling sites will shut down as their licences come up for renewal.  So it will mean no North Sea oil at all (not from the UK anyway), fairly soon.

 

Or that's what I'm told they're after.  They're a bit vague, presumably deliberately so.  Are we expected to believe that if they achieve their ambition of no new licences, they will fold their tents and steal into the night?  Or will they come up with a new set of demands?  Surely the latter, but if so, it makes it impossible to agree to meet their demands.

Their stated aims are to hold the government to account. The government agreed to no new licenses as part of the Paris climate agreement and have subsequently gone back on those promises. They are not requesting anything more than what the government promised to do.

 

Should the government actually do what they promised then I imagine JSO would probably fold back into wider climate change activism like XR.

[Daggers]

I can fully understand why some people are so angry about JSO’s actions. There are few things in life more completely disruptive than having racket ball or pony whipping delayed by a couple of minutes.

 

I completely agree with those who say we should reintroduce the death penalty for anyone delaying traffic - as long as we expand that to cover people doing roadworks on bank holidays, middle lane hoggers, people who leave dual carriageways at the very last minute, old people, and politicians who’ve allowed the road infrastructure to collapse beneath our feet.

[ALC Fox]

An excellent episode of Pod Save the UK this week including an interview with someone heavily involved with Just Stop Oil.

 

 

[Kopfkino]

11 hours ago, Captain... said:

Should the government actually do what they promised then I imagine JSO would probably fold back into wider climate change activism like XR.

No they won’t.

 

Just Stop Oil and Insulate Britain before that came about because of factions within XR disagreeing on tactics. On the one hand you had Roger Hallam and his backers that wanted to continue being disruptive and go further, on the other hand you had the likes of Rupert Read who thought that XR’s initial actions had worked but that it was now time to build a broader movement.

 

So Roger Hallam and his band set up Insulate Britain to carry on with the disruptive tactics and escalate whilst taking the common criticism of XR which was that they were disruptive without offering practical solutions and facing that head on by setting up around a single aim. 
 

Insulate Britain sort of burnt itself out very quickly and the branding went too far the other way, too safe. So Roger Hallam came back with Just Stop Oil again taking the lesson of having a clear solution as an ask. If they manage their current stated aim, it either changes to be actually stopping oil or they come back as something different. It’s just a wing of the environmental movement that’s wants to be more ‘disobedient’ and disruptive because that’s what they believe in - they’re not gonna change if they get this small win. They are essentially the bloke in the pub that’s always looking for aggro.

 

They get the attention and the coverage but on the other hand XR brought together 10s of thousands of people in London to ‘demonstrate’ but in an inclusive way. Gets less attention but can take more people on the journey than a few hundred loonies pissing everyone off.

 

You have people like Swampy, the country’s best known environmentalist for a long time, pushing back on their tactics and suggesting it’s not helpful. You have Trevor Neilson, who was part of setting up the Climate Emergency Fund that funds Just Stop Oil (but is now no longer part of the fund) saying that it’s counterproductive and calling for better coalition building.

 

Recently the Climate Majority Project was launched by Rupert Read and Liam Kavanagh, backed by people like Swampy to focus on inclusive, community action. The Climate Majority Project (CMP) is a UK-based organisation aiming to support a climate-concerned majority of citizens to respond in meaningful, relevant ways to the climate and ecological emergency. 
 

So if anyone’s interested in the cause or even sympathise with Just Stop Oil - if you’re willing and able to get involved with these community-driven initiatives and events to do so. Whether it’s this group or another, you’ll find it’s a better way to the outcome you want than some prat running around a tennis court with some orange foil.

 

 

[Kopfkino]

20 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Solutions that produce steel without coal have been discovered and are being implemented.

But not at scale or anywhere close to competing on cost. It’s far away.

 

Rich countries can get a big proportion of their steel needs from recycled steel now and might be able/willing to pay for expensive green steel.

 

Steel is arguably the biggest issue of the day. It produces a significant chunk of emissions but the amount you have tracks closely to development and standards of live so how do developing countries develop without the emissions.

[Captain...]

14 minutes ago, Kopfkino said:

No they won’t.

 

Just Stop Oil and Insulate Britain before that came about because of factions within XR disagreeing on tactics. On the one hand you had Roger Hallam and his backers that wanted to continue being disruptive and go further, on the other hand you had the likes of Rupert Read who thought that XR’s initial actions had worked but that it was now time to build a broader movement.

 

So Roger Hallam and his band set up Insulate Britain to carry on with the disruptive tactics and escalate whilst taking the common criticism of XR which was that they were disruptive without offering practical solutions and facing that head on by setting up around a single aim. 
 

Insulate Britain sort of burnt itself out very quickly and the branding went too far the other way, too safe. So Roger Hallam came back with Just Stop Oil again taking the lesson of having a clear solution as an ask. If they manage their current stated aim, it either changes to be actually stopping oil or they come back as something different. It’s just a wing of the environmental movement that’s wants to be more ‘disobedient’ and disruptive because that’s what they believe in - they’re not gonna change if they get this small win. They are essentially the bloke in the pub that’s always looking for aggro.

 

They get the attention and the coverage but on the other hand XR brought together 10s of thousands of people in London to ‘demonstrate’ but in an inclusive way. Gets less attention but can take more people on the journey than a few hundred loonies pissing everyone off.

 

You have people like Swampy, the country’s best known environmentalist for a long time, pushing back on their tactics and suggesting it’s not helpful. You have Trevor Neilson, who was part of setting up the Climate Emergency Fund that funds Just Stop Oil (but is now no longer part of the fund) saying that it’s counterproductive and calling for better coalition building.

 

Recently the Climate Majority Project was launched by Rupert Read and Liam Kavanagh, backed by people like Swampy to focus on inclusive, community action. The Climate Majority Project (CMP) is a UK-based organisation aiming to support a climate-concerned majority of citizens to respond in meaningful, relevant ways to the climate and ecological emergency. 
 

So if anyone’s interested in the cause or even sympathise with Just Stop Oil - if you’re willing and able to get involved with these community-driven initiatives and events to do so. Whether it’s this group or another, you’ll find it’s a better way to the outcome you want than some prat running around a tennis court with some orange foil.

 

 

Fair enough, that's a much more knowledgeable answer than mine. My broader point was that should their demands be met they might stop JSO but they would carry on with other climate activism. It may not be XR but they are most likely not going to think the job's done and start up or join a different cause.

[Kopfkino]

1 minute ago, Captain... said:

Fair enough, that's a much more knowledgeable answer than mine. My broader point was that should their demands be met they might stop JSO but they would carry on with other climate activism. It may not be XR but they are most likely not going to think the job's done and start up or join a different cause.

Yeah I realise. I didn’t really want to quote you in the end - I just wanted to share more details and make the point to anyone that reads to not be drawn into their defence just cos you support the cause - there are better alternatives.

 

They’re not bad people but mixing with some of these people you realise they are bad news and there’s many well-intentioned people that get drawn in by desperation.

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

But not at scale or anywhere close to competing on cost. It’s far away.

 

Rich countries can get a big proportion of their steel needs from recycled steel now and might be able/willing to pay for expensive green steel.

 

Steel is arguably the biggest issue of the day. It produces a significant chunk of emissions but the amount you have tracks closely to development and standards of live so how do developing countries develop without the emissions.

Right, so it's a question of time and will to fill the gap.

 

You're right that it's a big issue, and as with power generation infrastructure this is where the bigger richer nations are going to have to step up to help the developing ones rather than going insular. Global problem, global consequences, global solution needed.