Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday June 19 2020, @01:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the strawberry^W-oil-fields-forever-♫♫ dept.

As oil slumps, Norway explores new fields in the Arctic:

But the move does make you look askance at Norway. This week, MPs in the super-rich oil nation are expected to vote against further protection of one of the world's most important biological hotspots, so enabling continued exploration in the Barents Sea.

This comes off the back of a pledge to delay more than $10bn in taxes for petroleum companies, to spur investment which will help fund drilling in a uniquely biodiverse area called the marginal ice zone.

[...] But then Norway is environmentally at odds with itself.

You have the oil that made it one of the richest nations on earth. Then walk around Oslo and you will see electric cars all over the place - in fact, three out of four cars now sold in Norway are either wholly or partially electric.

And 98 percent of Norway's electricity comes from renewable energy, of which hydropower is the main source. The nation talks highly of its own sustainable prowess. And well it might.

But all those fossil fuels Norway extracts? They go overseas. The nation may not emit too many greenhouse gases, but it exports them on a colossal scale. Norway's wealth is someone else's smog.

Perhaps Norwegians welcome global warming?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 20 2020, @01:14PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday June 20 2020, @01:14PM (#1010361) Journal

    It's a decent strategy - if psychopathic.

    There's no point to pathologizing conflict of interest.

    Why should I care about global warming if it affects YOU more than me?

    Keep in mind that most adaptation to global warming is going to be pretty cheap over the timeframe we're talking about. Even moving 250 million from the countries in question is not that expensive. So why should I care when most adaptation just isn't going to be that big of a deal given a few centuries and a huge world economy?

    Besides at this point, shouldn't we be thinking about adaptation anyway? High end estimates of climate sensitivity shoot way past holding the line at 2 C already and nobody is interested in radical greenhouse gases emission elimination. These regions most effected would probably be better served figuring out how to negotiate permanent immigration to other countries rather than trying to hold back the tide (unless, of course, they're as competent with dikes as the Netherlands).