Shell in Nigeria.

Discovered via Platform London

Read the full post...

Vogue turns oil spill into fashion

Vogue Italy's August edition frontcovers models in the midst of an oil spill. A shoot by Stephen Meisel, a photographer now infamous for his fashion shoot amongst soldiers in Iraq back in 2007.

In case you are interested:

Kristen McMenamy (...) keeps her skin golden thanks to Self Tan Face Bronzing Gel Tint (to wear alone or with foundation): it takes care of the skin, while giving it a hint of color. Carbon, anthracite, and all of the earthy shades "dress" her eyes: Quick Eyes Cream Shadow, cocoa shimmer, a long-lasting cream eye shadow, worn with brown High Impact Mascara, and her lips feature a nude look. All by Clinique. Tulle dress with beaded embroidery, Ralph Lauren Collection. Rubber necklace, My Sister's Art. Hair by Orlando Pita for Orlo Salon. Make-up Pat McGrath. Fashion editor Karl Templer. Set design by Mary Howard.

And I guess "Oil courtesy BP?"

Read the full post...

A glacier a day, keeps the cold away

Back in 1962, we thought this was good publicity...


Discovered via Boing Boing

Read the full post...

Sarah Palin better roll up her sleeves

Sarah Palin reminds me of a Belgian artist many years ago. She competed for the pre-selections of the Eurosong festival, but did not qualify. Nevertheless, she made it as a real TV hit, made good money, and eventually ended up as a politician.

I guess Sarah Palin only made it thus far, as she appeals to hidden sexual fantasies of the middle aged US male electorate.

If women had as few braincells as men all Chippendales'd be senators by now.

Read the full post...

Picture of the day: And this is how your animals will look like

A Brown Pelican sits in heavy oil on the beach at East Grand Terre Island along the Louisiana coast.


Picture courtesy Periodismo Humano, AP Photo/Charlie Riedel. Discovered via The Horizon

Read the full post...

BP's new ad campaign

Read the full post...

Picture of the day: And this is how your oceans will look like

"Delicate patterns in the sea breaking on Orange Beach, Alabama".
More than 90 miles from the BP oil spill. (Hires)

Check the latest articles on the Gulf Oil Spill (or read the latest via RSS)

Picture courtesy Guardian UK, Dave Martin/AP. Discovered via @mparent77772 and The Horizon.

Read the full post...

Rumble: Oil prices: I have one question, though

Fact: Oil prices have crashed from about $150 to $50 a barrel in the past months. (Source)



Fact: The price of crude accounts for about 58% of the price of fuel at the pump (Source)

Question: As crude fell to 30% of its peak price, and the price of crude makes 58% of the price of fuel at the pump, then how much should the price of fuel at the pump be today, compared to the "peak crude price" times?

Question: Did fuel pump prices drop that much, where you live?

Question: If not, how come we are not rioting in the streets?

Read the full post...

News: Ecuador commercializes the rain forest. By not touching it.

There is more biological diversity in Ecuador's Yasuni rainforest than almost anywhere else in the world. No surprise it is protected as a national park and UNESCO biosphere reserve.

But the Yasuni region also sits atop Ecuador's largest known oil reserve, several hundred million barrels. Oil is the country's most important export. Without petrodollars and petro-jobs the country would likely be even poorer than it already is. No wonder several oil companies are pressuring the government to issue drilling licenses.

Hoping to prevent this from happening, Ecuador's environment minister requests for compensation to keep the oil under the forest, under the form of "CO2" or carbon credits.

Carbon credits are a way companies and countries have been stimulated to initiate environment friendly initiatives trying to cap global CO2 emissions.
If a country or company pollutes, it needs to ensure it holds an equal amount of "environment credits". CO2 credits can be bought on the international market from companies or countries who 'produce' environmental improvements, e.g. planting a forest.

But no country or company received carbon credits yet, for... "not doing anything" i.e. for keeping "nature untouched". And that's what Ecuador's critics are now claiming: "How can one be paid for not touching nature?"
What then if companies start asking money for not drilling oil in the Northsea, in Kuwait's desert. How about if any country with a tree asks for money not to chop that tree. Or worse, how about any country would ask credits for not starting a lucrative but polluting project?

Ecuador might also venture in more innovative solutions, which probably look more feasible. Projects such as offering a "virtual" carbon credit on the Internet, for anyone to buy. So maybe next month, you can buy your kids a piece of virtual untouched Ecuadorian rainforest. (Full)

More on The Road about environment and pollution.

Picture courtesy AFP

Read the full post...

News: Bush goes, Oil Drops

Price of Oil compared to the period of the Bush reign.
No further explanation needed. (Full)

Read the full post...

Picture of the day: Bio-Spill

A big stain of palm oil invades the shore of Taganga beach in Colombia after 10 tons of oil was spilled from the production plant of Terlica. Residents complained seeing about the dead fish but the spokesperson of Terlica said the oil is biodegradable and won't harm the environment.

More Pictures of the Day on the Road.

Picture courtesy AFP

Read the full post...

News: China, the West and Darfur: Why Do We Still Buy This Shit?

April 8, 2007.

Warning: This piece is opinionated.

1. Darfur According to the Chinese State Media: "Stable and Natural"

Reuters Alertnet reports:
"A Chinese government delegation visited refugee camps and met officials in western Sudan's strife-torn Darfur province to "get acquainted" with the situation there, Chinese state media reported on Sunday.

More than 200,000 people are believed to have died in Darfur and some 2.5 million have been driven from their homes into squalid camps since ethnic tensions erupted into revolt in 2003.

The United States and other Western powers have sought to authorise U.N. peacekeepers to quell violence in Darfur, where government-backed militia have been fighting rebel forces. African Union troops have failed to stop massacres.

China, which buys much of Sudan's oil and wields veto power over U.N. resolutions, is facing rising criticism from Western governments and rights campaigners for having rejected U.N. forces without Khartoum's agreement.

On Saturday the delegation, lead by Beijing government envoy Zhai Juan, went to Abu Shouk Camp, in North Darfur province, and met provincial governor Youssef Kibir, Xinhua news agency said.

"Administrative officials said that life of some 50,000 internally displaced people (at the camp) was stable and natural," Xinhua reported.

Continuing their four-day official visit, the delegation also visited a refugee camp with 14,000 people in Nyala, South Darfur province, and met provincial governor Al-Haj Atta al-Mannan Idris.

Idris said the general situation was "stable and improving", but "sporadic fighting" had occurred between rebel factions and tribes in the recent period, Xinhua added.

Last week Chinese Defence Minister Cao Gangchuan offered visiting Sudanese Joint Chief of Staff, Haj Ahmed El Gaili, stronger military cooperation while also urging that Sudan consider a peace proposal put forward by the now retired U.N. secretary-general, Kofi Annan.
"

2. Sudan and China: an "OW"-relationship: "Oil out, Weapons in."
(Also called a "win-win relationship"...)

According to the Council on Foreign Relations, "China takes 64 percent of Sudan's oil exports". The same report states that "China has sold the Islamic government in Khartoum weapons and $100 million worth of Shenyang fighter planes, including twelve supersonic F-7 jets. Experts say any military air presence exercised by the government—including the helicopter gunships reportedly used to terrorize civilians in Darfur—comes from China."

China is one of Sudan's major sources of weapons, says a BBC report.


3. So, we in the West, get good scores on this one?

Nah, don't think so.. The media reports cited above might be allied to the West and Western politics, and are all to happy to report China's debatable interest in oil import from and weapons export to Sudan. Because... well, because it is China who gets the oil and the business, and not the West... So let's relativate it a bit:

When last year, the UN Security Council is debated a US draft resolution on the Sudan crisis, based on colliding views whether a genocide is or is not happening in Darfur, the issue of Sudan's oil is became a key factor. If an oil export embargo was approved, China and India would have lost their influence over Sudan's vast oil reserves and a Khartoum regime change would open up these resources to the West. The US is in favour of sanctions (hey I wonder why!), China is against (surprise!).
The population of Darfur is presently, as the UN puts it, suffering from "the world's worst humanitarian crisis." It is well documented that the Khartoum government bares much of the responsibility for this suffering, which the UN calls "ethnic cleansing" and the US called "genocide". It is however also well documented that the US through its closest African allies, helped train the SLA and JEM Darfuri rebels that initiated Khartoum's violent reaction. (source: Afrol News)
[Just something that crossed my mind: Remember the Taliban used to be backed by the US (through the Pakistani Secret Service) in their fight against the Mujaheddin and Russian influences... That one ran out of hand also, did it not?]

According to the "European Coalition on Oil in Sudan", here is a list of the companies who have oil interests in Sudan. Or in a map format. Quite a few of non-Chinese (European, North-American) companies have interests also!

Still, China is fast emerging as one of the world’s biggest, most secretive and irresponsible arms exporters, according to a report issued by Amnesty International.

4. So.. What is the conclusion?

So, what should we conclude? The US has Iraq, China has its Darfur for main oil supplies and everyone should be happy? Or should the conclusion be that if we would use more alternative energy sources, the world would be a better place, not only for the environment, but also for the refugees, terrorism and civil unrest? One thing is for sure: the situation in Darfur is "NOT stable and natural" as the Chinese and Sudanese media reported today... Unless if we all accept an ongoing genocide is "stable", because it has been ongoing since so long, and "natural" as... well... as it is in Africa of course... That's where people kill each other naturally, no?

Some excellent video footage by Philip Cox:


A more recent video by BBC reporter Jonah Fisher:

Pictures courtesy WFP

Read the full post...