Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

Hugh_Lebowski

(33,643 posts)

2. The actual extraction of the oil may be relatively environmentally friendly

Reply to hatrack (Original post)

Thu May 27, 2021, 08:58 PM

May 2021

I mean, in relation to other installations. I don't know either way, but that COULD be true.

The BURNING of the oil, the release of the sequestered carbon, however ... cannot be environmentally friendly, period.

It's a bit like Perdue Pharma bragging that their Oxycontin contains no artificial flavors or colors.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Oh, Yay. New Russian Arctic Oil Port Will Ship 25 Million Tons in 2024, 100 Million Tons By 2030 [View all] hatrack May 2021 OP

If we drastically cut our oil usage, most of our problems will go away. Scrivener7 May 2021 #1

Yeah, because billions of people would die if we did that and economic growth would go negative Hugh_Lebowski May 2021 #3

How do you figure? I am suggesting, of course, that we ramp up our use of other energy Scrivener7 May 2021 #4

I just read what you wrote and responded literally :) Hugh_Lebowski May 2021 #6

The actual extraction of the oil may be relatively environmentally friendly Hugh_Lebowski May 2021 #2

Yeah, the Russians are famous for their fastidious care for the land on which they drill . . . hatrack May 2021 #5

I wasn't saying I'd bet on it or anything Hugh_Lebowski May 2021 #7

Well, yeah . . . . hatrack May 2021 #8