Log in

View Full Version : The Inuit sitting on billions of barrels of oil



Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant'
29th November 2012, 09:43
After a decade of legal wrangling and spending $4.5bn (£2.8bn), this year Shell Oil was given permission to begin exploratory drilling off the coast of Alaska. But many in the local Inuit community are concerned it could have a devastating impact on one of their main sources of food - the bowhead whale.
Marie Casados shows me the contents on her freezer. Inside there's whale meat, muktuk - frozen whale skin and blubber - a selection of fish and a polar bear foot, which looks like a human hand. She describes it as a real delicacy. But it's more than that - this is her food supply for the winter.
Fishing and hunting are central to the Inupiat way of life - archaeologists have found evidence of humans hunting whales in the area dating back to as early as 800BC.
"We are the oldest continuous inhabitants of North America," says Point Hope's Mayor Steve Oomituk. "We've been here thousands of years."
Oomituk shares the fear of many in the small community - population 800 - that offshore drilling by Shell could destroy the food chain that they rely on for survival. Over 80% of the food eaten in Point Hope is caught by the people themselves.
They worry that it will disrupt the migration routes of the marine mammals, driving them away from the coastal waters where they can be reached by hunters.
"Their proposed Arctic drilling is right in the path of the animals' migration routes," says Oomituk.
"We live in a cycle of life that hasn't changed for thousands of years. We know where the animals are coming. We know when they are going north, when they are going south, this is our home, our land, our identity as a people."
But Oomituk recognises that, like every other American citizen, he is dependent on fossil fuels. He heats his house with diesel, he drives a vehicle that needs petrol.
Jobs are also a major concern in this poor community. As mayor, Oomituk appreciates that many people would benefit from a new local employer.
"You want jobs for the people, you want the economy to come up, but do you want to sacrifice your way of life to have that happen? To endanger a way of life that's been here for time immemorial?"

(Full article here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20310752)

LiberationTheologist
29th November 2012, 13:05
Eat less polar bears and whales, use less energy. I know these people live in the arctic nonetheless its all a vile business. Same thing for other people using fossil fuels, eating way too many animals.

There is all kind of wind and sun energy in the arctic, it just needs to be harnessed in that harsh environment.

hatzel
29th November 2012, 13:40
Yeah great idea, buddy, what with Point Hope being famous for its long growing season and rich arable soils perfect for the kind of agriculture necessary to sustain such an isolated, largely self-sufficient community...

LiberationTheologist
29th November 2012, 14:10
Yeah great idea, buddy, what with Point Hope being famous for its long growing season and rich arable soils perfect for the kind of agriculture necessary to sustain such an isolated, largely self-sufficient community...

Firsts off, it was probably the US government that allowed the oil drilling, not the native people. So where are all the profits going?

They are not largely self sufficient. I wish it were so but they are largely colonized and fossil fuel dependent just look at the SUV driving and fossil fuel guy. Being able to buy your own solar panels and wind turbines is a step toward empowerment and self sufficiency. Having to constantly buy oil and gas involves far more dependency.

As for the growing season I said eat less meat. I know that is harder to do in the arctic region but you think that vegetables are not being shipped from the south? Also they could harness a lot of wind and sun energy and have green houses. A move away from so much meat consumption would be good for humans and animals alike. This is all a very technically possible thing, when you have control of land and economic decisions.

ÑóẊîöʼn
30th November 2012, 09:05
As for the growing season I said eat less meat. I know that is harder to do in the arctic region but you think that vegetables are not being shipped from the south?

If they eat less meat, then they will have to ship in more vegetables. Why should they become even more reliant on imports than they may already be?

Os Cangaceiros
30th November 2012, 09:24
They are not largely self sufficient. I wish it were so but they are largely colonized and fossil fuel dependent just look at the SUV driving and fossil fuel guy. Being able to buy your own solar panels and wind turbines is a step toward empowerment and self sufficiency. Having to constantly buy oil and gas involves far more dependency.

As for the growing season I said eat less meat. I know that is harder to do in the arctic region but you think that vegetables are not being shipped from the south? Also they could harness a lot of wind and sun energy and have green houses. A move away from so much meat consumption would be good for humans and animals alike. This is all a very technically possible thing, when you have control of land and economic decisions.

Well the Arctic is one brutal place. It's actually amazing that anyone lived here before the advent of electricity IMO (I'm in Fairbanks right now...30 degrees below zero, whoo!) All I have to say is, good luck getting sun energy at this time of year! Nothing even grows up here besides some scraggly spruce trees, it's a desert.

Vegetables do get shipped to Alaska, of course, but a lot of the fruit and vegetables that find their way up here are pretty bad. Of a much more inferior quality than produce you'd find down in the "lower 48". I was born in a coastal southern Alaskan community and it was even true there, can only imagine how bad it is in Point Hope!

Alaskan natives have lived pretty autonomously/self-sufficiently during most of the past 100 years or so, actually...for the large majority of Alaska's modern history, besides a few temporary focal points of activity (like Nome and the gold rush there) there really was nothing up here in the way of infrastructure. I'd actually say that resource extraction infrastructure is the biggest deal here. It could be argued pretty strongly that it's benefited the state economically in a big way. Some of the stuff that people were scared of ecologically in regards to the energy industry never transpired, too...like when the pipeline was built, people were worried that it would disrupt the caribou migration, but it didn't...the caribou just ignore it. But other projects have run into stiff resistance from Alaskans, like the Pebble Mine project, which if built would be the largest copper mine in the world.

Myrdin
2nd December 2012, 18:44
I feel ashamed that a company like Shell originated in a country like mine.

Luís Henrique
5th December 2012, 15:51
many in the local Inuit community are concerned it could have a devastating impact on one of their main sources of food - the bowhead whale.

Time to start some pseudo-ecological campaign about how whales are quasi-human and eating them equates to Nazi Holocaust.

Luís Henrique

Haunter
7th December 2012, 17:27
How about the overall fact that shell is a bastardly company and will no doubt expand the grip of industry over one of the very last tribal societies in the world today?
Is that not a problem in and of itself?

First of all, we need to find healthy alternatives to oil. If it isn't direly important now, it certainly will become more and more important in the future. [common sense] Oil isn't renewable, and the more we expand on this complex, the less likely we'll be prepared to break our habits. [/common sense]

It just seems like an insult to the people. They've been living off the land for thousands of years and no doubt cherish their enviroment. Oil drillers NO NOT.