Any silver lining from the BP disaster seems very tainted

For over two months now like so many other people I’ve been waiting for some good news to come from the BP oil rig disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. It’s been one of those events that I think we’ll reflect upon for many years in the future, for some people hopefully it was the moment where at last the true cost of oil (not just from the drilling process) was examined on a deeper level. In addition hopefully it’s the last event of its type we ever make the oceans and its inhabitants endure.

Something I read today made me think that perhaps there is a silver lining to the disaster after all. My initial thought was that maybe yes, this is a positive of some sort to be found. Then after thinking it through it simply made me more angry that we as a society need a roof to fall on our head before we accept that the roof was damaged. I’m referring to recent comments made by Eileen Claussen, President of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

Her comments explore the idea that the Deepwater Horizon crisis is making more Americans give added consideration to a cleaner energy plan for the future. However not to the extent that the average person feels they should have to pay for it or help to tackle climate change issues. She stated that the US population is ‘horrified’ by the impact of the disaster and resultant pollution in the Gulf and that the pendulum was moving slowly towards renewable energy sources being fully considered.  She also said that she doesn’t feel consumers are prepared to pay for the necessary changes and that government should pay. To me that’s quite remarkable really as so many talking heads cites the need for lower taxation and less government control. Her comments also mentioned that the BP crisis had created a “nudge, rather than a shift” in terms of the public’s desire for renewable energy.

Again that’s horrific, the worst natural disaster in recent times (arguably since Chernobyl) has created ‘a nudge’ toward changing our approach to energy for the future. What would it take to create a major shift? I hesitate to even guess. The very last barrel of oil sucked from the very last well? Four or five more oil rig disasters of the same scale? It’s easy to be offended by the site of polluted beaches, oil-slicked birds and dead fish. It’s easy to say BP are evil and should be boycotted for ever more. The reality is that legislation and out of date energy policies allowed this to happen. If not BP it would have been another company. The only thing approaching a silver lining would have been an outraged public  voice against the industry as a whole and renewed determination to force the hand of industries and governments alike to end the reliance on fossil fuels within the decade. Of course there will be a cost and of course it will seem steep, but the dividend is a more secure future. The dividend is a planet that is fit to inhabit. The cost of complacency results in the BP crisis. Complacency is very affordable.

This month 3 European nations have announced that domestic fuel charges will increase by up to 30% in the years ahead to allow the country to reach their green economic commitments, an emissions trading system in the USA is being shot down by one of the major parties as ‘an unacceptable energy tax’. How does anyone think we can make these changes at no cost? Most importantly of all, why does it take something such as the BP disaster for people to react to the energy policies we’ve pursued for decades? I wish I had all of the answers, but I certainly am left with dozens of questions.