Imperialist dominance over energy reducing and renewable energy flourishing would be cool
Just Stop Oil’s first protests were directly shutting down oil terminals, then oil companies bought private laws to stop that so they moved on to other, at the time legal, methods such as “slow marching”. These were then also made illegal. Also the sunflowers painting was covered in glass.
I’m still on the fence about Just Stop Oil. They “shut down” oil terminals for the span of a single Friday morning, but the blow back led to laws that are still on the book today.
Their operations seemed purposely created to create as much outrage as possible without actually effectively damaging the oil industry in any measurable way.
It doesn’t help that they were funded by a fucking Getty oil heiress. So it’s hard for me to determine if it was actually a false flag operation or just the good intentions of a incompetent billionaire.
Without showing my hand too much, I did do some actions with Just Stop Oil, so have some insight here.
The whole Getty thing has some basis in reality but has been ran with far too much. JSO received funding from the “Climate Emergency Fund”, who Getty co-founded. That group has donated money to 250 different NVDA groups, according to them. A vast majority of JSO’s funding came from donations from supporters.
While I obviously can’t really speak for anyone but myself, everyone I interacted with, including the founders, seemed 100% genuinely committed to the cause, if a bit misguided at times. You’re right about them trying to cause outrage, the whole idea was to keep the topic in the news, get JSO spokespeople interviewed etc. Everyone was well aware that we’d be treated with contempt but were okay with that, if it shifted the overton window a bit. There is theory behind this: Radical flank effect
Effectively damaging the oil industry is ideal, IMO, but it’s incompatible with being an “accountable” movement (i.e. chooses to get nicked), as you will spend your life in prison.
the blow back led to laws that are still on the book today.
Effectively, those laws were already in place. If the first time a tactic is used against powerful people, it is outlawed, it was never actually allowed. The laws getting passed at least shows people how the law is being used to benefit the rich and powerful. The previous unspoken rule gave the people in power plausible deniability. I’m not some huge fan of Just Stop Oil but the edges of the laws should always be probed by activists, imo.
I remember when people were angry at Greenpeace for attempting to scale oil drilling platforms in the Arctic. So yeah.
Lots of people will spend all day arguing about what the right kind of protest is but much fewer people go out and do what they believe should be done
The right kind of protest seems to be the kind that doesn’t inconvience anybody.
the right way to protest is the one history tells us that works and mexico proved that it still does work in 2017.
the wrong way to protest is the way we’ve been conditioned to believe how protests work and exemplified by ineffectual examples like the “no kings” marches.
Because if you get arrested then you lose your job and becomes national news.
The meme seems to be ironic than actually saying that Doland is like that.
Should I mention that in meme title or description?
Unfortunately it hasn’t really stopped oil, it just increased demand for oil from the imperial core.
This has been one of the best policy outcomes for American oil companies in history, it effectively destroyed opec and opened further sanctions to Russia.
It’s not a coincidence that the US had near concurrent conflicts with Venezuela, Iran, and Russia.
This is not true. Renewables and electrification tech are up significantly around the world. Especially in the developing world and non-western countries. Before the war, renewables were already the cheapest form of power which has not been the case for previous oil shocks. This one is different
I was talking about the national scale not the consumer market. Consumers installing some panels is great, but it is by no means going to make a large dent in the fossil fuel market.
the cheapest form of power which has not been the case for previous oil shocks. This one is different
Yes renewables are cheap, largely thanks to China’s advances in the production of cheaper solar panels. However, the scale of infrastructure investments required to transition an entire energy grid away from fossil fuels is still time consuming and very expensive.
As with my previous comment, I am not talking about only consumer renewables. I am talking about all overall total renewables sales which are massively increased and mostly do not come from the consumer market
True. At the same time, it seems to have made people talk more about renewable/alternate energy resources.
We will see if that talk gets transferred into any action. Unfortunately changes to energy infrastructure take a very long time, and from what it appears world leaders are hoping this to be a short term blip. Typically governments are hesitant to plan long term solutions for what they believe are short term problems.
My best guess for the best possible outcome is that nations who were already planning on building alternatives energy solutions maybe speed up their investments. What I actually think will happen is that US oil companies get even more access to influence not only the American government, but its partners who are desperate to meet their energy demands right now.
It already has turned into action in a lot of countries, especially in the developing world and non-western countries. Renewable sales are up significantly globally since before the war started
I was talking about the national scale, the vast majority of the increase in sales has been on the consumer side. Which is good, but it’s a tiny sliver of a very large pie.
I am talking about global renewable volume which is mostly not from induvidial consumers. In any case, residential solar has actually gotten to become a large segment in some countries and regions. For instance residential solar (not just solar overall) is over 25% of all grid capacity in Pakistan and over 20% of Puerto Rico’s energy capacity
I am talking about global renewable volume which is mostly not from induvidial consumers.
If you had some information about that I’d be glad to read it. From what I’ve read most of the growth has been from the residential/consumer market.
become a large segment in some countries and regions. For instance residential solar (not just solar overall) is over 25% of all grid capacity in Pakistan and over 20% of Puerto Rico’s energy capacity
Yes, there are going to be unique situations where solar is going to be a great and economically viable choice. Especially in regions with poor or inadequate grids that fail to reliably meet current demand. Those unique situations are not going to be the countries currently consuming the lion’s share of fossil fuels.
A lot of the times is going to be easier to start from the ground up, than it will be to redo an already functional system. Even in these scenarios solar isn’t likely to replace the systems reliance on fossil fuels, it’s just going to be able to expand their ability to provide additional power. If you look at Puerto Rico, they are still utilizing just as much fossil fuels as they were previously, they’ve just increased their overall capacity with solar.
Trying to find a source about this and they all use passive voice so none of them clarify who is doing the buying, but to the broader point, it is affecting oil demand
Global fossil-fuel emissions are set to fall by around 0.5% in 2026 amid the fallout from the Hormuz crisis, according to Carbon Brief analysis.
[…]
the rise in emissions associated with this increased coal use, much of which is unrelated to Hormuz, is set to be more than offset by declines for oil and gas.
[…]
While there are many short-term factors at play in the shifting forecasts for 2026, it is clear that the latest energy crisis will also affect fossil-fuel demand in the next year and beyond.
For example, whereas the IEA initially forecast that oil demand would rebound in 2027 to well above 2025 levels, it is now expecting use of the fuel to be effectively flat for two years.
[…]
At the same time, governments in countries that had planned to rely on imports of liquefied natural gas (LNG) have been signalling shifts towards favouring domestic clean energy instead – or continuing to use coal for longer.
JDPON DON BABY
