Radical Noesis - Thinking outside the box

According to the Independent's article, BP has been fighting against increased limitations in the US on CO2 emissions. This comes to light just after the big show of BP backing Blair's push to act more quickly on global warming. However, there's an ocean of difference between BP's politics in the UK and its politics in the US.

In the UK, BP is playing nice (and green) because it is pushing a plan for carbon sequestration in tis depleted offshore drilling sites (Seabed supplies a cure for global warming crisis). But the US has a stated policy of NOT decreasing oil consumption, and is in denial over global warming. It is still "gathering information" according to Bush, and the Bush approach is both anti-regulation and pro-oil. Therefore, why should BP support the same policies it supports in the UK? It is not in their business interests to do so.

BP has long been in the spotlight for its poor environmental practices. A nice place to start is What's Wrong With BP at the McSpotlight corporate info page. It makes a nice counterpoint to BP's Environment and Society page.

Whether in the UK or in the US most people are somewhat sensitive about environmental issues. The UK population is certainly more savvy and active on global warming than those in the US, but those in the US are still led to believe that there is a debate over whether global warming is happening, and whether humans have anything to do about it. All they have to do is point to the great leader Bush to prove the point that the jury is out on global warming. (Sorry world that the US public is so damned malleable to propaganda) Regardless, it behooves BP to present a "green" face in the US, as it does in the UK. I guess that they figure that news still doesn't cross the Atlantic - or if it does, that no one is watching.

Guess what BP? WE ARE WATCHING!