this post was submitted on 14 May 2024
138 points (95.4% liked)

World News

46802 readers
2686 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Reserves 10 times the North Sea’s output raise fears over drilling in protected region

Russia has found vast oil and gas reserves in the Antarctic, much of it in areas claimed by the UK.

The surveys are a prelude to bringing in drilling rigs to exploit the pristine region for fossil fuels, MPs have warned.

Reserves totalling 511bn barrels of oil – about 10 times the North Sea’s entire 50-year output – have been reported to Moscow by Russian research ships, according to evidence given to the Commons Environment Audit Committee (EAC) last week.

It follows a series of surveys by the Alexander Karpinsky vessel, operated by Rosgeo – the Russian agency charged with finding mineral reserves for commercial exploitation.

Antarctica is meant to be protected by the 1959 Antarctic Treaty that bans all mineral or oil developments. The UK’s interests are overseen by the Foreign Office – but it has been accused of ignoring the emerging crisis.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 74 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why are people doing resource exploration in protected areas? >___>

[–] [email protected] 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Yeah they should have never been allowed to search there in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

what's 500 billion times $78?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

Pay no mind to the effect this will have on climate change if they decided to plunder this crap

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

areas claimed by the UK.

Due to Antarctic treaties, the claim should be effectively inoperative as long as the UK is a member, and Russia shouldn't be extracting mineral resources as long as Russia is a member.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antarctic_Treaty_System

The Antarctic Treaty was signed in 1959 by 12 nations and came into effect in the mid-1960s. The central ideas with full acceptance were the freedom of scientific research in Antarctica and the peaceful use of the continent. There was also a consensus for demilitarization and the maintenance of the status quo. The treaty prohibits nuclear testing, military operations, economic exploitation, and territorial claims in Antarctica. It is monitored through on-site inspections. The only permanent structures allowed are scientific research stations. The original signatory countries hold voting rights on Antarctic governance, with seven of them claiming portions of the continent and the remaining five being non-claimants. Other nations have joined as consultative members by conducting significant research in Antarctica. Non-consultative parties can also adhere to the treaty. In 1991-1992, the treaty was renegotiated by 33 nations, with the main change being the Madrid Protocol on Environmental Protection, which prohibited mining and oil exploration for 50 years.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Environmental_Protection_to_the_Antarctic_Treaty

Article 7 prohibits any activity relating to mineral resources, other than scientific research.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

oh boy here comes the war

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If we were to burn another 500 billion barrels of oil, it would be game over for the planet.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

you have to start thinking quarterly. Imagine the quarterly profits

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Screw the planet, just think of all the profit. ~ Oil exes probably

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

is it possible they found none but seek a way to attract investments ?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Aren't Russian speakers opressed in the British antartic territories?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Tally ho, time for the RN to sail to ~~the Falklands~~ Antarctica!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You pretty much had it right the first time. The Falklands would likely be used as a staging area, being the closest British or allied territory to the part of Antarctica in question.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

True, although with Milei being as unpredictable as he is, maybe he'd offer a port for this venture.