Thursday
Apr092015
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Greenpeace oil wars
Apr 9, 2015 I missed this article on WUWT yesterday. illegal and dangerous actions by Greenpeace once again. Not foolhardy enough to try it on the Russians this time.
As one of the commenters points out- what do these activists think their ship powered by?
TM
Updated 13.44 9 April 2015 In case you wondered about their supply ship the Esperanza, here are some details. So glad to read they have an efficient diesel electric system.....
Updated 8am 12 April 2015
Six Greenpeace activists who scaled an Arctic-bound Shell oil drilling rig in the middle of the Pacific Ocean abseiled down on Saturday, with the oil giant securing a restraining order against the environmental group.
Read it here.
TM
Reader Comments (40)
In part, 'The Piracy Act 1837 (7 Will 4 & 1 Vict c 88)' is still sound law in the uk.
4 Punishment of accessories.
In the case of every felony punishable under this Act every principal in the second degree and every accessory before the fact shall be punishable . . . in the same manner as the principal in the first degree is by this Act punishable; and every accessory after the fact to any felony punishable under this Act shall, on conviction, be liable to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding two years.
It just needs a credible individual to bring the charges.
Since when? This is the UK. ANYONE can bring charges regardless of credibility. The left has been doing this for decades as part of their social engineering war on common decency!
Mailman
Well.....if they are using the new Rainbow Warrior...which I doubt if they are as this seems to be used mostly for transporting bigwigs and supporters around the nicer parts of the globe.....they may not be using fossil fuels. This advantage somewhat negated by the Euros 22,000,000 it cost to build.....
Unbelievably expensive and exclusive wind powered yachts being the sustainable future of sea travel, as any fule kno!
Meanwhile in India, Greenpeace India's Registration Suspended, Bank Accounts Frozen
The Home Ministry said in a statement that there were serious allegations of Greenpeace's involvement in what it called 'anti-development' activities. All seven bank accounts of the organisation have been frozen for the next 180 days, and a show cause notice slapped on it asking why its registration should not be cancelled permanently. That would make the organization a non-entity in India, and it would need to close all operations in the country.
Paul Matthews, I think Greenpeace being designated a 'non entity' in India, is the International recognition they deserve.
The Indian sub continent is being throttled by Big Green. Millions are suffering now, and Big Green is pleased with its achievements. But this is ok, because the Green Luvvies who make it all possible, are only thinking of the financial inheritance of their own grandchildren.
Jack Savage: “…exclusive wind powered yachts…” Exclusive? How is the lighting system powered? (ALL ships have to display lights.) What about ventilation and/or air conditioning? Then there are the radars and other navigational equipment to consider, as well as ovens and cookers; I mean, d’you think they might have a cup of tea on board, or even ice for their G&T? What about communications – and, do you think that these folk would be without their computers? Nope, even that enviro-dream will be burning “fossil” fuels.
Then: what materials are used in its construction? What was the energy source involved in its construction? Sorry, but greenpeas and similar organisations have obviously had a total removal of irony from their psyche, or they have no shame in their hypocrisy.
Greenpeace ships are powered by donations.
Donations pay for oil.
The word 'yacht' comes from the Dutch, meaning a ship built for pleasure purposes.
I do not know the details of this particular yacht/ship, but there will be diesel powered electricity generators on board, burning fuel at the rate of a large truck, even when engines are not required for propulsion.
Any wind turbines or solar panels on board will be for publicity generation, rather than reliable electricity, and as such, may even have a realistic payback.
Thank you TM. It would appear that greenpeas are dedicated to the truth:
So, what is she? A 30-year-old USSR clunker, or a pristine, state-of-the-art ocean greyhound, just 13 years old?Much of her refit seems to have been to raise her to present-day standards; even the lauding of her bilge water purifiers (“… 15 times more effective than current legislation demands…) depends on which country’s legislation they are referring to. Depending upon operations, she will be burning anything from 5 to at least 25 tonnes per day of diesel (or marine gasoil); also, her speedy RIBs and the fuel-hungry helicopter will also be wanting some of the fuel that greenpeas is so determined that we should not get. Quite why so few people seem able to see the dichotomy in their thinking is beyond me.
Nothing much out of the ordinary on the ship....
Greenpeas is a business...
They sell smug and lies.
The Rad Rodent thought I said "exclusively wind powered" when in fact I say "exclusive" , meaning the average Greenpeace contributor does not get to sail on it.
The yacht does have a powerful diesel/electric back up engine power source. Of course it does. Doubtless it is sustainable in some way....blah blah.
The thrust of my comment was that even throwing 22 million euros of fossil fuel generated wealth at "no fossil fuels" it is still all bullshit.
From the link to The Esperanza:
This photo shows the two smoke-chimneys (either side of the radar dome), for dispersal of the smoke & particulates from the pair of Sulzer engines.
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/espy_web.jpg
They seem proud that it has "an environmentally and economically efficient propulsion system to reduce CO2 emissions."
I'm not a marine engineer, but note they make no such claim for their diesel engines; and it's those beasts which create the CO2 emissions.
From the link to the Esperanza, it is possible to conclude that the accommodation makes it possible to operate as a cruise ship carrying fare paying passengers, as it smashes through the pack ice, they have paid to watch 'disappear'.
Green Luvvies do not pay for irony. They get it for free.
From the look of the keel on the new £££££Rainbow Warrior£££££ it won't be going anywhere by sail in anything over a force 3. (Check view 3 underwater here).
Did I imagine it or didn't Greenpeace used to rent a nuclear powered icebreaker before their bulging funds bought them their own ice-breaker? A quick Google didn't find anything (expunged from history perhaps).
P.s. If you want a good laugh check out the *amazing* lack of self-awareness over at aTTP.
The puff for the Esperanza video says: "Get a tour of the largest Greenpeace ship sailing our ocean.."
I know GP are big-headed, but their ocean..?
David Blake
hmm... not much of a keel and not much of an engine. I can't help thinking that the lack (complete absence actually...) of any trumpeting means that the new vessel goes most everywhere (slowly) by diesel at pretty run of the mill fuel consumption figures.
If a vessel has a schedule to keep - as several of my yacht owning colleagues have discovered - motoring is 80% of the passage ....
Speaking of oil wars, did anyone catch the news about UK Oil & Gas finding a possible bucket load of oil near Gatwick.
Shares up 169%!
Sorry if I appeared to be harping at you, JS. I just wanted to clarify a few points about that ship that others might have missed in mis-reading your original post (“Wooh-hoo! A ship that burns no fossil fuels!”). As you have highlighted, it is even worse – it is a ship only for the anointed.
David Blake (5:01 PM): I see your point.
What a splendid excuse for the AGWistas to increase their use of “fossil” fuel – it’s to save the world, don’t’cha know?Recall Greenpeace's firm adherence to environmental laws on one of their other ships:
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2004/10/01/greenpeace-charged-violating-alaska-environmental-laws
David Blake
So no need to go to Paris, then, Ken?This from your link to "... and then there's Physics":
Mike Jackson, the conclusions, recommendations, and possibly even the minutes recording who said what, have already been prepared, for the Paris meeting.
Apart from the partying, I can see no reason for anyone to turn up. The money saved, could be spent on something useful instead, like saving lives. I expect the Paris delegates would much rather have a Party instead, at tax payers expense.
Radical Rodent: "What a splendid excuse for the AGWistas to increase their use of “fossil” fuel – it’s to save the world, don’t’cha know?"
Its the usual crap to be expected from the green blob. The end justifies the means; like putting bombs under cars of medical researchers, beating up hunt employees, illegally occupying exploration sites/vessels etc.
This is simply beautiful. perhaps the most beautiful and poetic thing I've ever read. Treehugggers justifying their dependence on all things fossil...
'It has taken many months to refit the ship in as environmentally friendly way as possible and these improvements include: the removal or safe containment of all asbestos; fitting a special fuel system to avoid spillage; newly fitted, more efficient, diesel electric propulsion; on board recycling of waste water, leaving only clean water pumped overboard; a waste based heating system; bilge water purifiers,15 times more effective than current legislation demands; TBT-free hull paint; ammonia based refrigeration and air-conditioning rather than climate changing and ozone depleting Freon gas - the first Dutch registered vessel to be so fitted; and an environmentally and economically efficient propulsion system to reduce CO2 emissions."
Jimmy Haigh: What intrigues me is the “special fuel system to avoid spillage”; do “ordinary” systems not avoid spillage? What is the point of any system that does not avoid spillage? What sort of system does not avoid spillage? Perhaps there are systems where a person fills a bucket from the fuel tank and tips it, spilling willy-nilly, into the fuel intake; who knows?
Jimmy Haigh, what that list translates into is: the ship needed a refit. The existing plumbing etc, was pretty rubbish when it was built, and no longer acceptable. The ship had lain unused, because no one else was in the market for a Russian designed, Polish built icebreaker. The propulsion engines, and electricity generator engines, were a bit rubbish, difficult to get spares, and electricity supplied may have been a bit spikey, for IT equipment. There was previously no sewage treatment on board at all.
I can understand the refrigeration requirement for food, but air conditioning on an ice breaking vessel? How hot is it supposed to get before ice melts? Or are Greenpeace going to be sailing in the tropics, sending photos home bemoaning the lack of ice?
Please note that I have high respect for the make-do and mend ability, of former Iron Curtain countries engineers. They had to learn how to fix things, because new kit was never available.
Radical Rodent, A special fuel system, is one that does not leak, and is not patch repaired with rolls of gaffer tape.
It would probably also include divisions within the bilge of the boat, so that any fuel leaked, could not simply be pumped overboard, at the touch of a button. The special system probably involves pressing at least 2 buttons, and manually operating a valve, so that it is idiot proof, ie no one from Greenpeace could accidently activate it.
Golf Charlie: not sure why that would be considered special; it strikes me as being an eminently sensible system; I doubt the alternative fuel system you described would really be considered “ordinary”. As for pumping the bilges overboard, there are already regulations in force for that, with any pumping going through filters. Hence, the bilge water “purifiers” (I wonder what that really means?) mentioned later. Mind you, I doubt there is ANY system that is idiot-proof; never underestimate the ingenuity of an idiot. Other than that, you have probably summed it up nicely.
Radical Rodent, I think you nailed it. There is nothing particularly special. Oldish vessel, nobody else wants, needs a refurb, plus airconditioning.
Diesel electric was the power system running the UK's diesel trains in the 1950's. In a boat, it has the advantage that you can put the diesel engine, that powers the generator, where you want, and put the electric motor, near the propeller, linking the two with cables rather than a propshaft. You also have the option of using batteries or other source, to turn the propeller, which can also generate could publicity footage.
Here's a classic green hypocrisy example in the Mail today.
It's an article about a guy who's got 20,000 miles worth of free flights, and has "has logged an impressive 354,000 miles in the sky while visiting 30 countries over the course of his lifetime." Good for him.
His job..?
"Scott Keyes, [is] a 28-year-old writer for Think Progress"
Hey Ho
Ho Hey
How many laws
Did you break today?
The Greenpeace puff for their boat, translated:
..these improvements include: the removal or safe containment of all asbestos
left where it is, then, with a warning sticker
fitting a special fuel system to avoid spillage
ah, a new filler cap
newly fitted, more efficient, diesel electric propulsion
connecting the propellor to the engine would be more efficient still
on board recycling of waste water, leaving only clean water pumped overboard
and sewage?
a waste based heating system
that’s waste heat (from the engine) rather than heat from other waste, no doubt
bilge water purifiers,15 times more effective than current legislation demands
to remove the diesel that has unaccountably been spilt
TBT-free hull paint; ammonia based refrigeration and air-conditioning rather than climate changing and ozone depleting Freon gas
both TBT and Freon have been banned for years
an environmentally and economically efficient propulsion system to reduce CO2 emissions
you already said that, but it’s still diesel!
Re engineering changes to this vessel:
It is illegal to discharge water into the sea (MARPOL) if its oil content is above 15 ppm. Therefore ships above a certain size are fitted with oily water separators to remove any oil from water sloshing around the bilges.
Diesel electric propulsion can be more efficient depending upon the size, speed and service of the vessel.
Diesel engines of this size (small for a ship) tend to operate at 400 to 1200 RPM for maximum efficiency. Propellers, depending upon diameter run at 80 to 200 RPM.
So you either fit a gearbox, which is inefficient or you fit a generator and motor.
The advantage of a diesel electric system is that it is very good for ice breaking, constantly going forwards and astern, day after day is very easy with a D/E system.
Would I want to enter the AC compartment (room) with an Ammonia leak or a Freon leak?
Well, one can kill and the other can not, I'll let you make up your own minds on that one.
jamesp, but, but, but.......
The diesel used may be upto 50% bio diesel. This is brilliant because agricultural land can now be used to grow fuel, so food becomes more scarce and expensive, and so more people starve.
This is a win/win for Greenpeace, as people likely to die of starvation, were unlikely to donate to Greenpeace anyway, and their deaths can be blamed on man made climate change, plus the Green Luvvies who do donate to Greenpeace (whether from their own bank accounts, or via the companies or taxpayer funds they control) never believe anything that contradicts official Green propaganda.
Bet Greenpiss is rubbing its collective hands with glee - next target, no need to further than Gatwick....!
'Go' further - nitwit....
SR
"So you either fit a gearbox, which is inefficient or you fit a generator and motor."
Even if the generator and motor are each 80% efficient, overall conversion is only 64% - I'd hate to use a gearbox that bad!
Davis
"an impressive 354,000 miles in the sky"
Just trying to keep Joe Romm's dream (of being right for once) alive.. :-)
sherlock,
What is witnit?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6EaoPMANQM
Greenpiss
Where,s Bruce Willis with his Wilson when you need him ,when the Earth is about to be hit by another meteor obviously.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh8bbRPqHsE
Greenpeace writes that they use a propulsion system that reduces CO2 emissions.
That is another GP lie - they lie so easily. Conversion of mechanical energy to electricity cannot be done with 100% efficiency. Also, electric motors for conversion of electricity to mechanical energy do not have 100% efficiency. So, GP are using a ship with diesel-electric propulsion system that produces more CO2 for a given horsepower to the propellers than a ship with conventional diesel power would do.
They abandoned the rig 'because of worsening weather...'
Awwww - the poor dears..! Back to the mother ship, with its nice diesel-powered heating system...