Tarmageddon
May. 17th, 2014 08:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kibunoNikiforuk must have hated oil to his guts at the time of writing this article. Or he's being paid to write it, one way or another, there's no way a conscience man with bills to pay and mouths to feed would go about writing such details on a problem that wouldn't even come close to concerning his son's generation, let alone his life.
Okay, I'll lay off the mockery tone, but hey, that's what Andrew uses himself whilst writing "Canada's curse". To be fair, he wasn't wrong, but if one were to think about it, how many people out there actually care enough to read this lengthy article, understand it and then go about doing something to change the situation? It is obvious that Andrew Nikiforuk was against oil production and consumption, but he's not seeing things from other perspectives, or at least that's what his writings sounded like, a one way train of thought that takes you straight to Green Town.
I am sure enough to bet on it that the majority of people (those educated enough to read and understand the article itself) knew about the consumption of fossil fuel and its negative effects, or environmental footprints it leaves behind. The point is, one additional article about the negativity of oil, tar sands and all the like isn't going to rise people's awareness by much any more, diminishing returns apply here too and not only to the amount of steam required to melt bitumen. Although the information and statistics were well researched, organized and presented, the dryness also comes along with the package and even with the help of numerous imagery to keep things interesting and extend reader's attention span, it adds a tone of mockery so obvious that it backfire and instead of being funny, convincing and persuasive, it feels as if the author is trying too hard to make fun of the situation in order to win the reader's vote.
In all seriousness, writing about how to change the situation or spending time researching about solutions or a renewable, recycle-able, sustainable form of energy would be more worthwhile. One could then pitch the idea to an investor (or a group of investors, I'm looking at you, Dragons) with a reasonable initial investment and an emphasis on the long term, sustainable business and monopoly.
Okay, I'll lay off the mockery tone, but hey, that's what Andrew uses himself whilst writing "Canada's curse". To be fair, he wasn't wrong, but if one were to think about it, how many people out there actually care enough to read this lengthy article, understand it and then go about doing something to change the situation? It is obvious that Andrew Nikiforuk was against oil production and consumption, but he's not seeing things from other perspectives, or at least that's what his writings sounded like, a one way train of thought that takes you straight to Green Town.
I am sure enough to bet on it that the majority of people (those educated enough to read and understand the article itself) knew about the consumption of fossil fuel and its negative effects, or environmental footprints it leaves behind. The point is, one additional article about the negativity of oil, tar sands and all the like isn't going to rise people's awareness by much any more, diminishing returns apply here too and not only to the amount of steam required to melt bitumen. Although the information and statistics were well researched, organized and presented, the dryness also comes along with the package and even with the help of numerous imagery to keep things interesting and extend reader's attention span, it adds a tone of mockery so obvious that it backfire and instead of being funny, convincing and persuasive, it feels as if the author is trying too hard to make fun of the situation in order to win the reader's vote.
In all seriousness, writing about how to change the situation or spending time researching about solutions or a renewable, recycle-able, sustainable form of energy would be more worthwhile. One could then pitch the idea to an investor (or a group of investors, I'm looking at you, Dragons) with a reasonable initial investment and an emphasis on the long term, sustainable business and monopoly.
