This is JanEek's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following JanEek's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
JanEek
Bergen, Norway
I received my Masters in Comparative Politics from the University of Bergen, Norway in 1982. I was a Researcher and Teacher at that University for 8 years. My specialities were Comparing political systems and Social Psychology. I worked as a Vice President in Norsk Hydro for 18 years, basically within HR. I worked in Norway, Germany, Holland and Belgium. Besides my job within Management, I was extensively involved in major Change Operations. I established a company in the US, recruiting medical specialists. I lived there for almost ten years.
Interests: Politics, environment, books, cooking, travels
Recent Activity
Again Jim Thank you very much. I get it. I will go there now....
Toggle Commented Sep 4, 2013 on New year, new Healy expedition at Arctic Sea Ice
OK. So the comments are for Americans and Canadians and not for the total effects of the receding ice.... By the way, you say "Arctic sea ice", well, that includes the areas I talked about. You say:"this blog is really to follow the development in and causes of changes in the Arctic sea ice, and not directly the impact of these changes on fauna or flora." For me, that is like an ostrich putting her/his head in the ground... If you don't follow up on "not directly the impact of these changes on fauna or flora." Then what on earth is the point?
Toggle Commented Sep 4, 2013 on New year, new Healy expedition at Arctic Sea Ice
Thank you Jim Exactly what I am talking about. If one googles "ice melting polar bears", one will be slammed by a large number of hits. So, I ask again: Is it only me, or is this an issue that has been neglected in the discussion? I have a direct question to Hans Gunnstaddar: You write:" Nice to see the polar bears though and think this is a good year for them to fatten up and have lots of offspring." So, where is it a good year for the polar bears?
Toggle Commented Sep 4, 2013 on New year, new Healy expedition at Arctic Sea Ice
It's been a while since I had the opportunity to read here, and maybe I am a little off or maybe I am stating the obvious, but it seems nobody is addressing the problem we (I'm Norwegian) see as one of the most frightening effects of the receding ice in the Arctic. That is the dire situation of the polar bears, especially around Svalbard. Polar bears are now starving in these areas....
Toggle Commented Sep 4, 2013 on New year, new Healy expedition at Arctic Sea Ice
JanEek is now following Neven
Sep 4, 2013
Norway is the leading country when it comes to technology for developing and operating oil and gas fields offshore. No wonder when you take the harsh weather conditions into account and how close we are to the Arctic. BUT, we are also one of the biggest producer and exporter of fish. Our ocean is one of the most fertile biotope for fish. Before we found oil, our greatest asset was fish. Fish is still a major part of our export. We sell fish to 153 countries worldwide. One of the richest area for the fisheries is the Barents Sea, but it is also the most vulnerable biotope. It is way up North, in the Arctic. So, what do we do? We drill for oil and gas in an area with the harshest climate imaginable and with one of the most important source for fishing. What is this government thinking ? Statoil, the biggest oil/gas company in Norway, has found several very promising oil/gas fields much further south, so we have more than enough produce. AND, we are probably the richest country in the world. The so called oil fund is approaching 4000 billion NOK, and we are around 4.500 people in this country. You do the math…………… So, WHY are we taking the risk of destroying huge parts of the Arctic, including our own fisheries, by developing oil/gas fields in the Barents Sea? ONE large oil spill will be an utter disaster in that area, and because it is so far north, it may take 30, 40 or maybe 60 years to reestablish the biotope to normality. As a fisherman said some years ago: “We can eat fish but not oil”. Simple but true. We must not forget that pumping oil/gas will come to an end one day, but we will always have the fish, and we will be dependent on that simple fact. So, why destroy the most sustainable source of income for our country? The responsibility for this destructive policy lies wholly in our government. The government consist of three parties: The biggest, the Social Democrats (Arbeiderpartiet), and two very small parties; the Socialist Party (SV) and Senterpartiet, earlier called The Farmers Party. Both SV and Senterpartiet are very conscious and focused on the environment. It was therefore quite a shock when the minister for Petroleum and Energy, Ola Borten Moe from Senterpartiet (!!) stated that we (Norway), will drill for oil and gas up to the North Pole. What one minister say may not be that important. My main concern is the policy of this government. Drilling after oil and gas in the Arctic is utter madness.
OK, Espen. Thanks.... :-)
Sorry, you are wrong about "it is nobody's property nor responsability". Without going into to much detail, the North Sea, the Norwegian Sea and the Barents Sea are regulated basically as "Economic Zones" between Russia, Norway, Iceland and England. In addition, fisherman from the EU countries are given a quota each year. So, huge part of the Arctic seas I am talking about actually are Norway's Economic Zone. I am curious as to why this is so important to you. My point is that NOBODY should drill after oil/gas in these waters.
Norway is the leading country when it comes to technology for developing and operating oil and gas fields offshore. No wonder when you take the harsh weather conditions into account and how close we are to the Arctic. BUT, we are also one of the biggest producer and exporter of fish. Our ocean is one of the most fertile biotope for fish. Before we found oil, our greatest asset was fish. Fish is still a major part of our export. We sell fish to 153 countries worldwide. One of the richest area for the fisheries is the Barents Sea, but it is also the most vulnerable biotope. It is way up North, in the Arctic. So, what do we do? We drill for oil and gas in an area with the harshest climate imaginable and with one of the most important source for fishing. What is this government thinking ? Statoil, the biggest oil/gas company in Norway, has found several very promising oil/gas fields much further south, so we have more than enough produce. AND, we are probably the richest country in the world. The so called oil fund is approaching 4000 billion NOK, and we are around 4.500 people in this country. You do the math…………… So, WHY are we taking the risk of destroying huge parts of the Arctic, including our own fisheries, by developing oil/gas fields in the Barents Sea? ONE large oil spill will be an utter disaster in that area, and because it is so far north, it may take 30, 40 or maybe 60 years to reestablish the biotope to normality. As a fisherman said some years ago: “We can eat fish but not oil”. Simple but true. We must not forget that pumping oil/gas will come to an end one day, but we will always have the fish, and we will be dependent on that simple fact. So, why destroy the most sustainable source of income for our country? The responsibility for this destructive policy lies wholly in our government. The government consist of three parties: The biggest, the Social Democrats (Arbeiderpartiet), and two very small parties; the Socialist Party (SV) and Senterpartiet, earlier called The Farmers Party. Both SV and Senterpartiet are very conscious and focused on the environment. It was therefore quite a shock when the minister for Petroleum and Energy, Ola Borten Moe from Senterpartiet (!!) stated that we (Norway), will drill for oil and gas up to the North Pole. What one minister say may not be that important. My main concern is the policy of this government. Drilling after oil and gas in the Arctic is utter madness.
JanEek is now following The Typepad Team
Sep 30, 2012