Shell Oil Company has been relying on other countries to use the land to dig for oil for several years. In this particular case, a spill occured in Nigeria forty years ago. Why are charges just now being brought up? Well, apparently the people in Nigeria are getting sick of the big oil companies, Shell, for not taking responsibility for thier mistakes such as spills. They might have over-looked the spill from forty years ago in hopes that Shell would continue making money for the Nigerians. But with reaccuring accidents and still no clean up, the cost is now greater for the country of Nigeria to have to clean up someone else's mistakes. Cost include: safe foods, clean water, and all around living conditions. These things really take a toll on budget because of the toxic spills that have happened numerous times. However, Shell feels they should not have to pay compensation or anything to clean up because fill that the bursting oil pipe lines are primarily caused by local rebels who are trying to steal profits by sabotaging the equipment. Clearly Shell is responsible because they are reliant on the land of Nigeria; with out it, the locals would have many fewer problems realating to toxic spills. And as always the major company, Shell, benefits from the damaged people of Nigeria. The article "Shell Refuses To Pay For Nigerian Oil Spill Pollution", focuses more on the 'Shell' point of view. There are no qoutes from the local, everyday people of Nigeria. Maybe they were promised 'X' amount of dollars and recieved less because the oil company can push them around. We, as readers, do not know because the biased report left out all concerning parties. But if that were true, that clearly explains why there was sabotage.
In Robert Figueroa's article "Enviromental Justice", he explains what is acceptable. And the U.S. has had several questionable accounts of justice. A large movement for enviromental justice programs occured in 1982 in North Carolina. The 'rich and powerful' if you will, decided that it would be perfectly fine to dump soil laced with PCB, a toxin, in an area with the second highest poverty level and highest percentage of American-Americans. Basically a poor community who wouldn't do anything about the injustice of dumping contaminated soil. Apparently rich cooperations think poor people are ignorant. But we have seem time and time again that this is not the case; maybe just less fortunate. The Nigerian oil spill is a repeat experience. A poorer country suffered the burden of a multi-billion dollar cooperation. Shell gets oil from Nigerian land and doesn't care about the consequences because once the land dries up they will be gone and all that will be left is an uninhabitable land for the local Nigerian's to live on with no more income from the oil company. Just like in North Carolina, if it doesn't affect the rich, there is no need to worry. The sad thing is, it affects so many more people than just the locals. They can no longer grow their crops or do their daily tasks without clean water. It will take several years to rebuild, but by then the oil company will have moved on to someone else's backyard. Just as the saying goes, "NIMBY".
Distributed justice needs to take place. Shell should be thankful for being able to use the Nigerain land. They should spilt some of the profits more evenly and clean up after themselves because Nigeria would have less pollution problems without Shell masking the land. If a company doesn't want waste in their backyard, why would anyone else? Trust me, people living in poverty would still prefer a healthy drinking water like everyone else. As far as race goes, I don't find that relevant in large cooperations polluting poorer communities. I understand both stories of Nigeria and North Carolina consisted of a high percentage of African-Americans, but skin color doesn't matter. It all comes down to money; and the rich feel they can bully anyone without it. But now it's taking a toll because the poor communites are striking back with lawsuits.
Nigeria wants $100 million for something that happened forty years ago. If they win the case, it should really make Shell and other world leading companies consider who's backyard they enter. Participatory justice was tried and failed in the Nigerian situation. They delayed going to court for forty years and tried working it out; but now the time has come to step it up a notch. I also feel that recognition justice would be simple for Nigeria. Show the people, starved and fighting to find clean water. This symbol will be seen by many and change for the better will be followed close behind.
In Robert Figueroa's article "Enviromental Justice", he explains what is acceptable. And the U.S. has had several questionable accounts of justice. A large movement for enviromental justice programs occured in 1982 in North Carolina. The 'rich and powerful' if you will, decided that it would be perfectly fine to dump soil laced with PCB, a toxin, in an area with the second highest poverty level and highest percentage of American-Americans. Basically a poor community who wouldn't do anything about the injustice of dumping contaminated soil. Apparently rich cooperations think poor people are ignorant. But we have seem time and time again that this is not the case; maybe just less fortunate. The Nigerian oil spill is a repeat experience. A poorer country suffered the burden of a multi-billion dollar cooperation. Shell gets oil from Nigerian land and doesn't care about the consequences because once the land dries up they will be gone and all that will be left is an uninhabitable land for the local Nigerian's to live on with no more income from the oil company. Just like in North Carolina, if it doesn't affect the rich, there is no need to worry. The sad thing is, it affects so many more people than just the locals. They can no longer grow their crops or do their daily tasks without clean water. It will take several years to rebuild, but by then the oil company will have moved on to someone else's backyard. Just as the saying goes, "NIMBY".
Distributed justice needs to take place. Shell should be thankful for being able to use the Nigerain land. They should spilt some of the profits more evenly and clean up after themselves because Nigeria would have less pollution problems without Shell masking the land. If a company doesn't want waste in their backyard, why would anyone else? Trust me, people living in poverty would still prefer a healthy drinking water like everyone else. As far as race goes, I don't find that relevant in large cooperations polluting poorer communities. I understand both stories of Nigeria and North Carolina consisted of a high percentage of African-Americans, but skin color doesn't matter. It all comes down to money; and the rich feel they can bully anyone without it. But now it's taking a toll because the poor communites are striking back with lawsuits.
Nigeria wants $100 million for something that happened forty years ago. If they win the case, it should really make Shell and other world leading companies consider who's backyard they enter. Participatory justice was tried and failed in the Nigerian situation. They delayed going to court for forty years and tried working it out; but now the time has come to step it up a notch. I also feel that recognition justice would be simple for Nigeria. Show the people, starved and fighting to find clean water. This symbol will be seen by many and change for the better will be followed close behind.
No comments:
Post a Comment