• li10@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not advocating for it, but I do wonder why we don’t hear more about people doing this.

    I wonder if it’s one of those things that’s kept out of the mainstream media, or if it just doesn’t happen that much.

    • Lizardking27@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Because most people realize that while fossil fuels are horrible, blowing up the infrastructure and releasing those fossil fuels into the environment would be absolutely fucking disastrous. I mean, look at Deepwater Horizon. That was just 1 piece of infrastructure and it generated the largest oil spill in history.

      • Uranium 🟩@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        Tbf, there are other infrastructure that aren’t the literal wells of oil, take refineries for example, they are central to the operation, are harder to replace than a bit of pipeline, typically the end point for many pipelines.

        Though all of these factors make them much more likely to be targets and to also have much greater security. Still functionally even if you manage to take one down it won’t make a difference in the grand scheme of things.

        Add on that most refineries are likely designed with fire breaks/fire suppression systems nowadays so it probably won’t even have an knock on effect

        • Lizardking27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m sorry but I really don’t believe there is any environmentally friendly way to blow up an oil refinery, either. Those products would likely be even more processed and hazardous than the crude oil in the pipeline.

          Now, occupying an oil refinery, and disassembling as much as you can while inside, contaminating batches, cutting wires, that’s another story.

          • li10@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Now, occupying an oil refinery, and disassembling as much as you can while inside, contaminating batches, cutting wires, that’s another story.

            That’s more what I meant, destroying the infrastructure they’re using to extract the fossil fuels, as opposed to trying to destroy the source.

    • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      The charges for blowing up infrastructure are pretty hefty, especially if it’s politically motivated violence.

      Also a lot of fossil fuel infrastructure is stuff like pipe lines and refineries, and popping a pipeline will do a shit done of damage to an environment.

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anyone who realizes how bad things really are will also realize how small a single act of sabotage would be on a global scale. Anything an individual is capable of doing would be relatively minor and then their life would be over, and any group of people who could maybe hit hard enough to matter just gets targeted by government counterterror organizations.

    • frankPodmore@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s a group called Deep Green Resistance which does advocate for exactly this. In fact, they want to destroy industrial civilisation altogether, which possibly explains why their movement hasn’t really caught on.

      Aside from them, Ted Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber, thought similarly.