Sydney why would it be better if these rigs berthed in Tacoma, or Everett, or Ketchikan?

Especially when they are going to be towed to Vigor in Seattle for repairs anyway?

Why haven't you once written about the ways people could be stopping drilling in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas?

Let's not forget that Albro went on a charm offensive last year (?) begging for an exponential raise for his position, FWIW.

@1 I am writing about the ways people can stop drilling in the Arctic. Rejecting the Arctic drilling fleet can start at the Port of Seattle and spread to Tacoma, Dutch Harbor, etc. Our readers are also copying Sally Jewell on their letters to the port.

@1: Do you suppose the port commissions in those cities would participate in Shell's arctic drilling plans despite public pressure to refrain from doing so?

@4: There are ports in Washington that are actively seeking coal terminals for god's sake, you think they'll blink at hosting a few idled drill rigs?

Anacortes, Tacoma and Grays harbor all have oil refineries, Olympia ships war materials to Saudi Arabia, You think any of those ports will think twice about berthing a few idled oil rigs?

Shell WILL get berths for its idled rigs, the way to stop an environmental disaster in the Arctic is to prevent oil drilling there in the first place, and with luck we could stop drilling not just in the Beaufort and Chukchi, but ANWR as well.

To protect the Arctic the time energy and resources spent fighting a pointless battle against the Port Of Seattle need to be redirected to the federal level

And once again I feel compelled to ask: If you are successful in getting the Port of Seattle to rescind this lease (not likely but let's say) and Foss parks Shell's rigs in Tacoma, then when the inevitable spill happens in the Chukchi Sea, will you regret the time and energy you spent moving Shell's rigs to Tacoma, instead of spending that same time and energy stopping drilling there in the first place.

@1, 5 Have you ever been in a swordfight? (ok, I haven't either)
But while it's a good idea to just have them fight someone else... it's also a pretty good idea to parry. You don't win a fight by surrendering.

@6: You don't win a fight by attacking the wrong target,

Priorities matter, and time and energy wasted in a fruitless battle with the Port of Seattle is just that wasted time and energy, time and energy that could be spent stopping drilling in the Arctic to begin with.

@7 You sound like a very polished Concern Troll. Your diversionary tactic of taking the heat off the Port would mean taking the only directly accountable political actors we have, like the mayor etc., away from this fight and de-energize local political activity. You are also saying that we should not even go after the Port commissioners, whether or not they are acting as if they are responsible to someone other than the people who put them there to act for them.

I'm pleased that these local political actors, who may be a bit calculating when it comes to their local economic allegiances, seem to be catching on that their erstwhile allies at the national level are unable or unwilling to act. And maybe realizing themselves that this isn't a philosophical issue only relevant to the daily life of some other people who aren't like them.

Global warming is now accelerating too fast for pussyfooting NRDC fundraising and chess matching. The only chance of slowing the horrible trajectory is to start fighting hard, hard against all available targets and pushing hard to motivate each other and all non-bought-off political actors.

These frickin oil companies and their lackys and cowardly enablers in both parties are desperate to get as much oil out and burning as they can before the effects of global warming becomes overwhelmingly obvious in our daily lives. Those corporations know as a certainty what Fox news says is false and most of the rest of us have been unable to fully accept as the life changing catastrophe it will be in THIS generation. Climate change is happening and we are going to be seriously harmed. The only question is how badly.

@7 And if you aren't a hired Concern Troll: Any concrete action here will inspire others to do the same where they are, and not to accept the feeling of isolation and hopelessness encouraged by what our media calls news and how they report it. The minimum wage fight is a prime example.

@7: Berthing Shell's rigs in Tacoma and drilling in the Chukchi Sea protects the environment how?

The attack on the Port of Seattle is the diversionary tactic.

To stop Arctic drilling go here

http://www.professionalmariner.com/Web-B…

The Port of Seattle can do nothing to stop Shell from drilling in the Arctic, The Department of the Interior can

@10 Seriously tell me the last time an environmental campaign gained momentum and improved overall outcomes by writing another bunch of opinions to the bought off or scared off actors at the high Federal level.

Also, note please that local politicians and voters have no jurisdiction over the Dept. of the Interior or other Federal agencies, as the Feds have been going waaaay out their way to point out to people in Washington these last few years regarding fossil fuel issues. Agencies do listen directly to energy industry stakeholders, who are the primary customers of their services after all.

And why is it that you want people to NOT hit the Port on this? But want also for them become active in the way you believe will help? Please explain why they can't do both!

It is a political movement fact, fact, that mobilizing people on a local issue is an extremely effective way of bringing them in to fights at the state or national level.

If you really care about this, then you should be taking the time to educate people to the larger picture, rather than telling them something they have more (however small) immediate power over is so meaningless that they shouldn't bother. This is way more politically meaningful than using better light bulbs.

From an activist perspective, you are not acting like someone who wants to stop drilling in the Arctic, even if you mean well from a personal perspective.

@11:Any time hitting the Port of Seattle on this is time and energy wasted, even if you are successful, Foss will simply berth Shell's oil rigs somewhere else.

Any hour wasted giving the Port of Seattle hell is an hour that could have been spent giving hell to the BOEM and the BSEE

BSEE and BOEM will be publishing the final rules on Arctic drilling soon, and once that happens there is a 60 day period for public comment before the rule becomes final, after that the Department of The Interior will in all probability grant Shell leases to drill in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.

We can stop Oil drilling in the Beaufort and Chukchi, and with any luck ANWR too, but our only real chance is an attack at the federal level, yes I know that is harder to win, but a win at the local level does nothing to protect the Arctic.

Your argument that winning at the federal level is hard so we shouldn't try is the argument that will help destroy our environment.

There is however a very short window to win at the federal level, concentrate all of your efforts there until window closes, if we should fail then feel free for any feel good but ultimately impotent measure you like.

The email address you have listed for Sally Jewell, feedback@doi.gov, bounced back for me as "The e-mail address you entered couldn't be found."

@13:

Try this:

http://www.bsee.gov/uploadedFiles/Propos…

Skim through this document and you will find a lot of E-mail addresses to write to on this subject, get every body you know to write

@13 Whoops, bad link. Fixed!

Another complete waste of time. The drills will go somewhere. Us kicking them out of Seattle just lets the money go somewhere else where it will be put to less progressive causes.

You stop drilling by stopping drilling... not by pushing the drills to some other port.