Climate campaigners have blockaded Schlumberger’s research centre in Cambridge with a pink boat, fake oil rig, and metal “tripods”.
The activists from XR Cambridge and XR Youth Cambridge said they aimed to disrupt business for a week by stopping deliveries and access to the Gould Research Centre on University of Cambridge land.
This evening, police gave protesters a first warning. An XR Cambridge spokesperson said:
“They won’t be deterred. We’re here to stay. We’ve had enough of the University of Cambridge cosying up to fossil fuel giants which are destroying our planet.”
Schlumberger is a major oil services company and the world’s biggest offshore drilling firm. It says it has expertise in 120 countries. Its Cambridge site, with more 930m2 of laboratory space and offices for more than 100 scientists, develops new methods for extraction of oil and gas.
The XR campaigners said their action was an “escalation” of an ongoing Schlumberger out” campaign.
This has made three demands of Schlumberger and the University of Cambridge:
- Cambridge University to cut all ties with Schlumberger and stop collaboration
- Schlumberger to leave Cambridge
- Schlumberger to “stop profiting off planetary destruction and commit to climate reparations”
The XR spokesperson said:
“Schlumberger profits from our unhealthy dependence on oil and gas – yet the University continues to lend it legitimacy by hosting it on University land and providing it with a ready supply of academics to help with its fossil fuel research.
“We’re here today because the University has totally abandoned its moral duty to avert disaster by cosying up to planet-killers. It’s time to kick Schlumberger out of our city and off the planet!”
Police said protests remained peaceful throughout the day and had “minimal impact on those working at the site”.
Categories: Opposition, slider
Protesting ‘oil’ in Cambridge on Monday, flying to the of France of France on daddy’s boat on Saturday….. oh please!
P.S. XR relying on oil and gas for sourcing, making, and distributing the promotion extinction messaging…. Hypocrites!
I should let your tabloid speak for you, Eli-Goth, rather than just regurgitating their bile.
Except XR also want to stop tabloids being able to speak!
Speak of what you know, else you seem the bigger unaware person.
A well-considered peaceful protest to help make people think.
“Police said protests remained peaceful throughout the day and had “minimal impact on those working at the site”.”
Robin Grayson FGS
Albeit peaceful!, the demands placed by XR and the messaging is such that this wholly unsavoury rhetoric of defund, stop and ‘leave’ has ever so Marxist tones.
Schlumberger invests in academia, pays UK taxes ( yes that little conundrum ), feeds, heats and clothes families with jobs and opportunities, the world is already looking in to an energy transition, you not think Schlumberger is part of the futures solution and not the problem??
Defunct, uneducate and (leave), send packing is not a great message is it?
Ahh, a politician who wants to make people think!
I recall it was required that people should think Ms. Swinson was about to be PM. I recall students were made to think Lib. Dems. would not support an increase in their fees to attend University.
OMG. So, they are unable to think without being made to?
Careful, Robin, you may find that people who are made to think may actually think more about those making them think.
Perhaps they will think, “Police were removed from dealing more effectively with county line issues around Cambridge, where we would like our taxes to be used.”
Maybe not Lib Dems, but others.
Meanwhile, take a look at the latest oil rig count from USA. Plenty of work going on over there whilst they work (apologies) to try and fill the gap between oil and gas supply and demand, attempting to replace Russian supplies by 2030. I think-good job someone is getting on with keeping Europe supplied with energy. I think-shame all that revenue is being concentrated somewhere over the horizon where it will not help those in the UK who will struggle for a few years. I think-maybe that will not be sufficient, and Boris will have to try and persuade others, like the Saudis, to step up, whilst he takes flack from opportunists for doing so.
Sorry, Robin, perhaps I am just going to think for myself.
Martin, sometimes you are so last-century with your old style of thinking. Instead of peddling stuff from the bygone age of yesteryear, catch up with Schlumberger’s valiant efforts to shift into green energy and energy efficiency. Check it out at solar impulse – https://solarimpulse.com/solutions-explorer.
“Sorry, Robin, perhaps I am just going to think for myself”. Really Martin? but you always do.
Ahh, bygone age and yesteryear comment, and LibDem erased!
I can understand why.
Goodness, so many leopards apparently changing their spots, and the XR “greenwashing” avoided. Yes, a good job people can think for themselves.
Mind you, if I followed XR I might only be able to read what I was allowed to by them. I think Mr. Putin has the same idea, and I think the idea was played out in the 1930’s in Germany.
I also think that thinking for other people is patronizing, but I can see how it appeals to a party who continue with Democrat in their title even after trying to prevent the result of the largest democratic vote in the UK. Sorry, Robin, that bygone age will not only continue in people’s thinking but will become even more focused.
“Sorry, Robin, perhaps I am just going to think for myself”.
Fine Martin, but do remember to check out solar impulse – https://solarimpulse.com/solutions-explorer.
Typical XR – perhaps they don’t know that Schlumberger (and presumably the lab they are blockading) are at the forefront of the transition to renewables and using their extensive R & D facilities and funding to progress this. Why would XR want to obstruct this?
“The energy transition is characterized as the change from fossil fuels to cleaner sources of energy, mostly renewables. But the transition involves more than just switching to solar and wind infrastructure.”
So is Schlumberger in their efforts to explore renewable energy systems in Cambridge, also being funded by the Russians and the CCP just like BP and Exxon (judging from the claims of some on Drill or Drop) in order to “undermine” fossil fuel use and continuation in the west then? That one went strangely silent, didn’t it? Like a number of other inconvenient questions regarding the 20 million deaths worldwide per year? And the fact of far more health effects due to fossil fuel pollution, and other questions such as the 6th major extinction event in history, climate destruction and global warming? And other questions numbering well into the 20’s now?
Or are all those now just more of those inconvenient series of unfortunate truths to be brushed under the carpet and never mentioned again?
Except now, of course.
Incidentally Paul Tresto, and Robin Francis Grayson did you manage to discover what the fossil fuel industry, and the Liberal Democrat’s attitudes towards the changing of The Human Rights Act into a “Bill of Rights, in the consultation which ended on March 8th?
Phil – thanks.
For the Lib Dem position, have a look at the Liberal Democrat website and press releases.
For Martin’s position, have a look at his plentiful posts.
Curiously enough Robin, I didn’t ask for Martin’s position, the prospect being somewhat amusing, to say the least. However, I was seeking Paul Tresto’s position and your own position, rather than the political party manifesto position?
You will have to forgive the fact that I always presume people have their own private opinions, rather than those handed to them by policymakers. However, I will look at the Liberal Democrat website.
Hi Robin, the reason why I have highlighted that the Human Rights Act and proposed UK Bill of Rights is of interest on this particular page, is that Extinction Rebellion, and protest by the public as a rule for any issue, regardless of cause or position, is an Inalienable Human Right to do so. And cannot be interfered with, changed or altered by any subsequent act, bill, statute, or political extremism.
A loosely defined and badly written UK Bill of Rights may well remove or entirely remove the Human Rights and Common Law protections of the original Act.
The information, for those of you who are interested, is linked below:
https://www.libdems.org.uk/hra-review-submission. (there is a download link to the full .pdf document)
There are of course other political parties for those who will wish to do their own research rather than rely upon one.
There is also a response from the British Institute of Human Rights on the March 8th consultation with their response, which you can read here:
.pdf link here:
Hmm, that method worked well with student fees, Robin!
Yes, indeed, Martin’s posts show a consistent position. I remind all Lib Dems who canvass that they wished to trash one of my votes, but bank upon another, and that inconsistency will be “rewarded” in the appropriate way.
I expect Schlumberger are funded by their income from the oil and gas industry:
Fourth-quarter revenue of $6.22 billion increased 6% sequentially and 13% year-on-year
Fourth-quarter GAAP EPS of $0.42 increased 8% sequentially and 56% year-on-year
Fourth-quarter EPS, excluding charges and credits, of $0.41 increased 14% sequentially and 86% year-on-year
Fourth-quarter cash flow from operations was $1.93 billion and free cash flow was $1.30 billion
Board approved quarterly cash dividend of $0.125 per share
Full-year revenue was $22.9 billion
Full-year GAAP EPS was $1.32
Full-year EPS, excluding charges and credits, was $1.28
Full-year cash flow from operations was $4.65 billion and free cash flow was $3.00 billion
Probably no need for any Russian funding?
Or funded by their vineyards?
Hi Paul, thanks for that. However, are you saying that the claims that renewable energy development and production, are not at all funded and promoted by the Russians and the CCP, in order to defund and undermine the West’s use of fossil fuels thereby, one assumes, to weaken the West’s reliance upon fossil fuel energy production and use? Though it wasn’t clear exactly what that was intended to do? To weaken the Petro dollar, perhaps? A little vague maybe, but who knows what goes on behind locked doors on any side of this present insanity?
As with Robin’s reply, above, perhaps you also have a fossil fuel…Party…? Industry manifesto? Position on Russia and the CCP funding renewable energy, which was proposed by some and backed up by others of your acquaintance.
I recall you supplied links to similar claims by certain main stream media portals?
So do you disagree with those claims as well, then?
Perhaps, while you are looking at that, does the fossil fuel party/industry have a website which also presents their position on the Human Rights Act and the intended Bill of Rights? Then I can research both positions on such matters at the same time.
Just trying to establish what the official position is regarding these matters.
I expect, like most companies researching new markets, they are funded by existing markets (good for fossil fuels, eh, bad from those who wish to limit that by taking their money) and/or borrowing (if required.) Anyone who really needs to know can find out by becoming an investor, and asking the question.
Of course, when there are loads of incentives from the tax payer, it helps.
On rights, Martin’s are as important as anyone else’s, and those who want to curtail mine should suffer consequences.
Obviously not too much happening in respect of oil and gas (lol) as the agenda is now diverting to all these new pastures. Except the pastures may look a little sick without fertilizer or red diesel to spread it!