+- +-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 41
Latest: GWarnock
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 8710
Total Topics: 231
Most Online Today: 4
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 2
Total: 2

Author Topic: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery  (Read 3119 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #120 on: November 15, 2017, 05:41:13 pm »



November 14, 2017

Congress and Oil Industry Collude to Charge Anti-Pipeline Activists With Terrorism

The American Petroleum Institute has crafted a letter, signed by 84 members of Congress, suggesting that anti-pipeline activists should be charged with domestic terrorism. DeSmog Blog's Steve Horn says it's just one of many instances of a government-industry alliance against green activists



http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=20457


It REALLY WAS a good ride, not for you and me, but for TPTB. So expect them to do WHATEVER to prolong their RIDE, against all scientific evidence that EXPLOITATION WITHOUT REFLECTION OF FELLOW EARTHLINGS OF ALL SPECIES (not just humans) AND THE BIOSPHERE FOR PROFIT OVER PLANET is deleterious (i.e. SUICIDAL/abysmally STUPID) to the Homo SAP species.


The Fossil Fuelers DID THE Clean Energy  Inventions suppressing, Climate Trashing, human health depleting CRIME,   but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and conscience free crooks, they are trying to AVOID   DOING THE TIME or     PAYING THE FINE!     Don't let them get away with it! Pass it on!    [/move
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #121 on: November 22, 2017, 07:19:27 pm »
How Pipelines Put You In Danger For Profit! (w/Guest Greg Palast)


Greg Palast joins Thom to share his investigation into the alteration of pipeline safety equipment to avoid the cost of repairing old pipelines, the results are explosive.

Thom Hartmann Nov. 21, 2017 5:00 pm

Agelbert NOTE:
Fossil Fuel Indutry reaction to the above irrefutable evidence of Skullduggery:





Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #122 on: December 12, 2017, 07:57:42 pm »

 



Zinke, Perry and Pruitt’s Pretend Populism Profits Polluters

We started the week with a look at Pruitt’s industry-friendly contradictions--but we hardly scratched the surface yesterday.
 
For example, the New York Times reported on Sunday how Pruitt’s EPA has taken a step back from actually enforcing air and water pollution laws. Despite Pruitt’s professed dedication to enforcing the laws, his EPA has started a third fewer cases than Obama’s EPA by nine months in, and only a quarter as many as George W. Bush’s EPA in the same timeframe. This math makes it clear that Pruitt is giving polluters a pass, despite his claim that he doesn’t “hang with polluters; I prosecute them.” Take even the most cursory look under his whole down-home country lawyer shtick, and his true colors are revealed.
 
But Pruitt is far from the only Trump advisor palling around with polluters instead of regulating them. Last week, In These Times ran photos of a meeting between Energy Secretary Rick Perry and coal man Bob Murray in advance of Perry’s coal-friendly FERC proposal, after Murray vehemently denied he had influence over the plan. The Washington Post’s Steve Mufson expands on this reporting with his own piece last Friday about the plan that comes “straight from coal country.” Nora Brownell, Former FERC committee member appointed by George W. Bush, tells the Post that the plan is “cash for cronies.”
 
And then there’s Ryan Zinke, Secretary of the Interior. In an op-ed for CNN last week, Zinke wrote that the decision to dramatically shrink national monuments was a result of “prioritizing the voice of the people over that of the special interest groups.” Unfortunately for Zinke, the three million public comments filed--99% in support of the monuments and against shrinking them--undercut this claim. Who is in support of Zinke’s move to minimize? Well we can’t say for sure, but here’s a Washington Post headline with a clue: “Areas cut out of Utah monuments are rich in oil, coal, uranium.”
 
And hey, another clue in another Post headline: “Uranium firm urged Trump officials to shrink Bears Ears National Monument.” As Juliet Eilperin reported this weekend, a anium company lobbied and met with Zinke about the decision to downsize. Though Zinke told reporters there’s no mine within the monument, the new shrunk size of Bears Ears means significant uranium deposits are now no longer off-limits to industry.
 
Zinke hasn’t just been busy penning op-eds: he and the House Natural Resource Committee took some time to hit back at Patagonia’s criticism of the monument downsizing. But criticizing an American company for expressing its first amendment right to free speech is, in the words of former White House ethics officer Walter Shaub, “wildly inappropriate.”

Sure, this administration may be lawless and constantly capitulating to polluters and profiteers. But at least they’re down-home populists, in touch with nature and the common man, right? All of Zinke’s horseback-riding and cowboy-hat-wearing seems to suggest that he’s just a simple country boy.
 
That facade may be a little too thin for Zinke’s liking. In an interview with Outside Magazine published last week, Zinke presents himself as a Teddy Roosevelt conservationist and seasoned fisher, talking with reporter Elliot Woods while standing in a river, rod in hand. Unfortunately for Zinke, he’s no Teddy, and on top of that Woods seems to be a much better fisherman than the Secretary of the Interior, noting at the end of the piece that Zinke was having some trouble casting because he rigged his reel backwards.
 
And last May, when Zinke spent thousands in public money to helicopter out to a horse-riding session with Mike Pence, Zinke wore his cowboy hat backwards. This is apparently a frequent mistake: the Sierra Club pointed out that in the shot of Zinke exiting Air Force One for last week’s announcement, his hat was again on backwards.
 
Now we don’t expect Trump or his fan base to get all that upset about all these handouts to polluters at the public’s expense. But a faux-pas like this, with a man incapable of properly wearing his hat?
 
The red-MAGA-cap crowd’s anger is surely brimming over.   
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #123 on: December 12, 2017, 11:41:43 pm »
 



In the Battle of Pruitt Vs Pruitt, Industry Wins Every Time

Scott Pruitt’s long-awaited first appearance before the House committee that oversees the EPA was, somehow, both incredibly boring and richly informative. While Pruitt delivered his well-honed lawyer act like the seasoned professional he is, dodging and pivoting like a champ, there were a few notable fumbles in his performance.

For example, when Florida Representative Kathy Castor questioned Pruitt about his refusal to recuse himself from decisions involving both his donors and his previous co-litigants, Pruitt refused to answer. He instead deferred to the EPA’s ethics office, who apparently allow him to work on suits he was part of before becoming administrator. Implied conflicts of interest, Pruitt seemed to infer, aren’t a valid reason for recusal if the EPA ethics office doesn’t mandate it.

However, when pressed about his reforms to the EPA science boards, Pruitt’s response was that the removal of EPA grant recipients was to prevent “a perception or appearance of a lack of independence.” Who was making those complaints? Why, the tobacco and fossil fuel industries of course! And whose favorite researchers have gotten added to the board? Those same industries, whose products are regulated by the EPA.

So Pruitt claims replacing independent advisors with industry-funded advisors is necessary to prevent the EPA from appearing biased. But when it comes to Pruitt and his appointees working on cases and decisions they were once involved in, apparently the appearance of a lack of independence doesn’t matter. Even ignoring the fact industry scientists are the opposite of independent, Pruitt’s own standard for avoiding the appearance of impropriety is conveniently inconsistent.

As E&E’s Scott Waldman described in his roundup of the hearing, Pruitt also contradicted the very arguments the people he’s brought onto those advisory boards make about the dangers of particulate matter. Responding to California Rep. Raul Ruiz, Pruitt acknowledged the health benefits to reducing particulate matter pollution. But the Clean Power Plan repeal’s economic justification hinges on zeroing out those benefits to skew the cost-benefit analysis.

Pruitt also said a little more about the Endangerment finding than he has before, making the lawyerly process argument that by referring to the IPCC reports, the EPA committed a “breach of process.” But as Chelsea Harvey at E&E reports, that exact argument was used in a 2012 case, Coalition for Responsible Regulation Inc. v. EPA.

It lost. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decision ruled it “little more than a semantic trick,” saying the "EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question."   

Although Pruitt claims a deference to the “rule of law,” (even running a group with that in its name before moving to the EPA) apparently the rule of law doesn’t count when industry lost.

Although Pruitt claims particulate matter pollution is a health threat, his own CPP repeal math doesn’t include it.

Although Pruitt claims the appearance of a conflict of interest warrants removing advisors to the EPA, that same concern doesn’t extend to his own conflicts, or of those he’s bringing into the EPA.

At this point, if Pruitt claimed he wasn’t a robot controlled by polluting industries, we’d want to check that secret superfluous $25,000 phone booth for charging cables and a remote control interface.  ;D
 
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #124 on: December 19, 2017, 08:02:10 pm »

Is The Trump Administration Attacking Climate Scientists? (w/Guest Michael Man)


Thom Hartmann Program

Published on Dec 19, 2017

The Trump administration is threatening and harassing Climate Scientists, but why? Thom talks to Dr. Michael Mann to get to the bottom of this!
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #125 on: December 20, 2017, 07:42:41 pm »
Quote
‘The same tax bill that wrecked Obamacare and is taking a bite out of your paycheck has giveaways to Exxon—because Republicans care about Exxon, not you. Time to vote them out!’



What the GOP Tax Bill Means for Climate, Energy, and the Environment

Brian Kahn

December 19, 2017 2:47pm Filed to: DEATH AND TAXES

SNIPPET:

The tax bill is setup to kick people while they’re down   . While people who have lost everything (or close to it) from wildfires and hurricanes this year will be able to write off those losses on taxes, future disaster victims won’t be in the same boat.

The personal casualty loss deduction allows victims to write off losses that are greater than 10 percent of a person’s adjusted gross income. Taxpayers were able to deduct $1.6 billion in losses from natural disasters in 2015.

The House bill canned it entirely, but the Senate bill kept the deduction in place if a federal disaster is declared, which is how the final bill reads. For people who suffer from tornadoes, hurricanes or large fires, that’s (relatively) good news. But smaller fires or weather disasters may slip through the cracks.

Full article:

https://earther.com/what-the-gop-tax-bill-means-for-climate-energy-and-th-1821433421
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #126 on: December 30, 2017, 12:56:53 pm »

Juliana v US: For Children of All Ages — Part Two

December 28, 2017

By Joel B. Stronberg

SNIPPET 1:

In part one of this article, I took a closer look at the oral arguments in the latest episode of Juliana v. United States, and identified two questions that were raised during the orals that bear further consideration:

The first was: who would prevail in the event of a conflict between the findings of the District Court and the Trump administration?

More specifically:

What if: The District Court finds climate change harmful to the health of the plaintiffs and a violation of their constitutional rights. BUT, the Administration  finds climate change a hoax or of a much-diminished magnitude than currently thought after its current reconsideration of the Clean Power Plan (CPP)?

It is at least an even bet Administrator Pruitt will prevail upon Trump to approve rescission or a substantial watering of the endangerment finding as well.


SNIPPET 2:

Time and Nature wait for no one. Failing to contain global warming threatens the health and well-being of current generations. Most importantly, it steals the opportunities of future generations to live long and prosper. These are the Juliana’s plaintiffs.

The raw hostility to climate science and the depth of enmity exhibited by Trump and company is not to be seen merely in their efforts to unwind the environmental legacies of Nixon, Carter, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton, and Obama. It is found in their purging them from consciousness—to deny their reason for being and very existence. 

The darkest irony of all is the one time the Administration seems content to agree that climate change is bad for America and is the product of harmful human emissions is the time when their outright dismissal of scientific fact might defeat an open and consequential debate. A meaningful proceeding in the only remaining forum able to prompt constructive action.

Judge Coffin is right: the judicial forum is particularly well-suited for the resolution of factual and expert scientific disputes, providing an opportunity for all parties to present evidence, under oath and subject to cross-examination in a process that is public, open, and on the record.

Denial not debate is the watchword of this President and his agents . To date, the legal victories of climate defenders have been mostly the consequence of an administration indifferent to the established rule of law.

What distinguishes Juliana v. U.S. from all the cases that have gone before is the opportunity it offers to elevate environmental protection to a Constitutional right—equal to the right to vote or to love and to marry whomever one chooses. The inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness and opportunities to thrive and to prosper. A right not easily abridged or made a victim of political whims.

Full article:

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2017/12/juliana-v-us-for-children-of-all-ages-part-two.html

Agelbert NOTE: The mens rea modus operandi of Trump and his other Fossil Fuel bought and paid for Toadies behind the effort to purge environmental legacies from consciousness to the point of denying their reason for being and very existence is TEXTBOOK 1984 (the book written by Orwell about a cruel mind twisting dictatorship that forced people to deny reality - the origin of the term "Orwellian") strategy (See: EngSoc language purging). I do not think they will be successful, simply because Catastrophic Climate Change will continue to be too much in our faces to pretend it is not there.



But, I do think the Trumpers will delay and hamper meaningful action to mitigate Catastrophic Climate Change as long as they are in power. If you love your children and want a future for them where they inherit a viable biosphere, please do your part to get those children/biosphere murderers out of government as soon as possible. Please pass this on. We may be out of time already but we have to keep doing what is right, come hell or high water. 

Trump and his wrecking crew want YOU TO IGNORE all of the following IRREFUTABLE empirical evidence that our environment is WORSENING BECAUSE OF CONTNUALLY INCREASING POLLUTION FROM THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY and other polluters. ALL the following GOVERNMENT data will soon be erased by Trump and his wrecking crew in Orwellian mindfork fashion to convince you that these THREATS to your health are "not real" and Renewable Energy is "no big deal". DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH THIS ATROCITY! Save this and pass it on.
 

https://energy.gov/eere/sunshot/downloads/environmental-and-public-health-benefits-achieving-high-penetration-solar



DON'T LET the KOCHROACHES LIKE TRUMP RUIN OUR FUTURE!
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #127 on: December 30, 2017, 01:54:35 pm »
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #128 on: December 30, 2017, 02:53:50 pm »
The Deepwater Enterprise conducts operations to mitigate the effects of the Deepwater Horizon/BP oil spill, May 23, 2010. U.S. Coast Guard Photo

Trump Administration Rolls Back Offshore Safety Rules Put In Place After Deepwater Horizon

December 29, 2017 by Bloomberg

SNIPPET:

President Obama put the safety rules in place late last year, after six years of analysis following the 2010 BP Plc oil spill, in which a well blew out in the Gulf of Mexico. The proposed changes include revisions to safety system design requirements and equipment failure reporting requirements.

Environmentalists blasted the move, saying it put oceans and wildlife at risk.

Quote
“By tossing aside the lessons from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, Trump is putting our coasts and wildlife at risk of more deadly oil spills,” Miyoko Sakashita, director of the oceans program at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a statement. “Reversing offshore safety rules isn’t just deregulation, it’s willful ignorance.”

Full article:

http://gcaptain.com/trump-administration-rolls-back-offshore-safety-rules-put-place-deepwater-horizon/
Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #129 on: January 05, 2018, 02:23:00 pm »
 

January 5, 2018



Pulling Back The Curtain On the Red Team, CPP and Pruitt’s Agenda for the EPA

As Rebecca Leber of Mother Jones pointed out this summer, Scott Pruitt and his closest cohorts at EPA are uniquely reluctant to engage with journalists outside the conservative echo chamber. The agency’s new approach to press has also been revealed to be rather stormy: see the press office’s bizarre interchanges with New York Times reporter Erik Lipton and attacks on the AP’s Michael Biesecker this fall.

Because getting past the wall of Heartland-and-Koch-ghostwritten talking points during an interview with an EPA official can be a bear, we like to highlight when a reporter’s pushed through. This month’s hat tip goes to Robin Bravender at E&E.

In December, Bravender wrote on a meeting between EPA air chief Bill Wehrum and the White House, in which she reported that the White House put the Red Team attack “on hold.” Then yesterday, E&E published an interview between Bravender and Wehrum that offers up some intel into the EPA’s otherwise opaque thinking on the Clean Power Plan repeal process, the Red Team, and Pruitt’s priorities for 2018.

As Wehrum told Bravender, the Red Team project is still in the “talking and thinking about it” stage. While Wehrum indicated the agency has no “current plans” for a Red Team, Pruitt “would very much like to initiate a process to at least solicit additional input on the scientific basis for the endangerment finding.”

While we’ve assumed the end goal of the Red Team is overturning the endangerment finding, Wehrum’s statements confirm that this supposedly good faith examination of the science has a very specific policy goal . The endangerment finding is the White Whale for deniers. Whether Pruitt is just placating these tireless Ahabs with this seemingly unending “talking and thinking about it” stage or whether he really charts a course to somehow sail around the mountain of scientific evidence underpinning the finding is yet to be seen. 

What we do know is that either way, he’ll be doing what he can to roll back climate protections. On the Clean Power Plan, Wehrum told Bravender that the EPA is “setting out a range of possible outcomes” for repealing and replacing. But when asked specifically about the inside-the-fence approach that we’ve discussed before, Wehrum indicated “that's pretty much what [the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is] all about.”

Beyond that, Wehrum tips the EPA’s hand on another new regulation agency leadership is targeting, saying a priority for 2018 is to “take a hard look at” the rule requiring oil and gas drilling companies to limit methane and ozone-causing emissions.

Going beyond merely tweaking the rule to make it more palatable for the fossil fuel industry , Wehrum thinks they will “take a hard look at whether it really is appropriate to regulate methane under that rule.” (Quick catch up: an August ‘17 ruling of the D.C. Circuit court put the rule in effect, at least until Pruitt successfully finalizes a replacement.)

A well-deserved kudos to Bravender for managing to get the EPA to tip its hand, even just so slightly, and letting us know what our public servants are planning to do in the coming year. Keep up the good work, along with all the other great reporters out there. When it comes to Pruitt’s wall of secrecy at the EPA, we trust the press to eventually Wehrum down.   
 



Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

AGelbert

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8515
  • Location: Colchester, Vermont
    • View Profile
    • Agelbert Truth AND Consequences
Re: Fossil Fuel Skulldugggery
« Reply #130 on: January 06, 2018, 02:45:04 pm »
EPA chief Pruitt  is said to be eyeing attorney general job
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/05/scott-pruitt-us-attorney-general-position-326373

Now why doesn't that surprise me?  ;)

Where else would a world class crook want to go to make sure nobody nabs him for his crimes against the environment in general and humanity in particular?

Leges         Sine    Moribus     Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
50 Replies
2682 Views
Last post October 17, 2017, 03:13:27 pm
by AGelbert
182 Replies
6290 Views
Last post January 16, 2018, 07:00:16 pm
by AGelbert
209 Replies
3679 Views
Last post December 12, 2017, 02:40:24 pm
by AGelbert
0 Replies
432 Views
Last post October 25, 2013, 04:19:25 pm
by AGelbert
0 Replies
218 Views
Last post November 21, 2013, 12:05:39 am
by AGelbert

+-Recent Topics

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 05:51:23 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 05:07:22 pm

Money by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 04:02:39 pm

Human Life is Fragile but EVERY Life is Valuable by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 03:34:06 pm

Non-routine News by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 03:24:24 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 03:08:10 pm

Digging Down Into the Earth by AGelbert
January 20, 2018, 01:51:42 pm

Ocean Species Habits and Ocean Conservancy by AGelbert
January 19, 2018, 10:38:49 pm

Geography by AGelbert
January 19, 2018, 07:20:51 pm

Defending Wildlife by AGelbert
January 19, 2018, 05:32:36 pm

Free Web Hit Counter By CSS HTML Tutorial