+- +-


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

+-Stats ezBlock

Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Total Posts: 11311
Total Topics: 250
Most Online Today: 22
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 11
Total: 11

Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 46 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Message icon:

Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 1024KB, maximum individual size 512KB

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 09, 2019, 09:35:48 pm »

Bill McKibben ✨: The Fossil Fuel Industry 🦕🦖 Has Money, But We Have Movements

January 9, 2019

At the Sanders Institute Gathering, Bill McKibben says that a Green New Deal must address climate change, immigration, and unemployment, or we’re headed “if not to Hell, then to a place with a very similar temperature.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: January 02, 2019, 12:21:06 pm »

Updated January 2, 2019 Filed to: POLITICAL CLIMATE CHANGE

By Maddie Stone


Castor  herself has also sparked controversy since rumors began swirling that she would lead whatever committee was being put together. Despite her solidly pro-environment record, she drew the ire of climate activists last week when she suggested congresspeople 🐵😈🦕 shouldn’t be disqualified from serving 🐵😈🦕 on a climate committee if they’d taken campaign contributions from the fossil fuel 🦕🦖 industry.

Full article:

 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!   
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 19, 2018, 08:26:33 pm »


DEC 18, 2018

David Sirota, who told people “Something I didn’t know: Beto O’Rourke is the #2 recipient of oil/gas industry campaign cash in the entire Congress.” Sirota provided a link to campaign finance data.

“While O’Rourke 🦖 steadily avoided left-wing legislation, he went above and beyond to ally himself to the corporate wing of the Democratic Party,” Jilani reported.

Read more:

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 17, 2018, 08:33:30 pm »

What a Gag — BY MR. FISH
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 11, 2018, 07:44:59 pm »

How The Koch Brothers Broke Democracy & Stuck Taxpayers With The Bill

December 11th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

This is a story of how a small group of wealthy white men can hijack an entire nation, destroy its founding principles, and force those most affected by their deeds to pay for the damage. The background for this piece is Jane Mayer’s extraordinary book Dark Money 🦕🦖, which came out earlier this year. The subtitle says it all: The Hidden History Of The Billionaires Behind The Rise Of The Radical Right.

If you follow the link above, you can read the entire book in PDF form but be warned — the subject matter deals with such sleaze, so much self dealing, and so many crooked dealings in the halls of power, you will need a strong stomach not to feel sick to your stomach as you read it.

The principle characters in Mayer’s book are Charles and David Koch. Taken together, they are the richest people on the face of the Earth. They are also the sons of Fred Koch, who made his fortune supplying gasoline and diesel fuel to Josef Stalin and later Adolf Hitler. In December, 1958, the elder Koch became one of the founders of the John Birch Society, a radical right wing organization that has metastasized over the decades into dozens of right wing propaganda organizations, think tanks, and so-called “institutes.”

Weaponized 😈👹💵 🎩🍌 🏴‍☠️🚩 Philanthropy

You may never have heard of Charles and David Koch, but they have touched the lives of every American. Many of the coded phrases that have infected political discourse over the past 50 years are attributable to them — “trickle down economics,” “welfare Cadillac,” “shrink the size of government until it’s small enough to drown in a bathtub,” “Citizens United,” “the death tax,” “death panels,” “I’m from the government and I’m here to help,” “the Federalist Society,” and the “Tea Party” are phrases familiar to us all that trace their lineage to the Kochs.

Trickle Down EconomicsHow did this happen? According to Mayer, the Kochs were making little headway with their ultra right wing ideas until they figured out how to turn the tax code to their advantage. For generations, wealthy people were encouraged to donate to charities like hospitals, the Red Cross, and humanitarian causes because they could deduct their contributions from their taxable income.

What the Kochs did was take the charitable deduction process and stand it on its head.  They created their own “charities,” then funded them lavishly with money that qualified for tax deductions. Non-profits with patriotic sounding names like the Heartland Institute, the Heritage Foundation, Americans For Prosperity, and the Cato Institute have become powerful lobbying groups supported by non-taxable contributions.

Their methodology is always the same. Hire well-paid “researchers” who are smart enough to produce reports that support the positions espoused by the Koch Brothers and keep their mouths shut. Those reports, studies, and white papers are disseminated throughout the highest levels of government to elected officials who owe their seats to campaign contributions from the Koch Brothers. It’s a nice little sweetheart deal that was called racketeering when the Mafia did it, but is considered perfectly appropriate today.

Out Of Sight And Underground

Writing in The Guardian this week, columnist George Monbiot prefaced a story about how the Kochs have exported their ultra right wing agenda to the UK with this summary.

“Dark money is among the greatest current threats to democracy. It means money spent below the public radar, that seeks to change political outcomes. It enables very rich people and corporations to influence politics without showing their hands.

“Among the world’s biggest political spenders are Charles and David Koch, co-owners of Koch Industries, a vast private conglomerate of oil pipelines and refineries, chemicals, timber and paper companies, commodity trading firms and cattle ranches. If their two fortunes were rolled into one, Charles David Koch, with $120bn, would be the richest man on Earth.

“In a rare public statement, in an essay published in 1978, Charles Koch explained his objective. ‘Our movement must destroy the prevalent statist paradigm.’ As Jane Mayer records in her book Dark Money, the Kochs’ ideology — lower taxes and looser regulations — and their business interests ‘dovetailed so seamlessly it was difficult to distinguish one from the other.’

“Over the years, she notes, ‘the company developed a stunning record of corporate malfeasance’. Koch Industries paid massive fines for oil spills, illegal benzene emissions and ammonia pollution. In 1999, a jury found that Koch Industries had knowingly used a corroded pipeline to carry butane, which caused an explosion in which two people died. Company Town, a film released last year, tells the story of local people’s long fight against pollution from a huge paper mill owned by the Koch brothers.

“The Kochs’ chief political lieutenant, Richard Fink, developed what he called a three-stage model of social change. Universities would produce ‘the intellectual raw materials.’ Think tanks would transform them into ‘a more practical or usable form.’ Then ‘citizen activist’ groups would ‘press for the implementation of policy change.’

To these ends the Kochs set up bodies in all three categories themselves, such as the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, the Cato Institute and the “citizens’ group” Americans for Prosperity. But for the most part they funded existing organisations that met their criteria. They have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into a network of academic departments, think tanks, journals. and movements. And they appear to have been remarkably successful.

“As researchers at Harvard and Columbia universities have found, Americans for Prosperity alone now rivals the Republican party in terms of size, staffing and organisational capacity (emphasis added). It has pulled ‘the Republican party to the far right on economic, tax and regulatory issues’. It was crucial to the success of the Tea Party movement, the ousting of Democrats from Congress, and the staffing of Trump’s transition team. The Koch network has helped secure massive tax cuts, the smashing of trade unions, and the dismantling of environmental legislation.

“But their hands, for the most part, remain invisible. A Republican consultant who has worked for Charles and David Koch told Mayer that ‘to call them under the radar is an understatement. They are underground.'”

Funding The End Of Democracy

Koch-inspired and funded groups have led the campaign to gerrymander voting districts in states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and North Carolina. The current maps were drawn by ultra right wing partisans using artificial intelligence. The intent was to make it impossible for Democrats to gain a majority of seats in the legislatures of those states no matter how many people voted for them.

The strategy has been phenomenally successful. In the election last month, Republican Scott Walker was given his walking papers by the voters, but even though Democrats got 54% of the votes cast, they were able to win only 36 of the 99 seats in the state assembly thanks to the anti-democratic bias created by gerrymandering.

Writing in The Guardian, law professor Lawrence Douglas says, “Pundits have described these actions as Republicans playing ‘hardball,’ though the description obscures a noxious reality: Republicans aren’t playing ball at all — they are rejecting the basic rules of the game. The notion that elections count only when our side wins is nothing short of a repudiation of democracy. Republicans, on both the national and state level, are essentially staging minor coups.”

Democracy Is Socialism   

We hear a lot of talk from conservatives reactionaries these days about socialism. Most of them have no idea they are spouting Koch Brothers-inspired dogma that has been injected into the national conversation at the highest levels and become part of the political landscape. But democracy itself is socialism. It is a contract between the people of a nation that says the government will be elected by the will of the majority. Any policy that interferes with that core principle is undemocratic and an affront to America’s heritage.

Asked in Philadelphia “What sort of government have you given us?” Benjamin Franklin reportedly said, “A republic — if you can keep it.” Largely through the unrelenting efforts of the Koch Brothers — efforts that have been generously subsidized by American taxpayers — the prospect of America ceasing to be a republic is becoming more real every day.

Republic is another way of saying a representative democracy. Since all 330 million Americans cannot assemble in one place for a national conversation, they elect people to represent their interests. But the Kochs have broken the link between the people and their representatives.

Today, most government officials are looking out for the interests of the Kochs and their super rich colleagues, not those of the people who elected them. The only way to make America great again is to restore the democratic system of government the Founding Fathers envisioned.


 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!   
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 27, 2018, 07:33:36 pm »

Laura Flanders Show: Divest to Decolonize

November 25, 2018

At the traditional start of the holiday season, many in the US come together with family and friends to celebrate and give thanks. Though for indigenous peoples around the world perhaps apologies, even recompense, would be more in order. We hear from Native American activists Michelle Cook and Hartman Deetz about the ongoing struggle for autonomy and environmental protection


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 15, 2018, 02:27:39 pm »


No. 54, Nov. 15, 2018


Fossil fuels 🏴‍☠️ are driving our climate problems, as we all know, and a surplus of fracked shale gas is poised to make that even worse. The petrochemical industry🐉🦕🦖 😈 👹 is ramping up production of plastics thanks to fracking, with dire consequences for the climate and the health of residents in the Rust Belt, where many new pipelines and production facilities are being built.

Subscriber bonus:

We have a special thank you for our subscribers this week: a free copy of Corrupted Science: Fraud, Ideology and Politics in Science [/font]by John Grant, courtesy of publisher See Sharp Press. This must-read new book dives into the sordid history of how corporations and politicians — including the Trump administration — have twisted or attacked scientific expertise. As a subscriber, you can download the e-book in any of these formats: PDF, Mobi (Kindle) or Epub. Enjoy — and thanks for subscribing!

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 13, 2018, 07:29:07 pm »


November 13, 2018
Dear Anthony,

Our efforts to pressure fossil fuel companies is really having an effect. Earlier this year, ExxonMobil and Chevron finally releasing climate risk disclosure reports and ConocoPhillips agreed to disclose its lobbying efforts. And now, a prominent corporate responsibility group is securing responses from major fossil fuel companies in response to our recent Climate Accountability Scorecard. Our work to hold these corporations accountable for years of deception and climate impacts is working—unfortunately, it’s not enough. Just last month, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released their latest report showing that every fraction of a degree of warming we can avoid matters. The report calls for ‘rapid and far-reaching’ action. And we needn’t look farther than the fires currently rampaging through Californian communities to understand how urgent the situation is. We need to keep the pressure on fossil fuel corporations to make real change and take responsibility for the impacts of their business.  —Katy

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 13, 2018, 05:01:41 pm »


Judge: Wildlife Must Be Considered Before Permitting Fracking Off SoCal Coast

By Olivia Rosane

Nov. 12, 2018 08:38AM EST


In what environmentalists are calling a major victory, a California judge ruled Friday that the Trump administration cannot approve any new fracking off the state's southern coast until a full review is done assessing the controversial technique's impact on endangered species and coastal resources, The San Francisco Chronicle reported.

"Endangered sea otters and other critters just won a reprieve from the Trump 🦀 administration's 🐉🦕 assault on our oceans for dirty oil    🦖," Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) Oceans Program Legal Director Kristen Monsell said in a press release. "We plan to celebrate this great victory in the fight against climate change and dirty fossil fuels."

Full article:


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 25, 2018, 01:43:12 pm »

U.S. Approves First Oil Production Facility from Manmade 😈Island Offshore Alaska 

October 24, 2018 by Bloomberg

arctic drilling alaska File: U.S. Department of Interior


By Jennifer A. Dlouhy (Bloomberg) — The Trump administration 🐉🦕🦖 has authorized Hilcorp Energy Co.’s 🦕 plan to build an artificial gravel island in the Beaufort Sea north of Alaska and use it to extract crude — marking the first approval of an oil production facility in federal Arctic waters.

Full BARFicle:


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 23, 2018, 06:11:44 pm »

Saudis🦕 a Pillar for US 🦖🦍 Domination of Middle East – Q&A with Paul Jay (Pt 1/6)

October 22, 2018

Paul Jay with host Ben Norton discusses the history of how US foreign policy has used the Saudi claim to lead the Islamic world to fight nationalism and socialism in the Middle East – From a live recording on October 16th, 2018


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 18, 2018, 04:32:51 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: YES, this certainly DOES belong in this topic thread. WHY? Because the murderous crook Kissinger was instrumental in doing the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn's 🦖  bidding by setting up the Petro-dollar when Nixon closed (i.e. reneged on U.S. Financial Treaty obligations with France) the Gold window in 1972.

October 18, 2018


The groups penned and signed a letter urging the “NYU community” to reconsider hosting Kissinger.

Mr. Kissinger has left a legacy of economic devastation, physical destruction, violence, human misery, and death,” the letter states. “His greatest contributions to U.S. history are those of illegal bombing campaigns, failed military threats, direct involvement in coups and support for dictatorships, and the elongation of devastating, bloody wars for his own political gain.”

He was the architect of programs which were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, the destabilization of several nations, and the enabling of brutal, genocidal regimes,” the letter continues. “He leaves behind a legacy of decisions and policies so violent and horrific that any acknowledgement [sic], or validation of him by NYU is an indefensible act at odds with the values NYU claims to represent and the values of the NYU student body and faculty at large.”

read more:

Henry Kissinger Heckled At NYU, Told To "Rot In Hell"
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 17, 2018, 05:56:33 pm »


Paul Jay on the US🦖-Saud🦕 ‘Special Relationship’ 😈👹💵 🎩🍌🏴‍☠️

October 16, 2018

The likely murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi has inspired a new debate about the US’s “special relationship” with Saudi Arabia. TRNN’s Paul Jay and Ben Norton discuss why America sees the Saudi monarchy as a key player in its global empire, and the key role of arms sales and fossil fuels in geopolitics.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 02, 2018, 12:29:52 pm »

How Well Does Fossil Fuel Divestment Combat Climate Change?  ???

October 1, 2018

As the fossil fuel divestment movement grows around the world, a new study suggests its economic impact might be overstated. Leaders in the environmental movement respond to PERI economist Robert Pollin


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 02, 2018, 10:36:48 am »

Support CleanTechnica’s work via donations on Patreon or PayPal!

Or just go buy a cool t-shirt, cup, baby outfit, bag, or hoodie.

Coal & Gas Are Too Variable To Be Worth Considering

October 1st, 2018 by George Harvey

In one extremely important way, coal and gas are too variable to be worth considering.

We have heard it over and over. People whose thoughts go no deeper than common knowledge make the statement, “The sun doesn’t always shine, and the wind doesn’t always blow.” They seem to say this as though they think it is profound.

I will suggest a counter. “The variable nature of thermal power will kill natural gas just as surely as it is killing coal.” Thermal plants that are dependent on coal, gas, or nuclear fuel have one part of their nature that is too variable for them even to be worth considering in many places where they are used.

What matters to industry is not whether a given wind turbine is turning. What matters is getting the power when it is needed at a reasonable rate. Sign a power purchase agreement (PPA) at the right rate, and it is up to the supplier to make sure the power is there. If the seller cannot deliver, it will have to buy power to replace it. Therefore, the user can go for the least expensive power sources around with a fair amount of confidence that the power will be delivered at the proper price. And the least expensive resources happen to be renewable.

The CleanTechnica article, “Lazard: Wind & Solar Power Costs Continue To Fall, Putting Coal & Nuclear At A Disadvantage,” describes this. While that article is ten months old, the situation has only got worse for thermal power, as solar prices have continued to fall (see many articles HERE).

This is not as risky for the seller as it might sound. The buyer is looking for renewable energy, and renewable energy comes in many forms. A wind farm selling energy to a business can, for example, buy solar power to resell when it has insufficient wind. Since wind power is lowest during the daytime and during the summer, the very times that the sun shines brightest, solar power can provide a lot of the backup it needs. The wind farm can also call for hydro power, which is just about always available. It can also get power from geothermal plants, or biodigesters, or batteries. With today’s highly efficient transmission lines, it could buy the power cost-effectively from hundreds or thousands of miles away. There are a lot of options, and the power seller can either own those types of power plants itself, or it can enter into cooperative power agreements with other providers who do.

There is another thing that needs to be considered. Baseload power plants that are fueled by coal, gas, or nuclear materials are inflexible and cannot change their output to accommodate changes in demand. Because of their inflexible nature, they rely on plants called peakers, which are purposely built to provide variable or intermittent power. This is the old paradigm.

The new paradigm can rely on a smart grid. Renewable energy sources can be matched to demand. And demand response systems can adjust demand, if that becomes necessary.

So we have two ways of doing things. We can use the old paradigm, in which as much as possible of the constantly varying demand is met by inflexible power sources. Or we can use the new paradigm, in which the variable demand can be matched rather precisely by variable resources of many kinds, in many places.

Now comes the catch for thermal power, such as coal, nuclear, and thermal gas. Variability is not an issue that ends with the supply and demand of electricity. It also relates to the supply and demand of fuel, along with other variable costs. Thermal power is variable in one respect where renewable power is not, and that is its cost to the wholesale customer.

An article from Bloomberg, “Tech Investments Are Powering Up Clean Energy,” puts this very nicely. It says, “Corporations sign these purchase agreements for a number of reasons (sustainability goals and positive media coverage certainly being two), but the main reason is that long-term contracts with generators that have no variable costs are good for business. They give companies visibility on their power prices for several decades and, at least historically, have offered cheaper prices than what the grid provides.”

Commercial customers need to be able to have predictable costs. The fuel for solar and wind production will cost exactly the same twenty years from now as it does today. When you take that to the bank, you are pretty likely to be believed. That will not happen with coal, gas, or nuclear power. And that difference is very important when you are dealing with large amounts of money. All else being the same, it is easier to get a bond to build a power plant without variable costs than one for which some costs are unpredictable.

Solar and wind power are absolutely predictable when it comes to variable costs. By contrast, coal and gas power are altogether too variable to be reliable.


Agelbert COMMENT: Excellent article! 👍🌞

Here are some quotes that add support to the article's validity:

"There is a nice legal concept called estoppel. If you argue that you didn't kill the Major in the library with the Ming vase because you were in bed with his wife, you are estopped from pleading self-defence. In the same way, polluters are estopped from arguing that they were only complying with public policy as laid down in the law, because they spent tens of millions shaping those policies and laws to their advantage." James Wimberley

"We do not need a 'new' business model for energy because we never had one. What we need, if we wish to avoid extinction, is to plug the environmental and equity costs of energy production and use into our planning and thinking. " -- A.G. Gelbert

"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." -- Aldous Huxley

"We can’t have a healthy business on a sick planet."-- Ashley Orgain, manager of mission advocacy and outreach for Seventh Generation, Burlington, Vermont

"Technical knowledge of Carrying Capacity will not save us; only a massive increase in Caring Capacity will." -- A. G. Gelbert

"The core responsibility assigned to governments in democracies is the public welfare, protecting the human birthright to basic needs: clean air, water, land, and a place to live, under equitable rules of access to all common property resources.

It is astonishing to discover that major political efforts in democracies can be turned to undermining the core purpose of government, destroying the factual basis for fair and effective protection of essential common property resources of all to feed the financial interests of a few.

These efforts, limiting scientific research on environment, denying the validity of settled facts and natural laws, are a shameful dance, far below acceptable or reputable political behavior.

It can be treated not as a reasoned alternative, but scorned for what it is – simple thievery." —George M. Woodwell, Woods Hole Research Center founder

"There is a terrible desperation to the increasingly pathetic rationalizations from the climate denial camp. This comes as no surprise if you take the long view; every single undone paradigm in history has died kicking and screaming, and our current petroleum paradigm is no different. The trick here is trying to figure out how we all make it to the new paradigm without dying right along with the old one, kicking, screaming or otherwise." - William Rivers Pitt

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 12, 2018, 05:30:52 am »

There will come a day, for example, as with all financial bubbles, when the wildly optimistic projected profits of industries such as fracking will no longer be an effective excuse to keep pumping money into failing businesses burdened by debt they cannot repay.

“The 60 biggest exploration and production firms are not generating enough cash from their operations to cover their operating and capital expenses,” Bethany McLean writes of the fracking industry in an article titled “The Next Financial Crisis Lurks Underground” that appeared in The New York Times. “In aggregate, from mid-2012 to mid-2017, they had negative free cash flow of $9 billion per quarter.”


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 28, 2018, 06:52:03 pm »

Many Russians Think Climate Change is Propaganda to Weaken Their Economy – RAI with A. Buzgalin (11/12)

July 27, 2018

On Reality Asserts Itself, Prof. Alexandr Buzgalin says Russian oligarchs 🦖🐉🦕 find an oil based economy too profitable  to consider transitioning away from  it – with host Paul Jay

Story Transcript

PAUL JAY: Welcome back to Reality Asserts Itself on The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay, and we’re continuing our discussion with Alexander Buzgalin. Thanks for joining us again. And one more time, Professor Buzgalin is the director of the Center for Modern Marxist studies at Moscow State University. In the United States, Canada, most of the West and much of the South, meaning Latin America, Africa and many places in Asia, people recognize the critical necessity of facing the challenge of the climate crisis. The science is clear, we’re facing an existential threat. And in the wisdom of the American political system, a climate denier gets elected in a moment where it couldn’t be more critical to actually have policies that address the question. But in Russia, you more or less have a climate denier who supported Trump. And clearly, the importance of fossil fuel to the Russian economy. One understands his position, but still, this is an existential threat. How much is this discussion and debate going on in Russia?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Unfortunately, not too much. It’s one of the problems of our society which is far from really global problems and this is partly a result of Westernization, partly a result of the opposition to Westernization. It’s like a paradox but it’s true.

PAUL JAY: This is seen like a Westernized argument, climate change.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah. Of course, it’s not an idea, this might be a propagandistic slogan or something like that, that all these climate questions are inspired by the West, and this is part of the blah, blah, blah, and real problems are very far from this, and so on and so forth. It’s games of the rich countries. They didn’t understand that, I don’t know, what will be with climate, but today we are poor, we will build strong industries, they don’t want us to have strong industry, that’s why they created all this climate agenda. This is one approach. Of course, this is not true, but it’s more or less popular. 😟

PAUL JAY: Here too.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah. Second variant, we have our problems, let’s forget about all these Western talks. Russia is strong enough, we have enough nature and everything, so we much protect our nature. And this is maybe important, but the most important problem is to build our industry. So, two variants of the same game, which is not good game at all, but this is more or less a reality. More or less because we have, of course, a green movement, we have opposition, we have people who are talking about this seriously. That we must have another social organization in order to overcome global problems, and global warming is one of these problems. It is normal for left intellectuals, and not only intellectuals, in Russia.

PAUL JAY: Because if it’s as I think it is, that scientists in Russia have more voice and are more respected than here? At least that was certainly the tradition. I know when I was in Eastern Europe, back during the Soviet days, scientists were rock stars. If they were prominent, they’d be on T.V. all the time. Is it still anything like that? Are the scientists raising their voices?

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Unfortunately, it’s not the case now. We had terrible decline of the popularity of science, education, in mass consciousness, partly because of the primitive capitalization, this primitive accumulation of capital led to the destruction of fundamental science in many ways.

PAUL JAY: The asset grab in the ‘90s.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: Yeah. Plus, social status of scientists now in Russia is very low. Of course, money is not main illustration, but just to give you example, full professor in Moscow State University, best university, the best, the highest status, the wage is the same as for the driver of the subway train. And if you have PhD and start your career, you will have to two hundred dollars per month in Moscow, where prices are more or less like in New York. And this is a reflection of the social atmosphere. We still have some interesting cultural traditions, respect to science, but it’s more tradition than reality. More memories than modern situation.

PAUL JAY: If the West and the South gets really serious about policy to deal with climate change, it’s going to tremendously affect the Russian economy. I mean, if the world starts really getting off fossil fuel, getting off oil, the Russian economy is going to be hollowed, to say the least, which one, gives one a reason to understand why Putin would want a climate denier to become president of the United States, and maybe appreciate climate deniers having strength in Europe as well. On the other hand, you’d think there’d have to be a serious conversation about the future of the Russian economy. They’re having it even in places like Saudi Arabia, where they’re talking openly about having to plan for getting off an oil-based economy, they seem to be doing it. Qatar seems to be investing a lot of oil money now to develop what they’re calling this “knowledge-based economy.” I’m not saying they’re all for this, but at least there’s a conversation at high levels going on. If they’re not thinking and planning about this in Russia, it’s a problem.

ALEXANDER BUZGALIN: In Russia we have very big debates about oil dependence and this is a real problem for Russia. And we must overcome this dependence. And we must build another economy. And we have internal struggle, and one of the main ideas of opposition is to decrease the role of oil and gas export and the extraction of oil and gas, and to move towards the high-tech industry, education, science, medicine, and so on, as key branches of economy. And it’s possible. We have very good intellectual potential, potential in the sphere of creativity. And so, that’s why for Russia, the climate problem is not a threat to be killed. I mean, it’s not a threat for the economy. It’s a threat for this type of economy which is very profitable for oligarchs and which is very inefficient for Russian population and for the development of the country. Plus, oil can be used not only for fuel, not only to make energy. Oil can be used for production of different chemical things, and it can be very useful. And it’s necessary to have in other technologies.

And finally, it will be not one day no oil at all. It will be twenty, thirty years transitional period. And this is a good idea to change the economic situation. But here, we must have strong industrial policy. We must have plans, I’m not afraid of this word. We must have structural changes in the economy. And for that, we must realize, introduce a new economic model, and at least have very deep reforms of capitalist system, as minimum, very deep reforms of capitalist system. With modern system of capitalism in Russia, we will not move in this direction. That’s why we have, together, problems of political opposition, social opposition, a necessity to develop our life and necessity to solve ecological problems. It’s in one basket, in one sphere, in one political problem.

PAUL JAY: Okay, in the next segment we’ll talk about what the possibilities are for this next step, which I know you think is a socialism and a step towards communism, and whether there are actually conditions for this.


PAUL JAY: So, please join us for the next and last segment of our interview, at least last for now, on Reality Asserts Itself on The Real News Network.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 18, 2018, 12:48:14 pm »

Oil Change International

Jul. 17, 2018 11:38AM EST

'Traitor' Trump 'Colludes' With Putin Over Oil 🐉🦕🦖

By Andy Rowell

A "traitor." "Putin's Poodle." "Open Treason." These are just some of the harsh headlines to greet Trump after yesterday's summit in Helsinki with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The papers back home were indignant with rage. The New York Times called Trump Putin's "lackey." The paper said that this was the summit that Putin had dreamed of for eighteen years, and Trump had willingly obliged.

The Washington Post's bruising editorial headline was "Trump just colluded with Russia. Openly."

The paper thundered "Trump appeared to align himself with the Kremlin against American law enforcement before the Russian ruler and a global audience … Trump in fact was openly colluding with the criminal leader of a hostile power."

It was not just the press who criticized the president, as he also received cross-party political condemnation.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement: "For the president of the United States to side with President Putin against American law enforcement, American defense officials, and American intelligence agencies is thoughtless, dangerous and weak. The president is putting himself over our country."

John Brennan, the CIA director under Barack Obama, said: "Donald Trump's press conference performance in Helsinki rises to & exceeds the threshold of 'high crimes & misdemeanors.' It was nothing short of treasonous. Not only were Trump's comments imbecilic, he is wholly in the pocket of Putin," he tweeted.

Arizona Republican senator John McCain added it was "one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory … It is clear that the summit in Helsinki was a tragic mistake … no prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant."

The condemnation is everywhere, filling column inches after column inches in the press. Another headline in the Post stated "Trump is a Putin Fanboy: Someday we will know why."

There are many reasons why Trump is a "fanboy" of Putin. And we can guess why. As well as finding common cause to dismiss the evidence of Russian meddling in the flawed election he won, the egotistical narcissistic hard men have much in common, too. And one of those issues is oil.

As one news outlet, CNBC, put it: "Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested that Moscow and Washington could cooperate to soothe volatility in the oil market that has roiled the industry in recent years."

Putin said at the conference: "I think that we as a major oil and gas power, and the United States as a major oil and gas power as well, we could work together on regulation of international markets, because neither of us is actually interested in the plummeting of the prices."

Putin added: "But nor are we interested in driving prices up because it will drain a lot of juices from all other sectors of the economy, so we do have space for cooperation here."

Indeed the meteorologist Eric Holthaus, writing in Grist, also picks up the oil theme: "There's no way to understand Trump's 🦀 relationship with Russia 🦕 without putting oil and climate politics at its center" he wrote. "If you're upset at Trump and Putin for undermining our democracy, just wait until you find out that they are likely colluding to destroy our planet's climate system, too."

He added: "After Monday's meeting in Helsinki, it's clearer than ever that we are at a crucial moment in our American democracy as well as in the biggest and most important fight we've ever had—the fight against climate change."

Holthaus continued: "Russia is a petrostate 🦕, and the U.S.🦖 is now, too. In fact, the two countries are the world's largest non-OPEC oil producers, extracting nearly as much as all OPEC countries combined … By working together, they can keep the global economy swimming in oil and gas."

The two hardmen are propped up by fossil fuels and our addiction to oil and gas. So Holthaus finishes by arguing, "The quicker we resolve to move away from our dependence on fossil fuels, the quicker Putin and Trump will become powerless."    

And that can only be a good thing. For all of us.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 08, 2018, 06:06:20 pm »

This 2012 Article is even more applicable today.

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!   
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 06, 2018, 12:59:47 pm »

Ghost Ships No More: Seismic Vessels Resume Oil and Gas Search as Prices Perk Up 🤬

July 4, 2018 by Reuters

seismic survey vessel Photo: CutePloy / Shutterstock


By Florence Tan and Gavin Maguire SINGAPORE, July 5 (Reuters) – A growing fleet of ships is scanning oceans in search of new oil and gas fields as energy companies, now with more cash thanks to stronger crude prices, gradually resume spending on seismic services after a four-year downturn.

A doubling in the area contracted for seismic work in the first quarter this year from the last three months of 2017 has injected optimism into surveillance firms, with a global fleet of about 24 vessels, most of whom struggled to survive in the past years.

But they say the road to recovery remains bumpy with producers big and small not keen on drilling for new reserves unless oil prices, which have more than doubled from 2016 lows, stay high for at least a year.

Still, with crude prices stabilising well above $60 a barrel in the past six months, companies including mid- and small-sized independents such as Woodside Petroleum Ltd, Kosmos Energy Ltd and Tullow Oil PLC have helped boost demand for surveillance.

The total area tendered by upstream companies 🦖 for seismic work doubled to 40,000 square kilometres in the first quarter this year from October-December last year, said Duncan Eley, chief executive officer at Polarcus which owns a seismic fleet.

“That’s positive in isolation,” said Eley, keeping his optimism in check even as he pointed to a busy fourth quarter for geophysical work in Asia Pacific, particularly for gas with demand forecast to soar in coming decades.

Gas projects 🦖 in Myanmar could take two to three vessels from the global fleet, while there are also potential activities in Malaysia, Australia, India and Papua New Guinea, where Exxon Mobil and Total plan to feed more gas into their existing liquefied natural gas infrastructure, Eley said.

That marks a stark change from the dark days of 2015 and 2016 when orders for geophysical survey work came to a grinding halt as oil prices plummeted from over $100 a barrel to less than $50.

Petroleum Geo Services (PGS)🦖, the world’s largest seismic operator, was also seeing better opportunities now than last year.

“The recent increases we’ve seen are primarily driven by Africa and Brazil when it comes to bidding for contract work,” said Bård Stenberg, PGS’ senior vice president for investor relations and communication.

Demand for geophysical data at producing oil and gas fields, also known as 4D seismic survey, has also increased as explorers sought to maximise output from these assets ☠️, the two executives 😈 👹 said.

PGS expects to secure between 20 and 25 4D seismic jobs this year, up from 16-17 in 2017, Stenberg said, with most of it located in the North Sea, West Africa and Brazil.


The increased work should help improve the company’s earnings which remain well below pre-crisis levels.



Agelbert NOTE: Corruptio Optimi Pessima (evidenced in the video below).

In the year 2050, most humans alive today..., WON'T BE ☠️.

The Age of Stupid

Dr. Brown is the guy in the video. His credentials are World Class.

Patrick T. Brown, PhD

Curriculum vitae


Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford University
Postdoctoral Research Scientist (under Ken Caldeira)


Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
Doctor of Philosophy, Earth and Ocean Science, 2016
San Jose State University, San Jose, California
Master of Science, Meteorology and Climate Science, 2012
University of Wisconsin – Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
Bachelor of Science, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, 2008


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 05, 2018, 10:13:05 pm »

The Koch Brothers' 😈 👹 Best Investment


How a $40 million political outlay yields a $500 million tax cut.

This article appears in the Summer 2018 issue of The American Prospect magazine. Subscribe here.

The sprawling political network backed by billionaire brothers Charles 🦕 and David 🦖Koch will spend $20 million ahead of the midterm elections to convince voters that the Trump tax cuts are good for the country and the middle class. That’s on top of the $20 million they spent to promote the 2017 Republican tax bill’s passage. All told, the network plans to spend $400 million on candidates and issues this election cycle, up from $250 million in the last one.

Most of the money will be spent on TV ads targeting vulnerable Democratic senators for opposing the tax cuts. As of early May, the Koch network’s political advocacy arm, Americans for Prosperity (AFP), had already run more than 8,000 ads targeting Democratic Senators Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, and Claire McCaskill of Missouri.

The campaign also includes door-to-door canvassing, in which AFP employees and volunteers talk up the new tax law with voters. AFP is calling the campaign the “American Pay Raise.” Of course, if you have to spend tens of millions of dollars to convince working families that tax cuts are good for them, that should tell you there’s something fundamentally wrong with your tax cuts, which go mostly to corporations and the rich.

Nobody better personifies this tilt better than the Koch brothers themselves. The immense amounts shelled out by the Koch network to pass and promote the GOP tax law are just drops in the bucket compared with the tax windfall the Koch brothers will reap from the new law.

Americans for Tax Fairness estimates that the Kochs and their conglomerate Koch Industries will likely save between $840 million and $1.4 billion in income taxes each year. That’s a return on investment of at least 4,100 percent on the $20 million they spent to pass the law.

Estimating the potential tax savings for the Koch brothers is not an exact science. Koch Industries, the nation’s second-largest private corporation, does not publicly reveal its financial statements or how its individual companies are structured for tax purposes. Some may be C corporations, which would benefit from the lower corporate tax rate. Others are likely pass-through entities, so their tax savings would flow directly through to the individual tax returns of their owners, primarily Charles and David Koch.

Koch Industries brought in about $100 billion in revenue last year, according to Forbes. Assuming the conglomerate has a (relatively modest) pretax profit margin of 10 percent, Koch Industries’ profits would be around $10 billion before taxes. Let’s say that all the Koch companies are organized as pass-through entities, so all the income is taxed at the individual level. Let’s further assume that these profits are divided equally between the two brothers, so each reports $5 billion of business income. Under the new law, the Kochs will be able to deduct 20 percent of that income, so each will have $1 billion in tax-free income.

The tax law also reduced the top income tax bracket—which now applies to income over $600,000 for a married couple—from 39.6 percent to 37 percent. Under the new law, Charles and David Koch could pay about $1.5 billion in taxes each on their business income, versus the nearly $2 billion they would have owed under previous law. These two provisions alone could save them about $500 million each, or $1 billion in total.

To be fair, each brother owns a 42 percent stake in the business, so 16 percent of the profits will pass through to the other owners. Assuming that each brother reports 42 percent of the $10 billion in estimated profits doesn’t significantly change the magnitude of the estimated tax savings—each brother would still get about $420 million.

If we instead assume that all the Koch companies are taxed at the corporate level, the tax savings for Koch Industries could be up to $1.4 billion. This assumes that the Koch companies previously paid the statutory 35 percent corporate tax rate, in which case Koch industries would have owed $3.5 billion in taxes on its $10 billion in profits. Under the new law, it would only owe 21 percent, or $2.1 billion.

Most corporations pay less than the statutory rate due to myriad tax loopholes. Koch Industries could have already paid a low effective tax rate under prior law, meaning its benefit from the tax law would be less than estimated here—especially if loopholes that it relied on were closed. Even so, the lower rates in the new law will save them a bundle. And luckily for Koch Industries, which has substantial oil and gas operations, most of the loopholes for this industry remain wide open.

The propaganda for the Republican Tax Act portrays it as good for investment. It’s hard to find an investment in the real economy that paid off as handsomely as the Koch brothers’ political spending.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 05, 2018, 09:48:10 pm »

Scandal Ridden Pruitt 🦖 Finally Resigns from EPA, Leaving Another Climate Denier 🦕 in Charge 👎

July 5, 2018

Sierra Club’s Mary Anne Hitt says Pruitt’s long list of scandals is only matched by his long list of attempted environmental rollbacks, and new acting EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler will advance the same deregulatory agenda

Story Transcript

DHARNA NOOR: It’s The Real News. I’m Dharna Noor.

Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt resigned on Thursday amidst numerous allegations of ethical and legal violations. Trump announced Pruitt’s resignation via Twitter, where he also said that EPA Deputy Administrator and former coal lobbyist Andrew Wheeler will assume the role of acting administrator this Monday. Just hours before Pruitt resigned, two congressmen called upon the EPA’s inspector general to investigate allegations that Pruitt has been hiding and falsifying calendar records of his meetings with industry officials. And these came in a slew of new allegations reported by The Washington Post on Monday. Aides also said that the administrator asked EPA staffers to help his wife get a six-figure job, and to perform many other nonofficial tasks.

Here to talk about all of this is Mary Anne Hitt. She’s the director of the Beyond Coal Campaign at the Sierra Club. Thanks for joining us today.

MARY ANNE HITT: Thanks for having me.

DHARNA NOOR: So first let’s talk a little bit about what we’re losing in Scott Pruitt. Let’s assess his record a little bit. So as you know, and many of you probably know, on Monday a schoolteacher named Kristen Mink actually confronted Pruitt in a D.C. restaurant and asked him to resign. Let’s see that clip.

KRISTIN MINK: I just wanted to urge you to resign because of what you’re doing to the environment in our country. Meanwhile, you’re slashing strong standards for cars and trucks for the benefits of big corporations. We deserve to have somebody at the EPA who actually does protect our environment, someone who believes in climate change and takes it seriously for the benefit of all of us, including our children. So I would urge you to resign before your scandals push you out.

DHARNA NOOR: So Mink castigated Pruitt for being a climate denier, for attacking clean air and water standards, for renting a condo from the spouse of a prominent fossil fuel lobbyist with whom he was in talks. This was just as a reminder at the time that he actually approved the Alberta Clipper pipeline, allowing hundreds of thousands more barrels of oil per day to flow to the United States from Canada’s tar sands. Talk a little bit about his record generally, and what Pruitt’s environmental impact was, and about his deregulatory agenda.

MARY ANNE HITT: Well, let me say first that I am a mom of an 8-year-old, and I found it very heartwarming when that mom stood up and I think said what a lot of us moms wish we could say to Scott Pruitt in person, which is that it’s our clean air and our clean water and the very safety of our kids that is on the line. And Scott Pruitt from day one in office was, frankly, working to dismantle the EPA. It was his life’s work formerly as the Oklahoma attorney general to try to find shortcuts or loopholes around our clean air and clean water standards, and from his first day on the job he began working at the behest of polluters to do just that.

And in doing so, if that wasn’t bad enough, he also was just-. It was just, frankly, a bottomless pit of scandals, of corruption, from multi-hundred dollar fountain pens, to accepting cheap rent from a lobbyist for a fossil fuel company, to tactical paants that were bought for him for the price of hundreds of dollars a pair. So it was really, frankly, I think-. Again, as a mom, as someone who’s worried about the safety of your air and water, the fact that he was that corrupt in his personal dealings was one thing. The fact that he was playing fast and loose with the water that we all drink and the air that we all breathe was what was truly scary about Scott Pruitt.

DHARNA NOOR: Talk a little bit more about what some of the impacts that he had were on clean air and clean water regulations. Talk a little bit more specifically about what some of his legacies will be, moving on from the EPA.

MARY ANNE HITT: Well, the long list of Scott Pruitt’s ethical scandals is only matched by a long list of air and water and climate regulations that he tried to roll back in his tenure at EPA. Everything from standards for how to dispose of toxic coal ash safely so it doesn’t end up in the drinking water, so you don’t have things like arsenic in your drinking water from coal ash, to the first ever climate standards that we had as a nation to reduce climate pollution from power plants. He was working to repeal and revoke those. You can talk about the safety of pesticides. You can talk about-. Really, Scott Pruitt never met an environmental regulation that he didn’t want to try to roll back or repeal. And the good news, if there is any, is that he didn’t get too far in that agenda. A lot of what he was trying to do, we believe, was illegal. And the Sierra Club and other groups were challenging him in court every step of the way. So he set a lot of bad things in motion. And we are worried that Andrew Wheeler, the number two at the EPA who is now in charge, will continue on that toxic agenda. But we also are very determined to fight them every step of the way.

DHARNA NOOR: Yeah. So let’s talk a little bit more about Andrew Wheeler. Again, he’s a former coal lobbyist. And I understand that your organization actually obtained emails between him and Scott Pruitt through the Freedom of Information Act. What did you find from those emails, and what do you generally expect from him as an EPA administrator?

MARY ANNE HITT: Well, I want to give a special shoutout to our attorneys and press folks at the Sierra Club. They paged through, I am not kidding you, almost 60000 pages of FOIA documents from the EPA that are the source of the information about a lot of these scandals that you saw on the news and you wrote about on the front pages of the newspaper. And Wheeler and Pruitt were definitely partners in crime, working to advance this agenda of rolling back our environmental safeguards that they’re going to continue full speed ahead with Wheeler at the helm, to try to get that agenda over the finish line. And we are going to be fighting at the Sierra Club and with all of our partners every step of the way to prevent that from happening. Because it really is, you know, just as the mom who confronted Scott Pruitt in the restaurant put it so so beautifully, it’s our kids future. It’s the safety of the water we drink and the air that we breathe. And that, that is what they are playing fast and loose with to benefit their polluter buddies.

DHARNA NOOR: And then, lastly, how can people hold the EPA administrator, whether it’s Pruitt, Wheeler, or somebody else accountable? What are some actions that people can take to ensure that, you know, we don’t have another EPA administrator like Scott Pruitt? Is that even possible?

MARY ANNE HITT: Well, the Sierra Club tonight is reaching out to all of our members and supporters and asking them to call their members of Congress, because Congress is the agency that does have oversight over the EPA. And obviously Trump is happy to have folks reading the EPA doing the bidding of polluters. And so our check on that is the Congress. And Scott Pruitt did get a lot of a lot of very hard questions, increasingly hard questions, every time he appeared before the Congress and before the Senate. That was a lot of what put him on the hot seat and, again, exposed some of this corruption.

And so we’re going to be counting on members of Congress now to do the same thing with Wheeler who, again, he’s a coal lobbyist. He has a very long and not very pretty track record when it comes to clean air, clean water. He’s got the same agenda as Pruitt and Trump, which is to dismantle all of our environmental safeguards. And so folks should call their members of Congress and ask them to oppose Wheeler and Trump’s agenda, and to actually put someone in charge of EPA who will let the EPA do its job and fulfill its mission. I’m sure the very hardworking folks at EPA are breathing a sigh of relief tonight, and would just like to be able to do their jobs to make sure our air and water are safe. And the Congress needs to allow the EPA to do just that. That’s what the American people are counting on.

DHARNA NOOR: All right. Well, Marianne, as we see what Wheeler and others do in the EPA we’ll be sure to check in again with you. Thanks so much for coming on today.

MARY ANNE HITT: Thank you so much for having me.

DHARNA NOOR: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 03, 2018, 07:50:17 pm »

July 3, 2018

Rhode Island Sues Oil Giants 🐉🦕🦖

 Rhode Island became the first state to sue oil and gas companies for the impacts of climate change on Monday, filing suit against 21 of the world’s largest fossil fuel producers. State Attorney General Peter Kilmartin said yesterday that the state was especially vulnerable to the impacts of rising seas and extreme weather as he announced the suit with Democratic Gov. Gina Raimondo against a stretch of the state’s 400-mile coastline.

“The defendants' actions for the past several decades are already having and will continue to have a significant and detrimental impact on our infrastructure, economy, public health, and our eco-systems, and will force the state to divert already-limited resources to mitigate the effects of climate change, thereby diminishing resources for other vital programs and services,” Kilmartin said.

The suit joins a group of cases across the country brought by cities including New York and municipalities in California and Colorado.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: July 03, 2018, 01:38:26 pm »

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 30, 2018, 05:53:26 pm »

More Profit over Planet on behalf of Hydrocarbon Hustlers 🦖 comin' our way.  :(
League of Conservation Voters

June 30, 2018

House rushes forward on four drilling bills

Here's a partial list of these bills:

H.R. 6087, introduced by Wyoming's Rep Liz Cheney 🦖, requires citizens and groups to pay exorbitant fees to protest oil and gas leasing. If passed, the per page fee proposed in this bill could cost thousands of dollars per submission. Here's the rub: oil and gas companies don't have to pay a fee for expressing interest in these very same parcels.

H.R. 6106 and H.R. 6107, introduced by New Mexico's Rep Steve Pearce 🐉, would gut federal oversight over drilling projects for environmental, safety, or public health impacts.

H.R. 6088, introduced by Utah's Rep John Curtis 🦕, would move to hand out drilling permits as quickly as possible. Only the Interior Secretary could object to the permit — and there would be no site inspections or environmental review.

These attacks on public lands are directly aligned with the Trump administration, which over the past 18 months has sold out more federal land to drilling interests than any previous administration.

President Trump 🦀  and Interior Secretary Zinke 😈 want nothing more than to open up millions of acres of public lands to oil and gas drilling and mining. And Republican leaders in Congress are doing everything legislatively available to assist Trump and Zinke in their efforts.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 29, 2018, 01:58:51 pm »

🦖🦀🐉 versus 🦕🦍

Fossil Fuelers BATTLE for world hydrocarbon profits in BOOMING world economy 💵 🎩 🏴‍☠️

Trump 🦖🦀🐉 Firmly In the Twilight Zone: Threatens Nord Stream 2🦕🦍 With Sanctions

June 29, 2017

by Mike Mish Shedlock

Trump's 🦀 vise on the EU started with steel, progressed to cars, then to Iran, and now to a gas pipeline vital to the EU.

The story of the day, not discussed in mainstream media, involves Nord Stream 2, a gas pipeline between Russia and the EU. The feature image is from Gazprom🦕🦍.

Gazprom says "The new pipeline, similar to the one in operation, will establish a direct link between Gazprom and the European consumers. It will also ensure a highly reliable supply of Russian gas to Europe."

Some suggest the EU is unwise to depend on Russia. That is nonsense. Why?

Free trade stops wars!

Regardless, it is the EU's decision to make, not Trump's 🦀, and the deal is already underway.

Gazprom, Partners Invest €4.8 Billion Nord Stream 2 Construction

TASS, the Russian news agency reports Gazprom, Partners Invest €4.8 Billion Nord Stream 2 Construction.

Believe that? Why not? There is no dispute from the EU.

My point is the investment.

Russia’s gas producer Gazprom 🦕 and its Nord Stream 2 partners 🦍 💵 🎩 have invested a total of 4.8 bln euro in the project on natural gas pipeline construction as of the end of June, Chief Financial Officer of Nord Stream 2 AG, the operator of the pipeline construction, Paul Corcoran told journalists on Thursday.

"We have received 96% of the pipes, we have concrete coated 55% of those pipes and we mobilized vessels for the pipelines. So we are quite well prepared on track and on time for the project," CFO added.

The Nord Stream 2 pipeline is expected to come into service at the end of 2019.

Stop It All Says Trump🦀🦖🐉

Eurointelligence reports Trump 🦀now gunning for Nord Stream 2

As if the tariffs on steel and aluminium - and soon cars - were not enough, the US administration🦀🦖🐉  is now preparing sanctions against five European companies involved in the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project. Those sanctions previously had the status of a rumour. But FAZ reports this morning that it received confirmation from a senior US official, at the World Gas Conference in Washington, that the administration is formally considering an application to impose such sanctions. There are two German companies involved, Wintershall und Uniper, as well as OMV from Austria, Engie from France and Royal Dutch Shell. Together they fund 50% of the project. Gazprom funds the other 50%.

FAZ notes that Uniper, one of the German companies, would be particularly hard-hit. The company is a big player in the US coal trade. The company's CEO is quoted as saying that he continues to believe in the necessity of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline to secure gas supplies for the EU. It remains to be seen whether the companies will back off from the project once the sanctions are actually imposed.

Twilight Zone

Trump's 🦀 Iran sanctions are absurd. His Nord Stream 2 demands are so far beyond absurd as to be in the Twilight Zone.

Does Trump 🦀 have a yes or no vote on any and every trade agreement in the world?

It appears so.

The EU and all the countries that border the pipeline agreed to this deal. They invested heavily in it. Construction is underway.

What's Next?

This is so damn absurd, it's logical to conclude there is no way the EU will back down.

However, logic and reality can be quite different things. Trump 🦀 is proof enough.

Either way, the problem is "what's next?"

History suggests that when trade stops, war soon follows.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 28, 2018, 09:55:27 pm »

The Expanded Panama Canal Just Turned Two: Here Are Some Facts, Figures and Highlights the First Few Years of Operation

June 27, 2018 by gCaptain

Photo: Panama Canal Authority

The Panama Canal on Tuesday marked the two-year anniversary of the inauguration of Expanded Panama Canal, the largest enhancement project in the waterway’s 103-year history.

To date, the Canal has transited 3,745 Neopanamax vessels, exceeding the performance exceptions of Expanded Canal’s Neopanamax Locks.

“Two years ago, we pledged to usher in a new era for world commerce,” said Panama Canal Administrator Jorge L. Quijano. “Today, as we reflect upon our countless achievements and ever-expanding impact, we proudly reaffirm this commitment to the global maritime community.”

Over the past two years, the Panama Canal has recorded a number of notable milestones thanks to expansion project. In May, the canal set a new monthly tonnage record of 38.1 million tons (PC/UMS), the third such time the waterway has set a monthly tonnage record in the past two years.

May also saw the transit of the Panama Canal’s largest cruise ship to date, the Norwegian Bliss, at more than 168,000 gross tons and carrying nearly 5,000 passengers.

The transit of the largest capacity container vessel to-date, the CMA CGM Theodore Roosevelt, with a Total TEU Allowance (TTA) of 14,863.

The Panama Canal Authority, which is responsible for managing the canal, says increased experience with the Neopanamax Locks and continued investment into its operations have allowed the waterway to provide additional capacity, flexibility and efficiency to shippers.

Recent offerings include two additional reservation slots for the Neopanamax Locks, bringing the total number of slots from six (at the time of the inauguration) to eight.

Starting this month, the Panama Canal Authority also increased the maximum allowable beam for vessels transiting the Neopanamax Locks to accommodate larger vessels and greater tonnage.

While the container segment makes up the more than half of transits through the Expanded Panama Canal, the impact of the Neopanamax Locks has been seen across all segments.

Perhaps the greatest impact has been seen in LNG, an entirely new segment for the waterway, which has emerged as the waterway’s fastest growing. In just the past two years, the segment has seen a total of 358 LNG 🦖 transits through the Neopanamax locks.

Some other notable LNG highlights include the transit of three LNG vessels in one day in April 2018 as well as the transit of the “first of many” LNG cargoes from the Dominion Cove Point terminal in Maryland to Japan, taking place that same month.

Moving forward, the Canal’s LNG traffic is expected to grow by 50 percent by the end of FY 2018 compared to FY 2017, increasing from 163 to approximately 244 transits.

The Panama Canal is currently offering one of the eight Neopanamax reservation slots per day to LNG shippers, but the Canal Authority says it has transited to LNG vessels in one day on 14 separate occasions

The Expanded Canal is redrawing global trade routes, in the LNG industry and across segments, as shippers have more opportunity to take advantage of the economies of scale provided with the Neopanamax Locks,” said Deputy Administrator Manuel E. Benitez. “Thanks to the careful planning and strategic optimization of our operations, we’re confident the Expanded Canal will facilitate further growth in international trade and have a far-reaching impact in communities around the world.”


Yeah, lots of growth will result in a far reaching IMPACT, 🔥🌪☠️ for sure (see "Natural" Gas BRIDGE FUEL to the FUTURE BELOW).

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 26, 2018, 09:43:51 pm »

AG, your attempts to deluge the argument with volumes of stuff doesn't help. I will try and answer your last three posts, and leave the others for my next post.

You are saying that the heat produced from burning gasoline according to Hess's Law is incorrect because when you burn gasoline in an ICE it doesn't all get burnt.  That is hardly the fault of Hess's Law, is it?  It is clearly the fault of the ICE - it produces a hot exhaust, waste heat.  All the values for the Table of Standard Molar Enthalpy are arrived at by actual real calorimetry experiments, where all burning is complete and no heat is lost.

What is the minimum amount of fossil fuels we must burn each year to prevent a collapse of civilization during that year?

I HAVE already answered that question, but you didn't read it:
It is a silly question to ask "at what exact figure will it all collapse?", it is a matter of confidence that the oil is there to be had.  When the confidence goes, the oil majors' shares will collapse, and with it the financial system.

If there is not enough fuel (of the right types) to keep running the Army, Navy, Air Force, Space Force, Cyber Force, Police, Ambulance, Emergency Services, Courts, Prisons, Public Transport, TV, radio, the mobile phone system, the landline phone system, the banking system, hospitals and a host of other "essential services", then society will collapse.  Any attempt at establishing a figure for this is pointless, as it cannot possibly be accurate. 

The most critical element in that list is the banking system, as without a payments system running, no one can buy anything, including electricity (which involves getting coal miners to work on time and paying them so they can buy food). Once the electricity goes off, the internet goes down, water stops coming out the taps, toilets won't flush, and the zombies take to the streets, armed to the teeth.

The Hirsch Report (2005) (Page 5) says:
1. When world oil peaking will occur is not known with certainty. A fundamental problem in predicting oil peaking is the poor quality of and possible political biases in world oil reserves data. Some experts believe peaking may occur soon. This study indicates that “soon” is within 20 years.

2. The problems associated with world oil production peaking will not be temporary, and past “energy crisis” experience will provide  relatively little guidance. The challenge of oil peaking deserves immediate, serious attention, if risks are to be fully understood and mitigation begun on a timely basis.

6. Mitigation will require a minimum of a decade of intense, expensive effort, because the scale of liquid fuels mitigation is inherently extremely large.

7. While greater end-use efficiency is essential, increased efficiency alone will be neither sufficient nor timely enough to solve the problem. Production of large amounts of substitute liquid fuels will be required. A number of commercial or near-commercial substitute fuel production technologies are currently available for deployment, so the production of vast amounts of substitute liquid fuels is feasible with existing technology.

Hirsch was an independent contractor, contracted to produce the report by DoE.  He put the report up on the DoE website, but it was taken down when the Peak Oilers started quoting from it and asking DoE difficult questions.  Fortunately a school science website had downloaded a copy of it, and I downloaded it from them and put it on my RunningOnEmpty website.

It is all about mitigating the Peak Oil problem, so wouldn't have happened if DoE had thought Peak Oil wasn't real.

Here is Hirsch going through all the points, but you don't need it if you already Peak Oil aware:

[embed=640,360]<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PVoDYha8ZRM" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/embed]

I  am "deluging" nothing. If you are dot connecting challenged, that's your problem, Palloy.

Oh, and I just read your post. That is a NON-answer to my question. Give me A NUMBER, Palloy.

My number is around 7 Billion BOE plus or minus a billion BOE annually. As long as there is that minimum amount, which there certainly WILL BE for at least 50 YEARS,  there will BE NO COLLAPSE, PERIOD.

The speculation by the Hirsch Report cherry picked section that you put in red is just speculation, nothing more. You cannot base your collapse scenario on it. Stay on the subject Palloy. I am NOT discussing Renewable Energy technology with you. You cannot handle that discussion objectively.

Mitigation ain't your thing either. It never was. I've got a nice quote of yours from two years or so back that shows what you REALLY think about pollution costs. I'll post it here when I decide it needs to be posted.

 Have nice day.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 26, 2018, 08:23:06 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Another 'more oil and gas to be pulled out of the oceans' DOT to connect for those who have eyes to see. 8)

Jack-Up Specialist Shelf Drilling Falls in Oslo Debut, But Optimistic on Rising 🦖 Rig Rates

June 25, 2018 by Reuters

jack-up rig Lukasz Z / Shutterstock


By Nerijus Adomaitis OSLO, June 25 (Reuters) – A fall in equities and oil markets knocked shares in Shelf Drilling on their Oslo market debut on Monday, although the world’s largest owner of shallow water rigs was optimistic rig rates are set to rise.

The Dubai-based company’s shares were trading at 63.64 Norwegian crowns at 1400 GMT, below their initial public offering (IPO) price of 65.35 crowns.

“I think it (the share price move) is more of a response to a broader market movement than anything specific to the company,” Chief Executive David Mullen said.

Stocks in Asia and Europe fell on concerns about a trade dispute between the United States and other major economies, while Brent crude eased after a deal between OPEC and other oil producers to increase production.

Shelf Drilling’s debut came four years after it abandoned plans to list in London in the wake of an oil price downturn.

The company raised about $225 million in the offering, it said on Friday, the latest drilling firm to list in Oslo to raise capital.

Mullen told Reuters on Monday the company expected to see higher rig rates in 2019 and more consolidation of the fragmented market.

He forecast utilisation of marketed rigs would rise to near 80 percent by the end of this year from 74 percent currently, giving rig owners more leverage to ask for higher prices.

Offshore Oil Recovery Beginning in World’s Harshest Environments

“So going into 2019 we should see some pricing power, and some real price movements,” he said in an interview, adding the Middle East, North Sea and West Africa were the most promising regions for jack-up rigs.

About 80 percent of Shelf Drilling’s current business relates to drilling extra wells at existing oilfields to help to drain the reservoirs or to repair existing wells.

As a recovery in crude oil prices increases oil companies’ interest in offshore exploration and field developments, Mullen plans to acquire more so-called premium rigs, better suited to search for new resources than standard specification rigs.

“Today we have eight premium jack-ups and we want to see that grow … I would like to ultimately grow to a fleet of 15, maybe 20, premium jack-up rigs,” Mullen said.

Mullen also said he expected more consolidation in the drilling rig market between small players, and big deals too.

Borr Drilling to Acquire Paragon Offshore in Push to Consolidate Jack-Up Rig Market

“I think you are going to see some big mergers … but we are more interested in acquiring assets, not so much interested in doing broad M&A deals,” he said.

Copenhagen-listed conglomerate A.P. Moller-Maersk is expected to try to sell its drilling arm, Maersk Drilling, but has not found a buyer so far.

Mullen said Shelf Drilling itself was not seeking a broad deal with Maersk, but could be interested in buying some of the Danish company’s benign environment jack-up rigs.

($1 = 8.1000 Norwegian crowns) (Reporting by Nerijus Adomaitis; Editing by Jane Merriman and Mark Potter)

(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2018.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: June 26, 2018, 07:09:53 pm »

Jeffrey Phillips, Sr. Graphic Designer, Webber Energy Group, The University of Texas at Austin

Apr 30, 2016

Transportation is the big user of petroleum, 92% vs just 1% for generating electricity. Turning off the lights doesn't save oil.

Electric generation is the single largest consumer of primary energy, and 65% of that comes from fossil fuels, mostly coal, then natural gas. That mix is changing, with gas use growing  as environmental regulations raise the cost of using dirty coal.


Agelbert NOTE: Jeffrey Phillips wrote the above before Trump came to power. I guess they don't have to "worry" about all those pesky environmental regulations any more.    USA! USA!

+-Recent Topics

End Times according to the Judeo Christian Bible by AGelbert
January 16, 2019, 12:52:54 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
January 15, 2019, 08:51:55 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
January 15, 2019, 06:56:39 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
January 14, 2019, 07:05:57 pm

War Provocations and Peace Actions by AGelbert
January 14, 2019, 12:31:46 pm

Key Historical Events ...THAT YOU MAY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF by AGelbert
January 13, 2019, 06:10:10 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
January 13, 2019, 02:12:44 pm

Money by AGelbert
January 12, 2019, 05:00:03 pm

Non-routine News by AGelbert
January 12, 2019, 02:42:21 pm

Photvoltaics (PV) by AGelbert
January 12, 2019, 12:29:46 pm