+- +-

+-User

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

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 43
Latest: Heredia05
New This Month: 0
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 11118
Total Topics: 250
Most Online Today: 3
Most Online Ever: 52
(November 29, 2017, 04:04:44 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 0
Total: 0

Post reply

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
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
Verification:

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


Topic Summary

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 16, 2018, 04:32:08 pm »

Friends of the Earth foe.org


VICTORY : Ryan Zinke 🦖 resigns as Interior Secretary

Dec 15, 2018, 9:59 AM

Dear Anthony,

Victory for the environment: Ryan Zinke resigns from the Department of the Interior after onslaught of scandals!
VICTORY! Ryan Zinke just stepped down as Secretary of the Interior, according to a tweet from Donald Trump. He will leave at the end of the year. This was largely thanks to people like you demanding he be held accountable for his corruption.

Every day Ryan Zinke was in office, he worked to destroy our public lands and waters -- with devastating impacts on our communities. He slashed protections for places like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and Bears Ears National Monument. And he did it all to help his fossil fuel industry friends.

The scandals surrounding Zinke have been building for months. The DOI Inspector General released a report showing that every time Zinke had a choice between benefiting taxpayers and himself, he chose himself. He even changed policies so taxpayers would cover travel for his wife, and wasted $25,000 on a romantic trip to Turkey with her.

His corruption was so severe that the DOI Inspector General referred an investigation to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution.

Friends of the Earth members like you spoke out on these scandals and made them impossible for Trump to ignore. Zinke resigned after you signed petitions, made phone calls, took to social media and took to the streets to demand that he be kicked out of the Department of Interior.

This shows that when people like you stand up to Trump and his Administration, you can make a difference. You can stop them from destroying our environment and endangering our communities.

Forcing Zinke out is a huge victory for people and the environment. Each day Zinke was Interior Secretary, he worked to advance his radical plan to slash national monuments, cut Indigenous communities out of the decision-making process, and ignore significant environmental, cultural, and scientific information. And he did it all in a mad dash to frack ☠️, mine ☠️ and drill ☠️ on America's public lands.

And until the scandals caught up to him, he was dangerously ☠️ effective at it.

By kicking Zinke out of the Department of the Interior, you helped send a strong message that it’s unacceptable for our leaders to put the fossil fuel industry and other corporate interests ahead of people and the planet.

Trump 🦀 is still trying to fill his government with corrupt extremists 💵 🎩 and climate deniers 🦕. Zinke’s likely replacement, David Bernhardt 🐉, is a walking conflict of interest. Before coming to Interior he was a high paid lobbyist representing the very industries that will profit from Trump’s plan to hand our public lands and waters over to polluters.

That’s why we’ll need you with us every step of the way as we work to stop these dangerous nominees and appointees. But Zinke’s ouster shows that when we all take action together, we win.

Thank you for helping build a better future for our country and our planet.

Standing with you,
Nicole Ghio,
Senior fossil fuels program manager,
Friends of the Earth

https://foe.org/news/

Agelbert NOTE: As you have observed, Trump has MORE than FOUR Profit Over People and Planet 'HORSEMEN' (see: The Book of Revelation in the Bible) on his WRECKING CREW.


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 12, 2018, 05:07:12 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Don't think for a secomd that the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn are any less corrosive to our environment and our government than they were in 2017. If anything, they have increased their unethical destructive activity.

This article covers their typical mens rea modus operandi. These bastards need to be shut down in Ohio (and everywhere else) or we are toast.


OCT 29, 2017

BY BRAD WIENERS AND DAVID HASEMYER

How Fossil Fuel Allies Are Tearing Apart Ohio's Embrace of Clean Energy  >:(

With scare studies, policy drafts and political donations, industry groups turned Ohio lawmakers against policies they once overwhelmingly supported.

SNIPPET 1:

As fossil fuel 🦖 interests 👹 mobilized at the national level to fight proposals to mitigate climate change that would undercut their profits, they made Ohio a priority for fighting clean energy policy at the state level. Beginning in earnest in 2011, a network of coal companies, utilities, think tanks, nonprofit foundations and political action committees coalesced to roll back Ohio's alternative energy initiatives.

SNIPPET 2:

Agelbert NOTE: Bill Seitz is a typical (bought and paid for) KochRoach.

Read more:

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/29102017/renewable-energy-ohio-rps-law-fossil-fuel-political-donations-coal

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: December 10, 2018, 05:20:56 pm »

Court Orders Three Iowa Wind Turbines Dismantled

December 10th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

SNIPPET:

A court in Iowa has ordered three wind turbines in Fayette County, Iowa be dismantled by December 9. Local residents are standing outside watching them come down and cheering. What’s going on? Some of it has to do with NIMBY, some of it has to do with money, and some of it has to do with the “city vs. country” divide that helped propel the current president into office. The dispute comes down to whether or not the developers who put up the wind turbines had a proper building permit. The court ruled they did not.

Full article:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/12/10/court-orders-three-iowa-wind-turbines-dismantled/

Agelbert COMMENT: I smell one of these behind the "anlaysis" the judge made before his Court order:
 

If those who claim to be so discomfited by wind trubines had to actually pay for the damage the fossil fuel powered electricity they gleefully use in their homes causes, they would opt for sound proofing instead of Koch Brothers🦕🦖 funded, Profit Over People ☠️ and Planet🚩, Renewable Energy Strangling 😈. 

I defy anyone here to claim you "cannot soundproof against wind turbines". That is TOTAL BS. Do you want to talk SERIOUSLY about sound pollution or do you want to cherry pick "acceptable" and "unacceptable" sounds caused by out civilization (i. e. make stuff up)?

How many people in the USA live next to train tracks? MILLIONS of them. You don't hear of any court ordering the train tracks relocated because of the sound, MUCH GREATER than that of wind tirbines, generated by frequent freight trains, often carrying toxic cargo to boot!

True, if you are outside, you cannot avoid the sound that wind turbines make. But, if you are inside, which is where people in Iowa are 90% (OR MORE!) of the time, it is not terribly difficult to block the low frequency sound waves produced by wind turbines.

The HYPOCRITES that whine about wind turbines have consistently been quiet as DEATH about the decisions made in towns all accross the USA, for the last century, to permit the building of Coal fired power plants near neighborhoods of the poor.

I would order the judge that gave the Koch Brothers 🦕🦖 this Corruption Based Christmas Present to move to a house a mile or so downwind of a Koch Brothers 🦕🦖 refinery in Southern Texas.

I would plainly ask that judge, What part of the Precautionary Principle of Science does he so poorly interpret that he can turn a blind eye to massive fossil fuel pollution, while claiming that the sound of Wind Turbines is "unacceptable" through legalese DOUBLETALK about "permits"?
 

It was that judge's responsibility to COMPUTE the benefit of those wind turbines to the community, in terms of pollution avoided, and COMPARE THAT BENEFIT with the bother of the low frequency sound that could cause property values to go down around said wind turbines. He SHIRKED his respsonsibility, PERIOD!

As far as Fossil Fuels are concerned, people that talk about NIMBY (not in my backyard) have to change NIMBY to NOPE, not on planet earth. When they DO THAT, and not a second before, we can talk about whether wind turbines are properly positioned or not.

The double standard in this country between fossil fuel powered power plants and Renewable Energy power plants is the height of hypocrisy.

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 25, 2018, 04:15:06 pm »

Oil Industry 🐉🦕🦖 Cleanup Costs Vastly Exceed Alberta Government’s  🦖  Estimates


TheRealNews

Published on Nov 24, 2018

Regan Boychuk of Reclaim Alberta explains that Canadian taxpayers could ultimately be on the hook for hundreds of billions of oil industry cleanup costs

Visit https://therealnews.com for more stories and help support our work by donating at https://therealnews.com/donate.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 13, 2018, 05:16:12 pm »

EcoWatch


Koch Industries 🦕🦖 Lobbies Against Electric Vehicle Tax Credit

DeSmogBlog

By Dana Drugmand

Nov. 12, 2018 11:26AM EST

Koch Industries is calling for the elimination of tax credits for electric vehicles (EVs), all while claiming that it does not oppose plug-in cars and inviting the elimination of oil and gas subsidies that the petroleum conglomerate and its industry peers receive.

Outgoing Nevada Republican Senator Dean Heller introduced a bill in September that would lift the sales cap on electric vehicles eligible for a federal tax credit, and replace the cap with a deadline that would dictate when the credit would start being phased out.

Under the current tax credit for EVs, once a manufacturer sells 200,000 EVs in the U.S. the amount of the credit gets slashed in half, then halved again. The full credit amount is $7,500. Tesla has already hit the 200,000 cap and GM will soon reach it, so both companies would benefit from a tax credit extension via eliminating the sales cap. Heller's bill lifts the 200,000 vehicle limit and substitutes a phase-out period starting in 2022.

But the conservative senator's bill is facing opposition from the conservative billionaire Koch brothers.

In a letter to senators dated Oct. 24, Koch Industries lobbyist Philip Ellender urges opposition to the expansion of EV tax credits through 2022. Ellender claims that the tax credits primarily benefit wealthy consumers and that subsidization interferes with "innovation and consumer choice."

The letter cites two studies, each by a right-wing think tank. One study comes from the Pacific Research Institute, which has received fossil fuel funding—including more than $1.7 million from Koch-related foundations and $615,000 from ExxonMobil. The PRI study, "Costly Subsidies for the Rich: Quantifying the Subsidies Offered to Battery Electric Powered Cars," emphasizes that "the majority of the dollar benefits from energy and electric car subsidies are paid to tax filers in the higher income tax brackets."

The other study is from the Manhattan Institute, another "free market think tank" that takes in money from the Koch network and Exxon. The study paints a misleading picture of EVs and their subsidies.

In addition to citing biased studies by groups tied to Koch money, Ellender claims in the letter, "We do not oppose electric vehicles."

This sentiment echoes the company's 2016 advertorial, in which Koch Industries claimed to be "all for electric vehicles."

Ellender also claims that Koch Industries is against any and all energy subsidies, even ones that benefit the company. According to the letter:

Instead of expanding this subsidy for wealthy EV owners, Congress should eliminate it along with all other energy incentives—including eliminating any incentives given to us and our competitors where we may participate. We are focused on long-term value creation, not short-term windfalls.
In reality, while Koch Industries is claiming publicly to support ending fossil fuel subsidies (along with EV and clean energy incentives), Koch lobbyists have long worked to ensure that the petroleum industry continues to get subsidized.

As Koch vs. Clean previously pointed out, "In a detailed 2011 report on Koch Industries, the Center for Public Integrity wrote: 'Oil is the core of the Koch business empire, and the company's lobbyists and officials have successfully fought to preserve the industry's tax breaks and credits.' The report documented that Koch lobbyists have worked to preserve billions of dollars in oil industry subsidies, including the Section 199 manufacturing tax deduction and the 'last-in, first out' accounting rule."

In fact, according to the International Business Times, Koch Industries has itself directly secured subsidies totaling more than $195 million.

The Koch network also lobbied for the Trump tax cuts that became law late last year. The corporate tax cut is not specific to energy, but it benefits giant corporations including Big Oil and Koch Industries nonetheless. Americans for Tax Fairness estimated that the Kochs would save more than $1 billion just this year from the tax cut—a significant windfall for a corporate behemoth that claims, "We  are focused on long-term value creation, not short-term windfalls."

Quote
Koch vs. California: These Groups Want Pruitt 🐒 to Undo the State’s Right to Regulate Auto Emissions https://www.ecowatch.com/california-pruitt-koch-emissions-standards-2558995169.html … @ewg @UCSUSA @YEARSofLIVING @ClimateReality @greenpeaceusa @EnvDefenseFund

9:50 AM - Apr 11, 2018

https://www.ecowatch.com/koch-electric-vehicles-tax-credit-2619368336.html


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 10, 2018, 05:26:10 pm »

The US 🦍 Must Take Responsibility for Asylum Seekers and the History That Drives Them

BY David L. Wilson 🕊, Truthout

PUBLISHED November 10, 2018

Many Americans feel genuine sympathy for Central American asylum seekers, but confronted with the US's own failing systems, fall for the right-wing line that "it's not our problem." However, anyone who has followed the history of US policies and involvement in Central America knows that the current crises in the region and these migrants absolutely are our responsibility.

Full article:

https://truthout.org/articles/us-must-take-responsibility-for-asylum-seekers-and-their-history/
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 10, 2018, 01:26:46 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: YES, this belongs here. EVERY bit of  the U.S. Military Industrial Complex Sponsored Murder and Mayhem (including declared wars and undeclared wars) since 1980 has been planned BY the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn 🦕 AND executed by their bought and paid for TOOLS 🦍🦀 in Government. The Fossil Fuel Fascists 🦖, above and beyond the horrendous planetary death toll from carbon pollution hurting thousands of species (inculding humans ☠️), have the blood of millions of innocent people on their hands.

The War on Terror’s Toll, From Atrocities Abroad ☠️☠️☠️☠️☠️ to Mass Shootings ☠️ at Home

November 10, 2018

A new Brown University study says the US-led so-called “War on Terror” has killed around 500,000 people in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan — an “undercount,” it stresses. And as Ian David Long — an-ex U.S. Marine who served in the Afghan war — kills 12 people in Thousand Oaks, California, might we also count victims of mass shootings carried out by U.S. veterans? We speak to Vijay Prashad of the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research.


https://therealnews.com/stories/the-war-on-terrors-toll-from-atrocities-abroad-to-mass-shootings-at-home

 
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: November 08, 2018, 06:14:52 pm »

BY Norman Solomon , Truthout

PUBLISHED November 8, 2018


SNIPPET:

... sharp contrasts between advocacy for economic justice and flackery 😈 for de facto oligarchy 👹.



Surveys show that voters are hungry for genuinely progressive policies that have drawn little interest from mainstream media outlets. For instance, polling of the US public shows:

֍ 76 percent support higher taxes on the wealthy.

֍ 70 percent support Medicare for All.

֍ 59 percent support a $15 minimum wage.

֍ 60 percent support expanded tuition-free college.

֍ 69 percent oppose overturning Roe v. Wade.

֍ 65 percent support progressive criminal justice reform.

֍ 59 percent support stricter environmental regulation.

Read more:


Agelbert NOTE: I have ZERO confidence in Pelosi doing what she MUST DO (i.e go 100% Progressive, ESPECIALLY in regard to Renewable Energy) to keep the Hydrocrabon Hellspawn Oligarchy 🐉🦕🦖 STILL RUNNING (and still ruining through massive 24/7 government welfare queen subsidized pollution) the USA from accelerating down the path to the extinction of most mammalian vertebrate species, including humans. Never mind stopping them. They want to EXPAND the hydrocarbon Profit over people and planet 'business model' .

Stupid is as STUPID Suicidal Insanity DOES. 🤬


 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 04, 2018, 03:39:02 pm »


November 4, 2018

The brazen attack by Republicans on Debbie Mucarsel-Powell took away my breath. The National Republican Congressional Committee 🐉🦕 🦖😈👹 released an ad late last week claiming that climate hawk Debbie Mucarsel-Powell’s “campaign is flooded with dirty coal money, the very polluters that threaten our way of life in the Keys.”

Yep, you read that right.

I can hardly wait for the NRCC’s similar attack ads against EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN 😈👹🦕🦖 EVER.

See, when we endorsed Debbie, we pointed out that climate peacock Carlos Curbelo has taken tens of thousands from Big Oil. Debbie’s been using his fossil fuel money ties on the campaign trail. And right now, we’re running digital ads in the district pointing out the tens of thousands he’s proudly taken from Exxon Mobil and others. That means the attacks are working -- but now the evil empire is striking back.

Can you contribute to keep our ads going?

Climate Hawks Vote ad in FL-26

Oh, and the "dirty coal money" that’s supposedly flooding Debbie’s campaign? It’s $2700 from climate hawk Tom Steyer. And his business used to invest in fossil fuel-powered utilities, a long time ago, before he became a climate hawk. And… well, sorry. I. Can’t. Even. #eyeroll #facepalm

Here’s the real target of the NRCC: the disillusioned, occasional voters who say “both sides are the same” and then stay home on Tuesday. But you and I know that both sides aren’t the same. One in Congress voted to drill the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The other won’t. That’s why it’s so important that climate hawks stand with Debbie.

With polls showing a one-point race in Florida’s 26th District, I’m going to ask you to help us fight back.

Can you chip in to help our ads reach more voters?

Your fellow climate hawk,

RL Miller

Reference

The GOP is attacking a Democrat for being weak on climate change. Wait, what?!,” Mother Jones

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/11/carlos-curbelo-debbie-mucarsel-powell-the-gop-is-attacking-a-democrat-for-being-weak-on-climate-change-wait-what/


Agelbert NOTE: Fascist enablers everywhere hate Tom Steyer because he wants to get the Trump FASCIST impeached.


Fascist enabler Republicans are serial LIARS who do not care how much this country is trashed by Profit Over Planet Fascism. A vote for a REPUBLICAN IS A VOTE FOR THE DEATH OF THE REPUBLIC, PERIOD.  
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 21, 2018, 02:59:10 pm »

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

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

Lies, Lies, & More Lies: Lawrence Solomon🦕 Is Scared & So Is The Fossil Fuel Industry

October 21st, 2018 by Joshua S Hill

It should come as no surprise that the fossil fuel industry has many defenders 🐵 🐒 🦍 willing to step up to the plate and bat for them — it is, after all, a multi-billion-dollar industry with long-standing relationships and a desire not to collapse into infamy and oblivion.


The simple reality is that, for a large part of the planet, the fossil fuel industry is on its last legs. Developed nations are wholesale turning to renewable energy — either by federal impetus or through the work of sub-national players such as local governments and corporations — and developing nations are looking to renewable energy as a means to jump over the fossil fuel step altogether, avoiding the need to build up costly nationwide infrastructure and preventing further emissions increases.

Fear & Ignorance

This new reality, however, is apparently difficult for some people to comprehend. Most recently, BP CEO Bob Dudley, speaking as the “Petroleum Executive of the Year” at the Oil & Money conference in London, raised his fears of the global divestment and disclosure movements that are impacting the fossil fuel industry, suggesting that they “could lead to bad outcomes.” His rationale, however, was based on faulty assumptions and blind ignorance of the realities.

BP 🦕 CEO Bob Dudley 😈

However, Dudley can at least be given credit for admitting the need for change, and presenting a path forward which he claimed was “not a call for business as usual” and one that “requires significant and rapid disruption to our industry.”

The same credit cannot be given to Lawrence Solomon, however, a columnist for Canada’s National Post section (which bears the name Financial Post after the business newspaper of the same name) and the Executive Director of Energy Probe, the consumer and energy research team of Canada’s Energy Probe Research Foundation.

Writing an op-ed recently for the Financial Post, Solomon set aside any dignity or professional integrity he may once have grasped to and penned what can only be described as a hit-piece on the renewable energy industry with all the internal consistency of a wet tissue. Solomon’s article — entitled “Trudeau stands alone as Canada — and the world — abandons green energy” — ran with the witty lede, “Wind and solar have become the fossils of the energy industry; oil, gas and coal remain the fuels of the future.” An entire fact-check article could be written about the opening paragraph on its own — not bad, considering it boasts only 109 words in four sentences.

Solomon’s article was brought to our attention here at CleanTechnica by a frustrated reader who asked that we investigate the claims Solomon made in his piece — described by the reader as “so untruthful and so far from reality that I think it deserves to be called out.”

More than simply “calling out” Lawrence Solomon, however, I think it’s worth being completely upfront and honest about Solomon and his opinions — and opinions they are, make no mistake about it, in the true spirit of the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of the word — “A view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge” — for, it would appear that Solomon’s opinions have never even heard of the concept of “facts” and “knowledge.”


Lies, Lies, & More Lies

To be fair, the issue is not so much with Lawrence Solomon in and of himself, rather, he is simply representative of a number of such pundits who occupy their own little space of real estate in magazines, newspapers, and on television the world over.


Solomon is in no way particularly special for the absurdity of his views, but he serves as a convenient example of the types of lies that are spread, and the way in which people opposed to renewable energy and in denial about global warming make their arguments.

In his opinion article, Lawrence Solomon attempts to make the argument that renewable energy is not only on the back foot around the world, but that it is in full retreat. To support this argument, Solomon refers to several pieces of so-called evidence which he has pulled kicking and screaming out of context. I’ll handle them one at a time.




China

Solomon claims that China has “begun to throw in the towel by cutting subsidies to renewables, an augur of the demise of investment in its renewables sector.” Solomon also points to recent reporting from green campaigners CoalSwarm which claimed that 259 gigawatts (GW) of new coal capacity are currently under construction.

Satellite visualization from Carbon Tracker

While Solomon accurately reported the findings from CoalSwarm’s new satellite imagery report — which showed construction ongoing at coal plants across the country, the result of a permitting surge between late-2014 and early-2016 — he incorrectly blames the reason for China’s decision to cut subsidies to renewables.

It’s important to remember the context of China’s current reliance on coal. The new capacity currently under construction is the result of local authorities approving new projects, and actually flies in the face of China’s Central Government’s decisions to halt construction of new coal-fired power plants. Toward the end of 2016 and over the first few months of 2017, China announced the cancellation of 30 large coal-fired power plants amounting to 17 gigawatts (GW), followed soon after by the cancellation of 104 more under-construction and planned coal projects amounting to 120 GW. In March of this year, a report showed that the development of new coal plants in 2017 had declined in China, thanks in part to the Central Government’s decision to suspend construction across hundreds of projects.

Unfortunately, CoalSwarm’s recent report might suggest that China’s Central Government no longer has the control it once had to make these sweeping cuts, but a report published earlier this month by Carbon Tracker shows that 40% of China’s coal plants are already losing money and that the country could save nearly $390 billion by closing plants instead of keeping them operational.

Further, it’s important to look at the whole of what is happening in China. In September, China’s National Development & Reform Commission (NDRC) wrote a draft policy that paved the way to increase the country’s renewable energy target from 20% to 35% by 2030.

Later that same month, China’s National Energy Administration (NEA) issued draft guidelines that would look to phase out power generation subsidies — just as Solomon highlighted, except, the intention of the decision was to provide the country’s renewable energy sector with further technological and policy support so that those technologies can compete against other technologies on their own. Specifically, the draft guidelines seek to incentivize renewable energy technologies in regions where they can operate without help from government subsidies.

“The reason China’s cutting subsidy is mainly because of the huge deficit in the national renewable subsidy fund,” explained Yali Jiang, a solar analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance, who spoke to me via email. “By the end of 2017, the deficit amounted around $19 billion including those for wind and solar projects. As a result, the government expects to, for instance, restrict new solar installations that require national subsidy immediately.”

“China’s solar installation contracted in 3Q due to the policy change,” Jiang added. “The grid-connected PV capacity halved in July and August compared with last year. But the country remains to be the largest investor in clean energy in 3Q ($26.7 billion), a fraction above the same period of 2017.”

Far from being “an augur of the demise of investment in its renewables sector,” as Solomon so dramatically put it, China’s decision to cut subsidies is actually based in a desire to minimize the financial strain caused by subsidizing new power generation, while at the same time providing technological and political support that will help renewable energy compete on its own — much as it does in other parts of the world, such as throughout Europe and North America.


Europe

Lawrence Solomon, far from being happy with one example, decided to add another to the mix, explaining that, “With the cutting of subsidies to renewables in the [European Union], investment last year dropped to less than half of its peak six years earlier.”

Again, Solomon correctly looked at the chart, sourced from Bloomberg New Energy Finance and highlighted by the World Economic Forum in May of 2018 — an article, mind you, which highlights the success of the investment in China’s renewable energy sector, and betrays Solomon’s contention that China has suffered a decline in investment in its renewables sector (made literally the sentence beforehand).


While it is true that investment in Europe’s renewable energy industry has fallen off in recent times, it’s doubly important to look at the region’s capacity installations over the same time. Between 2011 and 2017 — the six-year period Solomon highlighted — generation from renewable electricity across the 28 Member States of the European Union skyrocketed.


Gross electricity generation from renewable sources, EU-28, 1990-2016 Image Credit: Eurostat

The share of renewable energy sources in the final consumption of energy has also steadily increased over the past decade, as can be seen in the table below.

Share of electricity from renewable sources in gross electricity consumption, 2004-2016 Image Credit: Eurostat

Complete renewable energy capacity additions for Europe are difficult to come by — unsurprising, given the nature of a supranational governing body — but we can mitigate that somewhat by looking specifically at the two dominant renewable energy technologies, wind, and solar.


Annual wind energy installations across Europe have steadily ticked up each year, declining only once since 2011, in 2013.


It’s worth noting, though, that new capacity additions for 2018 are on a worrying downward trend, as seen by half-year figures published by WindEurope in July.

Europe’s solar industry has similarly suffered from recent investment figures, as can be seen in the graph below, published by SolarPower Europe in June (as part of a global outlook).


Evolution of Global Annual Solar PV Installed Capacity 2000-2017

So while from a certain point of view, Lawrence Solomon can claim that Europe’s clean energy investment has fallen, resulting in lower solar capacity additions and moderate wind additions, it’s worth seeing this in light of the whole. Solar has begun growing again across Europe — with a total of 9.2 GW worth of new capacity added in 2017, a 30% increase on the year before — and offshore wind continues to increase its share. Europe was also one of the first regions to double-down on solar, and accounts for 28% of the global total, with a total of 114 GW worth of installed capacity.

Additionally, even though investments have decreased, this does not necessarily speak to a larger fall-off for the renewable energy industry. Rather, as technologies such as solar PV and onshore wind mature, their costs have decreased, which means that less money is needed to build even more capacity.

Lawrence Solomon may have struck closer to the mark with this particular example, but it does not serve to bolster his argument any, considering the impact of Brexit and the UK’s shift away from solar towards wind, the declining cost of mature technologies, and natural market dynamics and political malfeasance from politicians who share Solomon’s point of view.

Japan


Investment in Japan’s clean energy industry has indeed slowed since 2016 — essentially falling off a financial cliff at the end of 2015. Much like China, however, Japan’s situation is not as clear-cut as a graph might show.


“After years of record-breaking investment driven by some of the world’s most generous feed-in tariffs, China and Japan are cutting back on building new large-scale projects and shifting towards digesting the capacity they have already put in place,” said Justin Wu, head of Asia for BNEF, said in January of 2017.

“China is facing slowing power demand and growing wind and solar curtailment. The government is now focused on investing in grids and reforming the power market so that the renewables in place can generate to their full potential. In Japan, future growth will come not from utility-scale projects but from rooftop solar systems installed by consumers attracted by the increasingly favorable economics of self-consumption.”

It’s ironic, however, that Solomon decided to use Japan as throwaway proof of “a worldwide trend rejecting renewables.” If he had made the argument even a year ago, it might have held more weight, but given recent moves by Japan’s government, and corporations and utilities within Japan, it loses all importance.

In July, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, better known as TEPCO, announced that it intends to pursue the development of between 6 and 7 GW worth of renewable energy capacity worth tens of billions of dollars in an intentional move away from nuclear power. Speaking to Nikkei, TEPCO’s president Tomoaki Kobayakawa announced his company will look to develop 6 to 7 GW of renewable energy across Japan and overseas in a move expected to yield 100 billion yen ($8.98 billion) in profit. “We must gain a competitive advantage in renewable energy,” he said.

Meanwhile, in September, Japan’s Electric Power Development Co., better known as J-Power, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with French multinational electric utility ENGIE to collaborate on power projects, specifically offshore wind and floating offshore wind projects — a further sign of Japan’s turn away from nuclear, and specifically towards contending with Taiwan as an offshore wind hub. And only last week, the Fitch Group published a forecast which expected Japan to add 17 GW worth of new solar capacity by the end of 2020, before the sector begins to slow.

For Lawrence Solomon, Japan also does not prove his belief that renewable energy is on the back foot.


The UK, et al


I could go on. Solomon points to Germany, the UK, and Australia as further proof that the world is turning away from renewable energy. While both Germany and Australia serve as good examples of this, they are about the only two countries that do — and only from a national point of view, with sub-state actors serving to pick up where the nation’s governments left off (or, in Australia’s case, never picked up to begin with).

Solomon’s citing the UK as an example of a flagging renewable energy industry, however, truly beggars belief. Not only is the UK home to one of the world’s most persistent and dominant renewable energy countries, Scotland, but the UK is also the world’s offshore wind energy leader, boasting a portfolio of projects in operation, under construction, or in development, of 35.2 GW.

Agreed, the UK’s investment is likely to fall, a point made by the Green Alliance in January of 2017, analyzing the UK Government’s own numbers. The government has proven lackluster at best when it comes to preparing for a post-Brexit world, and it has thoroughly mishandled commitments to various technologies (onshore wind and solar, in particular). However, it’s important to look at the long-term — the Green Alliance’s analysis only looks to 2020, and a July announcement from the Department for Business, Energy, and Industrial Strategy could mitigate some of these short-term losses, by setting a timeline for new offshore wind auctions starting from 2021.

“The renewables sector in the UK has seen pretty dire policy from government: solar and onshore wind projects have been effectively blocked, despite the fact that they’re now the cheapest form of new power,” explained Dustin Benton, Policy Director at Green Alliance. “By contrast, dirty power stations, supported by the UK’s flawed capacity market, have seen several hundred million pounds of government contracts over the past few years.”


Image Credit: MHI Vestas

“The exception to this generally gloomy picture is in offshore wind: despite irregular auctions, the sector has reduced prices by two-thirds over the past two years, and the government has committed to procuring around 16 GW of new offshore wind during the 2020s, putting the country on track for 30 GW by 2030 – a level consistent with meeting the UK’s carbon targets.”

It’s also worth remembering that Great Britain currently boasts its lowest ever share of fossil fuels in its energy mix, accounting for only 41% of total generation, down from 71% only 7 years ago.


How Do You Solve A Problem Like Lawrence? Lie!

An argument against renewable energy and climate change is not complete, however, without mentioning the biggest elephant in the room — the United States. Solomon reserves an entire paragraph for the US but barely manages to come close to the truth.

Solomon sets the scene — the Democrats are out of power and Donald Trump is in, and quickly moves to exit from the Paris Agreement. What did the country manage to do with this new paradigm shift?


Right out of the gate, Solomon … well, he pretty much rushes headlong into the gate. Solomon starts out by claiming that the US has revived its coal industry. One wonders exactly where to start on this. In January, Reuters obtained preliminary US government data which showed that the coal industry continues to shed jobs. In February, figures published by the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) revealed that not only had there been no new coal capacity added during 2017 (and only 3 units in 2016) but that coal’s total share of generating capacity has declined by 17.83% over the past five years. In fact, according to figures published in June by the US Energy Information Administration, coal has dropped to providing only 27% of total electricity generation.

The cause for coal’s steep decline? According to researchers from North Carolina State University and the University of Colorado Boulder writing in May, the responsible party is not renewable energy but is in fact the decline in natural gas prices. And only this week, the White House — the very center of Donald Trump’s power — has reportedly shelved a plan to bail out the coal (and nuclear) sectors.  ;D

The final point to make is, possibly, the most absurd. Written and positioned as if it was the final nail in Solomon’s argument, he writes that “The once-powerful United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, formerly a fixture in the news, is defanged and forgotten, having lost its US funding and its relevance.”

Solomon’s article was published on September 28, only 11 days before the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published a report warning that limiting global warming to 1.5°C will “require rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.” Putting aside the fact that the IPCC works in long-term cycles and is not beholden to publish material regularly (nor has it ever), Solomon must have regretted that particular sentence.


Abandoning Truth


It takes something special to be able to so blatantly and casually lie in public as Lawrence Solomon manages. To so clearly and repeatedly mishandle the facts and misconstrue the evidence requires either an almost champion level of ignorance, or a complete disregard for the truth. Solomon squeezes at least a dozen lies and half-truths into only 750 words — that’s at least one every 62 words.

Is the global renewable energy industry on the back foot? No — in fact, in many parts of the world, it is progressing faster than ever before, and well above any other energy technology. The industry is maturing, however, and with that naturally comes some bumpy patches — stagnation, political intervention and misappropriation, and economic fluctuations; to think otherwise is naive.



But to think that these bumps in the road represent some global shift away from renewable energy is to ignore all common sense and historical evidence. Renewable energy isn’t going away, nor is it declining in popularity. It is the future — not just because we need it to be, but because it is economically better. 


https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/21/lies-lies-more-lies-lawrence-solomon-is-scared-so-is-the-fossil-fuel-industry/


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 18, 2018, 02:54:22 pm »

Quote
Jens Stubbe

Nicholas you need to read this article.

Europe's love affair with diesel cars has been a disaster

The original impetus to launch Diesel big time for cars was that after the first oil crisis B&W launched motor technology for the shipping industry that could run on the cheaper and filthier bunker oil. This made Diesel an excess fraction.

Big oil rounded the car industry and EU up and they all agreed to launch Diesel for cars as a way to support big oil.

All European countries kept Diesel taxation down and Diesel for touted as more efficient and thus environmentally benign than gasoline.

Also to further press Diesel car technology down the throat of the ordinary car buyers the new car taxation began to be tied to CO2 emissions, which as everybody now knows are never really attainable in real life.

Along the way EU also imposed a demand for catalyzers. They do not function at all for most trips and they rarely last for mere than 100.000 km, so most driving are done with no effect from the catalyzers say for the benign effect for big oil that the catalyzer increase consumption by 10%.

EU has systematically rigged the scene for big oil and the car industry have been happy with the going of things in lieu with the fact that there never where any serious EU investigation going on regarding emissions so they could meet the emission standards with phony software and get permission for not meeting standards below certain ambient temperature (17 degrees Celsius).

Now the car industry is upset that they are to blame while all the time everybody else have been in on the plot.

agelbert  > Jens Stubbe
EXCELLENT comment!

Thank you 💐 Jense Stubbe.

   


Read more:

October 18th, 2018 by Nicolas Zart

SNIPPET:

The Groupe PSA, which includes Peugeot, Citroen, Opel, and Vauxhall, has had its hands full after acquiring Opel and Vauxhall. The transition hasn’t been as smooth as expected and now the company is facing legacy emission problems after a fiery French newspaper revelation.

Full Article:

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/10/18/groupe-psa-braves-emissions-hell-with-pure-electric-citroen/



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 17, 2018, 01:44:54 pm »

 
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click here to subscribe.

Oxtober 17, 2018



Trump 🐵 Trying To Turn Military Bases Into Gas Stations


Beware the military-industrial complex, a real president once warned America. Unfortunately for us Trump, with all his complexes of a different sort, is looking to turn the military into an arm of industry, just like he has the rest of the federal government.

That’s the latest development in Trump’s attempts to bail out the dying coal industry, reports Ben Storrow at E&E. Initially, Storrow reports, the bailout was going to be the Department of Energy’s job. Last year Rick Perry put on his smartest looking glasses and did his best to cook up a report justifying the use of presidential war powers to require military bases to buy coal and nuclear power. But it turns out Perry might need more than just a new pair of black plastic rims: Bloomberg recently reported that the grid study didn’t turn out the way the administration wanted, which is likely why it’s yet to see the light of day.

DOE denied that portrayal this week, but Politico reported on Monday that Perry’s 🐒 plan is dead in the water , and Hannah Northey at E&E got a quote from a Trump admin official calling Perry’s proposal “poorly articulated.” (This must be a particularly painful dig for Perry, given that the criticism is coming from an administration led by a man who not only speaks like a child, but probably doesn’t even know the meaning of “articulate.” )

With an increasing recognition that Perry’s plan won’t work, Trump et al. are looking elsewhere to help the dying, dirty industry.

Not to be outclassed by the leg-flexin’ Texan, Department of Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke told the AP on Monday that the administration is considering using military installations as fossil fuel export terminals. Communities along the west coast have voted to prevent the construction of new export terminals, which has left the fossil fuel industry is hunting for ways to get its products to overseas markets.

Obviously the Trump 🦀 administration isn’t going to let a little thing like democracy stand in the way of doing whatever industry wants  , but to be fair this isn’t exactly all the Trump crew’s doing. In fact, a certain Representative from Wyoming by the name of Liz Cheney told the AP she had spoken with Zinke and Perry about using military bases “to get around some of the unreasonable obstacles that have been thrown up” to the export terminals.

A Cheney  considering democracy an “unreasonable obstacle” to fossil fuel profits? Seems Trump’s 2018 isn’t so unique after all… (Let’s just hope she doesn’t take too much after her father and “accidentally”  shoot anyone in the face over this, and then make the victim apologize.)

Fans of respecting the people who voted against polluting facilities on their coasts and in their communities were quick to criticize the plan. Washington Governor Jay Inslee told Politico that “it’s really impressive how this administration churns out harebrained schemes for their Department of c o c k-Eyed Ideas,while former undersecretary of the Navy Tom Hicks said it “doesn’t sound logical or fully baked,” and instead “sounds a little half-cocked.”  

While turning military bases into what amounts to gas stations may sound far-fetched and insane, Trump’s already more or less done so with the rest of the federal government, so why not use military bases to serve the fossil fuel industry

Besides, of course, the obvious fact that doing so would worsen climate change, a problem the military recognizes and is already confronting.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 15, 2018, 01:16:20 pm »


Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click here to subscribe.

October 15, 2018

DOE Hasn't Released Inconvenient Report

A report commissioned by the Trump administration whose findings ran contrary  to the administration's 🦖 claims that propping up coal and nuclear is necessary for national security has yet to be made public, the report's author said last week.

Michael Webber of the University of Texas’s Webber Energy Group tweeted Friday that a report finding that onsite coal storage is not a "critical factor" for grid resilience was delivered to the DOE six months ago, but has yet to see the "light of day." "The three points the report makes are useful and counter to the [administration's] narrative--and squashed," Webber told Bloomberg.

Read more:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-12/study-that-fails-to-back-trump-coal-rescue-plan-kept-under-wraps




DC Rolls Out Dirty Welcome Mat For Oily 🦕 DOJ Appointee

It’s been 632 days since Trump took office and the halls of the White House are filled with the dirty footprints of the countless fossil fuel insiders. How could industry possibly assume more power in this administration?

Well, move over, coal-dusted smog lovers, and take a seat, gassy pipeline boosters, because last week the Senate officially confirmed one of the oiliest swamp creatures of all, Jeffrey Bossert Clark 🦖, to the top environmental position in the Justice Department.

        


Who is Clark, you may ask? Why, none other than the lawyer who successfully defended BP against state lawsuits in the aftermath of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill. He’s also involved in lawsuits against the Clean Power Plan, has voraciously challenged the government's ability to regulate carbon emissions, and has called climate science “contestable.” Clark’s also got full-throated support from CEI’s Marlow Lewis Jr., one of the fossil fuel industry’s favorite frontmen.

Clark’s nomination was officially announced last summer, so his confirmation isn’t exactly a surprise. But because we needed more depressing confirmation votes on our schedule this month, the Senate just got around to clearing Clark last week. In the 52 to 45 vote, Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin (WV) and Claire McCaskill (MO) crossed the aisle to join Republicans in clearing Clark for the gig. (We’re not exactly shocked about Manchin...and white women haven’t been great firewalls for democracy recently, either.)

Per the Hill, Clark’s  job at the DOJ “will include being the top law enforcement official in pursuing claims against polluters and companies that violate environmental laws” and “defending Trump’s aggressive deregulatory agenda against an onslaught of lawsuits.” Since he’s questioned the legality of tying the EPA's endangerment finding to IPCC science multiple times, we’re not too confident he’ll hew to the IPCC when making his decisions. 

Want to protest Clark’s appointment? Better do it soon. The Trump administration has a proposal in the works that would block protests outside the White House and on parts of the National Mall.

They claim protests are costing too much money, but we have a sense it’s maybe something else going on... (If you want to preserve your ability to trample all over Trump’s lawn, the public comment period is open until the end of the day today.)

So congrats to the oil and gas industry’s latest shill to join the rest of the swamp creatures in Washington. There’s a chance that we may soon lose the ability to show them how we really feel on their home turf. But maybe it would be good to stay away: if Clark’s plans for the DOJ look anything like what he defended in the Gulf, DC will be a very messy place indeed.




Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 14, 2018, 04:25:57 pm »


Trump's 🦀 Aggressive Plans to Stifle Democracy


BY David Halperin Republic Report

PUBLISHED October 14, 2018

From Secretary of Education Betsy Devos's fight against protections for students to the National Park Service's rules that would bar demonstrations in front of the White House, Trump and his underlings are aggressively pushing measures to stifle public protest and citizen participation in our democracy.

Read the Article:

https://truthout.org/articles/trumps-aggressive-plans-to-stifle-democracy/




An Introduction to the Koch 🐉🦕🦀🦖 Digital Media Network

BY Will Lennon Center for Responsive Politics

PUBLISHED October 14, 2018

The Kochs' total spending may hit $400 million this midterm cycle, but exactly how much of that will go to digital advertising is impossible to determine at this point. However, by using the tools Google, Facebook and Twitter introduced to increase digital ad transparency in the wake of 2016 election controversies, we can get a glimpse at which races and issues the network is currently interested in.

Read the Article:

https://truthout.org/articles/an-introduction-to-the-koch-digital-media-network/


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 10, 2018, 07:04:02 pm »

October 9, 2018


A Former  ;) Oil 🦖 Lobbyist Quietly Wields Power Behind the Scenes at the Interior Department

By Ilana Novick —  Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt is “the ultimate D.C. swamp creature,” according to watchdog organizations.

Read more:

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/a-former-oil-lobbyist-quietly-wields-power-behind-the-scenes-at-the-interior-department/

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 10, 2018, 05:56:08 pm »


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 06, 2018, 02:24:03 pm »

EcoWatch

Kavanaugh Also Lied About His Environmental Record

By Olivia Rosane

Oct. 05, 2018 09:12AM EST

The upper chamber of the Senate is set to vote at 10:30 a.m. Eastern Time Friday on whether to end debate on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. If the motion passes, the Senate could vote whether to confirm him Saturday, CNN reported.

Much of the outcome will depend on whether key swing voters believe Christine Blasey Ford's testimony that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party when they were both in high school, or if they accept Kavanaugh's denials. But anyone paying attention to how he represented his environmental record would have reason to doubt his credibility, The Intercept reported Thursday,

In his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kavanaugh presented himself as pro-environment overall.
Quote
"In some cases, I've ruled against environmentalists' interests, and in many cases I've ruled for environmentalists' interests,"
he said.

But an analysis from Earthjustice found that of 26 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cases he had written opinions for, he had ruled for rolling back clean air and water protections 89 percent of the time. The Natural Resources Defense Council came out against a Supreme Court nomination for the second time in 25 years to oppose his advance to the nation's highest court. And an analysis by William Snape, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity, found that in 18 decisions he had made on wildlife cases, including split ones, he had ruled against protecting animals in 96 percent of them.

"He lied. He abjectly lied," Snape told The Intercept of Kavanaugh's testimony. "And if he's going to lie about his record on environmental cases, what's he not going to lie about?" 

In one moment in particular during his testimony on Sept. 5, Kavanaugh said he had upheld environmental regulations in several cases, including what he described as "the Natural Resources Defense Council case versus EPA, a ruling for environmentalist groups."

When senior NRDC attorney John Walke (National Resources Defense Council), who argued the case in question before Kavanaugh, heard his testimony, he was stunned.

"My immediate reaction was, I thought I had misheard him," Walke told The Intercept. "But as he kept talking, I realized he 😈 was talking about my clean air case before him. And then, I honestly could not believe that a federal judge and Supreme Court nominee was misrepresenting my case to U.S. senators in order to bolster his environmental credentials."

Walke wrote a Twitter thread explaining how Kavanaugh had misrepresented his own ruling. Walke pointed out that Kavanaugh had ruled against the NRDC and the Sierra Club, who had also participated in the case, on three out of four counts. He 🦖 upheld lax pollution limits for soot, lead, arsenic and other metal emissions from cement plants and let the EPA grant polluters  a two-year extension to meet the weakened limits. 😠  🤬 He only ruled in favor of the environmental groups on a procedural question.

"[T]he claim is revealing because my case was one of his own leading examples of pro-environmental rulings: that it is a very poor example ends up reinforcing the relative paucity of his 'rulings in favor of environmentalists' interests," Walke tweeted.

https://www.ecowatch.com/kavanaughs-environmental-record-2610220986.html



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: October 04, 2018, 05:40:13 pm »



Our government should be working for us, not Exxon and the Koch Brothers.


Tell  Politicians🐒
to Stop Taking Fossil Fuel 🐉🦕😈🦖 Money


Greenpeace USA

Published on Sep 20, 2018

Congressmen are taking millions of dollars from fossil fuel companies to deny climate change. Tell your politicians to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge.


Over 1,200 candidates across the nation have signed the pledge -- including -endorsed candidates like Beto O’Rourke and Jana Lynne Sanchez in Texas. See which candidates near you are still taking their dirty money and then send a message urging them to take the pledge here.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 27, 2018, 05:09:30 pm »



September 27, 2018

Scientists Oppose Trump Attack on Endangered Species Act

Polar bears

The Trump 🦀 administration 🐉🦕🦖 has proposed brutal 👹 changes to the Endangered Species Act. But hundreds of scientists and organizations, including the Center, are fighting back. We've called on the administration to withdraw the proposed rules, which ignore science, would strip protection from many species, and would speed up habitat destruction.

And you've spoken up too: On Monday we delivered more than 56,000 comments from Center supporters, defending the Act, to Interior Secretary Zinke. Thank you. We'll keep you posted.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 27, 2018, 05:08:46 pm »

 

September 27, 2018

Win for the West

A federal judge has blocked a Trump "energy dominance" policy slashing public and environmental review of oil and gas leasing on public lands. The injunction bans the Bureau of Land Management from using the policy on more than 67 million acres in 11 western states.

Lease sales slated for December — spanning hundreds of thousands of acres of sage-grouse habitat — must now face full public and environmental review.

"This is good news for public lands and the millions of people who love them," said the Center's Taylor McKinnon. Read more.
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 19, 2018, 02:40:29 pm »




September 18, 2018

Shell 🦕 and Exxon's 🦖 secret 1980s climate change warnings


SNIPPET 1:

America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.


SNIPPET 2:

The documents make for frightening reading. And the effect is all the more chilling in view of the oil giants’ refusal to warn the public about the damage that their own researchers predicted. Shell’s report, marked “confidential,” was first disclosed by a Dutch news organization earlier this year. Exxon’s study was not intended for external distribution, either; it was leaked in 2015.

Nor did the companies ever take responsibility for their products. In Shell’s study, the firm  argued that the “main burden” of addressing climate change rests not with the energy industry  , but with governments and consumers.

That argument might have made sense if oil executives , including those from Exxon and Shell, had not later lied about climate change and actively prevented governments from enacting clean-energy policies.

Full IRREFUTABLE article:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings



 

 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: September 16, 2018, 06:50:46 pm »


Quote
This piece is really about removing our support, removing the social validation of these companies, removing what we call their social license. We want politicians and others to think of the fossil fuel industries like they think of the tobacco industry. Like a politician doesn’t want to see their picture in the newspaper shaking hands with the tobacco industry, because we all know they are pariahs. The tobacco industry was willing to lie and undermine public health for their profits.

It’s the exact same thing with the fossil fuel 🐉🦕🦖 industry. Their fundamental business model is threatening humanity. It is killing people right now. Yet we name our stadiums after them, we let them sponsor jazz festivals. We act like they’re a functional member of society when they are literally killing people.

Video and transcript:

https://therealnews.com/stories/annie-leonard-governor-jerry-brown-doesnt-care-about-climate-justice
Posted by: AGelbert
« on: September 13, 2018, 04:27:54 pm »


🤬

Trump 🦖 Lights the Fuse on a Deadly Methane Bomb💣

BY William Rivers Pitt Truthout
PUBLISHED September 13, 2018

SNIPPET:

The reasons why climate scientists don’t sleep well at night can be condensed into one word: methane. The current methane situation within ongoing planet-wide climate change is already dire. In his ruinous quest to erase the legacy of his predecessor, Donald Trump intends to make matters even worse.

Full article:

https://truthout.org/articles/trump-lights-the-fuse-on-a-deadly-methane-bomb/



 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: September 01, 2018, 10:53:51 am »



Agelbert NOTICE: To the clever Hydrocarbon Hellspawn trying to stop people from posting on this forum by locking all my board topics:

You have finally gotten my attention. Let the REAL (i.e. SPIRITUAL WARFARE) games begin. I work for God. I know you don't. Therefore, I am confident that your personal life (or lives, if you operate as a team of empathy deficit disordered hackers) will soon be a living hell. Your despicable actions will NOW begin to cause you sporadic, unpredictable, but frequent, multiple difficulties in your daily lives.

By attacking this forum, you have earned your place as an enemy of the Being I work for, the Creator of Heaven and Earth. Repent of your evil stupidity while you have the time. Have a nice day.

 

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 31, 2018, 06:01:47 pm »

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

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


Tesla “Big Battery” Responds To “Power System Emergency” In Australia 

August 29th, 2018 by Steve Hanley

Last Saturday afternoon, lighting strikes in Australia temporarily interrupted transmission lines that interconnect the electrical grids in the eastern part of the country. For a time, the grids in Queensland and South Australia were turned into energy islands, cut off from the national grid infrastructure. The Australian Energy Market Operator termed the incident a “power system emergency.”

Tesla big battery in South Australia

Customers in New South Wales and Victoria experienced widespread power outages while those in in Queensland and South Australia noticed little more than a momentary flicker of their lights. In Queensland, that happy circumstance was due to an abundance of renewable energy available to meet that state’s energy needs. Some of the excess was being shared with NSW before the transmission line between the two was put out of commission.

South Australia was largely unaffected, thanks to the Hornsdale Power Reserve, known affectionately in SA as the “Tesla Big Battery.” It kicked in immediately to add 84 MW of power to the state’s electrical grid and stabilize the frequency of the local grid, which was disturbed when the link to neighboring Victoria was disrupted.

The success of the “Big Battery” was a silent rebuke to new Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, a Donald Trump wannabe who channeled US senator James Inhofe when he brought a lump of coal onto the floor of parliament earlier this year to demonstrate his love of coal. In July, Morrison uttered these sage words to demonstrate his vast storehouse of knowledge about energy policies:

“I mean, honestly, by all means have the world’s biggest battery, have the world’s biggest banana, have the world’s biggest prawn like we have on the roadside around the country, but that is not solving the problem.” The Big Banana is an amusement park located in Coffs Harbor in northern NSW.


Big Banana NSW

Last year, Morrison went out of his way to mock the Tesla battery installation in South Australia. “I don’t care if it’s wind, coal, the world’s biggest battery, but you’ve got to measure it on its contribution, and it doesn’t measure up to a big solution. 30,000 SA households could not get through watching one episode of Australia’s Ninja Warrior with this big battery. So let’s not pretend it is a solution.”

As RenewEconomy so cogently points out, “The Tesla big battery, also known as the Hornsdale Power Reserve, was able to play a key role in helping keep the grid stable and the lights on in South Australia on Saturday, in its biggest threat since the 2016 blackout. It did solve a problem. Morrison’s Big Banana, on the other hand, wasn’t able to lift a finger to help customers in NSW. Such a shame they didn’t have a battery to help them.” It also noted that people in SA were able to watch their tellies uninterrupted by the crisis.

The outage occurred on the first day of Morrison’s term in office after ousting Malcolm Turnbull last week. Compounding the ignorance of his administration, Matt Canavan, the country’s new resources minister, told The Australian after the event, “The system has heightened vulnerability because of the reliance on interstate and unreliable power. More investment in coal, gas or hydro would firm up the system, create more supply and bring down prices.”

That’s a lie. When the interstate transmission lines went down, NSW was forced to shed 724 MW of load and Victoria 280 MW. In South Australia, no load was shed. None. As in, not any. AEMO said after the event the outages had nothing to do with any loss of generation. In fact, no generator — whether coal, gas, wind or solar — tripped off as a result of the transmission failure. So, sorry, Matt Canavan — no amount of extra generating capability would have helped the situation.

Morrison has appointed Angus Taylor, a fierce critic of renewable energy policies, as his new energy minister, leading the Australian Clean Energy Council to declare that is is now up to the individual states to move the renewable energy revolution forward with no expectation of assistance from the federal government, according to a report by Energy Matters.

If you think it is merely a coincidence that Australia and the US are both now hostages to fossil fuel advocates 🐉🦕🦖 , you are simply not paying attention.
Despite some recent efforts to greenwash themselves, the fossil fuel interests are busy committing crimes against humanity in the background while they continue to stuff their pockets with oil-soaked cash and coal-polished coins, and then use some of that money to buy influence at the highest levels.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/08/29/tesla-big-battery-responds-to-power-system-emergency-in-australia/


Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 29, 2018, 12:13:59 pm »


The Atlantic

The Global Rightward 🐉🦕🦖😈 👹 🏴‍ ☠️ 🚩 Shift on Climate Change

President Trump 🦀 may be leading the rich, English-speaking world to scale back environmental policies.

By ROBINSON MEYER

AUG 28, 2018

SNIPPET 1:

At a basic level, this pattern holds up, well, everywhere. Every country except the United States supports the Paris Agreement on climate change. But no major developed country is on track to meet its Paris climate goals, according to the Climate Action Tracker, an independent analysis produced by three European research organizations. Even Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom—where right-wing governments have made combatting climate change a national priority—seem likely to miss their goals.

Simply put: This kind of failure, writ large, would devastate Earth in the century to come. The world would blow its stated goal of limiting atmospheric temperature rise. Heatwaves 🌡️ might regularly last for six punishing weeks, sea levels could soar by feet in a few short decades, and certain fragile ecosystems—like the delicate Arctic permafrost or the kaleidoscopic plenty of coral reefs—would disappear from the planet entirely.

SNIPPET 2:

So Australia’s energy policy is now again adrift. Its new prime minister, Scott Morrison, is perceived in the country as being on the center-right, and he’s said he won’t abandon the Paris Agreement. But Australian carbon emissions have been rising for six years and it’s totally unclear whether it will meet its greenhouse-gas targets. The new prime minister has also already appointed a far-right opponent of renewable energy to lead Australia’s ministry of energy and environment.

What else drove this coup? Look to a July speech made by Tony Abbot 🦀, a former Australian prime minister and by far its most conservative leader this decade. He exhorted Australia to follow President Trump’s 🦀 lead and leave the Paris Agreement—which is notable, since Abbot himself signed the agreement. But the situation had changed: “Absent America, my government would not have signed up to the Paris treaty, certainly not with the current target,” he said.

Full article:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/a-global-rightward-shift-on-climate-change/568684/

Agelbert NOTE: Excellent article. The Hydrocarbon Hellspawn 🐉🦕🦖😈👹 never stop corrupting governments all over the world.

One day somebody will ask (while they take one of these Big Oil Cretins to prison for life), "What part of the FACT that CO2 is a pollutant that can wreak havoc on the biosphere in mere Parts Per Million do you NOT understand?".



Earth with and without GHG:

The last time CO2 was this high:
   

 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: August 26, 2018, 02:29:37 pm »

Agelbert NOTE: Back in 1979 Americans were rather tired of paying through the nose for energy and all things related to energy (food, housing, transportation, breathing, etc. you get the idea). The Hydrocarbon Hellspawn were happy as pigs in poop, blaming OPEC for all those bad nasty oil high prices (that was making the Big Oil in the USA mind bogglingly rich from PRICE GOUGING Americans at the pump and everywhere else).

The blame was put on OPEC while the crooks and liars passing the cost to American public did everything they could to keep their gravy train going. President Carter put his finger on the cause without naming the industries that pushed rampant comsumerist materialism (as far back as Bernays in the 1930's - see: Century of Self) from planned obsolescence to "new" car models each year to feed our status seeking greed. When Carter gave the following speech, it threatened Big Oil (and the Republican Party already owned by Big Oil).

WHY? Because their entire profit over people and planet business model has always been based on making us addicted to pigging out on energy use, no matter the pollution cost, so Big Oil can buy or bop any politician that wants to stop their direct and indirect subsidy welfare queen gravy train.

 

So, their man George H. Bush made SURE Carter lost in 1980 by engaging in a treasonous conspiracy to not release the US State Department hostages  taken in Iran until AFTER the election, so Reagan could use it as a propaganda attack on Carter during the campaign. It worked. >:(

Then Reagan did his part for Big Oil by telling everyone to consume (i.e". "Moring in America" = "make America great again" ). Big Oil drops the price of oil to ZIP to boost their people in the US Petrostate, even while they wail and moan about low oil prices.

Yes, the history books just don't want to talk about how Big Oil managed to drop prices so fast, IMMEDIATELY after Reagan was elected, despite OPEC still wanting more money for their oil. As soon as Reagan got in, Big Oil in the USA was able to control OPEC crude oil prices just fine, even though they just couldn't seem to "control" OPEC prices while Carter was in power... 

Big Oil disngenuously claims it was the "genius" of the "petro-dollar" scheme cooked up by another tool of Big Oil, Kissinger that lowered prices. That is 100% bullshit. WHY? Besides the fact that Kissinger started petro-dollar ball rolling BEFORE Carter became President (Kissinger was part of the Nixon Adminsitration), said duplicitous claim TOTALLY ignores the decision (irrefutably evidenced - SEE: The Tryranny of Oil by Antonia Juhasz) by Big Oil to help the US economy under Reagan in the opposite way that they (NOT OPEC!) HURT the US economy during the Carter Administration (the Bush+Iran Treason was icing on the 'make Carter lose' cake ).

I was there. I  :-[ was a Republican. The anti-Carter propaganda was so thick you could cut it with a knife. I :-[ fell for it. I voted for Reagan (just in 1980).


Learn from me and from history.

It's far worse now, but the Hydrocarbon Hellspawn game plan 🐉🦕🦖 😈 👹 💵 🎩 🍌 🏴‍ ☠️🚩 is identical.  🕵️

We kill Big Oil or Big Oil kills us, along with all the greedy, empathy deficit disordered, abysmally stupid Wall Street Capitalist bastards that support their "business model".



The “Malaise” Speech: When Jimmy Carter Humbly Told the Truth to Americans

July 16, 2018 | By The Conversation

Guest post by David Swartz of Asbury University/The Conversation


Employees at a gas station in Los Angeles watch President Jimmy Carter giving his energy speech over national television on July 15, 1979 (AP file photo)

Nearly 40 years ago, on July 15, 1979, President Jimmy Carter went on national television to share with millions of Americans his diagnosis of a nation in crisis. “All the legislation in the world,” he proclaimed, “can’t fix what’s wrong with America.” He went on to call upon American citizens to reflect on the meaning and purpose of their lives together.

Carter made several specific policy prescriptions. But in a presidency animated by spirituality perhaps more than any other in American history, this speech called more generally for national self-sacrifice and humility.

At a time when political strongmen, hypernationalism, and xenophobia have risen in the U.S. and the world, Carter’s speech offers a powerful counterexample to these trends.

A nation in ‘very serious trouble’

In 1979, Jimmy Carter was three years into his presidency. The burdens were many. Leading a divided Democratic Party, he faced a staunch and growing Republican opposition. The nation suffered from stagflation, a combination of economic stagnation and 12 percent inflation.

In 1973 the OPEC cartel, comprised mostly of Middle Eastern countries, had cut oil production and imposed an embargo against nations that supported Israel. In the late 1970s production declined again. Coupled with high global demand, this generated an energy crisis that increased gasoline prices by 55 percent in the first half of 1979.

In protest, truckers set bonfires in Pennsylvania, and Carter’s approval rating sank to 30 percent. An anxious Carter cut short his overseas trip to Vienna where he was holding nuclear-arms talks with the Soviet Union’s Leonid Brezhnev.

After a brief stop in Washington, the President retreated to Camp David for ten days. As he considered the severe and interlocking problems facing his administration, Carter read the Bible, historian Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism, and economist E.F. Schumacher’s Small Is Beautiful, a meditation on the value of local community and the problems of excessive consumption.

He also invited representatives from many sectors of American life – business and labor leaders, teachers and preachers, and politicians and intellectuals – to consult with him. By the end of his retreat, Carter had concluded that the country faced more than a series of isolated problems. Collectively they comprised a fundamental cultural crisis.

The malaise speech


Having cloistered himself for an unprecedented length of time, the President emerged from Camp David with great drama on July 15, 1979. In a nationally televised speech that was watched by 65 million Americans, Carter intoned an evangelical-sounding lament about “a crisis of the American spirit.”

He said,

Quote
“In a nation that was proud of hard work, strong families, close-knit communities and our faith in God, too many of us now worship self-indulgence and consumption.”

Indeed, the President’s sermon expounded at length about excess. “Human identity is no longer defined by what one does but by what one owns,” he preached. But “owning things and consuming things does not satisfy our longing for meaning.”


It was a penetrating cultural critique that reflected Carter’s spiritual values. Like the writers of the New Testament, he called out sin. Like the prophets of the Old Testament, he confessed to personal and national pride.

In the mode of theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, he noted the limits of human power and righteousness. In this moment of national chastening, he committed himself and the nation to rebirth and renewal.

As a scholar of American religious history, this so-called “malaise speech” (though Carter never actually used the word “malaise”) was, in my opinion, the most theologically profound speech by an American president since Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address.

A squandered opportunity

This articulation of economic and political humility sounded the perfect pitch for a nation whose confidence in civil institutions had been shaken. The Watergate scandal had revealed corruption in the nation’s highest political offices. The Vietnam War had ended with a Communist victory.

The “malaise speech” was a continuation of a long-running theme for Carter. In his 1977 inaugural address, he intoned, “We have learned that ‘more’ is not necessarily ‘better,’ that even our great nation has its recognized limits, and that we can neither answer all questions nor solve all problems … we must simply do our best.”

Popular memory suggests that the nation reacted negatively to his speech. In The Age of Reagan, historian Sean Wilentz writes that Carter appeared to be blaming the American citizens for their problems. Others panned Carter’s idealistic approach to the energy crisis as naïve.

Soon after the speech, Carter got a bump in his approval ratings. AP Photo/Harry Cabluck

But that was not how most Americans received the speech. In fact, Carter enjoyed an immediate 11 percent bump in his job approval rating in the days that followed. Clearly many agreed with Carter’s line that the nation was mired in a “moral and spiritual crisis.”

The President, however, failed to capitalize on the resonance with his meditation. Just two days after his speech, Carter fired his entire cabinet, which seemed to suggest that his government was in disarray.

The President’s poll numbers immediately melted. As Time magazine described it, “The President basked in the applause for a day and then set in motion his astounding purge, undoing much of the good he had done himself.” Ronald Reagan soon capitalized on the disillusionment. “I find no national malaise,” said Carter’s successor, who campaigned on a platform of America as “a shining city on a hill.

About to win the Cold War, America was ready for some exuberant nationalism, not a plain-style president who insisted on carrying his own garment bag aboard Air Force One.

New resonance

Forty years later, national jingoism pervades both political parties. Republicans and Democrats alike speak of the United States as a “city on a hill,” and Donald Trump’s “America first” rhetoric has lifted hubris to new heights and alienated allies around the world.

The Conversation Jimmy Carter’s sermon of humility speaks more than ever to crises of our times.

David Swartz is Associate Professor of History, Asbury University. This article was originally published on The Conversation.

https://www.who2.com/president-carter-national-malaise-speech-sermon-1979/

Quote
“The world says: "You have needs -- satisfy them. You have as much right as the rich and the mighty. Don't hesitate to satisfy your needs; indeed, expand your needs and demand more." This is the worldly doctrine of today. And they believe that this is freedom. The result for the rich is isolation and suicide, for the poor, envy and murder.” ― Fyodor Dostoyyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov


Tomorrow is Yesterday...

Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 23, 2018, 08:40:16 pm »


Trump’s 🦀 Dirty Energy Appointees Dismantle Clean Energy Controls 

August 22, 2018

Trump’s EPA announced a plan to end Obama’s Clean Power Plan, using coal companies’ proposals, which lowers federal regulations on emissions and allows states to set their own emissions reduction goals. We discuss the proposal with Mustafa Ali


https://therealnews.com/stories/trumps-dirty-energy-appointees-dismantle-clean-energy-controls



Posted by: AGelbert
« on: August 21, 2018, 03:21:32 pm »

The New Republic


The Modern Automobile Must Die    

If we want to solve climate change, there's no other option.

By EMILY ATKIN

August 20, 2018

SNIPPET:

Germany was supposed to be a model for solving global warming. In 2007, the country’s government announced that it would reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by the year 2020. This was the kind of bold, aggressive climate goal scientists said was needed in all developed countries. If Germany could do it, it would prove the target possible.

So far, Germany has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 27.7 percent—an astonishing achievement for a developed country with a highly developed manufacturing sector. But with a little over a year left to go, despite dedicating $580 billion toward a low-carbon energy system, the country “is likely to fall short of its goals for reducing harmful carbon-dioxide emissions,” Bloomberg News reported on Wednesday. And the reason for that may come down not to any elaborate solar industry plans, but something much simpler: cars.

“At the time they set their goals, they were very ambitious,” Patricia Espinosa, the United Nations’ top climate change official, told Bloomberg. “What happened was that the industry🦕🦖—particularly the car industry 😈🐉🦕🦖didn’t come along.” 

Changing the way we power our homes and businesses is certainly important. But as Germany’s shortfall shows, the only way to achieve these necessary, aggressive emissions reductions to combat global warming is to overhaul the gas-powered automobile and the culture that surrounds it. The only question left is how to do it.

In 2010, a NASA study declared that automobiles were officially the largest net contributor of climate change pollution in the world. “Cars, buses, and trucks release pollutants and greenhouse gases that promote warming, while emitting few aerosols that counteract it,” the study read. “In contrast, the industrial and power sectors release many of the same gases—with a larger contribution to [warming]—but they also emit sulfates and other aerosols that cause cooling by reflecting light and altering clouds.”

In other words, the power generation sector may have emitted the most greenhouse gases in total. But it also released so many sulfates and cooling aerosols that the net impact was less than the automobile industry, according to NASA.

Since then, developed countries have cut back on those cooling aerosols for the purpose of countering regular air pollution, which has likely increased the net climate pollution of the power generation industry. But according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, “collectively, cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of all U.S. emissions,” while “in total, the U.S. transportation sector—which includes cars, trucks, planes, trains, ships, and freight—produces nearly thirty percent of all US global warming emissions ... .”

In fact, transportation is now the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions in the United States—and it has been for two years, according to an analysis from the Rhodium Group.

Full article:

https://newrepublic.com/article/150689/modern-automobile-must-die

+-Recent Topics

Fossil Fuels: Degraded Democracy and Profit Over Planet Pollution by AGelbert
December 17, 2018, 08:33:30 pm

Electric Vehicles by AGelbert
December 17, 2018, 08:07:31 pm

Money by AGelbert
December 17, 2018, 06:02:34 pm

Corruption in Government by AGelbert
December 17, 2018, 12:26:57 pm

Hydrocarbon Crooks Evil Actions by AGelbert
December 16, 2018, 07:47:11 pm

Global Warming is WITH US by AGelbert
December 16, 2018, 07:36:46 pm

Christmas by AGelbert
December 16, 2018, 06:49:10 pm

Pollution by AGelbert
December 16, 2018, 05:42:36 pm

Fossil Fuel Profits Getting Eaten Alive by Renewable Energy! by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 09:10:55 pm

Apocalyptic Humor by AGelbert
December 14, 2018, 02:34:18 pm