Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on September 7, 2017

Bookmark and Share

To Understand Pipeline Economics, Follow the Money

To Understand Pipeline Economics, Follow the Money thumbnail

I have worked for electric and gas utilities in other states, so I am interested in seeing a modern energy system developed in Virginia. I prefer to find solutions where everyone wins, but Virginia is currently split between those who want to protect our land and waters and those who want the lower cost energy and jobs they think pipelines will bring. We can find ways where all interests are served, but we will have to reshape the plans that have been proposed.

The promised economic benefits are what have motivated many political and business leaders to support the Atlantic Coast Pipeline (ACP). Let’s set aside the environmental issues and focus on the economics. In dealing with contentious issues, it’s often hard to find agreement on the “facts.” We can avoid disagreement by using information that the pipeline owners (Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, and Southern Company, the parent company of Virginia Natural Gas) have filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

To show FERC that a new pipeline would be needed, the pipeline owners had their utility subsidiaries in Virginia and North Carolina sign 20-year firm transportation agreements with the Atlantic Coast Pipeline. FERC’s own guidelines say that this is not enough to prove true market need for a new pipeline, especially if the companies signing those contracts are owned by the pipeline developers. U.S. Department of Energy studies and reports from independent consultants show that existing pipelines can provide all of the gas we need in Virginia and North Carolina. Unfortunately, FERC has not requested any substantive data to prove the need for a new pipeline. Signed contracts are all that have been used to approve pipelines for the past several decades and it appears that this substandard practice will continue.

Dominion claims that the cost savings provided by the ACP are enough to prove it is necessary. Will the ACP actually save ratepayers money in Virginia and North Carolina? Enough to spur new job creation, as has been advertised? The truth is revealed by examining who pays for the $5 billion ACP, and how much it costs compared to other options.

Data filed with FERC show the ACP will cost customers more than existing pipelines

Pipelines charge a fee to transport natural gas. The gas itself is purchased separately. Traditionally, large users of natural gas, such as utilities, have signed long-term contracts to reserve capacity on a particular pipeline. These contracts must be paid in full, whether or not all of the capacity is used. Having the capacity reserved assures that natural gas can be delivered when it is needed and reduces the price volatility compared to paying for pipeline transportation only as it is needed.

Capacity reservations can be a good idea, but not when the cost of the long-term contract is far higher than other alternatives. Based on the fee and the capacity reservation filed with FERC, Dominion’s utility customers could be obligated to pay over $4 billion during the next 20 years to the ACP for the long-term transportation agreement.

Existing pipelines, currently serving Virginia, can transport the same or greater amount of gas as the ACP for a much lower cost, because existing pipelines have been mostly paid for by previous customers. Using gas prices from May of this year, which show a price advantage at the Dominion South zone (the source of supply used by the ACP), the total price of gas delivered by the ACP to Dominion’s Brunswick plant would be 28% more expensive than gas delivered by the connection to the Transco pipeline built in 2015. The fee to use the ACP is over three times more expensive than using the Transco connection. Using existing pipelines in other parts of the state would save even more money compared to the ACP.

The ACP will be one of the most expensive pipelines on the East Coast. The fee to transport gas using the ACP is over 60% of the current price of natural gas. If this seems like a lot to pay just for transportation, it is. A fee this high raises the delivered price of gas compared to what can be delivered by other pipelines.

Dominion study shows savings from the ACP, but doesn’t tell the whole story

The study used by Dominion to publicize the presumed $377 million per year cost savings from the ACP examined a short-term phenomenon that was over in 2016, but was assumed to last until 2038. The calculation of savings during that anomalous period was extended over twenty years and subjected to a magic multiplier to increase the apparent savings even more. But the study left out one important factor, the cost of transportation. If the FERC rate for using the ACP to transport the gas was added to the savings in the price of gas during this especially favorable period, there would be no savings, just added costs.

The ACP is more expensive than using existing pipelines

As new takeaway pipelines are added in 2017-2018 to the production zone used by the ACP, it is expected that the gas price in this zone will equalize with other regions, so that the difference in the price of delivered gas will be due mainly to pipeline transportation costs. This will put the ACP at a considerable disadvantage to other alternatives. Using the ACP to deliver gas over the long-term is far more expensive than using existing pipelines.

Long-term agreements with existing pipelines cost money too, and differences do occur from time to time between production zones. An independent analysis identifies that using the ACP in Dominion’s territory compared to existing pipelines will create a net cost to ratepayers of $1.6 to $2.3 billion over the next 20 years. Perhaps about half that amount would be an extra cost to Virginia Natural Gas customers to use the ACP rather than connections to existing pipelines during that same period. In general terms, the ACP would add about $3 billion in costs to Virginia energy consumers over the next 20 years. The ACP will raise energy costs and therefore, diminish job creation, exactly the opposite of what has been claimed.

Can existing pipelines deliver the gas? Dominion’s actions say yes

Dominion argues it can’t get enough gas from other pipelines, but its actions indicate otherwise. The ACP’s FERC application identifies that the Columbia Gas Pipeline can deliver Dominion’s full allotment of gas from West Virginia to Virginia for use in power plants. Columbia Gas is adding about 87 percent of the capacity of the ACP to its system in the region. Transco is adding 400 percent of the capacity of the ACP to its corridor moving southbound through Virginia and North Carolina. Dominion says the capacity being added to the Columbia Gas and Transco systems isn’t available. Yet Dominion obtained capacity from Transco for use at the Cove Point LNG plant that it claims is “unavailable” for use in power plants.

Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., the gas supplier over the Transco Pipeline to Cove Point, plans to increase production by 1.7 Bcf/d (more than the capacity of the ACP) in the next two years. Dan Dinges, Cabot’s CEO, says Cabot is getting calls “from various people looking to secure . . . long-term supplies . . . and we are definitely answering those calls.”

It certainly appears that Dominion could receive its full allotment of 0.3 Bcf/d using existing pipelines, much cheaper than using the ACP, if only it was willing to ask.

Gas service to southeast Virginia and to North Carolina could be accomplished with connections to existing pipelines, mostly over existing rights-of-way, at a fraction of the cost and impacts associated with the ACP. Southeast Virginia could obtain as much, or more, natural gas using a connection to existing pipelines, entirely over existing rights-of-way. The region could have its own source of supply for 80 years for a fraction of the price it would pay for the 20-year contract with the ACP.

North Carolina would receive as much, or more, capacity to supply the same customers in the same locations as proposed by the ACP. A connection to Transco would be made over 105 miles of the Cardinal Pipeline corridor, then connect to the last 90 miles of the ACP right-of-way to serve the same delivery points. This shorter pipeline would meet the same needs but save North Carolina residents billions of dollars compared to the ACP and avoid disruption of West Virginia and Virginia mountains and pristine streams, as well as national forest lands.

Connections to the Transcontinental Pipeline corridor serve the same customers in North Carolina as the ACP, saving billions.

With demand for natural gas slowing, rushing to build the ACP risks making a costly mistake

Dominion and Duke have been scaling back the number of gas-fired units that require service from the ACP and pushing back the expected dates for initial operation. Just this year, the two companies cut in half the number of large gas-fired power plants needed in the next 15 years. The first unit is not needed until 2025, in Virginia. There is no need to rush through the regulatory process. We have time to do a thorough evaluation of the need, costs and impacts of new pipeline projects.

Growth in U.S. natural gas use has slowed markedly, further undermining the ACP’s need argument and the artificial sense of urgency to gain regulatory approvals. An industry analyst says, “With domestic demand gains slowing across power burn, residential, commercial, and industrial, the North American gas market must find new levers to pull. It is likely that the biggest demand lever for the U.S. gas market over the next five years and beyond will be LNG exports.” This statement indicates that the rapid growth in natural gas use is not shaping up as policymakers were led to believe. The industry is looking to greater LNG exports as a way to increase natural gas prices and rescue Wall Street’s failing investments in natural gas developers.

As the red line of the chart shows, pipeline capacity in the Appalachian Basin is growing much faster than the supply of natural gas.

The Appalachian Basin is not producing enough gas to fill all of the pipelines that are currently in front of FERC for approval. The production of natural gas would have to increase by 50 percent in the Marcellus/Utica shale plays to fill the pipelines currently proposed over the next several years. Rather than reducing the number of pipelines built, the industry is suggesting that we need to drill for more gas.

Australia tried to use its ample reserves of natural gas to increase domestic use and LNG exports. They converted many factories to natural gas in hopes of creating more jobs. Instead of greater prosperity, domestic gas prices rose 3-4 times in 10 years, factories closed or converted back to coal, and utility bills skyrocketed.

Learning from others’ mistakes: Florida’s example

The ACP is not the only pipeline project to overestimate demand. Further south, Sabal Trail, the most recent pipeline to go into operation, is running at 25% capacity, all of it taken from existing pipelines. This new pipeline, in rapidly growing Florida, was promoted as being absolutely necessary to meet growth in natural gas demand by its utility holding company owners, NextEra and Duke Energy. Yet, total natural gas usage in Florida is down 4% over last year, undercut by cheaper renewables.

If Virginia’s families and businesses lose, who wins?

It can be puzzling to understand why utility holding companies want to build a pipeline if it isn’t needed. It seems unlikely that an unregulated, private corporation would invest billions of dollars in a project the market doesn’t support. The answer has to do with the way the utility subsidiaries are compensated. Our utilities get paid more when they build more. Today, there is little reason to build new power plants, because demand for electricity is no longer growing nationwide, even though there is growth in our economy and population. Demand for electricity in Virginia is growing only because of new data centers and Dominion’s studies show that growth from that source will taper off by 2023.

FERC offers a 50% higher return for gas pipelines than for interstate transmission lines. The holding company executives are making what they see as a prudent decision to chase this extra money, while revenues from their utility subsidiaries are flat, and shift the risk and higher costs to the utility ratepayers.

A choice that is good for the shareholders but bad for the ratepayers is not one that we should encourage. A company cannot be successful in the long run setting the interests of its owners against the interests of its customers. If Dominion builds the pipeline and successfully convinces the SCC to pass on the full costs of the 20-year agreements to the ratepayers, customers will pay billions more for no benefit. This would give them a reason to do less business with Dominion in the long run (using energy efficiency and self-generation with solar to reduce their usage). The higher costs due to the pipeline would create a less healthy state economy and a less healthy utility.

We need to create different approaches where everyone can benefit. To do that, we must reset the role of our utilities and pay them differently so they can prosper when they serve us better, as other states are doing.

Given that the economic benefits we have been promised will not materialize, we should ask the state and federal regulators to fully analyze the need for this project and make a thorough assessment of its impacts. We have the time. The process could take two more years and still not affect the operation of any of the new power plants in Virginia or North Carolina that were used to justify the pipeline.

powerforthepeopleva



21 Comments on "To Understand Pipeline Economics, Follow the Money"

  1. Ghung on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 6:15 pm 

    “Let’s set aside the environmental issues and focus on the economics.”

    sigh……….

  2. onlooker on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 6:17 pm 

    Let’s set aside the environmental issues and focus on the economics.”
    wtf

  3. Davy on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 6:34 pm 

    Let’s agree there are environmental issues and economics issues and try to make the best of a bad situation.

  4. Apneaman on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 7:55 pm 

    What about the FACT that the new environment is destroying the economy?

    If we don’t talk about it maybe it will go away.

    Fucking retards. The Cancer economy has altered the chemistry and physics and biology of the planet. Radically altered it. Have we not noticed that a consequence of this is that it is smashing to shit the infrastructure?

    It’s like these people live in an alternative universe. Bizarro World. Days after an AGW Jacked hurricane lays a shit kicking on Houston, the cancer capital of the world, this retard does not want to talk about it?

    Hey let’s pretend Irma is not real either. Let’s just talk about the stock market and pipelines and ignore Florida and all the other unfortunates in it’s path.

    What about droughts that are driving farmers bankrupt? Can we talk about them? It that the environment or economics?

    The unprecedented drought that’s crippling Montana and North Dakota

    It came without warning, and without equivalent. Now a flash drought is fueling fires and hurting the lives of those who work the land

    “There’s nothing to harvest.”

    “…one of the country’s most important wheat growing regions is in the grips of a crippling drought that came on with hardly any warning and, experts say, is without precedent.”

    “This is as dry as it’s been in recorded history and some of our recording stations have 100 years of data. A lot of people try to compare this to previous years, but really, you just can’t.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/07/flash-drought-north-dakota-montana-wildfires

    Those in denial will fail to adapt to the new reality and suffer and die first. Of course the rich and their managerial class and priestly/propaganda class (this guy) have the resources to get out of the way or not have the economic hit wipe them out, so they have no problem continuing to lie and pretend everything is normal when it’s not. The planet is in runaway climate change and if steps are not taken to adapt then there will be maximum pain. When it gets worse, dire, they will abandon you completely. None of these people give a fuck about anything but clinging to what they have. They know it’s coming and they rely on the sheeple remaining faithful to a dying system. They are actually as terrified as you are. Faith & Fumes.

  5. Apneaman on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 7:57 pm 

    Scores Of Roads Closed. 50,000+ Displaced. Houston Still Has A Long Way To Go

    http://www.npr.org/2017/09/07/549169437/100-roads-closed-50-000-displaced-houston-still-has-a-long-way-to-go

  6. Apneaman on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 7:58 pm 

    More than 500,000 ordered to evacuate as Hurricane Irma bears down on South Florida

    At least 31,000 people fled the Florida Keys, which could begin seeing wind and rain from Irma as early as Friday night, Gov. Rick Scott said.

    https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2017/09/07/most-of-floridas-high-risk-flood-zones-not-insured-as-hurricane-irma-approaches.html

  7. Apneaman on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 8:08 pm 

    The Monumental Task of Restoring Houston After Harvey

    “FEMA administrator Brock Long and Texas governor Greg Abbott both said last week that it will take years to rebuild homes, salvage businesses, shore up infrastructure, and rehouse droves of displaced residents. Their inauspicious projections have left many Texans wondering what a multiyear recovery effort could entail for them and their communities.”

    “Abbott has said he expects the recovery will ultimately cost “probably $150 to $180 billion.”.)”

    https://www.wired.com/story/the-monumental-task-of-restoring-houston-after-harvey/

  8. makati1 on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 8:16 pm 

    “Fry baby fry!” or is it “Drown baby, drown!”

    Neither. Its “Profit$ baby, Profit$!”

    The American way … to the 3rd world.

  9. Apneaman on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 9:47 pm 

    Here’s some economics the Cancer & it’s lovers won’t love.

    Big Oil must pay for climate change. Now we can calculate how much

    It is possible for scientific evidence to help apportion responsibility for climate damages among fossil fuel producers. Our paper shows how

    “Who should pay these costs? In the United States, the default assumption is that costs of climate damages and adaptation should be borne by taxpayers, through flood insurance programs, federal disaster relief funds and the like, as well as by affected individuals, families and private businesses.

    This assumption is now being challenged in the courts. Lawsuits filed in July by three coastal California communities against ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP and other large fossil fuel companies argue that the companies, not taxpayers and residents, should bear the cost of damages from rising seas.

    They draw on extensive evidence that fossil fuel companies, knowing that their products contributed substantially to climate change, engaged for decades in a coordinated campaign to publicly disparage climate science to avoid limits on emissions.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/07/big-oil-must-pay-for-climate-change-here-is-how-to-calculate-how-much?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    I told you the victims would eventually come for their pound of flesh. This is just the start. Wait and see what happens when it’s parents of dead climate babies looking for vengeance.

    rockman, better adjust your budget. Big big chunk will be needed for security.

    Maybe you & Rex Tillerson can go halfers on a retired seal team 6 home security squad? Give Eric Prince a call – he fix you up.

  10. coffeeguyzz on Thu, 7th Sep 2017 9:50 pm 

    Ghung, onlooker, Davy,

    I do not think you understand what the author of this article, Thomas Hadwin, is attempting to accomplish with this piece.
    He is not at all striving to communicate with avowed anti fossil fuel folks.
    He is reaching out – and probably with good effect – to the much wider audience of people who have no fucking clue about any of the data, charts, named (and unnamed) projects that he is referencing.

    What Mr. Hadwin has done was to introduce himself as an industry professional, stated two opposing sides existed, mentions that displayed facts should/could sway observers on these matters, and then proceeds to produce copious amounts of information that virtually NO reader has ANY fucking idea about, all for the purpose of influencing opinion.

    Who of you knows anything about the Sabal Trail pipeline?
    Anyone wanna give a shot on why the South Australians are gonna be burning 200,000 gallons of diesel per HOUR (!) in a few weeks – if their lucky – to keep their hospitals running, food refrigerated, lights on at 10:00PM?

    What is at stake here folks, is a life and death struggle by the sun/wind advocates to stifle the build out of natgas consumption for heating and electricity while the push for renewables (FAR more tenuous a reality than you might think) gets more established.

    That’s it.

    I’ll not even think of pointing out the near 100% fallacious nature of this article as the readers here are demonstrably not committed to hearing publicly available, provable info that runs contrary to their beliefs.

    This author did a pretty decent job of persuading the vast unknowing populace, but to those more informed, this is mostly half truth B.S.

  11. Anonymous on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 8:03 pm 

    It is pretty funny that the “infrastructure” advocates of the Democratic party who were all hep for road and bridge construction (at taxpayer expense) are fighting so hard to prevent pipelines that don’t even get any taxpayer funding and that allow for energy to flow to where it is needed. I have taken to calling them the anti infrastructure party now.

  12. Boat on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 8:36 pm 

    amouse,

    It is commonly mentioned there is no difference between Dems and Reps since the deep state Jews control everything. Yet here we are with opposing powers with differing views on energy. Has the Jews lost their influence? Which side are they on? What does a Jew hater think.

  13. Apneaman on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 9:00 pm 

    Anonymous, I like to think of the people/corporations and their true believer retards, who ignored the scientific warnings that the consequences of AGW will smash the fucking shit out of the infrastructure, as the true ‘anti infrastructure party’.

    And the party is just getting started. Houston just partied down. Put your dancing shoes on Florida et al because AGW Jacked Irma is coming to party on your infrastructure. You know, just like you were warned was going to happen thousands of times over the last 30 plus years.

    Not only has the well funded and ceaseless efforts of the true ‘anti infrastructure party’ assured the the consequences of AGW would happen as fast as is humanly possible, their denial has also left their population totally unprepared for the new climate reality. All you denier fucks can gaze upon the destruction of your cities and country and take pride in knowing your efforts were a big part of making it go down the way it has and when it has – now. If you spread denial, voted for denier politicians, apologized for big oil’s yearly billion dollar denial and disinformation campaign or worked for one of the lying PR firms the shit is on you. It’s stuck to you and will not come off. Environmentalism is the biggest failure of any social justice moment in the history of movements and the assertion that they have slowed down the consumption is fucking ridiculous Anonymous or nony or whoever. Y’all team cancer won. Hands down. It was a fucking slaughter. Aggregate numbers for extraction and burning and the pollution it generated tells the tale and no other evidence is needed. Any Cancer lover who ever felt threatened by enviro-tards was fooled by the propaganda. The numbers don’t lie. What’s the argument? If it wasn’t for environmentalists we would be burning 96.5 million barrels a day instead or 96? Oooooo they practically brought down capitalism with their polar bear pictures. Y’all cancer lovers don’t even pay attention. Hey, you ever hear the rockman talk about how much of a threat environmentalists have been to his career? No because they don’t matter and never did. This is how you can tell who has a clue and who is just parroting his tribes think tank talking points. Anyway, team cancer won. Enjoy AGW Jacked Irma and the rest of your pyrrhic victory. I will… until it gets me too.

  14. Apneaman on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 9:06 pm 

    Are We F–ked? Decoding the resistance to climate change


    Thursday September 07, 2017
    Are We F–ked? Decoding the resistance to climate change

    From Aug. 25, 2013, file photo, firefighters continue to battle the Rim Fire near Yosemite National Park, California.

    From Aug. 25, 2013, file photo, firefighters continue to battle the Rim Fire near Yosemite National Park, California. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong, File)
    Listen to Full Episode 53:59

    The evidence is everywhere: forests retreating, glaciers melting, sea levels rising. Droughts, floods, wildfires and storms have increased five-fold over the past 50 years. And we’re only just beginning to feel the strain of climate change. It’s estimated that rising sea levels will threaten 30 million people in Bangladesh alone. Miami could disappear within a generation. Despite all of these dire events and projections, the attacks continue — on climate scientists.

    Australian public intellectual Clive Hamilton describes how he’s been attacked for telling the truth about climate change.”

    http://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/are-we-f-ked-decoding-the-resistance-to-climate-change-1.4277614

  15. Apneaman on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 9:08 pm 

    Eight low-lying Pacific islands swallowed whole by rising seas

    https://www.newscientist.com/article/2146594-eight-low-lying-pacific-islands-swallowed-whole-by-rising-seas/

    Starts on the periphery…..costal cities are going down next.

  16. makati1 on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 9:31 pm 

    Ap. Miami could disappear as a viable location this weekend. How much will be rebuilt? How many thosands will finally leave and never come back? Will it sink into the sea?

    About 50 years ago, I saw a six story beach side motel tipped on its side, like the Leaning Tower of Pizza, after a hurricane on the Maryland coast undermined its foundations. What are the Miami buildings sitting on? We may just find out this weekend. Stay tuned.

  17. Anonymous on Fri, 8th Sep 2017 9:42 pm 

    After Katrina and Rita, we had a HUGE amount of media and Internet hype about global warming causing more hurricanes. Then we went about 10 years without a major landfalling US hurricane. Much less than the normal amount.

    Now we get slammed again and the clucks start up again. I think this shows more about the cluckers than the climate.

  18. Apneaman on Sat, 9th Sep 2017 11:56 am 

    Nony another version of your favorite ‘argument ad populum’ – yawn!

    Argumentum ad populum
    Part of the series on
    Logic and rhetoric

    Argumentum ad populum (“argument to the people”) is a logical fallacy that occurs when something is considered to be true or good solely because it is popular. Undoubtedly many popular notions are true, but their truth is not a function of their popularity, except in circumstances where other factors ensure that popularity correlates with truth. The fallacy is the opposite of an appeal to the minority

    https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

    ”Eat shit. Twenty trillion flies can’t be wrong.”
    —Bill Maher[1]

    Nony, ya there was a 10 ear drought of hurricanes not making landfall in the US, SO? Why would the US MSM talk about the connection between hurricanes and climate change if they weren’t making landfall in the US? So your accusing the MSM of not talking about something that was not happening? Ooooooo that’s a conspiracy.

    BTW even your basic premise is wrong. The US MSM barely talk about the connection.

    STUDY: ABC and NBC drop the ball on covering the impact of climate change on hurricanes

    https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2017/09/08/STUDY-ABC-and-NBC-drop-the-ball-on-covering-the-impact-of-climate-change-on-hurricanes/217881

    Nony, where do hurricanes get their energy from? Start with that you fucking shit stain.

    You and the other denier scum fucks want to argue, but there is no argument scientifically.

    The unchecked burning of your beloved fossil fuels has AGW Jacked the weather (as was predicted) and the consequences are upon you. It’s gonna tear the fuck out of your country. Smash it all to shit. Break industrial civilization like it was made of Lego.

    As a nickle a comment denier shill you get to own a bigger share of the responsibility for the suffering and destruction. Congratulations on your victory.

  19. Anonymous on Sat, 9th Sep 2017 12:01 pm 

    Your posts are the equivalent of the teacher talking on a Charlie Brown TV special.

    waa waa

  20. Apneaman on Sat, 9th Sep 2017 12:05 pm 

    Another fat white tub of goo, piece of shit denier & junkie – professional liar.

    Citing Climate Hoax, Limbaugh Downplayed Irma Threat to Millions. Now He’s Evacuating

    Radio host tells listeners hurricane warnings are exaggerated, but now indicates he’s getting out of town before massive storm hits

    “On Tuesday, right-wing radio provocateur Rush Limbaugh claimed the media was intentionally exaggerating threats about Hurricane Irma to advance a “climate change agenda” and enable local businesses to make money off of emergency preparation efforts. On Thursday, Limbaugh indicated he will evacuate South Florida ahead of the storm.”

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/09/08/citing-climate-hoax-limbaugh-downplayed-irma-threat-millions-now-hes-evacuating

    I was going to say only America can produce a human as disgusting as him, but he really reminds me of those fat Muslim Imams yakking away and planting seeds of hate in the minds of the useful idiots so they will volunteer for cannon fodder duty. Rush is a millionaire mouthpiece for his billionaire overlords and his job is to rile the right tribe up. Rachael Maddow works the left. Divide & rule. They all get rich, their masters even richer, while the plebs continue to be bleed dry and are abandon to the storm gods.

  21. Apneaman on Sat, 9th Sep 2017 1:23 pm 

    Nony, wa wa is what you convert any words into that don’t support your capitalist fossil fueled ideology. You have a series of brain filters whose sole purpose is to protect your psyche from reality. Quite common among the humans. They told you an simple & emotionally satisfying story growing up and you have spent all your free time rallying against anything or one who challenges it. Terror Management writ large.

    In my half century I have sen this world change radically. The physical, the biosphere and the humans social systems. Both of our countries have changed enormously in that time and you need to cling to an unchanging story. That’s how you et al remind me of Charlie Brown -Linus clinging to his security blanket. Your beliefs will bring you down, The game has changed and you don’t even know it.

    Those who adapt will survive the longest with the least amount of suffering. History is full of dead civilizations who failed to adapt and clung to their old ways that once worked, but became their undoing. No system lasts. Adapt or die.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *