[dohboi]

+1

[kiwichick]

+2......thanks vox

[onlooker]

I guess Vox, where all trying for they're to be a little justice to atone for what collectively we have done and are still doing to Earth. Yes all are to some degree guilty but some more like first world consumers and especially lying deceiving corporations like Exxon. All now a moot point but a little soul searching and ping of conscious never hurt anyone.

[vox_mundi]

Lawsuit: ExxonMobil polluted river, ignored climate change

ExxonMobil has polluted the Mystic River while failing to plan for the potentially severe impacts of climate change at its Boston-area fuel storage terminal, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by an environmental advocacy group.

Boston-based CLF alleged the company had ignored an "imminent" threat posed by rising sea levels. A storm surge from even a modest hurricane or other significant storm could leave much of the Everett, Massachusetts, facility underwater and result in more devastating pollution to the Mystic River and a smaller tributary, the lawsuit said.

CLF offered flood maps drawn by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to support its warning.

"ExxonMobil is aware of these risks, yet has failed to design and implement protective measures to fortify the Everett Terminal as required under federal law," the suit stated.

"For more than three decades, ExxonMobil has devoted its resources to deceiving the public about climate science while using its knowledge about climate change to advance its business operations," said CLF president Bradley Campbell, in a statement announcing the suit.

[dohboi]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ene ... _alert-hse

Loss to Exxon--Court Demands Documents about when they knew about GW

[Plantagenet]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/10/26/in-a-loss-for-exxonmobil-ny-supreme-court-orders-oil-giant-to-produce-climate-documents/?utm_term=.b2375781b707&wpisrc=al_alert-hse

Loss to Exxon--Court Demands Documents about when they knew about GW

A very interesting case. The NY AG is accusing Exxon of fraud for concealing that climate change is real while continuing to sell oil and gas.

This is analogous, in some sense, to the tobacco companies concealing that cigarettes cause cancer while continuing to sell cigarettes.

In the cigarette case the states were able to extract large financial settlements from the tobacco companies and all cigarettes sold today must carry a warning label. Oh, and tobacco advertising was banned.

Presumably if the New York State AG wins the Oil companies will have to pay lots of money to the states, and put a warning label on all their gas pumps and there would be no more adds for gasoline.

While this might make liberals feel good, in fact this kind of thing would do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions and global warming.

Cheers!

Cheers!

[dohboi]

Plant, the name of the game is delegitimize. Each individual step toward delegitmization seems inconsequenctial. But the combined force can lead to sudden, dramatic change.

[onlooker]

Plant, the name of the game is delegitimize. Each individual step toward delegitmization seems inconsequenctial. But the combined force can lead to sudden, dramatic change.

D, I think we all can agree that we have not the time for incremental
change. The abrupt massive sudden change somehow needs to happen NOW. Some already here think its too late. I do not see de-legitimization being the trigger for said change. Rather perhaps some truly catastrophic natural with large numbers of casualties. Perhaps

[KaiserJeep]

Probably time to remind everyone that the US government:

1) Gives subsidies to tobacco farmers, and funds anti-smoking commercials.

2) Gives subsidies to beef suppliers, and funds heart disease commercials.

3) Sells oil leases and promotes alternative energies.

4) ....generally behaves as it is paid to behave by lobbyists.

Those of you who are even 20 years old have had enough time to observe the actions of government and understand the principle of pay-for-play. If you - and your similar-thinking buddies - can outbid Exxon-Mobil's lobbyists, then you can mete out some justice.

At least, you might have been able to, if you had elected Sanders or Trump as POTUS. HRC is gonna go for the highest bidder, and that's not you.

[dohboi]

Yup--all solutions pretty much must be incremental while the catastrophic consequences of CC cascade down around us. So either you do nothing, or you work on what are inevitably incremental and inadequate countermeasures.

We have long ago rule out better options.

[vox_mundi]

Exxon Warns on Reserves as it Posts Lower Profit

Exxon Mobil Corp., which is under state and federal investigation for how it accounts for the value of its oil and gas wells, said Friday that it may be forced to recognize that as much as 4.6 billion barrels of its reserves are no longer profitable to produce.

The disclosure came as the oil producer reported a 38% decline in quarterly profit.

The vast majority of Exxon’s holdings under scrutiny are in Canada’s oil sands, an area that has been devastated by low prices and environmental concerns as countries around the world seek to reduce high-emitting forms of energy. The company also said it plans to examine its assets to determine whether their value should be written down.

About 3.6 Bbbl of reserves in the Canadian oil sands and the equivalent of another 1.0 Bboe in other North American fields may be written down if the average energy prices seen during the first nine months of 2016 persist, Exxon said in the statement.

[kuidaskassikaeb]

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-family-fund-vs-exxon/

This is a pretty good summary of the case against EXXON mobile, by the other grand children of the Rockefeller.

Basically EXXON scientists knew in the 1980s quite well and with little doubt that global warming was real and a danger to humanity. After a short period of actually investing in science In the hot summer of 1988 they decided to start funding denialist organizations, and play all our conservative friends here for fools.

[KaiserJeep]

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/12/08/the-rockefeller-family-fund-vs-exxon/

This is a pretty good summary of the case against EXXON mobile, by the other grand children of the Rockefeller.

Basically EXXON scientists knew in the 1980s quite well and with little doubt that global warming was real and a danger to humanity. After a short period of actually investing in science In the hot summer of 1988 they decided to start funding denialist organizations, and play all our conservative friends here for fools.

I don't think you quite grasp the principle here. Oil companies sell oil-derived products of all kinds, including plastics, all kinds of petrochemicals used in all kinds of goods, and of course fuels - everything from aviation gasoline to diesel to heavy bunker fuel used in ships and power plants. There are no available replacements for most of these things.

The people who purchase the fuels are the ones who choose to burn these oil products and spew carbon into the air. If you own a vehicle with a fuel tank, you are a planet-killer. There have been viable electric cars for at least two decades - do you even own one, or is it the case that you can't be bothered to?

[kuidaskassikaeb]

Dear KJ:

At first I thought what you wrote was just a non sequitur, but I think I do get the point. I guess I brought morality into it.

There must be some guilt attached to the actual burning of fossil fuels, and some liberal friends of mine have a way of ignoring the facts. But except for a few beers, the users of the products did not spend any money stop the users of the products from feeling guilty by paying others to lie about the facts. They did not bully or spy on themselves, and they did not personally attack scientists trying to study global warming. Like most liberals they only sit around a complain, an activity which generates very little carbon dioxide. The fossil fuel companies decided to fool some of the people all of the time and pretend that they didn't know what they knew. I think that is called disingenuous.

[dohboi]

https://robertscribbler.com/2017/04/12/ ... ent-112489

Opposing effective responses to CC is swiftly becoming illegal...perhaps we'll soon see some of our resident denialist trolls behind bars???

[Cog]

Good luck with that. You coming personally? I'll bake a cake.

We president now.

[KaiserJeep]

I would posit that the only "denialists" here are those that:

- Complain about climate change, while owning a fuel-burning vehicle that spews carbon dioxide. After all, practical and efficient EVs have been available since Tesla shipped it's first car in 2008, or Nissan in 2010. If your car is newer than 2010 and is NOT a zero emissions EV, YOU are a planet-killing "denialist".

- Use grid electricity while living in a private residence, where you could own solar panels or a wind turbine, and generate more power than you consume from the fossil-fuelled grid. If you are "on-grid" but not replenishing your power consumption with carbon-free power, YOU are a planet-killing "denialist".

Those that blame oil companies for emissions have a fundamental problem with causality. We do not blame pencils for mis-spelled words, gun manufacturers for deliberate shootings, those who manufacture/distribute/sell crowbars for break-ins using these tools, etc. etc. etc.

You can argue the merits or lack of scientific rigor in the unproven theories of AGW and CC all day long. But even if one were to postulate the correctness of such theories, the causality for the effects of carbon dioxide emissions are clear: he who burns the fuel or consumes the electricity without replacing consumed power from renewable sources are directly responsible for such emissions.

Now all of you planet-killing, Gaia-raping, and ultimately ever-so-confused AGW fanboys and CC fanboys can chime in and tell me your opinions, which still don't make any sense, no more than the first time we had this debate. I'm still right and you are still wrong.

Now I would point out that almost every time we have this same debate, it's over some article published online by some silly rabble-rowser, who is just as unthinking as those who read his prose and screech "The world is warming! The world is warming!"

[dohboi]

Ah, managed to get a couple of our trout to rise to the surface with that one!!

(kj in particular seem to have forgotten that I do not own a car and that all my electricity comes from renewables...not that either is germane to the point at hand )

[KaiserJeep]

That's news to me, as - in spite of me asking more than once - you have never shared your lifestyle details. Please do so, we will take what you say at face value, if it's credible.

[Cid_Yama]

Shows just how disingenuous Trump Administration climate change denial is. If it's a hoax, why do we need geoengineering?

Under the Trump administration, enthusiasm appears to be growing for the controversial technology of solar geo-engineering, which aims to spray sulphate particles into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s radiation back to space and decrease the temperature of Earth.

While geoengineering received little favour under Obama, high-level officials within the Trump administration have been long-time advocates for planetary-scale manipulation of Earth systems.

David Schnare, an architect of Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency transition, has lobbied the US government and testified to Senate in favour of federal support for geoengineering.

He has called for a multi-phase plan to fund research and conduct real-world testing within 18 months, deploy massive stratospheric spraying three years after, and continue spraying for a century, a duration geoengineers believe would be necessary to dial back the planet’s temperature.

Geoengineers argue that such methods would be an inexpensive way to reduce global warming, but scientists have warned it could have catastrophic consequences for the Earth’s weather systems.

Scientific modelling has shown that stratospheric spraying could drastically curtail rainfall throughout Asia, Africa and South America, causing severe droughts and threatening food supply for billions of people.

“Clearly parts of the Trump administration are very willing to open the door to reckless schemes like David Keith’s, and may well have quietly given the nod to open-air experiments,” said Silvia Riberio, with technology watchdog ETC Group. “Worryingly, geoengineering may emerge as this administration’s preferred approach to global warming. In their view, building a big beautiful wall of sulphate in the sky could be a perfect excuse to allow uncontrolled fossil fuel extraction. We need to be focussing on radical emissions cuts, not dangerous and unjust technofixes.”

A White House report on climate change research submitted to Congress in January called for the first time ever for research into geoengineering.

US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has also appeared to support geoengineering, describing climate change as an “engineering problem.” ExxonMobil’s funding of the climate denial industry is under investigation by attorney generals in the United States, but it’s less well known that ExxonMobil scientists under Tillerson’s reign as CEO were leading developers of geo-engineering technologies like carbon dioxide removal.

Asked about solutions to climate change at an ExxonMobil shareholder meeting in 2015, Tillerson said that a “plan B has always been grounded in our beliefs around the continued evolution of technology and engineered solutions.”

link

This is just downright criminal. And insane.