#american petroleum institute

[lordrakim]

Mike Huckabee’s “Kids Guide to the Truth About Climate Change” Shows the Changing Landscape of Climate Denial

Producers of climate misinformation are targeting kids and families, delivering an updated message that acknowledges global warming, but minimizes the influence of human emissions. Continue reading Untitled

[trendynewsnow]

Wright's Nomination and Advocacy for U.S. Energy Dominance

Wright’s Advocacy for Oil and Gas Development As the CEO of Liberty Energy, based in Denver, Wright stands out as a prominent advocate for oil and gas development, particularly fracking, which is a cornerstone of Trump’s ambition to establish U.S. “energy dominance” in the global market. Wright has emerged as one of the industry’s most vocal opponents of initiatives aimed at combating climate…

[ttpd-chair]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/04/30/oil-companies-climate-documents-democrats/ Congressional Democrats found that Big Oil misled the public about climate change and their commitment to lowering their use of fossil fuels.

[mightyflamethrower]

“Name me a single objective we’ve ever set out to accomplish that we’ve failed on. Name me one, in all of our history. Not one!”

-President Joe Biden, August 16, 2023 

Joe Biden in one of his now accustomed angry “get off my grass” moods dared the press to find just one of his policies/objectives that has not worked. Silence followed.

Perhaps it was polite to say nothing, given even the media knows almost every enacted Biden policy has failed.

Here is a summation of what he should instead apologize for.

Biden in late summer 2021 sought a 20th anniversary celebration of 9/11 and the 2001 subsequent invasion of Afghanistan. He wished to be the landmark president that yanked everyone out of Afghanistan after 20 years in country. But the result was the greatest military humiliation of the United States since the flight from Vietnam in 1975.

Consider the ripples of Biden’s disaster. U.S. deterrence was crippled worldwide. China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea almost immediately began to bluster or return to their chronic harassment of U.S. and allied ships and planes. We left thousands of allied Afghans to face Taliban retribution, along with some Western contractors.

Biden abandoned a $1 billion embassy, and a $300 million remodeled Bagram airbase strategically located not far from China and Russia, and easily defensible. Perhaps $50 billion in U.S. weaponry and supplies were abandoned and now find their way into the international terrorist mart.

All our pride flags, our multimillion gender studies programs at Kabul University, and our George Floyd murals did not just come to naught, but were replaced by the Taliban’s anti-homosexual campaigns, burkas, and detestation of any trace of American popular culture.

Vladimir Putin sized up the skedaddle. He collated it with Biden’s unhinged quip that he would not get too excited if Putin just staged a “minor” invasion of Ukraine. He remembered Biden’s earlier request to Putin to modulate Russian hacking to exempt a few humanitarian American institutions. Then Russia concluded of our shaky Commander-in-Chief that he either did not care or could do nothing about another Russian invasion.

The result so far is more than 500,000 dead and wounded in the war, a Verdun-stand-off along with fortified lines, the steady depletion of our munitions and weapon stocks, and a new China/Russia/Iran/North Korean axis, with wink and nod assistance from NATO Turkey.

Biden blew up the Abraham accords, nudged Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States over to the dark side of Iran, China, and Russia. He humiliated the U.S. on the eve of the midterms by callously begging the likes of Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and Saudi Arabia to pump more oil that he had damned as unclean at home and cut back its production. In Bidenomics, instead of producing oil, the president begs autocracies to export it to us at high prices while he drains the nation’s strategic petroleum reserve for short-term political advantage.

Biden deliberately alienated Israel by openly interfering in its domestic politics. He pursued the crackpot Iran Deal while his special Iranian envoy was removed for disclosing classified information.

No one can explain why Biden ignored the Chinese balloon espionage caper, kept mum about the engineered Covid virus that escaped the Wuhan lab, said not a word about a Chinese biolab discovered in rural California, and had his envoys either bow before Chinese leaders or take their insults in silence—other than he is either cognitively challenged or leveraged by his decade-long grifting partnership with his son Hunter.

Yet another Biden’s legacy will be erasing the southern border and with it, U.S. immigration law. Over seven million aliens simply crossed into the U.S. illegally with Biden’s tacit sanction—without audits, background checks, vaccinations, and COVID testing, much less English fluency, skills, or high-school diplomas.

Biden’s only immigration accomplishment was to render the entire illegal sanctuary city movement a cruel joke. Given the flood, mostly rich urban and vacation home dwellers made it very clear that while they fully support millions swarming into poor Latino communities of southern Texas and Arizona, they do not want any illegal aliens fouling their carefully cultivated nests.

Biden is mum about the 100,000 fentanyl deaths from cartel-imported and Chinese-supplied drugs across his open border. He seems to like the idea that Mexican President Obrador periodically mouths off, ordering his vast expatriate community to vote Democratic and against Trump.

Despite all the pseudo-blue collar dissimulation about Old Joe Biden from Scranton, he has little empathy for the working classes. Indeed, he derides them as chumps and dregs, urges miners to learn coding as the world covets their coal, and studiously avoids getting anywhere near the toxic mess in East Palestine, Ohio, or so far the moonscape on Maui.

Bidenomics is a synonym for printing up to $6 billion dollars at precisely the time post-Covid consumer demand was soaring, while previously dormant supply chains were months behind rebooting production and transportation. Biden is on track to increase the national debt more than any one-term president.

In Biden’s weird logic, if he raised the price of energy, gasoline, and key food staples 20-30 percent since his inauguration without a commensurate rise in wages, and then saw the worst inflation in 40 years occasionally decline from record highs one month to the next, then he “beat inflation.”

But the reason why more than 60 percent of the nation has no confidence in Bidenomics is because it destroyed their household budgets. Gas is nearly twice what it was in January 2021. Interest rates have about tripled. Key staple foods are often twice as costly—meat, vegetables, and fruits especially.

Biden has ended through his weaponized Attorney General Merrick Garland the age-old American commitment to equal justice under the law. The FBI, DOJ, CIA, and IRS are hopelessly politically compromised. Many of their bureaucrats serve as retrieval agents for lost Biden family incriminating laptops, diaries, and guns. In sum, Biden criminalized opposing political views.

Biden has unleashed the administrative state for the first time in history to destroy the Republican primary front runner and his likely opponent. His legacy will be the corruption of U.S. jurisprudence and the obliteration of the American reputation for transparent permanent government that should be always above politics, bribery, and corruption.

If in the future, an on-the-make conservative prosecutor in West Virginia, Utah, or Mississippi wishes to make a national name, then he has ample precedent to indict a Democrat President for receiving bad legal advice, questioning the integrity of an election, or using social media to express doubt that the new non-Election-Day balloting was on the up-and-up, or supposedly overvaluing his real estate.

The Biden family’s decade-long family grifting will likely expose Joe Biden as the first president in U.S. history who fitted precisely the Constitution’s definition of impeachment and removal—given his “high crimes and misdemeanors” appear “bribery”-related. If further evidence shows he altered U.S. foreign policy in accordance with the wishes from his benefactors in Ukraine, China, or Romania, then he committed constitutionally-defined “treason” as well.

Defunding the police, and pandemics of exempted looting, shoplifting, smashing, and grabbing, and carjacking merit no administrative attention. Nor does the ongoing systematic destruction of our blue bicoastal cities, Los Angeles, New York, Portland, San Francisco, Seattle, and Washington, D.C. All that, along with the disasters in East Palestine or Maui are out of sight, out of mind from a day at the beach at Biden’s mysteriously purchased nearly 6,000 square-foot beachfront mansion.

Biden ran on Barack Obama-like 2004 rhetoric (“Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America).”

And like Obama, he used that ecumenical sophistry to gain office only to divide further the U.S. No sooner than he was elected, we began hearing from the great unifier eerie screaming harangues about “semi-fascists” and “ultra-MAGA” dangerous zealots, replete with red-and black Phantom of the Opera backdrops.

What followed the unifying rhetoric was often amnesties and exemptions for violent offenders during the 120 days of rioting, looting, killing, and attacks on police officers in summer 2020.  In contrast, his administration lied when it alleged that numerous officers had died at the hands of the January 6 rioters. In addition, the Biden administration mandated long-term incarceration of many who committed no illegal act other than acting like buffoons and “illegally parading.”

The message was exemptions for torching a federal courthouse, a police precinct, or historic church or attempting to break into the White House grounds to get a president and his family—but long prison terms for wearing cow horns, a fur vest, and trespassing peacefully like a lost fool in the Capitol.

Finally, Biden’s most glaring failure was simply being unpresidential. He snaps at reporters, and shouts at importune times. He can no longer read off a big-print teleprompter. Even before a global audience, he cannot kick his lifelong creepy habit of turkey-gobbling on children necks, blowing into their ears and hair of young girls, and squeezing women far too long and far too hard.

His frailty redefined American presidential campaigning as basement seclusion and outsourcing propaganda to the media. And his disabilities only intensified during his presidency. Biden begins his day late and quits early. He has recalibrated the presidency as a 5-hour, 3-day a week job.

If Trump was the great exaggerator, Biden is our foremost liar. Little in his biography can be fully believed. He lies about everything from his train rides to the death of his son to his relationship with Biden-family foreign collaborators, to vaccinations to the economy. Anytime Biden mentions places visited, miles flown, or rails ridden, he is likely lying.

Biden continues with impunity because the media feels that a mentally challenged fabulist is preferable to Donald Trump and so contextualizes or ignores his falsehoods. Never has a U.S. president fallen and stumbled or gotten lost on stage so frequently—or been a single small trip away from incapacity.

So, yes, Biden’s initiatives have succeeded only in the sense of becoming successfully enacted—and therefore nearly destroying the country.

[ultraviolet-divergence]

President-elect Donald Trump has selected Chris Wright, a campaign donor and fossil fuel executive, to serve as energy secretary in his upcoming, second administration. CEO of Denver-based Liberty Energy, Wright is a vocal advocate of oil and gas development, including fracking, a key pillar of Trump’s quest to achieve U.S. “energy dominance” in the global market. Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry’s top lobbying group, said Wright’s experience in the energy sector “gives him an important perspective that will inform his leadership” of the Energy Department. “We look forward to working with him once confirmed to bolster American geopolitical strength by lifting DOE’s pause on LNG export permits and ensuring the open access of American energy for our allies around the world,” Sommers said.

President-elect Donald Trump announced Friday that North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum, his choice to head the Interior Department, will also lead a newly created National Energy Council that will seek to establish U.S. “energy dominance” around the world. Burgum, in his new role, will oversee a panel that crosses all executive branch agencies involved in energy permitting, production, generation, distribution, regulation and transportation, Trump said in a statement. As chairman of the National Energy Council, Burgum will have a seat on the National Security Council, Trump said.

[beardedmrbean]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Even as she promoted her efforts to boost clean energy, Vice President Kamala Harris said in Tuesday's debate that the Biden-Harris administration has overseen “the largest increase in domestic oil production in history because of an approach that recognizes that we cannot over rely on foreign oil.″

The comment by Harris, a longtime climate hawk who backed the original Green New Deal, surprised supporters and opponents alike — and conflicted with frequent boasts by Harris and President Joe Biden that they are champions in the fight to slow global warming.

After former President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the Biden-Harris administration reentered the global pact aimed at reducing emissions. The administration also set a target to slash U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 and moved to accelerate renewable energy projects and shift away from fossil fuels.

Liam Donovan, a Republican strategist, said it was notable that at a debate in energy-rich Pennsylvania, Harris chose to “brag about something that President Biden has barely acknowledged — that domestic fossil fuel production under the Biden administration is at an all-time high.″ Crude production averaged 12.9 million barrels a day last year, eclipsing a previous record set in 2019 under Trump, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The statement was “another sign of Harris’ sprint to the middle″ on energy policy and other issues, said Donovan, who works with energy industry clients at the Bracewell law and lobbying firm.

Harris went one step further, rebranding the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act — the administration's signature climate law — as a boon to fracking and other drilling, thanks to lease-sale requirements inserted into the bill by independent West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a key swing vote in the Senate and a strong supporter of the fossil fuel industry.

Harris's comments disappointed some in the environmental community.

“Harris missed a critical opportunity to lay out a stark contrast with Trump and show young voters that she will stand up to Big Oil and stop the climate crisis,'' said Stevie O’Hanlon, a spokesperson for the Sunrise Movement, one of the groups behind the Green New Deal.

“Harris spent more time promoting fracking than laying out a bold vision for a clean energy future,'' O'Hanlon said. “Young voters want more from Harris'' on climate change, she added. “We want to see a real plan that meets the scale and urgency of this crisis.''

Her group is working to turn out young voters, “but we hear people asking every day, ‘What are Democrats going to do for us?’” O'Hanlon said. “To win, Harris needs to show young people she will fight for us.”

Other environmental groups were less critical, citing the looming threat to climate action posed by Trump, who rolled back more than 100 environmental protections during his term as president.

“There is only one presidential candidate who is a champion for climate action and that is Kamala Harris,'' said Alex Glass, speaking for Climate Power, a liberal advocacy group. Harris "laid out a clear vision to invest in clean energy jobs and lower costs for working families,'' Glass said.

By comparison, she said, Trump "will do the bidding of his Big Oil donors.''

Glass cited the conservative Project 2025, written by Trump allies, saying it will put millions of clean-energy jobs at risk and let oil companies "profiteer and pollute.'' Trump has denied a direct connection to Project 2025 but has endorsed some of its key ideas.

Mike Sommers, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil and gas industry's top lobbying group, said Harris' comment in support of fracking reflected political reality in the closely contested election. “You have to be for fracking to be elected president in 2024,'' he said. “That's good news for our industry and great news for American consumers.''

Asked why he was so confident about the need to support fracking, Sommers offered a one-word answer: “Pennsylvania.”

Not only is it a key swing state in the election, Pennsylvania also “is the beating heart of the natural gas industry in this country,” Sommers said, second only to Texas in total production.

"You don't win Pennsylvania without supporting fracking, and you don't win the presidency without Pennsylvania,'' Sommers said.

In the debate, Trump disputed Harris's claim that she will not try to ban fracking, but Sommers said he takes Harris at her word and welcomes her support for fracking and oil drilling more generally.

Asked if he was concerned about Harris' past actions suing oil companies, Sommers said no. The oil and gas industry supports 11 million jobs, he said, and the price of gasoline “is determined by economics — supply and demand. There is no man behind the curtain” rigging prices.

As California attorney general, Harris “won tens of millions in settlements against Big Oil and held polluters accountable,'' her campaign says. Her platform includes a promise to ”hold polluters accountable to secure clean air and water for all.''

Trump, meanwhile, has vowed to rescind unspent funds from the climate law and other programs, and said he will target offshore wind projects. He said Harris would move to restrict onshore oil and gas production if elected.

“They’ll go back to destroying our country, and oil will be dead, fossil fuel will be dead,” Trump said.

A president’s power to restrict fracking, even on federal lands, is limited, and barring the practice on private land would require an act of Congress.

[shamandrummer]

Let's Stand Again With Standing Rock

It's time to take action and stop the Dakota Access pipeline (DAPL)! It's been over six years since DAPL began carrying oil and nearly a year and a half since the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the pipeline operator Energy Transfer's attempt to avoid producing a required Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Today, in violation of a separate court order, DAPL continues to operate illegally, without a federal easement. Finally, after interminable delay, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has finally released an extremely problematic draft EIS for public input.

That's where you come in. You now have just a few weeks to submit your public comment demanding the Corps shut this pipeline down and require a new, valid EIS. Please stand with Standing Rock in this critical moment and write to the Army Corps right now.

Now that the EIS has been released, we can confirm what we already suspected. Prepared by a member of the American Petroleum Institute -- clear conflict of interest -- the EIS addresses none of Standing Rock's many grave concerns about DAPL. Those include DAPL's imminent threat to the Missouri River, big problems with Energy Transfer's emergency response plans, Energy Transfer's horrendous safety track record, continued lack of transparency with Standing Rock throughout the environmental review process, inaccurate characterizations of tribal consultation, and sensitive habitat and sacred burial sites along the riverbank.

Earlier this year, four U.S. senators including Bernie Sanders submitted a letter to the Corps seeking an explanation. The reply from Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Michael Connor did not adequately or honestly address the tribe's complaints. Standing Rock replied, pointing out the flaws in approach and demanding redress.

For now, it's up to us to lend a hand. We must flood the Army Corps with a single, unified message: This illegal pipeline's operations must be terminated and the Army Corps must start over with a legitimate environmental review. In the midst of a climate emergency, let's defend sacred ground and safeguard Unci Maka (our Grandmother Earth). This may be our last, best chance to end DAPL once and for all. Please take action now.

[demoisverysexy]

Fun fact about Jack Gerard, the guy who gave the "dont criticize us" talk

before he was a general authority, he was the head of the American Petroleum Institute

like, THE oil lobby

he was even accused of astroturfing pro oil protests

mad shit

thanks for @pierre-menard for pointing this out to me

[the-cimmerians]

The Nation-State of California, the world’s fifth or sixth largest economy (depending on who’s talking and what week it is), is suing some of the biggest players in the oil industry for damages caused by climate change, arguing that Big Oil knew for decades that burning fossil fuels would have catastrophic effects on the planet’s climate, but that the industry conducted a “decades-long campaign of deception” to protect its profits, causing tens of billions of damage in California alone. This could be HUGE.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed the suit Friday in state court in Sacramento, against oil giants Exxon Mobil, Shell, Chevron (which is headquartered in California), ConocoPhillips, and the oil industry trade group, the American Petroleum Institute (API), that oily hive of scum and villainy.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from The American Prospect:

The Clean Air Act (CAA) has been fiercely opposed by polluters and their allies since its passage in 1970. Industry has never quite stopped fighting to prevent the government from protecting American lives and communities at the expense of even a bit of their profits. But over the past few years, opposition to the law has reached new feverish heights. Multiple cases seeking to gut the CAA have been filed by (or with the support of) oil and gas organizations, their dark-money front groups, and their political allies since 2022.

The ringleaders of this effort are the usual trade groups driving climate apocalypse, including the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API), as well as oil giants themselves, like ExxonMobil.

Yet the coordinated attacks on this lifesaving, popular, and historically successful regulation go beyond the singularly destructive interests of the oil industry alone. And they go beyond the federal rule too, and are working their way into litigation against state enactments of the CAA.

Of course, many of the companies driving these suits are some of the biggest names in corporate greenwashing, like Amazon, FedEx, SoCalGas, and more.

These companies have continuously insisted that they are committed to leading the clean-energy transition, even while they fight for the right to poison the general public for profit, and have endeavored—at every turn—to destroy any opportunity the public may have to pursue recourse for it.

Last year, the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association (EMA) threatened a lawsuit against the California Air Resources Board (CARB) over the state regulator’s Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) rule.

The rule, which would mandate a “phased-in transition toward zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles,” threatens the transportation sector’s historically noxious way of doing business; the sector accounts for more than 35 percent of California’s nitrogen oxide emissions and nearly a quarter of California’s on-road greenhouse gas emissions. CARB’s rule could go a long way toward actualizing rapid reductions in the state’s annually generated emissions.

However, later that year EMA and some major truck manufacturers reached an agreement with CARB not to sue over the rules, in exchange for the state’s loosening of some near-term emissions reductions standards.

EMA has by and large kept its promise to not intervene with the regulation in courts, but litigation challenging CARB’s rule would soon be picked up by the California Trucking Association (CTA). Enforcement of the rule has since been on hold, as CARB waits to be issued an ACF-related waiver from the EPA in return for CTA not filing for preliminary injunction against the law.

Even despite these agreements, some of EMA’s own members—and even some of those specifically signed on to the CARB deal—pop up on CTA’s member rolls, as per CTA’s own 2023 membership directory. Daimler Trucks North America and Navistar, Inc., are specifically listed as Allied Members of CTA for 2023.

Amazon is listed among CTA’s Carrier Members, while separately making routine promises to be a partner in the fight against climate change. While Amazon announced its “Climate Pledge” in 2019 of reaching net-zero emissions by 2040 to great fanfare, and has since branded itself a climate leader, the Center for Investigative Reporting has detailed how the e-commerce giant is overselling its green credentials by drastically undercounting its carbon emissions.

In truth, Amazon’s emissions have increased more than 40 percent in the time since it issued the pledge. Amazon also remains the largest emitter of the “Big Five” tech companies, producing no less than 16.2 million metric tons of CO2 every year. Without question, the corporation should be regarded as an industry leader in greenwashing, rather than in actual climate action.

FedEx is also a CTA Carrier-level member. Like Amazon, the company has also made promises “to achieve carbon neutral operations by 2040,” an initiative FedEx has labeled “Priority Earth.” In the years since, FedEx has funneled intensive time and resources into lobbying directly against climate action while pushing its net-zero greenwashing narrative.

UPS is another CTA Carrier-level member. UPS has historically been less effusive in its climate promises than have other corporations on this list, but the delivery giant has continuously reinforced its stance that “everyone shares responsibility to improve energy efficiency and to reduce GHG emissions in the atmosphere.”

[posttexasstressdisorder]

The arc of justice finally bends against Big Oil

Sabrina Haake

April 14, 2024 6:15AM ET

An oil refinery blow off stack is seen, Sept. 16, 2008, in Texas City, Texas. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers. Not a subscriber? Try us and go ad-free for $1. Prefer to give a one-time tip? Click here.

In an historic ruling that could change the trajectory of a rapidly heating planet, a court of law with binding jurisdiction over most of Europe has ruled that governments can be held liable for inadequate responses to climate change.

The European Court of Human Rights determined that rising temperatures in Switzerland caused direct and tangible health consequences among Swiss citizens, and that governments failing to take adequate steps to mitigate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions could owe damages to people hurt by their inaction.

So what, in practical terms, does this mean for a planet that is literally burning in an increasing number of locations?

Europe could take climate cases in a new direction

The ECHR ruling is unprecedented in several respects, beginning with its reliance on principles of human rights.

The Court ruled that governments failing to do enough to address climate change were violating the European Convention on Human Rights, which holds as its first tenet that, “Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law.” By failing to meet its own climate goals, the court held, the Swiss government impaired citizens’ fundamental rights to life.

The plaintiffs themselves were also unique. In climate cases pending around the world, including in the United States, the vast majority of plaintiffs are young people worried about how they will survive on a sweltering planet with rapidly disappearing habitats and resources.

ALSO READ: 15 worthless things Trump will give you for your money

The ECHR case, in contrast, was brought by elderly plaintiffs, most of whom were women in their 70s who proved that their age and gender make them particularly vulnerable to health risks linked to climate change. Heatwaves, in particular, can be deadly for the elderly as excessive heat triggers a strained cardiovascular response. Cognizant of their own time limitations, these women sued to benefit the next generation. One plaintiff told the BBC, “We know statistically that in 10 years we will be gone. So whatever we do now, we are not doing for ourselves, but for the sake of our children and our children's children.”

Because there is no avenue for appeal, the ECHR ruling will directly influence energy policy throughout the industrialized economies of Europe. Although it falls to Switzerland to comply with the ruling, its precedent is legally binding on all 46 member states, including Germany, the U.K., France and Italy — all fuel-burning heavy hitters.

Climate challenges in the U.S.

The European Court ruled that Switzerland’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions had been “woefully inadequate.” Although the ruling isn’t binding on U.S. courts, the domestic fossil fuel industry will be directly affected by it, since the U.S. has recently become the biggest supplier of crude oil to the European Union.

ALSO READ: Revealed: What government officials privately shared about Trump not disclosing finances

Climate litigants in the U.S. follow a different strategy. State and local governments are now suing fossil fuel companies and the American Petroleum Institute for damages caused by climate change — astronomical damages that inevitably fall to states, cities and towns that can’t afford to pay for them.

These climate cases name private fossil fuel companies as defendants, seeking to hold responsible various for-profit companies, including BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Shell, for increasing carbon dioxide and methane emissions caused by their products.

Big Oil’s campaign of deception

Legal claims and allegations pending in the U.S. focus largely on Big Oil’s deceptive practices. Like the tobacco disinformation cases from the 1990s, these cases allege fraud, nuisance, conspiracy and negligence arising from the industry’s long-standing public disinformation campaigns.

Congress has conducted numerous investigations into Big Oil’s pattern of deception. Despite conclusive evidence that oil executives have long known the causal connection between fossil fuels and climate change, industry executives have consistently lied about it to protect their profits.

Nearly 10 years ago, Democratic members of Congress addressed a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists concluding that “there was a coordinated campaign of deception” on climate science by ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, Shell, Peabody Energy and other members of the fossil fuel industry.

Tanker drivers working for Shell in Grangemouth, Scotland. (Photo by Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)

Big Oil’s targeted acts of deception over a decades-long campaign included “forged letters to Congress,” secret funding of allegedly independent but industry-controlled scientists, creating “fake grassroots organizations” to influence policy, and multiple, ongoing, and in-depth “efforts to deliberately manufacture uncertainty about climate science.”

Evidence of the industry’s deceptive practices could be pivotal in cases brought by state and local governments paying a staggering tab for intensifying storms, flooding, crop-destroying droughts, extreme heat events and, for states and towns on major bodies of water, coastal erosion.

In the meantime, the fossil fuel industry continues to profit outrageously from extracting, distributing and marketing dangerous products known to increase Earth’s already feverish temperature: March was the 10th month in a row to set a new monthly global heat record, both on land and in the oceans, as global reliance on coal — the dirtiest fossil fuel of all — continues to climb.

Landmark climate cases in Montana, Hawaii

The ECHR decision was the first to rule that governments are obligated under human rights laws to address climate change, but it won’t be the last. Cases pending in Montana and Hawaii also allege damages from unmet climate obligations by their respective state governments.

Last August, 16 young plaintiffs scored an unprecedented victory in Montana. They argued that the state violated a state constitutional provision that guarantees Montana citizens a healthy environment, and Judge Kathy Seeley agreed. She ruled that permitting coal, oil and gas production worsened the climate crisis, in violation of the “healthy environment” guarantees found in the Montana constitution.

In result, state regulators issuing permits for fossil fuel developments must now consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions as part of their overall analysis of whether to grant or deny the permit. After the state appealed the maverick ruling, Montana’s Supreme Court, in a 5-2 decision, denied the governor’s request to block the ruling pending appeal.

In Hawaii, another pending climate case involves 14 youths. Plaintiffs in Hawaii allege that the state’s transportation department, by funding highway projects that increase fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, violated a constitutional duty to protect the environment.

A protestor holds a 'Polluters Pay Up' sign outside the Phillips 66 Los Angeles Refinery Wilmington Plant on Nov. 28, 2022, in Wilmington, Calif. (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

After the state challenged plaintiffs’ standing, claiming they could not show particularized harm because climate damages are already “baked in,” the judge ruled that climate damages to plaintiffs “are not hypothetical,” and allowed the case to proceed.

When the state asked Hawaii’s legislators for more than $2 million to hire outside counsel to fight the case, one state legislator told Hawaii Public Radio that instead of “spending the millions of dollars we’re spending on some hotshot law firm,” Hawaii should apply that money toward emissions reductions instead.

The case was scheduled for trial this summer, but in February, the fossil fuel defendants petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, claiming that federal law precludes damages claims against them.

Take heart, then take action

Climate activists should be uplifted and encouraged by the ECHR decision, particularly as its effects begin to ripple through the fossil fuel industry, industrialized economies and reluctant courts.

It won’t change the prognosis or the immediate future — today’s youth throughout the world will still live through the worst effects of climate destruction, even though they had nothing to do with the policies that caused it.

It’s the same lament heard from emerging economies in Asia and Africa. Struggling countries and coastal populations who had nothing to do with industrialization over the past 150 years are now paying the steepest price through their own rapidly disappearing habitats.

Thousands of school students join protesters in a Climate strike rally on September 20, 2019, in Sydney, Australia. (Photo by Mark Evans/Getty Images)

But one major, outcome-determinative difference between these two rightfully aggrieved populations remains: the right to vote.

As enraging as it is for young Americans to hear oil-financed politicians deny climate change (“Drill baby, drill!”), we could fund the transition to clean energy — including an upgraded, nationwide grid of sufficient capacity — if every young adult simply voted.

Sabrina Haake is a columnist and 25 year litigator specializing in 1st and 14th Amendment defense. Follow her on Substack.

[foxgirlinfohazard]

just saw a commercial that was like "DONT let the government take YOUR RIGHT to DRIVE!! bidens epa wants to TAKE AWAY your RIGHT to ignore environment issues!!" and then "paid for by the american petroleum institute" yeah of fucking course it is

[steelindustryman]

Discover the Strength and Versatility of GI Flange

Q1: What are the key processes involved in the manufacture of GI flanges?

A: The key processes in the manufacture of GI flanges include:

Material Preparation: Raw materials like steel plates or sheets are cut to size.

Forming: The material is shaped into the flange design using processes like stamping or forging.

Welding: If needed, flanges may be welded to create specific designs.

Galvanization: The flanges are coated with zinc through hot-dip galvanization or electro-galvanization to enhance corrosion resistance.

Finishing: Final finishing processes include cleaning, inspection, and surface treatment to ensure quality.

Q2: Which materials are typically used in the production of GI flanges?

A: The primary material used in the production of GI flanges is carbon steel, which is coated with zinc to provide corrosion resistance. Depending on specific requirements, other materials such as stainless steel may also be used.

Q3: How do manufacturing standards affect the quality of GI flanges?

A: Manufacturing standards, such as ASTM, ANSI, and ISO, provide guidelines for the design, material specifications, and testing of GI flanges. Adhering to these standards ensures consistency, reliability, and safety in the final product, significantly affecting its overall quality.

Q4: What industries commonly utilize GI flanges?

A: GI flanges are commonly used in various industries, including:

Construction

Oil and gas

Water and wastewater treatment

HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning)

Shipbuilding

Q5: Can you customize GI flanges according to specific project requirements?

A: Yes, GI flanges can be customized based on specific project requirements, including size, thickness, pressure rating, and design specifications, to meet the needs of different applications.

Q6: What certifications should a manufacturer of GI flanges have?

A: A manufacturer of GI flanges should ideally have certifications such as:

ISO 9001 (Quality Management System)

ISO 14001 (Environmental Management)

API (American Petroleum Institute) certifications for oil and gas applications

Other industry-specific certifications as required.

Q7: How does the manufacturing process ensure corrosion resistance in GI flanges?

A: Corrosion resistance is ensured through the galvanization process, where flanges are coated with zinc, which serves as a sacrificial anode. This protects the underlying steel from rust and corrosion when exposed to moisture and other corrosive elements.

Q8: What are the advantages of using GI flanges over other types of flanges?

A: The advantages of using GI flanges include:

Cost-Effectiveness: Generally less expensive than stainless steel flanges.

Corrosion Resistance: The zinc coating provides excellent protection against rust.

Versatility: Suitable for a wide range of applications and environments.

Strength and Durability: Good mechanical properties make them reliable under pressure.

Q9: How does the cost of manufacturing GI flanges compare to other flange types?

A: The cost of manufacturing GI flanges is typically lower than that of stainless steel or other specialty flanges, primarily due to the lower cost of raw materials and the manufacturing processes involved.

Q10: What quality control measures are in place during the manufacture of GI flanges?

A: Quality control measures during the manufacture of GI flanges may include:

Regular inspections and testing of raw materials.

In-process inspections to ensure dimensional accuracy and adherence to specifications.

Testing for corrosion resistance, mechanical strength, and other relevant properties.

Final product inspections before shipment to ensure compliance with standards and customer specifications.

[wildmonkeysects]

War Profiteers

Remember President Dwight “Ike” Eisenhower, who after green-lighting the overthrow of Iran’s democracy in 1953 at the behest of petrochemical corporations, had a change of heart and warned about the Military Industrial Complex? Here are the top 100 USA Military Industrial Complex “defense” contractors, all corporate welfare queens mooching off the public, who have blood on their hands in Palestine and elsewhere:

Academi

Action Target

ADT Corporation

Advanced Armament Corporation

AECOM

Aerospace Corporation

Aerovironment

AirScan

AM General

American Petroleum Institute

Argon ST

ARINC

Artis

Assett

Astronautics Corporation of America

Atec

Aurora Flight Sciences

Axon Enterprise

United Kingdom BAE Systems

BAE Systems Inc

Ball Corporation

Ball Aerospace & Technologies

Barrett Firearms Manufacturing

Battelle Memorial Institute

Bechtel

Berico Technologies

Boeing Defense, Space & Security

Booz Allen Hamilton

Boston Dynamics

Bravo Strategic

CACI

Carlyle Group

Carnegie Mellon University

Ceradyne

Cloudera

Colt Defense

The Columbia Group

Computer Sciences Corporation

Concurrent Technologies Corporation

CSRA (IT services company)

Cubic Corporation

Omega Training Group

Curtiss-Wright

DeciBel Research

Dillon Aero

Dine Development Corporation

Draper Laboratories

DRS Technologies

DynCorp

Edison Welding Institute

[Israei]l Elbit Systems

M7 Aerospace

Ensco

United Kingdom/Military contractor Ernst & Young

Evergreen International Aviation

Exxon

Fluor Corporation

Force Protection Inc

Foster-Miller

Foster Wheeler

Franklin Armoury

General Atomics

General Dynamics

Bath Iron Works

General Dynamics Electric Boat

Gulfstream

Vangent

General Electric Military Jet Engines Division

Halliburton Corporation

Health Net

Hewlett-Packard

Honeywell

Humana Inc.

Huntington Ingalls Industries

Hybricon Corporation

IBM

Insight Technology

Intelsat

International Resources Group

iRobot

ITT Exelis

Jacobs Engineering Group

JANUS Research Group

Johns Hopkins University

Kaman Aircraft

KBR

Kearfott Corporation

Knight's Armament Company

Kratos Defense & Security Solutions

L3Harris Technologies

Aerojet

Brashear

[France] Lafayette Praetorian Group

Lake Shore Systems

Leidos

EOTech

Lewis Machine & Tool Company

Lockheed Martin

Gyrocam Systems

Sikorsky

LRAD Corporation

ManTech International

Maxar Technologies

McQ

Microsoft

Mission Essential Personnel

Motorola

Natel Electronic Manufacturing Services

Navistar Defense

Nextel

Northrop Grumman

Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems

Northrop Grumman Ship Systems

Northrop Grumman Technical Services

Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems

NOVA

Oceaneering International

Olin Corporation; also see John M. Olin and John M. Olin Foundation

Oshkosh Corporation

Para-Ordnance

Perot Systems

Picatinny Arsenal

Pinnacle Armor

Precision Castparts Corporation

Raytheon Technologies

Collins Aerospace

Rockwell Collins

Goodrich Corporation

Pratt & Whitney

Raytheon Intelligence & Space

Raytheon Missiles & Defense

Raytheon BBN

Remington Arms

Rock Island Arsenal

Roundhill Group

Ruger

Saab Sensis

Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)

SGIS

Sierra Nevada Corporation

Smith & Wesson

Smith Enterprise (SEI)

SPRATA

Springfield Armory

SRC Inc

SRI International

Stanley

Stewart & Stevenson

Swift Engineering

Tactical Air Support

Teledyne

Teledyne FLIR

Textron

AAI Corporation

Bell Helicopter Textron

Trijicon

TriWest Healthcare Alliance

Unisys

U.S. Ordnance

Verizon Communications

Vinnell Corporation

Westinghouse Electric Corporation

[hasanyoneseenmyspoons]

The state of California on Friday filed one of the most significant cases against major oil companies for their role in perpetuating climate change.

The 135-page legal complaint, filed through the office of California Attorney General Rob Bonta in San Francisco superior court, alleges that five big oil companies along with the American Petroleum Institute, a trade organization that represents them, orchestrated a decades-long disinformation campaign to hide the correlation between fossil fuel production and climate change.

The state claims that this intentional cover-up has gone on since at least the 1970s and has delayed the public's response to climate change, exacerbating extreme natural disasters and incurring tens of billions of dollars in recovery costs.

The oil companies named as defendants are BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, and Shell. The state is seeking an abatement fund paid for by the defendants that will finance recovery efforts for the future damage of human-caused climate change. It also asks that the oil companies and their trade group pay a share of the damages from extreme weather disasters worsened by climate change.

[vanauviet]

Tiêu chuẩn và quy định liên quan đến van 2 ngã

Việc sử dụng và vận hành van 2 ngã trong các ứng dụng công nghiệp và hệ thống cấp nước cần tuân thủ các tiêu chuẩn và quy định để đảm bảo an toàn và hiệu quả. Dưới đây là một số tiêu chuẩn và quy định quan trọng liên quan đến van 2 ngã: Tiêu chuẩn sản xuất và chất lượng: Mỗi quốc gia có thể có các tiêu chuẩn sản xuất và chất lượng riêng để đảm bảo rằng van 2 ngã đáp ứng các yêu cầu kỹ thuật và an toàn. Ví dụ: tiêu chuẩn ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) và tiêu chuẩn ISO (International Organization for Standardization) cung cấp các hướng dẫn về yêu cầu chất lượng và thử nghiệm cho van 2 ngã. Tiêu chuẩn kỹ thuật: Các tiêu chuẩn kỹ thuật quy định các thông số kỹ thuật cụ thể cho van 2 ngã, bao gồm kích thước, áp suất làm việc, dải nhiệt độ, độ chính xác và độ bền. Ví dụ: tiêu chuẩn ANSI (American National Standards Institute) và tiêu chuẩn API (American Petroleum Institute) cung cấp các hướng dẫn về tiêu chuẩn kỹ thuật cho van công nghiệp. Quy định an toàn: Các quy định an toàn quy định các yêu cầu và tiêu chuẩn an toàn cho van 2 ngã, đảm bảo rằng nó hoạt động một cách an toàn và không gây nguy hiểm cho môi trường và con người. Ví dụ: quy định của OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) và các quy định an toàn quốc gia có thể yêu cầu việc sử dụng van 2 ngã đạt các tiêu chuẩn an toàn nhất định. Quy định môi trường: Trong một số ứng dụng, van 2 ngã cần tuân thủ các quy định về môi trường để đảm bảo không gây ô nhiễm và tuân thủ các tiêu chuẩn về bảo vệ môi trường. Ví dụ: quy định của EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) và các quy định quốc gia có thể áp dụng cho van 2 ngã trong các ứng dụng liên quan đến xử lý nước thải và bảo vệ môi trường. Quy định vận hành và bảo trì: Để đảm bảo hoạt động đúng cách và an toàn của van 2 ngã, cần tuân thủ các quy định và hướng dẫn vận hành và bảo trì cung cấp bởi nhà sản xuất và các cơ quan quản lý. Các hướng dẫn này bao gồm các biện pháp bảo trì định kỳ, kiểm tra áp suất, bôi trơn và thay thế bộ phận hỏng. Tóm lại, việc tuân thủ tiêu chuẩn và quy định liên quan đến van 2 ngã là rất quan trọng để đảm bảo hoạt động an toàn và hiệu quả của hệ thống. Các tiêu chuẩn và quy định này đảm bảo rằng van đáp ứng các yêu cầu kỹ thuật, an toàn và môi trường.

Tìm Hiểu Thêm: Van 2 ngã - van bi vi sinh điều khiển khí nén hàng chính hãng giá ưu đãi

Xem thêm: Tiêu chuẩn và quy định liên quan đến đai khởi thủy

#auvietco-com-vn, #vannuoc1chieu, #vandientu