Guest's blog

Sat, 2015-01-10 06:00Guest
Guest's picture

Subsidy Spotlight: Publicly Funding a Utah Disaster in the Making

This is a guest post by Anna Simonton, on assignment with Oil Change International | Part 1 of 2

A green stegosaurus graces the logo of Uintah County, Utah, a gateway to the famed Dinosaur National Monument, where breathtaking landscapes and fossils preserved in sandstone attract thousands of visitors every year.

That logo has taken on new meaning over the past decade as prehistoric remains have attracted a different crowd. Now oil and gas executives are flocking to the Uinta Basin in Eastern Utah, as new technologies––and support from the government––offer the dubious possibility of digging up the region’s vast deposits of oil shale and tar sands.

Fri, 2015-01-09 16:42Guest
Guest's picture

Keystone XL Vote Analysis: House Proves Who They Serve

This is a guest post by Matt Maiorana, cross-posted with permission from Oil Change International. 

2015 is already bringing new challenges — including a congress that’s set on ignoring climate science and fighting for the fossil fuel industry instead of the American people.

One of their first acts of business has been an attempt to force approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, despite President Obama stating that he’ll veto the legislation. This hasn’t stopped pro-oil legislators from pushing the issue forward and it’s clear why.

We crunched the numbers and found that in today’s Keystone XL vote, members of the House of Representatives who voted ‘yes’ on approving the pipeline took a combined total of over $13 million dollars from the Oil and Gas industry in 2014 ALONE.

Compared to members of the House voting against the pipeline, they took 8.5x more money on average. And this doesn’t even include all the ‘dark money’ being spent by the fossil fuel industry in the most recent elections.

Wed, 2015-01-07 15:39Guest
Guest's picture

George Will’s Incorrect Claim on Historical Climate Change

This is a guest post by Climate Nexus.

Syndicated columnist George Will's latest piece, “Climate change's instructive past” is more carefully written than previous columns (see Media Matters Misinformer of the Year), but it still requires correction. Contrary to his claim, past changes in our climate should be understood as a warning, but shouldn’t be seen as evidence that current climatic change is naturally occurring, as he suggests.

The problem with this claim is that human-made emissions have increased exponentially since Will’s historical examples.  Science has clearly shown how current human-made climate change is very different from earlier slower natural changes, something Will failed to factor.

More accurately, historical climate change provides insight into problems we can expect in the future as greenhouse gases are increasingly amplifying variations in our climate. Historical trends should, instead, serve as a stark warning of what we can expect from the emission-driven warming we’re experiencing now.

Tue, 2015-01-06 20:08Guest
Guest's picture

Energy Shift Requires Shift In Conversation

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

Abundant, cheap fossil fuels have driven explosive technological, industrial and economic expansion for more than a century. The pervasive infrastructure developed to accommodate this growth makes it difficult to contemplate rapidly shifting away from coal, oil and gas, which creates a psychological barrier to rational discourse on energy issues.

The ecological and true economic costs of energy use force us to scrutinize our way of living. And because our infrastructure doesn’t allow us to entirely avoid fossil fuels, we must face the contradiction between how we should live and constraints against doing so.

Canada has no national energy plan, other than governmental desire to be a fossil-fuelled energy-export superpower. Given the consequences of human-induced climate change already hitting home, you’d think the highest priority of governments at all levels would be to decide on the lowest-emission energy path. But politicians focused on election intervals have difficulty dealing with generational issues.

Wed, 2014-12-24 13:34Guest
Guest's picture

Harvard Professor Tribe Makes Peabody Coal’s Case Against Clean Power Plan in The Wall Street Journal

This is a guest post by Climate Nexus.

While many legal experts have already picked apart his argument, Harvard Professor Laurence H. Tribe took his analysis on behalf of the world’s largest privately held coal company against the EPA Clean Power Plan (CPP) to The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page.

The opposition of fossil fuel interests to any climate change law or regulation has long been clear, and Tribe – one of the nation’s premier constitutional scholars – was retained by Peabody Coal to dispute the proposed regulations’ legal foundations.

Tribe’s arguments have already drawn substantive legal criticism:

Sat, 2014-12-13 13:10Guest
Guest's picture

California Communities Fighting Back Against Prospect Of 25-Fold Crude-By-Rail Increase

This is a guest post by Tara Lohan that originally appeared on Faces Of Fracking, a project of the CEL Climate Lab in partnership with Grist that was launched to capture the stories of concerned residents who live on the front lines of fracking.

Ed Ruszel’s workday is a soundtrack of whirling, banging, screeching — the percussion of wood being cut, sanded, and finished. He’s the facility manager for the family business, Ruszel Woodworks. But one sound each day roars above the cacophony of the woodshop: the blast of the train horn as cars cough down the Union Pacific rail line that runs just a few feet from the front of his shop in an industrial park in Benicia, California.

Most days the train cargo is beer, cars, steel, propane, or petroleum coke. But soon two trains of 50 cars each may pass by every day carrying crude oil to a refinery owned by neighboring Valero Energy. Valero is hoping to build a new rail terminal at the refinery that would bring 70,000 barrels a day by train — or nearly 3 million gallons.

And it’s a sign of the times.

Crude by rail has increased 4,000 percent across the country since 2008 and California is feeling the effects. By 2016 the amount of crude by rail entering the state is expected to increase by a factor of 25. That’s assuming industry gets its way in creating more crude by rail stations at refineries and oil terminals. And that’s no longer looking like a sure thing.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Guest's blog