Republicans, the Environment, and Coal. Oh my.
It’s not uncommon for us Americans to say that our two dominant political parties are so close to being identical to one another that it doesn’t matter for whom we vote. The reasoning is thus: they are both essentially owned by special interests, they espouse the same hawkish, imperialistic foreign policies and forward the same neoliberal agenda.
Be this as it may, there is an important and obvious difference on environmental matters–one that seems more glaring by the day. Check out this piece on the Republican National Convention platform touting coal as a “clean” form of energy.
One can say that, among her faults, Hillary Clinton is not a completely honest person. I get that; I too would rather have Mahatma Gandhi. But it’s hard to see how anyone with a conscience can want a government run chiefly by the fossil fuel industry, when the future of our civilization is so clearly at stake.
As suggested in the photo above, burning coal is rapidly ruining this planet; there is not a single environmental scientist who disputes this. That makes it tough to understand how anyone who cares a whit about the future of life here on Earth can vote Republican (even ignoring Trump’s magnificent lack of qualifications for the presidency and his vast ignorance on economic and foreign policy matters).
Craig well said and its High Time Thoughtful people speak out to all the so called Inconvenient Truths about the Gomers ( Gop) .
A informed and reasonable person would agree that the two parties share the Imperialistic and Neo Liberal addictions and also are addicted to the big $$$ industry for support.
How ever the track record for Senate, Congressional, Presidential Votes and a Objective Tallying of the votes and laws over the Years clearly will show that the donkeys those DEMs are kinder to the environment and have a Better Vision for getting us to a Cleaner Energy future as the Gomers want to perpetuate the fossil fuel degradation of the Earth and the Economic ruin it will bring to all. . In spite of the power of money The DEMS have made a difference in right direction but we are behind the curve time wise and time is short.
We need to reverse the Slide or the world going to really heat up to Fast and all the solar etc will be too little too late. Perhaps.
The Gomers the GOP – reflect on a tv show that had a character who was not real Sharp about common ordinary stuff – The GOP acts like him so inner Circle of Allies call them Gomers! Their policy ignorance and technical knowledge is deficient. They are into wishful thinking like some money hungry lusting CULT !
Also anti science and on and on so your question has many answers that show Big differences!
Their latest scheme is to close all but 3 of the 17 Nat labs and turn all research over to private sector! Take over the Yucca Mtn Nuclear waste project and let a private co run a nuclear waste dump and the folks in Nevada get NO Say in this – but they the gomers are the Freedom Party or that’s just one of their Meaningless and at times Cynical Orwellian slogans.
Contrary to popular confusion,
There are some significant differences in the parties still , seen and lived from over 38 years in the front lines , trenches and back rooms, Pinnacles and Valleys of the energy / environmental sector!
Its a False Equivalency to claim there is no difference in the two parties. Yes, Both have Stains but one of them trys to use some Bleach Organic Bleach to address some of these important Environmental Issues. The other wants to ramp up Staining in the slef interests of money and class. Or they the gomers just deny there is a Stain!
Craig if you included race and human relations and people , fairness and so called american fairness issues. The Divergence between the parties would be even more clearly seen like black and white. Since 1980 the gomers have drifted into a racial / class warfare party and I will leave it at that. Peace to all and I try to be Outside looking In Sad too!
I am not sure I understand your use of the term “gomer” in this context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GOMER
Craig,
This is a very tough response for me to post. It’s always difficult and awkward to find myself forced to be impolite to those whom I respect.
Self-important fools, sanctimonious hypocrites with delusions of grandeur can be demolished without regret, but disputes with people I respect, well.., I find it difficult.
I respect you, which is why the following is very difficult to write. My criticism is not born of animosity, but from a sincere concern that your are squandering your considerable talent and credibility by embarking on a fruitless and erroneous crusade.
Wild, sensationalist and unsupportable claims can only be counter-productive. (It makes you sound a bit like a reverse Trump 🙂
Let’s get something straight. The concept that the “fossil fuel industry owns Congress and the administration”, is just plain silly. It’s the sort of nonsense spouted by people with far less intellect and insight than yourself.
If the fossil fuel industry owned Capitol Hill and the Presidency, then there would be no US ethanol mandate, and keystone would be being built as I write.
Like all the dynamics that make up the US body politic, the fossil fuel industry has considerable influence. No government can oppose or ignore the needs of any major economic sector, without paying a heavy political price.
The same applies to organized labour, Sierra Club,RFA and other widely diversified powerful organized groups.
The fossil fuel industry is the largest US taxpayer, 80% of the US retirement and superannuation industry is dependent on oil industry profits.
Without the opportune and unexpected boom in the domestic (North American) oil and gas energy, the US economy would have collapsed by 2014.
These are factors any responsible government, no matter what persuasion, must carefully consider.
But influence, and recognition of economic significance, doesn’t mean governments or the legislatures are mere “puppets” of oil company Executives.
Currently, there is no real alternate energy to replace the global importance of coal. ( except natural gas) The coal industry is trying to develop technology to mitigate environmental harm, but the hurdles are not easy.
It’s true that the long tern future of the coal industry is drawing to a close. Advanced nuclear technology will soon provide more economical, convenient, and cleaner power generation. Globally, the Coal industry is doomed, but not tomorrow, and maybe not for several decades.
A little more study of the writings of Mahatma Gandi would have informed you that he considered himself totally unsuited to assume the burden and responsibilities of Administration and Government ! He also was realistic about the limitations of his style of political action.
Gandi admitted that his non-violent methods while effective against nations like the British, would not be effective when dealing with a more ruthless and barbaric enemy.
Idealism has its place, but responsible governments must be pragmatic and realistic. America has seen enough trauma with ill-conceived, idealistic enthusiasms. (think of the Volstead Act).
You are correct, both Donald Trump and Bernie Saunders are totally unsuited to be President. Hilary Clinton may not be a perfect human being, but those very imperfections may make her a great President. (I pray so).
In this election, major US corporations have played a very diminished role. Some individuals and unions have stepped up support and contributions, but not the oil or automotive sectors. Both distanced themselves from his campaign. ( Oil companies need competent, reliable, intelligent governments who understand the economy ).
Donald Trump’s biggest donors seem to be real estate companies.
Oil and automotive industries have reduced support for all candidates. Contributions that have been made favour both parties equally.
In contrast, Renewable Energy Association members have outspent the entire oil and automotive industry on political contributions several times over ! These contributions run almost 86% in favour of HC and Democrat candidates. (the exceptions being GOP candidates in farm-belt electorates.
These are all verifiable facts.
Craig, I appeal to you. We are living through times of great change and uncertainty. It will be an era of hysterical advocates and populists of all persuasions (some just plain crazy). In the meantime, never has the competitiveness of Western Economies been more vulnerable.
If men of goodwill, and intelligence, such as yourself, fail to support moderation, co-operation, pragmatism and objectivity, who will ? If you fall into the trap of extravagant cliches, and wild rhetoric, where will be the voice of common-sense to make tangible progress ?
Men of goodwill like yourself, must set an example as cool, clear thinking, practical advocates. Be prepared for the long haul. Settle for an evolutionary, not revolutionary process. The goal can only be won by persistent endurance and persuasive example.
I’m no Carlos Ghosn, or Elon Musk. However, in my own humble way I hope I’ve provided examples of practical environmental practices that can be built on by future generations.
We need to enlist the co-operation of major corporations and industries. That won’t be achieved by belligerent moralistic tirades castigating them for providing the economic resources to develop cleaner technology !
The Unions and Greens drove the Australian car manufacturing industry out existence. It hasn’t stopped Australian’s buying cars, but it does mean that the unions and “greens” have no influence or input into a now fully imported industry.
So what was achieved ? A lot of sanctimonious rhetoric, and a lot of unemployed workers. ( Hey, never mind, new jobs will be created in the “service sector” or clean tech industries.
Hmmm…, sounds good, except that “service industries” usually means jobs funded by the taxpayer (providing social services for people who once had a job) except now we have less taxpayers. Clean Tech industries don’t spring up in countries with no other manufacturing infrastructure, supply chains or experience, so the new tech is made in Asia, and imported !
Hang on, say the “green leftists” we can avoid a recession by “taxing the rich” !
Except the rich have left or have invested in more friendly environments, so that’s not really viable. Oh well, say the green-left, we can always get a job back at University or a leftist government funded quango leaving others to try to fix the mess, while we sneer and deny all blame.
Craig, the world desperately needs advocates like yourself. My fear is that by wasting your talents on impractical rhetoric, is irresponsible. It’s only by focusing on practical, achievable goals that you and I can prove to others we deserve their trust and co-operation.
( Whew,..that was difficult. I hope you don;t take offense.)
Perhaps a thing most disturbing about the present options is that either candidate has obvious character flaws that could easily be exploited. Party platforms suggest what those around the candidate might support with what influence they could offer. There are no real promises. It is politics as usual.
Sanders did not sufficiently exploit his rather steadfast (decades long) perspectives or it may not have been entirely understood. It was definitely something different. This may have hurt the campaign, perhaps in favor of a movement. He may have misjudged when he needed to start his campaign. Could another 2 months have made a difference?
“Let’s get something straight. The concept that the “fossil fuel industry owns Congress and the administration”, is…” Words are easy. Even stats like those provided by this site: http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?indexType=c&showYear=2008 aren’t necessarily “proof.” We might examine influence peddled and the results observed to see if they match up in a way that provides a suggestive correlation. We could inquire to see if there exceptions or concurrent reasons for the correlation. But when the evidence mounts we would have to be an idiot to ignore the relationship.
“Oil and automotive industries have reduced support for all candidates. Contributions that have been made favour both parties equally.
In contrast, Renewable Energy Association members have outspent the entire oil and automotive industry on political contributions several times over!” The numbers , at least for the US, don’t support any of these conclusions. Rather the opposite seems to be true.
“Craig, the world desperately needs advocates like yourself. My fear is that by wasting your talents on impractical rhetoric, is irresponsible.” Too often I see this word “practical” bantered about as if it were the sole arbiter of correct action. But then when we inquire into the definition of the term it begins to sound more like “whatever the author wants” “practical” can be making money. “Practical” can be conservative values. “practical” can be efficient. But it also can be the chance to dream, explore new things and invest our time and money… especially when these things result in some desired value.
To condemn Craig’s or anyone’s philosophy or speech as “impractical” is then nothing more than a convoluted way of saying it does not agree with your own, which seems obvious, redundant, and a somewhat inaccurate use of speech.
@ Breath on the Wind,
Thank you for your observations.
In my opinion candidates like Bernie Saunders attract the support of hard core leftists,radicals, the young and the disaffected. This is especially true in primaries.
The longer the campaign, the more enured voters become to rhetoric and the more voters “get to know ” the candidates. ‘Preachy’ candidates like Bernie Saunders retain their hard core, devoted followers, but the appeal to the centre dissipates and without capturing the centre no candidate can win office.
“the opposite seems to be true”
Er,….if you examine the graph offered by your own source of reference, you will observe US expenditure on lobbying and political contributions in 2016, is only 18% that of 2010 !
Political donations by the US Oil and Automotive sector in 2016 are less than 14% of 2009-10.
Since your own source of reference appears to support my assertion, I’m at a loss to understand how you conclude the opposite is true ?
(The reason some myths are hard to dispel, is people want to believe and feel the myth ‘ought’ to be true. From there it’s an easy step to keep claiming a myth is true).
We obviously define the word ‘practical’ differently.
I have no objection to anyone philosophizing, or dreaming, exploring new ideas etc. In fact, I think such activity is laudable.
However, when advocates misrepresent “dreams” as realistic projects requiring immediate implementation, or portray technologies with only “potential” as proven mature technology at the expense of existing technology, then it becomes a problem.
“Practical” is a ‘conservative’ term, in as much as it defines tangible evidence of effectiveness. Too often idealistic, or esoteric concepts are advocated by activists as a replacement or excuse for doing anything of any real value.
The old saying “when all is said and done, there’s a lot more said than done”, rings true when examining the rhetoric of many advocates.
The term “practical” also implies “focus”. My concern is not whether Craig agrees with me or not, but whether the real value of his message could be lost or confused by the inclusion of extraneous issues.
Greetings again, Like your post Breath on The Wind and you draw some interesting comparisons for sure.
As far as Gomer , my group means DUMB . Forget about some wikipedia posting even if it is the correct version and definition., We were not trying to be completely or technically correct with this name.
We wanted a catchy easy ( for the keep it simple I want to be Stupid american mind) to latch on to. We found GOMER to resonate well and it brings laughs and smiles to many when used in public settings.
Gomer Pyle the dumb soldier on the TV show years ago is the reference we are using . While the actor in real life I am told was a fine man his TV character was Dumb. GOP attempts at policies are DUMB. In respect to Energy and Coal they are Incompetent!
And in my observation of Life many people who vote for their bad policies are DUMB too along with many other character deficiencies but that is too partisan and I dont want to go there on this post. Anyone reading who is offended understand the comparison and context in which I am making. Don’t intend to rankle your Sensibilities.
So call the Gomers out on their bad Coal position. The world is backing off Coal and it is in Terminal decline and will be phased out because it is a dirty fuel that the world can no longer afford to use. Perhaps when Oil reaches a consistent price over $ 100 per barrel then coal might be able to be converted into gasoline and have some revival. That is uncertain and only time will tell. EV’s will rule by that time and at that price for oil. Economic Substitution will happen but the gomer mind w reject that as we dont want to drive Europe looking cars we need our gas guzzler trucks whatever . I can see that cultural conflict coming. the empty slogans will be drinking material for laughs!
There are now new technologies like solar, wind , more cleaner gas that undercut coals price position and are driving many coal plants into early retirement. Solar Tracking Utility Scale are going up for $1.50 watt w 36 % capacity factor. BTW That meets most of the daily demand curve for most utilities. The 2018 price is projected to be $1.00 watt so solar is definitely In the Money as us former Utility men used to say. Its more market based than it is regulatory based but Gomers would try to deceive you to believe the Cruel Fairy Tale that a certain Presidents policies are their Root Cause Problem when its Technology and Price , and a Global Awareness that Climate Change is REAL . So growth in coal is leveling out and declining and yes it will take a few decades to unwind from this dirty fuel. God Bless UK for ending all coal use in early 2020’s.
Climate Change is not a China Man hoax like a certain Carnival Barker and his legions of foolish angry followers seem hell bent on trying to convince the American Public. But comedy even if it is Tragic sells in America , the shortcomings of a over market dependent society.Perhaps? So we stand on the Sidelines and watch in dismay as this Circus going on in Cleveland continues to deny the need for a Renewable Energy Economy and balanced use of Fossil fuels.
Hells Bells the Gomers dont even talk about the potential Blessings of new advanced nuclear energy?? Like where is their energy policy ? Talk about 1 Trick Ponys they chant we are going to drill our way into aplenty , and Happy Times w return to all the cheap oil will awash us all.
The current decline in the oil market is a result of over drilling and over supply and has led the domestic oil and gas industry whose list of bankruptcies grows each month to now begin Lobbying the Government for price supports and tax on imported oil. ( Will our good neighbor Canada like this???) More Free market Follies and Lies!
Industry seems to be more Hat than Cattle !
It is Timeless and Recurring Event that All words have Consequences !
So the word GOMER it works! We use it because most GOP policies or what they try to package and peddle as policies is DUMB Stuff. There is no global Warming is a GOP position. They cant deny their Words and Inactions. Saying no to climate change is DUMB period End of Story no need for analysis paralysis!
The Corporate Pretend to the End $$$ driven media allows them great license to continue their many follies , lies , deflections and distortions because the purpose of most of the american media is to keep the masses of Americans confused and illiterate on the real issues and who the real bogeyman is etc, . etc.
They just want eyes watching so they can sell ADS .more $$$…and this undermines the political process for all types of believers.
So maybe that has spread to other Nations as it seems that many countries political parties cant cope with all the different issues societies are facing . Perhaps the process is breaking down in Australia as that example was mentioned by the other comm enter? Perhaps. At risk of being criticized I state clearly America’s political parties and our Governmental processes are not up to the Task of addressing the multifaceted challenges that have grown in magnitude and are NOW Converging. The Convergence of so many challenges at one time may overwhelm our governing capacity and the masses in their muddled confusion and rage will turn to worse forms of Carnival Barkers aka Fascist types as people will want a Strongman to save them ? Fear is not a Positive Motivator.
I too found deficiency and inconsistency in our distant colleague Marco Polo – who tends defend and postulate for the entrenched establishment position even when the results of these positions have been exposed and actually failed the market test. And these Market Failure are too Voluminous to list as they would make a Economic History for the ages !
The over use of False Equivalency is a time worn tactic to delay and stall constructive progress ! A favorite tool of the Ruling Class too!
Failure to recognize technical and market failures despite over whelming evidence to the contrary, Begs a whole set of different Questions that is for sure!
On the Political dysfunctions in certain countries well in that Yes there is much Truth and disappointment and it crosses over into all political parties it seems. No one group has a monopoly on inefficiency and failure. The root cause most likely has much to do with the Flawed Human condition and the Broken processes by which we form our politics.
I am disappointed in how far America has sunk in respect to our Two candidates for Presidents. That is another long discussion.
Not to suffer from confusion, One is less Evil than the other and the choice is overwhelmingly clear and easy to make.
Concerning Sanders – a good man.
The media and the DNC conspired to undermine the excellent Sanders campaign. Mr Sanders elevated the debate, his long track record of public service for public service sake is to be respected even if one does not share his positions. He is Honest man and he tapped into what most of the American people are longing for. If he had more money on front end time wise he would have the time needed to travel earlier and deprogram certain blindly loyal democratic voters who voted in unison for the DNC anointed candidate. He won and he was winning over good middle of the road voters , working people in the Nations Heartland. White people who tend towards gomerism were awakened. He really exceeded goals for sure. A Honest leader who wants to Raise more Boats and not just the 1 % like the others have done.
Former UK PM G Brown recently published a article warning all so called Western political parties that the groundswell of the masses will rise up everywhere as the Ruling elites, 1 % percenters and Uber capitalistic class has extracted to much wealth from the other classes for far too long. We have only just begun to see this Trend and Consequence of Excessive Globalization and the market must Rule us all !
How these trends impact the needed clean energy future will greatly determine our collective future, so even though their policies are lacking the Gomers could get in the way of good progress for Humanity!
Good Days to All thanks Craig for the forum a good question but most dodge reality these days. They want a neat tidy packaged solution ! Perhaps playing Poke Mon on the phone will bring answers !!!
Another Day over 100 degrees , my o my !
@ Marco Polo re your comment to Craig referring to Extraneous issues and Sanders campaign
The majority of what Craig puts out is positive. He does put out for discussion concepts and ideas which tend to stimulate discussion from a wide variety of perspectives. They result in some creative contemplation and open things up for exchange.
So what is Extraneous about this?? The World in respect to technologies and potential approaches and various solutions to our challenges is NOT FLAT It is Neither linear nor can the approaches being rehashed versions of former approaches as the problem has evolved so solutions must Evolve.
If the Mythical Unencumbered Market and all of its various Forces worked in a Synergistic manner then things would be rolling along….but the evidence is over whelming that they don’t.
I see you produced some stats that show different levels of funding for Lobbying , that could be the case. Maybe the energy guys the fossil fuel ones are hoarding their cash for the upcoming fire sale of assets by the weaker co’s and a big asset grab by the Super Majors could be in the works? Perhaps. Maybe that explains reduced lobbying.
Or it could be the Billions that are being spent to influence State wide and Federal elections so they can stack in some more subservient congressmen and Senators to do their Voting ??
Craig and all if one has any wonders about the Gomer concept and support for so called Clean Coal google Kemper Coal plant in Mississippi. A dark tale of corruption and political payoffs to finance a plant that is finally coming online a few years behind and a 2 to 2.5 Billion in cost over runs. Over night LCOE energy costs are in the $ .15 to $ .17 cents per Kwhr and may bankrupt the State wide Utility as well as impoverish the already rural poor of Mississippi. Not much has changed in the Southern Sharecropper economy since the civil War era.
This plant will not be that clean and it is not cost effective , but lobbying by a certain political party forced this plant on the public.
Maybe the name should be changed to Kemper Gomer 1
Interesting how the pain of the past lingers long into the future?
Marco as for Bernie Sanders , he won 22 states and came real close in a couple of others and the Cal vote narrowed to a 4 % difference in the end. Not bad at all running against the strongest political machine in the US. He started a Mopvement and it is still active and supporting candidates in several states. He plans on leaving seed money for his Legions to build grass roots bottom up political groups Nationwide.
so he won in a different way and standard. In deep reality , He was not really running to be President. He knew as a Senator knows that he can be more effective in Impacting Change by remaining in the senate. Many analysts who know him have reported such. America needs a few elections of new fresh leaders who are not part of the Neo Liberal DLC billy boy clinton mode.
If this grass roots movement grows and continues it could be a new political force for the 2 parties to contend with.
Parting thoughts to you Marco over in UK – I send condolences as I saw where the so called King Of Coal in Britain – name slips me – well he passed away. While coal has now fallen out of favor , in its day it did turn the wheels of society and industry and moved nations forward, etc. but all things come to and end on this Earth.
@ Silent Running
I wholeheartedly agree with your observation;
” The majority of what Craig puts out is positive. He does put out for discussion concepts and ideas which tend to stimulate discussion from a wide variety of perspectives. They result in some creative contemplation and open things up for exchange.”
My concern is that sometimes minority rhetoric can distract from the impact of the majority, that was the whole point of my post.
I have no idea why you think an “Unencumbered Market” exists, or if it did, it would work in a ” Synergistic manner” ! You seem to have invented or distorted an economic theory only to argue against it’s existence !
Nor did I quote any statistics relating to funding. I simply observed that the reference provided by BOW , supported not detracted from my assertion.
That’s the problem with believing in conspiracy theories and similar nonsense, you start assume others fit into the prism of your perceived sterotypes. ( next thing you’ll be telling me it’s because I’m an Aries :).
Nevermind, as for my comments on Bernie Sauders, again you should read what I actually wrote, not what you assume I wrote. Bernie Sauders did not win any votes as a candidate for election since he only contested in the primary process. Like all politically active leaders of factional politics he will undoubtedly have some influence on more mainstream politicians.
But that doesn’t invalidate my assessment of his chances to be elected President. In a General Election, he must gain the support of a majority of voters. Support by only a hard core wing of his own party, without winning middle America, is the same problem that Mitt Romney encountered.
Thank you for noticing the demise of Richard Budge. I had the privilege of knowing Richard, his wife Rosalind and his two sons quite well. I was also a friend of his brother Tony, sadly also deceased. ( I’m a similar age, so such events always give me pause to consider the fragility of life)
Both Brothers were charismatic entrepreneurs dedicated to the Quixotic task of preserving the last of the UK coal industry for as long as possible, and preserving a way of life for more than 15,000 miners and their families they experienced for generations.
Both brothers were deeply moved by the traumatic closures of the uneconomic state owned UK coal industry during the 1980’s.
Outside of Coal, both brothers had widely varied charitable, sporting and philanthropic interests.
Reality can’t be ignored. Coal still produces nearly 40% of the world’s electricity generation. With the exception of Nuclear, replacement of coal by renewable technology will be extremely difficult.
The US and other countries with large scale natural gas can replace many, particularity older, coal fired generation with NG. Wealthier nations can also afford the high capital and operating costs of replacing some coal generation with renewable sources.
Success and investment relies upon governments deploying a combination of substantial taxpayer/consumer funded subsidies, taxes, regulations, and incentives.
Unfortunately, the world is a bio-sphere, and environmentally harmful emissions don’t respect national borders !
Global pressure on industrial grade electricity generation is increasing rapidly , especially in developing nations. These countries can’t sit and wait for new technologies that might one day become adequate, they need the power coal can provide, to lift their populations out of poverty, today!
No one, (well, no one sensible) denies that coal has massive environmental problems and challenges. The Coal Industry is investing billions of dollars researching “clean coal technologies”. (or more accurately ” cleaner coal technologies”.)
Personally, while I applaud their efforts, I think the quest pointless and the money would be better invested in replacing Coal generation with advanced nuclear (particularly thorium).
There will always be idealistic, well meaning folk who don’t really appreciate the scale of the problem. To these people (and advocates) the problem is a simple contest between “good ” and “evil”.
They argue from a position where mere “potential” becomes reality, and demand completely unrealistic “solutions’ based on largely erroneous, or wildly optimistic and exaggerated claims.
We all want a better environment. Dreams and idealistic aspirations have a place, but they can’t be allowed to interfere or retard practical progress.
Please do me a favor and give me phrase that accurate depicts what you DO stand for.
Hi Craig,
Since I’m not an adherent of any particular “ism “, it’s not easy to find a particular phrase or term that sums up my beliefs to conform to any particular stereotype.
I try to analyze and judge each issue on it’s merits. I try to balance idealism with pragmatic reality. I try to avoid accepting, without analysis, popular enthusiasms.
( I’m a bit like Mr. Davis, Juror No. 8, in Reginald Rose’s Twelve Angry Men :).
I guess the closest label I would identify with, is the old fashioned term of “Progressive Conservative”. Or “pragmatic moderate”.
I have always been inspired by the methods and political actions of men like William Wilberforce, who patiently wrought great social change, but avoided bloody revolution and disastrous consequences.
I do believe in the ability of the human species to survive through our own creativity and ingenuity. Most of our problems as a species are created by our increasing dependence on technology, yet technology is our only hope of survival.
I believe the rights of individuals are paramount, but must be exercised responsibly.
I try to be a effective environmentalist. (without turning environmentalism into a quasi-religion). As an environmentalist, I want to see public policies that involve public spending or restrictive legislation subject to a rigorous analysis of tangible, (not symbolic) practical benefits, careful planning and level of priority.
I want environmental policies to be rational and effective, not based on emotive idealism, that may conceal covert political agendas.
I believe effective environmental progress requires focusing on achievable priorities, while maintaining strong economic surplus. Without a strong economy, no investment in clean tech is possible.
When I hear or read extravagant claims or grandiose statements by advocates, I want to know how much thought has gone into the detail of their demands. For me it’s not good enough for advocates to simply present a “wish list”, without any regard for the complex consequences and aftermath of ill-conceived, poorly planned public policies.
I believe effective environmental progress can only be achieved by enlisting all the dynamic forces in society.
Modern societies and economies are very complex. There are no “winner take all” victories to be achieved by adherence to any particular ideology. Progress can only be made by compromise and careful resolution of obstacles.
A process of “evolution” not “revolution”.
OK, I’ll try not to make that mistake again. But I need to mention that “Progressive Conservative,” at least in American English, is self-contradictory. It’s like describing someone is a tall short person. I think I’ll go with “pragmatic moderate” should the occasion come up again.
Hi Craig,
Thank you for your reply. The terms “Progressive Conservative” or “Conservative Progressive’ (CP) is better understood in the UK and Australia where it denotes the progressives or centrists within the ranks of the main Conservative parties.
It’s a generalization used to explain the shades of difference in conservative philosophy.
CP’s tend to be economic conservatives, with a strong belief in the right of equal opportunity for all, but preserving the right of the individual to benefit and endow his family with the fruits of his industry, ingenuity and good fortune.
CP’s usually adhere to those traditional social values and traditions which have proved beneficial, while remaining open to progressive social liberation and modernisation.
Thus it’s not surprising to see CP governments abolishing discriminatory laws concerning the private lives of individuals, abolishing the death penalty, defending “free speech “, less bureaucracy more efficient, effective government.
CP’s do believe governments have a regulatory, even managerial, role in society, industry and the economy. However, CP’s believe government intervention should be kept to a minimum.
Alongside their more right wing comrades, CP’s have a mistrust of the “Nanny State”. CP’s support a strong efficiently monitored social safety net for the fortunate of societies citizens.
But social welfare can’t be allowed to become a cancer, trapping people into a life of poverty, hopelessness and despair. It’s a duty of every civilized society to assist under-achiever’s back to self-respect and the dignity of prosperity.
This extends to all, even offenders. I hate term “Criminal ‘, and the mentality that believe long crushing incarceration in brutal despair ridden prisons, is an effective method of reducing crime.
Nor is ignoring the value of rehabilitation effective.
That’s what I have against ‘isms’ or adherence to any rigid ideology.
In my lifetime I have witnessed how adherence to a 19th century version of socialist ideology drove the UK into economic and social bankruptcy.
The politics of bitter class warfare, destroyed the British wealth and spirit. Industrial and social strife created bitter divisions impoverishing everyone and causing millions (the best and brightest) to emigrate.
Conservative progressives want to retain the best of the existing, while introducing improvements.
We don’t believe in change for the sake of change, or gambling public funds without a serious, practical assessment of the proposed benefits.
I could go on,..( but to your relief 🙂 I hope that’s sufficient to give you an idea of my thinking.
“Gomer” as an acronym for “Get Out of My Emergency Ward” could be a funny euphemism for a hypochondriac. I became familiar with the term from an Emergency Room Doctor. I provided the wiki definition as it seemed typical.
You want to use the term as a slur and I could not find the definition you suggest in any reference.
In general, the use of colloquial labels to categorize people is a form of prejudicial expression often used by bigots and runs counter to intelligent understanding you otherwise seem to advocate. As such, in this context and with your definition, “gomer” seems a poor rhetorical device.
Craig you have rolled far to many side tracking issues and observations into one serious minded subject. The result – a scrambled egg commentary that does not enlighten anybody, and only incites indifference, sniping, and abandonment of professional detachment and objectivity.
Marcopolo may be the one exception though, as he always strives for a level of objectivity to prevail in his commentary, but even he has not done such a good job with this topic.
The prevailing key technology that is providing “space and time” for our best and brightest global technologists and scientists to develop the next generation of enduring energy technologies that will satisfy the global must have imperative of “low cost and abundant energy for all people” is fossil fuel generation.
There is absolutely no doubt about that. And we are most fortunate to have (modern era efficient and clean) fossil fuel energy technologies in place as mature sciences at this point in our global evolution.
Please be mindful readers, that we are on an exciting technological pathway globally and new energy technologies will be at the forefront.
And guess what? when we get to the pointy end of research and development of new energy dense molecular generation technologies, we will quickly transition to this more efficient and cost effective form of generation from other current sources, which include the current crop of transitional and non-enduring renewable energy technologies such as solar PV and wind energy, as well as other conventional fossil fuel generation technologies.
Politics will have no role at all in evolving energy generation technologies being commercialised. In fact the politics of the day will demand the immediate uptake of energy dense molecular generation technologies, quickly cutting adrift redundant technologies.
Lighten up a bit and bring a little future vision to the table. Not everything that we would like to see happen, can happen instantly. Tomorrow will come and with it will come important changes in all technologies.
Lawrence Coomber
I hate to sound like I’m laughing at you, but I should tell you that I get a big smile on my face every time I see the name “Lawrence Coomber” in the comments section. I say to myself, “OK, here it comes. What’s it going to be this time?” And what was it this time? An indication that my work is “commentary that doesn’t enlighten anybody.” Well, I know for a fact that it doesn’t enlighten EVERYBODY, but wow, ANYBODY? Oh well. See you again in a few days. I need the smiles. 🙂
Craig, to the original post, here is an article that just came out today. It is fairly damning regarding influence and misdirection by both the tobacco and oil industry: http://grist.org/business-technology/way-back-when-big-oil-taught-tobacco-companies-a-few-tricks/
@ Breath on the Wind
Neither damning nor new. Just a biased attempt to cobble together some fairly nebulous facts to support a conspiracy theory .
For nearly 50 years, Shell, Exxon, BP and Chevron have all published considerable research, often in collaboration or participation with government and independent research into the health effects of oil additives.
It was oil industry research that discovered and published the possible effects of products like Benzine on polyneuropathy.
Curiously, the health effects were first noticed not only among production workers, but by the Conservator of the Getty Conservation Institute. Exxon and Shell were foremost in identifying and researching the effects soil contaminated by product like benzine. Oil company research has also been at the forefront in developing “clean-up’ technologies and techniques.
Starting as early as the late fifties, oil company laboratories have produced a tremendous volume of research, not all favorable to oil products. Once proven, this research has mostly been made public and made available to authorities and researchers.
Unlike the tobacco industry, the oil industry hasn’t the same level of paranoia, simply because oil is an essential product. Governments accept a degree of downsides from oil products due to the essential nature of the product.
The evidence for this can be easily observed in the attitude by oil companies to greatest single contributor of man-made pollution (and one of the most deadly).
The toxic pollutant is Marine grade No. fuel (bunker oil). In the Northern hemisphere, oil product may kill as many a 200,000 per year, create another 2-3 million cases of cancer, destroy the oceans ability to act as a carbon sink, and the effects on the food chain are just becoming known.
One large vessel can emit the annual pollution equivalent as 50 million motor vehicles! The abolition of this single source o could achieve a reduction in climate change emissions equal to most countries targets combined.
How do we know all this ? The only research conducted, or seriously funded, comes from Shell, Chevron and Exxon. (Exxon and Shell began publishing warnings over 30 years ago !)
Cover up ? Not by the oil companies ! In 2008 Shell, Exxon, BP and Chevron reported the ease by which this product could be abolished.
So why is nothing being done ? Simple, led by the USA, many governments have laws requiring the production of bunker oil by oil companies !
There is no question that like all large corporation involved in a tough business, (and they don’t get much tougher than oil) the oil corporations have not always behaved like choirboy’s !
But this kind of silly conspiracy theory, is pointless and diverts attention from real issues. (Like getting bunker oil abolished).
Marco: To say that governments have laws in place requiring companies to produce bunker oil is not dispositive. What is the history of the laws? Rarely do governments create laws without some influence. I hardly think it was a platform of he green party. Perhaps you think it is beyond “simple honesty” that petrochemical interests have shown for 100 years oil, for them to privately lobby for legislation and then publicly release studies against it. That would be a tactic of an industry that regards the population as fools with an ineffective government. Surely the honest oil interests are only serving the public good. If you live in that world then I will not be one to try and shatter your beliefs.
Otherwise I was surprised by the revelations that the oil companies and the tobacco industry used the same groups for privately funded studies and the same marketing group. But of course that is only coincidence and conjecture.
Hi Breath on the Wind,
Thank you for your reply.
Firstly, let me say that over the years Oil companies have not been Angels ! They are perhaps the most aggressively successful of the multinational corporations.
The history of some oil companies is the best evidence of why nations (and the world in general) needs strong,incorruptible but effective regulatory authorities.
But having said that, some oil companies have from time to time displayed exemplary corporate governance and sponsored considerable scientific advances.
In recent decades Exxon, Shell, BP, Chevron and Conoco-Phillips have all been much better behaved. But competition from government backed oil companies from nations such as France, Russia, the PRC etc, are ruthless and very determined. The oil business is tough.
Oil companies don’t fear political fall out from global warming or climate change in the way conspiracy theorists would have you believe. Oil companies can sell all the product they can produce.
The Oil giants know Governments,(especially the US) are absolutely dependent on the oil industry economically. Oil is an indispensable component of any developed nations economy.
Unlike tobacco, the nation can’t ‘quit’ using oil products !
As for the legislation concerning Bunker Oil, this is very old, dating back to before the second world war. At one time bunker oil was seen as an essential part of national security and trade. All governments wanted to ensure that a monopoly wasn’t created.
Like lot’s of laws, the original purpose has long since been forgotten, but most shipping companies still find excuses and lobby to retain the supply, to avoid the capital cost of retrofitting shipping.
My anger is that “green parties” show very little interest in campaigning (actually just plain no interest) in this significant form of toxic pollution.
As I say, oil companies are no angels, but they’re not the forces of Satan either.
Marco, I have at some length responded to another perspective that the “world cannot live without resorting to nuclear energy.” You seem to pose a similar argument but are substituting “oil” for “nuclear energy.” Others would substitute “population control” or even wishfully, “renewable energy.” The problem with all such arguments are that they are myopic. People will do whatever they feel forced into doing. Witness, as one horrible example, people jumping out of a burning world trade center.
When people feel trapped they can ban all nuclear energy. (Germany) If they feel trapped or otherwise sufficiently motivated they will ban all oil. (There are several small towns with no motor vehicles.) Yes, there are consequences. There are to all of our actions. So when I hear arguments that suggest “what we “can’t do,” I think them rather naive.
You are a thinker, so think in terms of the consequences rather than the more simplistic what we “can and cannot do.”
**”Oil companies don’t fear political fall out from global warming or climate change in the way conspiracy theorists would have you believe. Oil companies can sell all the product they can produce.”** Oil companies are corporations and depend upon their capitalization and the product they sell as part of their valuation. They have a lot of cash on hand and lots of equipment but a big part of their value and their future is the reserves of oil they have in the ground.
We have already heard from scientists that if all the reserves of fossil fuels presently discovered are produced it will raise CO2 levels and global warming beyond what is acceptable for human life. http://www.environmentamerica.org/programs/ame/more-oil-more-global-warming see also http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-30709211
There is a movement afoot to divest from the fossil fuel industry: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/22/us/heirs-to-an-oil-fortune-join-the-divestment-drive.html?_r=0
Forget about governments for a moment. Consider the financial impact on oil companies of a limitation on selling their reserves and or divestment. It is not global warming that will affect their bottom line. It is the threat of global warming. To counter that threat there is a very strong incentive to delay and obfuscate as their was with the tobacco industry which has responded by largely moving offshore to third world countries.
You can believe that oil companies do a lot of good, are managed well and/or in the public interest. You can even believe that such a powerful incentive does not raise to the level of action for some companies. I won’t disagree. … And if you want to believe pigs can fly I won’t stop you in that belief either.
@ Breath on the Wind,
Just a couple of points.
1) Germany isn’t doing very well without it’s nuclear power generating capacity. Germany has the highest energy costs in Europe, which for a nation with such a high economic dependence on manufacturing is painful. Nor is Germany free of nuclear energy, the nation buys nuclear generated power from France and the Czech Republic. Germany has also re-opened old Coal fired plants.
2) Oil company do not lack for investors ! The number of ‘ethical’ investors selling shares in oil companies is insignificant and more importantly easily compensated by other eager buyers. (Who do you think buys those shares sold by ethical investors ?).
3) There is no sign of any slow down in the rate of global oil consumption. The only thing that affects oil consumption is the growth/decrease of economic activity. Western oil companies could easily remain highly profitable in the advent of a decrease in gasoline-distillate consumption. Petrochemical products generate far higher profit margins and require far less expensive overhead and infrastructure investment.
4) Oil companies are as diverse in culture as nations. Like nations they’re neither all black, nor all white, policies shift and change to meet different challenges and respond to the opinions of different leaders.
Governments are more vulnerable to the effects of a loss in oil revenue than multi-national, multi-product oil companies.
Government survive on tax revenue and economic prosperity. This is especially true in the US with it’s absurdly short lower house electoral cycle. Oil companies are the largest single taxpayers in the US, and the most valuable source of revenue.
Fine, now you are referring to “consequences” rather than what we “can’t do.”
I also mentioned that oil companies react to the threat that the idea of global warming has to their bottom line. If we were to substitute “the ghost of Christmas future” for “global warming” it would be the same thing. Again people don’t have to stop buying oil for the threat of that “ghost” to seem real.
An oil exec takes a look at the movement to divest and says, “Whow, if this spreads, it could be a problem for us.” That is a motivation for someone paid to anticipate trends. Even more of an impact is the threat of government regulation limiting the production of oil or taxing the profits or reducing subsidities for oil production.
Someone who is not completely blind will look in anticipation for the motivations rather than in hindsight for causes. So when you try to tell me that divestment has only a minor impact you are telling me it is only a small poisonous snake and they are not usually seen. Like the ghost it is not what is seen but what is imagined that presents a motivational issue. Oil companies fight what they imagine with dis-information: oil is essential, we can’t live without oil, we can clean our operations, oil only represents a little pollution, we really don’t know the effects of pollution, scientists disagree, oil companies work for public progress …
It is a cliche to say that nothing is completely black or white. “Luke says, “I know there is good in him…” It is a reason to “turn the other cheek” It is a set up for the triumphant struggle where good overcomes evil. Sadly it is also a ploy. “Come here little girl, do you want a cookie?” “Oh he is a nice man…” Later… “Yes, my husband beats me but I know that there is good in him…” I am sorry if I refuse to be like the little girl bribed by a cookie when I hear arguments that speak of the honesty or integrity of the oil industry. Oh, they can be dealt with but it is not by starting with the thought that “they are nice people, they only beat me a little, I need them.” They are not my family, they are not my friend.
@ Breath on the Wind
Clearly you are a moralist, and see everything through a prism of stereotypes. That’s not meant as a derogatory description, just an observation that you may not be totally objective.
I know a lot of people in the Oil Industry. Western oil company executives are just mean. The same sort of people who reach the senior ranks in any large corporation.
They are neither saints, nor “evil”, some are responsible, insightful people, with good judgement, others are the same ego driven, flawed personalities you find in any large organization.
Your analysis of how oil companies regard the departure of ‘ethical’ investment shareholders, is naive. that’s not intended to be condescending, it’s a reasonable belief given your information is derived from media articles.
In fact, most oil executive would be glad to see the departure of “ethical” shareholders who are an awkward group and often create public relations problems.
Most investors and shareholders, simply want to make money. No industry has ever produced the consistent profits created by oil companies.
The Trustees of one large Pension trust were recently sued successfully by beneficiaries, for divesting investments from the oil industry to renewable. Unfortunately, most of the renewable energy investment either yielded very poor income, or lost considerable sums as many of the investment had fallen into bankruptcy.
The beneficiaries were naturally upset that their income payments became so small, and they could no longer afford to live.
The Judge hearing the case referred to the observation made by the President of Harvard when he stated, ” It’s not appropriate to use Investment Trust funds as an instrument to impel social or political change “.
But I have a soft spot for shareholder activists. I met my late wife during a protest demonstration at one of my client’s AGM. She was a young, passionate student, and along with other demonstrators had bought enough shares to be entitled to attend the AGM they planned to disrupt.
She was being arrested by some harassed police, when I intervened. The police responded to my conservative dress, and calm air of authority, learned during my years as an officer in the army, and released her to my custody.
Over the next few hours as she angrily explained that she wasn’t grateful and hated me for depriving her of her right to be arrested for beliefs, she discovered that fighting with me was more fun than with the police, and we got married 6 weeks after meeting, and spent the next 16 years together until her untimely death.
Each time I see our daughter championing some deserving cause or another, I see how much see has grown to resemble her mother.
Most of my interest in the environment and clean tech investment, was at the instigation of my late wife. I hope when I retire my daughter (if she wishes) can run the foundation we established and continue her mothers passion.
Marco, I am sorry for your loss. Your former wife no doubt had a tempering affect on your outlooks.
I have not seen reports describing Elon Musk as “mean” but would consider him to have reached, ” the senior ranks [of a] large corporation.” Perhaps your enthusiasm caused you to “see everything through a prism of [a] stereotype”
By your own admission oil companies are “different” yet you seem to have a certain affection for them. Could this possibly be due to a working association? Could this possibly lead to an “observation that you may not be totally objective.”
“Moralist” has several definitions. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/moralist I would plead guilty to being “a philosopher or writer concerned with moral principles and problems,” though not exclusively. That would make me a “sometimes moralist” which may not be a moralist at all. But when it comes to the part of the definition that suggests a moralist is someone “concerned with regulating the morals of others.” I am far more miserable a creature. I don’t care what you think or how you act. You could be an absolute fool and act in the most depraved ways and because it is not my job, I will probably do no more than act with somewhat condescending pity on your deplorable state. No, I think I would have to aspire to be a moralist by that definition.
But somehow you see me as a “moralist” which seems to be warped around some thought of steriotypes. Perhaps because you are unfamiliar with the difference between “steriotypes” and “archetypes.” Somehow you have also managed an oddly prescience belief that my understanding of how oil companies regard the departure of investment is “derived from media articles.” But for the second time you protest “that’s not intended to be condescending” I will leave that to Shakesphere who wrote “Methinks thou dost protest too much.”
Media articles are information. But like people they often contain much more than what is on the surface or what might be gathered with a more than superficial reading. I have enjoyed both classical and non academic training and from this I offer a glimpse of a different way to view the world. You have taken it as a personal threat and as has been done in the past, lashed out personally. I see your struggle and your attempt to justify the conclusions of your experience, but I don’t care. It is you who have to make that choice.
Clearly you have a lot of valuable experience and insights. But it is sad when our “wealth” becomes our burden and our history blinds us to the future.
Marco, you really don’t need to hear anything more from me. If you are curious you might find new insight in what I have already written, but I won’t disturb you further.
“Government survive on tax revenue and economic prosperity. This is especially true in the US with it’s absurdly short lower house electoral cycle. Oil companies are the largest single taxpayers in the US, and the most valuable source of revenue.”
No, governments survive on belief, a fiction of which tax revenue and economic prosperity can be evidence. Another belief is that “If I don’t pay my taxes or do try to overthrow the government, I will be murdered by a government trying to protect its life.” We have a belief structure we call a constitution, a body of laws and a history of judicial decisions. We believe precedent should govern our lives. We are shocked when it doesn’t happen but believe it will never affect us.
In another system we believe that everyone must do whatever the war lord wants. Another system survives by believing in spreading terror and chopping off the heads of those who seem to oppose its rule.
The lower house election cycle is short if you “believe” that corruption is not a problem. You mentioned that oil companies are the “largest single taxpayers” Then you go on to state your “belief” that oil dollars regardless of the amount or size are somehow “more valuable” than those of the poor or charitable or good individuals.
I wonder at priorities that “believe” corporate money is somehow “more valuable” than that supplied by real people.
@ Breath on the Wind
Ok, you seem to have misunderstood my meaning, and maybe that’s my fault because I didn’t make myself clear.
So I apologize and will clarify your misunderstanding.
1) Oil industry Tax revenue is more valuable because it can be assessed on a ‘daily’ estimate, and used to guarantee bond issues etc, as a compounding equation. (like reverse compound interest). It’s the nature of the collection stream that makes it more valuable, not the source.
While charities pay no tax. They do relieve the taxpayer of the expense of providing services and amenities.
It has nothing to do with ‘morality’, simply the machinery of public financial intricacies.
2) The reason why I think the term of members of the US (and some states) House of Representatives is absurdly short, is it creates a situation where a Representative is forced to be stuck in a perpetual election campaign.
No sooner is the candidate elected, than he must start raising money and campaigning to get re-elected ! Extending the term in the lover house to four years, would relieve a lot of pressure on members and allow the voters more time to assess the Rep, when not campaigning.
It would also provide more time for Reps to work among their constituents. It would also make candidates less dependent on campaign funding.
# Marco Polo
Marco you said that the Greens have never campaigned against the bad out of date policy concerning Dirty Bunker Fuel for shipping. Do you have any ideas as to why they have avoided this entrenched policy and fuel?
To add to what you poted , most of the worlds Oil is now controlled by State Oil co and they are pushing the big majors around. I think only 12 to 14 % of oil reserves are controlled by the private sector players. How things have changed?
The state controlled oil entity’s say they are more concerned about National Interests with the resource an want more of the revenues.
Concessions to private sector co are less favorable than in years past.
What is your take on these new developments ?
Glad you believe in strong regulations , do you believe in heavy fines are in order when needed to herd the greedy cattle?
take care
Hi Silent Running,
I think Green Party policies are designed to appeal to local politics, and attract votes for local politicians. Complex issues detract from the emotive motivations of their support base.
State owned or partly owned oil companies are even less interested in environmental concerns than the independent majors. Competition between state sponsored and (usually western) privately controlled corporations is very fierce. But the Western Major oil companies are, so far, ascendant in advanced technology.
Regulation should be strong, and penalties must be effective, but fair and appropriate. Penalties should be imposed to make corporations obey regulation, not ideologically based punitive measures.
@ Marco
Got it thanks
As you have said the failure of many Movements comes from dis array from within and lack of focus. Yeah they do tend to concentrate on local issues and miss the Bigger Picture so they dilute their effectiveness
The weak side of some so called Liberals – Speak about much but dont Stand for the right Issues Not all the time but some times and they hurt the good causes as result my take later thanks
@ Breath On the Wind
Thank you for another articulate breakdown and explanation of the complexities of public policy , taxes and big oil co’s tax and control over the legislative process.
You make real good sense .
Exxon own scientists identified issues with methane, co 2 in 1979 from the ocean research work they did for a few years. They hid all this for 30 years plus.
They lobbied and paid money to lobby against regulations on climate change . Their former staffers who did the work and are now freed from the employment disclosures limits are free to tell the TRUTH to their Dark Actions. How Fitting!
They bribed technical mercenary’s ( nothing has changed since inception of time – whores can be bought sometimes real cheap ) they are always willing to perform the hangman or Master’s Bidding that War Lord mentality you mentioned. There are no labor shortages of greedy motivated losers out there Hacks.
Your words Well Said I am just being blunt.
So Exxon stalled and distracted the debate by more reasonable people. The legal process was circumvented and this is NO Casual Manner and it Borders on High TREASON from a National Security standpoint.
OUR DoD HAS said Global Warming is a National Security Issue and Billions of our precious tax dollars are going to waste due to Exxon’s Corporate GREED and LIES.
The whole co should be on Trial and if brings them down so be it. Others will rise up from the ashes and the industry w REFORM itself or face similar fates!
The type of Lobbying is not a healthy practice given its current negative impacts and constraints ( too many to state)
Thanks Breath On The Wind for illustrating what is Wrong later
@ Marco Polo
I lean with Breath On the Wind – resent being dismissed as Moralist. If we had more morality things would be better off all around.
The Investor class is not above the Moral Bar that is the Point not all this defense of the indefensible .
Nice Story on your late wife. Regret your loss . I say join your daughter and concentrate on doing good change.
As for your comments on the negative consequences of the short election cycles- you are right . That is one of the ROOT Casues of the broken american political system. That with excessive funding, lobbying and gerry mandering.
The month after the presidential election the news media begin stirring the pot for the next election and it is mindless conter productive and is why our system is Broken.
One last thing so called term limits may have a place but we lose much Institutional Knowledge and Wisdom and Policy is longer term that a 2 year election cycle. Longer election cycles and then perhaps under careful structure some form of term limits.
Issues are Complex and 2 years is not appropriate to develop sensible policies that can SOLVE issues rather than Paper coat over them. Amen
Yes governments are hooked on revenues from all fossil fuels and in Wy they tax wind energy sales. I support those types of taxes they are justified and most likely should be raised so the pain is spread all around .
One obstacle I uncovered in my promotion of solar in Texas was told to me by the State people. They explained that Texas has lived off the tax revenues of oil and gas and solar right now does not bring in revenue to them so that is a Inconvenient Truth us Green Promoters must be willing to address.
Silent, we go to school and learn a little about history and how the constitution was organized. We may learn a bit about the “branches of government.” We could learn a bit about the functions of the senate and the house and why they are different and then graduate from Grammar school and depending upon your post HS education perhaps never hear of it again through HS or after. It is no wonder we forget much of what we once were exposed to upon a time.
If you were further schooled in politics or constitutional law you might have noticed that the Federalist Papers are a source to help determine the thinking behind the constitution. https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers They can be quite difficult to read and I won’t pretend to understand every nuance, but I do know a professor of political science who has occasionally taken a question. I also understand that some of the subjects can be extremely complex.
Without that knowledge someone might blurt out “term limits should be […]” We sometimes assume that because we don’t know something no one does. A wiser person might instead ask “Why were term limits set to […] for this house of congress?” It this way, a simple statement can act as a revelation and there is truth the statement attributed to Mark Twain, “It’s better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/409209-it-s-better-to-keep-your-mouth-shut-and-appear-stupid
Shorter term limits would tend to give more power to regulations and the civil service. Longer term limits would give a chance to examine long term issues. An extreme example might be the leadership of China planning for the next 50 years. Longer term limits would also tend to establish a ruling class and promote corruption.
But if the concern is being distracted by the election process then the problem may best be addressed with election reform necessarily term limits. Changing term limits to solve election reform may be a little like giving someone a promotion so that they can use the executive washroom which is closer to their desk. You may or may not solve the problem while you add a host of others.
@ Breath on the Wind
Interesting viewpoint. But I still can’t see the disadvantage of extending the term of the Lower House to four years.
I’m not saying disadvantages don’t exist, just I can’t see any. I agree it’s not a major reform, but I would contend a definite improvement. Accordingly, I’d be grateful if you could show me what disadvantages would come from such a measure ?
@ Breath On the Wind and Marco Polo
Nice reply and very polite Breath – You write very well and thanks for confirming my thoughts that you are a Writer as you write and express your self quite Well.
Your words below apply to all the others who defend the rigged system we have become Slaves to ….it need and it can be changed. We have Free Will ya know
Clearly you have a lot of valuable experience and insights. But it is sad when our “wealth” becomes our burden and our history blinds us to the future.
Well said , maybe Marco will re think his positions.
Silent, thanks for your kind observations. At some point however, compliments can become pandering. I am not sure where that line lies, but at some point it may be more valuable to assimilate than to express and then stay true to the name “silent running.”
Marco will rethink his positions or not, as he chooses.
@ Breath On the Wind and Silent Running
One of the problems in these debates is posts and replies get a bit of of sync sequentially.
As I wrote to Craig, at heart we all desire the same objective. We all want to leave our children a better, cleaner, more sustainable environment.
It’s my observation this objective is often obscured by political, philosophic and ideological distractions. I understand passionate advocacy can be a powerful motivating driving force for change, but sometimes advocacy can also be counter-productive, creating unnecessary diversion and dissension.
I try to bring my analytical training and experience to remain objective. I try to gain insight and understanding, and avoid judging events or circumstance through a prism of political, philosophic or ideological distortions.
I advance the following example of the difference in our interpretation of information, not as evidence of any superiority, but as an explanation of our different perspectives.
Both Breath On the Wind and Silent Running, along with many others, condemn Exxon for suppressing information regarding AGW in 1979. The advocates of this position are righteously outraged and see evidence of a continuing “evil” conspiracy by Exxon to continue making money from destroying the planet.
My perspective of these nearly 40 years old events is very differently. The CEO of Exxon at that time encouraged widely diverse research. However, by the time Lee Raymond became CEO the board of Exxon was receiving conflicting reports on the ” possible” contribution of fossil fuels to AWG, and even more conflicting reports on the effects.
In 1979 many highly qualified and reputable scientists disagreed with one another over this issue. Exxon spent considerable money and resources on scientific research, the result was some of Exxon’s scientists became outspoken advocates for AWG and throughout the 1980’s Exxon forwarded their results to scientific journals, academic and government agencies.
Other Exxon scientists, like Dr Roger Cohen, disagreed, citing computer modelling as immature and controversial. These ‘skeptic’ scientists appealed to beliefs of a rising executive who was being seen as a potential replacement for the increasingly accident prone and weak senior management.
By the mid 1990’s Exxon was encountering problems. The Exxon Valdez disaster,diversification failures, and the increasing challenges and fears of “Peak Oil” was absorbing the attention of Executives,shareholders and the public alike. In addition Exxon was being assailed by the arrival of new competitors from Russia, the PRC and other new State sponsored Oil companies.
In this climate of uncertainty Lee Raymond was a appointed CEO of Exxon. Lee Raymond remains, even in retirement, an outspoken critic and skeptic of AWG and Climate change. He’s also a deeply conservative advocate of right-wing politics and social conduct.
Lee Raymond and his supporters, changed the direction of Exxon. He closed down the billions being invested in researching bio-fuels and other non-core projects. Instead Lee Raymond demanded Exxon devote itself to developing new technology to solve the problem of “peak oil and gas”.
He also insisted that Exxon stop retreating from global competition, and aggressively compete with newly emerging oil conglomerates. The union with Mobil was just the start of a new aggressive era.
In these two objectives, Lee Raymond and his chosen successor, Rex Tillerson, have been stunningly successful. Exxon is financially and strategically stronger than ever.
History has proven Lee Raymond wrong in his assessment of AWG, but Exxon is not a government, his reasoning that Exxon should stick to what it knows best, producing oil products, remains valid from the perspective of the shareholders.
His argument that oil remains an essential component for the economic and stability of the planets population, remains valid and will for many decades.
None of that indicates any “conspiracy”. The only question that can determine if any conspiracy took place, is whether Lee Raymond, and Exxon concealed information for corrupt purpose ?
By any measure of the facts, Exxon concealed nothing. Exxon is not a government, nor a University. It spends money for commercial advantage, not public benefit. Nevertheless, did make available nearly all its research. Nor is it illegal for Exxon Lee Raymond to sponsor skeptic research and advocacy, any more than it was to sponsor pro-AWG research.
The only question Exxon must answer, is whether or not Lee Raymond was sincere in his decision making (but wrong) or insincere and acted out of self interest.
Being wrong, stubborn or even obtuse isn’t the basis for a conspiracy. He may be wrong, (even barking mad) but as long as he publicly announces his policies, he’s free to accept or reject any scientific information he believes is most credible.
Breath On the Wind and Silent Running, I understand that to a passionate environmental advocate, Exxon and Lee Raymond must appear like all powerful devil-incarnate type figures!:)
Personally, I’m not a fan of Lee Raymond. However, I believe to see things in correct perspective, we must set aside emotive judgements and focus on our objectives.
It really doesn’t matter what Exxon did, or didn’t do, 40 years ago, what’s important is the future.
My concern is that by continual focusing on who’s to blame, and arguing about theoretical solutions in the future, we ignore the very tangible things we could be doing right now to benefit the environment.
I put my faith in supporting beneficial clean tech solutions that can not only compete with older, less environmentally friendly technology, but help grow our economies so we can afford and implement even more clean tech.
I feel sorry for the US, at a time when the nation needs inspired uniting leadership, the candidates seem to consist of an old guy with the wrong answers, a populist with a lot of questions and no answers, and woman desperate to cover up the questions and answers !
In normal circumstances, none would be considered eligible to be a delegate, let alone a candidate.
But even politicians must respond to advancing technology. They can place impediments in the path, but in the end beneficial technology always wins.
Thank you for listening.
@ Marco and Breath On the Wind
Marco as usual you articulate positions in fine detail re Exxon and their Former CEO Mr Raymond. while your positions are full of reasonable logic they MISS the Greater Point!
That is our political and social constructs need to STOP Rationalizing and Appeasing and Obfuscating all the flaws of the Human condition etc. Corporations and their leaders who harm the public need to suffer the consequences. As Dopey W used to say we have Tough Love in Texas , though it is only applied to the poor and minorities both selectively and corruptly!
Corporate historical information while informative and an a attempt at Context make make some sense – but at the End of the DAY EXXON is Guilty of harming the environment and thereby Harming the Public.
Where is the Responsibility and Accountability??? Selective Amnesia is a trait perfected by those GOMERS
God Knows our prison s ( for profit too) are over flowing with poor offenders whose fates and futures are doomed when Excessively paid CEO’s like Mr Raymond get $ 400,000 million in retirement .
I will not waste many words attacking that Excessive Elitist . It speaks Volumes to the Moral Bankruptcy of the system we live in period end Of Story.
Exxon hid the Truth if their Executives and Board of Directors were decent human beings or Even the Great Executives they and their Ilk claim they would have re packaged the company and shifted into other green technologies and they like BP and SHEll could be the leading Green Energy Providers and they would still be making money.
Realize they had the Capital Structure to make the shift and we do need real energy providers which they have been. Since that time these firms have lost Billions Billions due to their addictions to out of date business practices.
Several studies have been done on how these firms could have charted a great new course. so you tend to defend the indefensible from my view.
Perpetuating the Broken fragmented scourges that plague us all no matter what political persuasion one may have, hinders our collective efforts to Change course Reduce carbon burning and implement more efficient energy systems upon which the entire world’s economies and social constructs depend on !
Marco here are two more Exxon Serious Sins for your considerations.
The Exxon Valdez incident resulted in over paid Parasitic lawyers and worthless parser’s of the English Language making obscene and un necessary sums of money defending and lying for Exxon while the native and white fishermen industry owners and workers suffered significant economic damage. Most of them have never recovered , read the stories. Collatteral Damages in the Wake of Corporate Greed and Incompetence.
In Far Western Wyoming there are 2 Large Natural Gas Fields that Exxon has operated for over 30 years. One is called the Shute Creek Project, I forget the other . These plants treat the natural gas for High Levels of H2 S as it is much to high for pipeline transmission , etc. Massive amounts of CO 2 are sent into the sky thereby hurting the environment. Exxon refused to address it while their cash registers rang up more Profits.
The State Government of Wyoming in Bondage to tax revenues from fossil Fuels Nodded and Winked and allowed this to go on for decades! So much for those Illusionary Family GOP values! Perhaps they are Virtual ?
Finally Anadarko Oil in the mid 2003 time frame or so was able to get a contract to siphon off 30 % of the exhausted volumes and pipe it East across WY to use the CO 2 for Enhanced Recovery from seriously depleting legacy oil fields in central Wyoming. That line now is being extended North towards Montana as the fields are in POST PEAK decline.
A few years ago with much corporate Hallabaloo Exxon announced that they were going to Expand CO @ capture and pipeline more into the market.
The damage they have done over the 35 to 50 years ?? dismissed as not our corporate profit seeking responsibility !
My question to you is What gives company’s like Exxon and others the Right to perpetuate global warming, and slowing the transition away from dirty fuels like Coal .
People of my Persuasion say nothing justifies this and we should tax them to death if need be the world can do fine with better players.
Mr Raymond should be a water boy at a prison if I had my druthers. He and chumper dumper could make water delivery to their fellow inmates a great service again.
It’s time to Seize It! Use the money for green energy and SMR’s and Efficiency and Water and food Projects . Close Coal plants by helping the utilities make the transition.
It is no wonder that Social Populist Movements ( not chump trump he is no real populist he is just a manipulator of feeble minds) and Anti business and Anti Establishments are Rising Up against the MACHINE – stay tuned more is coming .
Regrettably our system is not about such common sense justice as Mr Raymond and other retired corporate Parasites are flipping stocks and underwriting more dirty energy projects or funding crooked politicians who continue the broken system we live under.
Breath On Wind… You went off into the Constitution something related to the term limits debate I think.
I lean toward Marco that we need more continuity in our Congress and short term limits may appear on the surface to be a slogan friendly solution devoid of serious contemplation of the law of Un Intended Consequences.
Too much churn in our Elected leaders and POLICY Makers ( yes Policy matters) leads to reactionary laws and bad decisions and policy to the Highest bidder. Which we already have.
Exhibit A is TEA BAGGER Types who whine and Whine and run off to collect their Social SS and Medicare checks but rationalize it away as their White Privilege when called Out !
the idea that we need to move people after a reasonable time has merit. What is Reasonable has not been decided?
I don’t think re reading the Constitution has anything to do with this s conditions have changed totally. Evolution is a good thing.
California has serious policy issues and some log jams because of term limits that were not thought thru. Now Lobbyists make the policy because the issues are too complex and their historical context gets lost in the sloganeering of the new elected members, then reality w set in and it gets tough to get things Done.
I dont know what the right level of term limits should be. Yes some checks and balances are needed but it needs to be thought thru.
Marco points and I agree The short 2 year election cycle is a Big Flaw we have. Needs addressing. But also Gerry Mandering , campaign funding and other things all need to factored into the solutions.I think you have said that too Breath ..
We would get rational carbon policies and some better balanced policies from both the Dems and the GOP and other parties that form.
Breath , I don’t need to go back to school to understand the Constitution. Your suggestions were condescending in references to the out of date and imperfect thing called the US Constitution . I will leave it at that and it would be more Valuable for input related to GOP holding on to coal and other dirty fuels, technologies or how crooked politics lead to bad policy and why it all conspires to make it hard to clean up our World, which is how this discussion started.
BTW the US constitution lacks credibility among-st many Americans who have read , educated them selves both in schools and in the REAL World of Work and Training. Becasue we have lots of Education, Common sense and Yes GRAVITAS we feel the following:
One of the most common phrases I hear is 1. It was written by a bunch of upper class landowners who wanted to take over the export businesses that the British East India Co was making money doing, So it was profit inspired packaged as a Freedom document , though is has some components of that. 2. All were White men 3. Most were Slave owners 4. It labeled Native Americans as sub human calling them Savages set the STAGE for Genocide 5. It categorized Blacks as not having full human being status as 2/5 or some fraction humans so they dont count. 6. Women were not allowed to vote
And the BS 2nd amendment that extremists and gun infatuated insecure types Scream and Holler about the most and misunderstand and misinterpret its Real Meaning .
Yes we should be able to have some guns etc. But the real reason for the 2nd Amendment was FOR SLAVE PATROLS AND TO KEEP CONTROL of the BLACK SLAVES That were running off the BRUTAL Slave Plantations and Joining the British Army during the War. The British to their credit took close to7,500 or so of these people off to Nova Scotia and Bahamas after the war. Only Lord Cornwallis turned over the Blacks who were fighting for him. Spineless fella!
Yes sir Breath that ol constitution has lots of Pauses and False Clauses in it. It needs to be really redone by more enlightened people include Women too for a More enlightened Time with all of our Modern technologies etc etc . And Slavery is Not allowed , well formal slavery is not allowed but we have plenty of economic / social slavery going on for sure.
Truth be known the only way to get certain States the Big slave States to sign the constitution was to add the Flawed Slave Patrol 2nd Amendment.
The cognitive political dissonance that surrounds all this is Endless.
You may not like these Inconvenient Truths related to the Constitution but they are quite Educated positions
the current constitution needs UPDATING TO REALITY of TIMES
Peace have good days
@ Silent Running.
You will get no argument from me that Fossil fuels are not, by nature, industries fraught with environmental risks and challenges. Like most human inventions the downsides are often ignored as long as the upsides are considered more beneficial.
Oil companies are no different than any other enterprise. It’s the duty of governments to calculate and impose regulations. If those regulations become too oppressive or onerous, or weak and ineffectual, then government will eventually lose the endorsement of it’s electorate (if a democratic representative system) or endorsement by the power structure in an authoritarian system.
Like all matters relating to human affairs, nothing works perfectly. Oil company directors are required by law to obey the rules as they exist and actively pursue the best interests of shareholders.
There are those who argue the phrase “best interests ” implies a wider meaning, while others argue a stricter definition. Like everything in Law, it becomes a matter of “reasonable” interpretation. Then again, the word “reasonable” must be interpreted, and so on,…providing much work for lawyers and philosophers :)!
Like Exxon, Shell and BP’s foray’s into diversification, including alternate energy produced some useful innovations but resulted in heavy financial losses.
Lee Raymond took over Exxon after the Exxon Valdez disaster. Every year Americans spill more oil filling garden equipment than was spilled by the Exxon Valdez, (and create more environmental damage) yet no one complains or is outraged.
I understand your desire to lessen AWG/CC emissions, I share your concern and aspirations, but disagree with your idealistic vision of how to achieve such a goal.
As CEO, Lee Raymond couldn’t “transition” Exxon away from oil. Not only wouldn’t his shareholders have allowed such a transition, but Exxon would have become so weak and financially uncompetitive it would have fallen prey to it’s competitors.
The only reason the US isn’t currently in deep economic recession and losing even more ground to foreign competitors, is thanks to Exxon. By concentrating on Oil and Gas technology, Exxon and the other Western Oil Companies have overwhelmed OPEC and created US energy independence.
Such victories come at a price. The price is heavy, but most would argue the alternate would be even worse.
When ever philosophers, moral idealists and dreamers congregate there’s always one awkward outsider who bring down the mood by asking “how ?” and persisting in requiring details.
Regrettably, that’s what I do for a living. I’m a financial and business analyst. I ask how does it work ? It’s heartbreaking to see how many well-intentioned, highly educated people fail to understand that nothing exists in a vacuum.
We live in very interconnected world. Once having recognized a problem, any proposed solution must fit all the dynamics to be of practical value. Any solution, no matter how worthy or elegant, that isn’t practical, shouldn’t be pursued.
Unfortunately, advocates of “solutions” become so emotionally committed to the “solution” they lose objectivity and start to ignore inconvenient dynamics, instead invent imaginary replacements.
That’s okay when it’s only there own money or time they waste, but sooner or later they want other people, usually the taxpayer, to support their alternate reality.
The world needs all it’s different types of personalities, from hard headed pragmatists to idealistic dreamers. Human civilization is based on a constantly shifting balance of dynamics and contradictions.
Through debate and discussion we gain inspiration and learn greater perceptive. No one has a monopoly on truth or vision.
Some years ago I developed a stomach ulcer. My doctor prescribed treatment and explained the causes as being stress related and excessive lifestyle, rich food, alcohol etc.
For over 100 years this diagnosis was held to be correct by a consensus of leading scientists and medial experts. Other theories were dismissed as unscientific.
It seemed to be a sensible and accurate analysis, supported not only be science but also the vaguely moral view that the patient “deserved ‘ the condition for their transgressions and lifestyle.
That was until two Australian doctors, Barry Marshall and Robin Warren discovered that most stomach ulcers are caused by a bacterium Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori), and treatable with antibiotics.
Despite this discovery being well documented and established by every possible scientific analysis, ( Marshall and Warren won a Nobel Prize) there is still a huge number of practitioners and people who reject this treatment in favour of the older, more moralistic approach.
Just as there are those who reject evolution etc. Believing in creationism isn’t harmful, or “wrong” , until adherents insist on others adhering to the belief in publicly funded institutions.
Hating and castigating oil companies, is fashionable but I would argue a bit pointless. I’m continually amazed by the ability of people to blame others for their own transgressions.
Exxon sells a product you buy. Carlos Ghosn listened to the millions of people who said if only a company produced a small EV commuter vehicle, they would eagerly buy. Mitsubishi believed in the same studies, opinion polls, focus groups etc.
Green advocates vociferously castigated the automakers for denying the public the right to buy zero-emission EV’s. the completely inaccurate conspiracy theory film ‘Who killed the Electric Car’ became a cult hit with millions of devoted fans.
Mitsubishi and Renault-Nissan listened and produced a range of EV models. The result was predictable. Sales were abysmal ! Even with heavy government subsidies and incentives, the billions invested produced no profits for the automakers, and most of the hopeful start-ups collapsed into liquidation.
The most idealistic, verging on an almost religious fervour, “Better Place” collapsed in welter of broken dreams.
The reason was always obvious. What people respond to in a survey, or loudly demand from others, doesn’t necessarily translate to making personal sacrifices.
Today, despite the astonishing determination of Carlos Ghosn, and amazing achievement of Elon Musk, EV’s constitute less than 0.5% of vehicle sales, and 0.01% in markets lacking substantial government incentives.
Recently on this very forum, I asked how many participants owned an EV. I found myself the only EV owner ! ( I live in Australia with no government incentives, and I bought my UK EV before the UK government rebate was announced).
I don’t condemn others for not supporting my choices, I’m sure everyone has a reasonable justification for continuing to buy from Exxon or it’s competitors.
All I do ask, is that advocates carefully consider all the complexities on how to implement the changes the demand, along with a reasonably objective assessment of the practicalities before asking for support.
I also ask that people spend more time focused on achievable environmental goals, than ignoring what can be done, in favour of advocating impractical, grandiose dreams.
Is that too much to ask?
Marco thanks for a polite reply. While our Johari’ window and lenses may differ there is some common ground more than not.
I just don’t get the long defenses of known violators of good practices. why should a Corporation get a Pass for ill gotten gains and pushing off the Externalizes onto the Public Commons.
Its beyond being either idealistic or a moralist versus a go along to get along position.
What makes Oil co special ? Why the exemptions to common sense Rules . As I said the DOD US defense says that global warming is a threat to National Security so violations or bad practices like I outlined for you Undermine National Defense.
The Wyoming example is clear evidence of a corporation out of control and deserving of serious corrective fines.
Your dismissal of the damage done to honest hard working fishermen in Alaska by Exxon is alarming! Oh well hope your sfe in Australia a country that keeps spinning in and out its Prime Ministers seems like the politics there are fluid and people are confused.
You got lots of sun , gas to export , but some could balance out your So Wind farms and soalr farms and your energy needs would be it seems in good shape.
You can still export your coal to China and others as long as they buy it but ration your gas as your country will need it.
As far as Exxon saving the US from Arabs oil ?? not Accurate Sir.
The independents find most of the new shale oil and gaas, Yes Exxon and Shell and Conoco , BP have their hands in it most of the volume is done by Mid majors and minors. Many minors are going bankrupt now as are some Mid majors. The pain has climbed upwards into the Big players with people like Conoco laying ff around 6,500 last 18 months. Haliburton and Schlumberge have also made steep cuts .
The big guys have some assets but mostly they buy product from the Mid Majors and smaller players like Pioneer Resources in West Texas. They are one of the very few shale play players that can a profit with $25 per barrel oil. As their retiring CEO ssays we make it work but cant expand at that low margin. But their success is not Universal to many other Shale Oil plays. It is geology and VINTAGE specific. Vintage is the real driver. This has much to do with the cost of the lease or land where they want to drill.
Pioneer always bought excess land from the big guys when there is a Bust in market. They spent some money stockpiling leases ON the Cheap in 1980’s when most people needed cash flow and were dumping assets.
Pioneer is successful for many reasons but two relate to the environment.
They bought slightly higher precision lab analytical services to ensure aquifer and water resource protection before they opened up a field.
While other co cut corners they did not so they have less interference from State agencies and get buy in to their projects. Smart and Good Stewardship.
They realized very early in the shale game that the water usage and the water disposal cost and environmental issues Could Not Be Ignored or Externalized to the Commons .
Smart to know it would be Bad for future business and bring the Blow Back that fracturing is now facing. Well deserved Blow back I add.
So they worked with various small water treatment co’s and over the past 5 years have developed systems that recycle all the contaminated produced waters and they dont have to waste more drinking water. Most wells take 4 to 5 Million gallons.
So that is some of the secrets to their success. They practice stewardship so all these money loving firms should be doing the same. What do you say about that.
Demand is States is down we have plenty stored in reserves and the tanks are flush , they cant sell enough right now, need prices to go higher or more pain is coming .
The greed of industry motivated them to lobby the congress to allow oil exports last year , many believe that is a short sided deal time will tell.
The reason the oil co are so slow to respond to better practices is that they have invested Billions into future reserves as that is how the casino called the stock market sets valuations . How much future reserves does a firm claim to have . it causes the players to rig the numbers to show potential more profits and keep the investment money flowing.
That money scam is now collapsing in the shale gas world with over 65 bankruptcies in the US alone and many banks are going to get caught short with worthless Junk Bonds as are Investors. Wall St funded overly optimistic reserve estimates and the like.
its like the real estate crash same thing except the land is a oil or gas lease.
I would not give Exxon much credit for any of the good developments.
Other players in the aggregate made the supply balance go positive. Plus Obama finally got Fuel Efficiency standards raised 6 years ago it is starting to kick in.
As we talked earlier EVs will not sell like Hot cakes until the price comes down, the price of gas goes up and people get more concerned about reducing pollution. It should come in mid 2020’s
Maybe you could send Craig a note we need a discussion on Oil and Transportation or what laws we should have on fracking and water usage . SMU college in Dallas finally released technical reports ( many of us already knew the findings ) trying to determine the impacts of excessive produced waters being injected into the disposal wells. Both Oklahoma nd N Tex have been having small earth quakes for past 5 years.
Well the findings SAID YES , the pressure from disposal wells are related to earthquakes. So there it is.
Regulatory Under sight and bad practices have consequences
I see nothing wrong in calling it like it is. If it is being a Moralist then so be it. I call it being responsible ethical business person period
America has plenty of cell space waiting for the Lee Raymond s of the world.
later on Marco take care
Silent: I haven’t taken the opportunity to say hello and thank you for your excellent insights. Let me rectify that. I appreciate your being here.
Hi Silent,
My reference to Exxon breaking OPEC power, was in regard to the thousands of amazing advances in oil/gas exploration, extraction, site/well management and refining technology.
Exxon was the first of the majors to concentrate all it’s energy and resources back into it’s core product. Exxon feared Western companies were losing the race with the PRC and Russia, (or even total)by becoming distracted by investment in other industries.
Oil is just a commodity like any other. The industry will always go through periods of boom and bust.
The oil industry is divided into three sectors, upstream, midstream and downstream. The safest and most solid are those majors who are fully integrated across all three levels. The less integrated, the higher the profits in good times, but the higher the risk.
Investors need a lot of due diligence to swim in such treacherous waters !
I commend your compassion for the unfortunate fishermen and residents of Prince William Sound. Disasters like this can have a devastating effect on small communities. The Prince William Sound disaster is particularly serious because it was completely avoidable. The chain of negligence that led to the disaster is typical of corporations where maintenance and management have grown slack.
Human error is always the hardest to accept, because it’s so avoidable, but then so human !
As to “stewardship” , once we agree oil remains an essential resource in the immediate future, and certainly the main underpinning of the economy for decades to come, the next question becomes how to best mitigate the downsides ?
Obviously, governments must continually upgrade and monitor regulations, while keeping the industry sufficiently profitable to invest in new and cleaner technology.
The US EPA claims there’s nothing amiss with fracking technology as such, but it does point to the need for stricter regulations and better monitoring of smaller operators.
The industry has suffered from the activities of a lot of ‘cowboy’ operators, using inappropriate practices. this has given rise to a lot of wildly exaggerated or false claims about the technology in general.
At the present time, NG is the best replacement for coal.
Water treatment is an industry growing in importance and deservedly so ! Every time I see an article or news of better water technology, I’m not only interested but assured that at least some people are getting the message.
Keep safe, and never lose heart !
@ Craig and @ Marco Polo @ Frank E
Good Evening returned from the Field of Opportunity with the satisfaction that progress on a couple of Energy Efficiency Programs was made with my young and energetic partner on a Geo Thermal HVAC project which we are Collaborating.
Got online and wanted to acknowledge my positive pleasure on receiving two very nice notes from Craig and Marco.
Thanks for the common spirit expressed and Craig pleased postings have your Favor. Marco and Frank both write topic rich Posts and they over stimulate my mind and leads to longer Posts than I intend to do.
So Craig your Platform is reaching some of its goals.
Once this dark election chaos is passed the internal rage that dwells within from all the years of trying to make positive change and encountering the layers and layers of entrenched resistance and the continued ignorance that is part of the game will subside .
It is my wish that more contributors will join in. The topic created a political component of the coal and bigger energy debate. I commend you for putting it out there and I sure have shared my views on Gomers just based on real world track record that they have on holding back the Transition to moving away from carbon fuels.
There is much to learn , contemplate and absorb from many of the posters.
Thanks Craig take care I will be back in touch
Marco I will respond to you in a day later Your UK Roots are part of your Character and the Australia Part was your Creativity zone good mix.
@ Marco
Too much to say but Exxon was not the father of Directional drilling with 3 D imaging and a couple of other enhancements along with the Fracturing process. A Tex co based in Humble tex invented the directional drilling concept and has gotten well deserved rich off selling the license to the other players.
I forgot the name of the man responsible but most of the good ideas that move the ball forward come from small or mid sized co’s.
Both Schlumberger a french Co and Cheney’s former co Haliburton really enhanced the drilling process but it came from a Texas Legacy wildcatter a legend. Forgot his co name.
The majors just deploy their accumulated capital to aquire reserves etc. They are big big but not Innovative as one thinks . Its called Serious critical mass.
For the topic of RepubliCons thats CONS aka Gomers continuing role in short sided energy policy or no policy. Excessive un regulated Fracking in Pennsylvania Black Swans appearing!!
As far as Cowboy activity goes – Former Democrat Gov of Pennsyslvania E Rendell is now lamenting NOT Speaking Up Louder in 2010 when the Marsellus Industrial Fracking Operation and converted some of Pennsylvania into a Industrial War Zone or Waste Zone! He was out of office but he wishes he had tried to intervene as the Gomer Gov allowed under regulation and lax water rules and under funded state agencies so nothing could get in way of Bidness .
the Gomer Gov also said NO to any severance taxes on the shale gas players. They di put in play a well tax to cover cost of soem regulators and inspectors.
Well its 2016 and now the water contamination cases are over 220 plus and they will grow in future years. leaking well heads from poorly done drilling completions etc. Of course many of the gold rush cowboys are bankrupt now and out of business.
so the State is paying for mitigation to state residents and land owners. Same state gomer legislature refuses to put severance tax into play like other Sane states ( except California hard to believe but true) Mean while some cities in PA are closing High Schools – what happened to the Manna from Heaven from gas the Bounty from the Earth !!! ??? COL COL crying out loud.
So yes Marco Cowboys and Gomers get in the way. Rendell is sponsoring rules that the new DEM Gov is trying to get into place to prevent further damage. They need a tax period well head fees are too low.
So once again Gomers allow private sector to privatize the profits and then socialize the costs . Regret if these Inconvenient Truths bust the Decades long Illusions about GOP and its so called efficiency !
peace
Hi Silent,
Yes indeed, your point is well made! It’s very important that responsible agencies and governments act quickly to encourage and regulate good practice.
Every new technology will encounter difficulties, even abuse, that’s part of the human condition. It’s very important that regulators work as early as possible with industry to impose regulations that assist in developing good practice, while not stifling innovation.
Don’t be too hard on the GOP, remember that it was a Republican administration that created the EPA.
@ Marco Polo
Good evening thanks for the similar reply. I don’t intend to be Hard on GOP those Gomers though keep making check marks in the Big Black Book kept on Energy & Environmental Positions.
To change the record they need to start putting check marks on the other side of the ledger. Its hard to Un learn how one should count!
Pennsylvania and its poor management of the development of the huge Marsellus Shale Gas fields is a classic case of Hubris and political homage to campaign donors blinding the political leadership to the need to put into place funding mechanisms over the industry so it could be a pay as you go system and best practices could be established before their are major issues. Its called proactive .
Now a Democrat must deal with it so the people in Pennsylvania will be ok as everyone is out of Denial , lets hope.
Same issue is happening in Colorado, Texas, Okl., NM., some parts of Wyoming and N Dakota and Arkansas, Alabama too. Many Shale gas and oil operators have left a mixture of contamination in their wake! It rivals the radiation tailings etc. from the 1950’s to early 1980’s uranium mining gold rushes. Lots of sites remaining to be mitigated etc. Legacy issues for sure. There was alot of Rape and Scrape of the Land!
Back to fracking in PA., Now they have to be reactive and it is costing money and the social costs for cleaning things up and mitigating damages to residents , rural landowners who in many cases did not participate in royalties or were strong armed by other neighbors into leasing their land or more of their land to the gas developer co’s back when the gas rush began and continuous land sections were needed for the gas plays. So some are innocent collateral victims and other s were participants cause they wanted to try and earn revenues from the gas flow which is fine.
The bankrupt gas wildcatter’s cut costs along the way and they hid behind weak over sight and now many are gone. They took the profits , filed bankruptcy and the social costs are spread among-st the public.
So this one example is just the Tip of the Socializing the Cost Iceberg.
On a personal note nice to learn of your roots. Your Father served in the African Desert Campaign and others as well as Normandy Invasion. Good he survived all that war action. Britain has much to be Proud of in respect to its Historical superior Military Actions.
So you got to Australia and yes UK declined for some time after the break up of the Commonwealth colonies. But don’t be too hard on them as they have managed to remain quite Relevant on the World Stage for many decades and their economy is the 5th or 6 th in World. They have evolved into a much more diverse and tolerant nation. I think if they get good leadership they will emerge from Brexit in better shape and forge new alliances , opportunities, etc.
I wish them a good outcome as Britain is needed on World Stage. The Aussie way is sorta like the American Cowboy way to a degree ,m robust and independent. glad it worked out for you. Australia is moving closer into the over expanded military sphere of the US as we are going to station Marines in N Australia soon part of this Asian Pivot scheme ?
My father was orphaned on the boat from Italy in 1915. Luckily he was placed in a Catholic Orphanage in Philadelphia and he became a self made man after a youth filled with severe hardships.
He served in W War 2 in Pacific and made 6 beach landings in several Islands. How fitting that you described Australia and New Zealand. I am sitting in my late father’s office and to my left on the wall is a picture of the nice Medical facility in New Zealand where he recovered from his wounds in 1944. Auckland location. He and some other American soldiers were saved during a daring rescue carried out by a mix of Royal Navy, New Zealand ships that got them off a Island under fierce Jap night attack.
he said it was one of the worst moments as they used a pontoon bridge of sorts to get out to the navy ships in the Bay. The waters were full of Sharks and everyone was afraid of falling into the water etc.
It was great he said when they reached the navy ships and climbed the rope ladders and got to the top and the British sailors yelled out welcome aboard Yank mates! Once the men in his battalion around 500 soldiers and some native fighters got aboard the ships the ships opened up fire with cannons on the Beach as the Japs were closing in. The rescue luckily had started early and thanks to the brave Navy men who laid out the pontoon bridge and came to the shore and guided the American soldiers and their wounded comrades to cross on the boats as the ships had to stay away from the shoreline etc.
A tight situation , and he said they laid on the deck of the Navy ships as they slowly churned away from Japs but a withering fire fight was on. Japs were out gunned as there were 4 ships with 4 and 5 inch guns. Japs had no field guns just machine guns and mortars etc. A close call.
A year later he got wounded and was in Auckland for 3 or 4 months.
His wounds from the war resulted in a bacteria getting into his internal cavity and eventually it grew and destroyed his nervous system around his spinal cord. he was 87 when he passed away. He had a great and full life and became a tax accountant. Positive character man. Was State Commander of the DAV in Texas.
Been meaning to share a thank you for sharing some of your personal history Enjoyed learning about your Journey. Thank you . Oh the invite to Australia is taken in a positive spirit Marco Polo.
Ironically perhaps My late father used to call me Marco Polo as I traveled in 44 States and so Canada during my career. I was able to drive over 1,000,000 miles in 44 states some flying of course but I drove in circles thru some large states. Like Montana I drove it East to West 4 times as example . Then Texas of course.
Anyways it was a great Blessing to see the land etc. and meet diverse folks and never have a accident etc. Blessed Indeed !
we commented on your other posts so lets keep exchanging and Frank came back later Marco
Hi Silent,
Your dad sounds like one helluva guy! What an interesting history.
Australia and NZ will always be grateful to the sacrifice and assistance provided to defeating the Empire of Japan. I’ve got some occupation money printed by the Japanese to be used in the occupation of Australia.
Unfortunately for the Emperors devoted followers their argument with Admiral Chester Nimitz and the US Navy didn’t turn out to be the victory they boasted ! The Japanese Navy certainly shouldn’t have persisted in challenging Admiral Nimitz and the US Navy at mid-way.
I served alongside US personnel in Vietnam. All joking aside, Anzac’s know deep in in their hearts, there’s no better ally than Uncle Sam.
Greetings Marco, finally get to see your comment and response to my response to the wonderful story of your Heritage.
So you fought in Vietnam glad you survived that as I lost many school chums there.
Thank you for the Excellent History of the Great Island Nation called Great Britain and their Yeoman efforts to reverse course , transform and end slavery. They don’t get the credit they deserve in the history books around here.
Britain has had many fine moments on the World Stage , all things considered they deserve a membership in the Hall of Fame of Nations for sure. I know many people who state that.
BTW they counseled America about Vietnam and not to escalate it. They were Wise not to engage.
Ironically they are the only Western nation to ever successfully engage and WIN a civil war insurrection by communists in Malaysia. Another Gold Star for their Excellent Record.
The mouthpieces for American Exceptionalism can never match these two deeds…
I thought you would enjoy my father’s tale I am looking at the Auckland Hospital picture now God My God its 72 years old or close to it!
His character and spirit was Relentless and his heart and Compassion for others Outstanding Indeed !
Par to the course the curse of his being a orphan and powerless continues to this day as his grave marker and that of my dear late mother in the National Cemetery at Fort Bliss are not marked properly.
After all the years of service etc they never painted his identity or my mother’s tombstone either. The Army is inconsistent in this as there are other deserving grave sites with similar – unmarked graves. Sad Failure of the agency that runs the Cemetery.
My brother and I offered to paint the tombstones in matching black , but we were warned that if we were to do this we would be charged and arrested for damaging Federal Property! and suffer the consequences. I even lobbied a Garrison Commander for whom I performed energy contract work and he tried but could not get anything done on this to correct the matter.
What a Travesty of Patriotism and another sign of a Broken Nation. Many Ironies and Failed Promises, too many to name them all….such is Life.
Perhaps it is American so called Exceptionalism in action! LOL COL LOL
Thank you for responding to the story as I did yours , without that Island rescue during the Great War I may never have been Born!
Hi Silent,
The neglect of your father’s last resting place is disgraceful. Regrettably, it’s an all too common complaint.
The treatment of returning Australian Vietnam Veterans, especially conscripts, was a national disgrace. Abandoned by the military, the government, hounded by leftists, abused by student activists, humiliated by leftist civil servants, and even worse denied the status of Returned Veterans by the RSL, (equivalent of VFW).
Tragic.
I also served briefly in the Malaysian campaign. A very different war.
Have you thought of writing to the Sloan Gibson Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs. I know he takes an active interest in resolving matters such as yours. Another Veteran with some influence is Senator John McCain, he helps the families of thousands of Veteran’s every year.
@ Marco
Thanks for the tips and I may look into that idea. Its a shame that carious people in different governmental agencies go off on their own agenda and stop serving the constituents they are charged with serving.
I turned against the Vietnam War but my crowd did not support all the negative and hurtful treatment to Veterans . Many misguided extremists over here hurt innocent drafted soldiers and caused divison in the country. Sad to learn about that happening in Australia as well. Not right. That sounded so wrong to not give the Veterans a status they earned , so politically correct but wrong. Darn the division lingers on.
I added to the other discussion and put some new info on Hinckley Point planned big nuclear station in UK , a status report.
Nu Scale the leading advanced nuclear SMR , w water . Not a molten salt version say they need to 2025 if all goes well w NRC to deploy commercially. etc. Their Executives said it will have been 25 years to get something developed and accepted by all the agencies and funders etc. That long regulatory process eats up co’s discourages investments. So it makes it tough but that is the way it is.
I forgot to ad that the closed Chernobyl Nuclear site in Ukraine that is a toxic wasteland is now going to be repurposed to a degree.
The Ukrainian Govt is dealing with 2 Western Solar Co to build large solar farms on the closed site. So the irony of that and its good Irony. I like it as I like solar.
So the Beat goes on. Thanks again for the Tip.
Politically it lead to a right Wing Blowback in various forms.