URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Renewable Revolution
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Hydrocarbon Industry Skullduggery 
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 12956--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: July 23, 2019, 5:50 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/7Iwt1Obw1A9OF4rmgyl-UYRo4MEJDf68gFtbGNW6JHUtpykjdICNc8oASCFbrYsucF5Fg17XbLG86FfHFO8yE4EkX6gjGVlOvmRAD7s5dGscLlHcisQ_pzhkscbiV_-D4oBdJi6nkSe_a2el9qT1VJhzoNSsAEZvHHg=s0-d-e1-ft#https://gallery.mailchimp.com/d1f5797e59060083034310930/images/2f11cead-050f-4018-bfed-c12fb45691e5.png[/img][/center]
       Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
  HTML http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7c84c08aaa<br
       />to subscribe.[/i]
       July 23, 2019
       SNIPPET 1:
       Bill &#129429; Wehrum, who resigned last month, met repeatedly
       with industry &#128009;&#129430; contacts who were clients of
       his former law firm while crafting significant policy for the
       Trump [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418203402.gif[/img]<br
       />administration, including last month’s rollback of the Clean
       Power Plan.
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185037-16401634.png<br
       />SNIPPET 2:
       Oddly though, the editorial acknowledges that the gas banning
       ordinance “contains a social-justice rationale” in its reference
       to the fact that the highest rates of asthma are located in
       “areas that were redlined pursuant to racist housing policies.”
       Yes, part of the reason to ban gas is to protect those who
       suffer its pollution, but no, that doesn’t mean the WSJ is going
       to take their health concerns to heart, as it references
       redlining only to hand-wave it away.
       For those young or privileged enough not to know already,
       redlining was an explicitly racist system of structural
       oppression in which black Americans were deliberately denied
       access to the federal government’s Home Owners’ Loan
       Corporation, which literally drew red lines around minority
       communities. As a result
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040718162656-14241872.gif,<br
       />economic development in those marginalized communities remains
       depressed, leaving property prices so low that these became
       obvious choices for
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418193910.gif<br
       />industry to locate dirty, polluting facilities that leave its
       neighbors struggle to breathe with disproportionately high rates
       of asthma and other ailments.
       The &#128181; &#127913; Wall Street Journal’s editorial,
       however, turns a blind eye to this classic, textbook example of
       systemic racism. Instead the piece downplays redlining merely as
       “bankers once didn’t lend to the poor,” once again revealing how
       &#128520; hands greased by &#129430; fossil fuels are awash in
       [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png[/img]<br
       />white supremacy.
       [center][img
       width=175]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-060914180936.jpeg[/img][/center]
       [center]Former &#129429; EPA air chief faces mounting scrutiny,
       military faces the rising heat, & more
  HTML https://mailchi.mp/3178155e2971/former-epa-air-chief-faces-mounting-scrutiny-military-faces-the-rising-heat-more?e=0fd17c5b57[/center]
       [move][I][font=impact]The &#129429;&#129430; Hydrocarbon
       &#128121; Hellspawn Fossil Fuelers DID THE Clean Energy
       Inventions suppressing, Climate Trashing, human health depleting
       CRIME,[COLOR=BROWN] but since they have ALWAYS BEEN liars and
       conscience free crooks &#129408;, they are trying to AVOID
       [/color]  DOING THE TIME or   PAYING THE FINE! Don't let them
       get away with it! Pass it on!   [/font][/I][/move]
       #Post#: 13069--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 2, 2019, 2:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=200]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-020818201645-1486464.jpeg[/img][img<br
       />width=30]
  HTML https://www.stickpng.com/assets/images/580b57fcd9996e24bc43c44c.png[/img]<br
       />[img
       width=180]
  HTML https://www.globalresearch.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Imperialism-supporters.jpg[/img][img<br
       />width=30]
  HTML https://www.stickpng.com/assets/images/580b57fcd9996e24bc43c44c.png[/img][img<br
       />width=200]
  HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-160619140243.png[/img][/center]
       TruthDig
       JUL 31, 2019 OPINION
       [center]The Inconvenient Truth About Migration the &#128520;
       Media Brush Off[/center]
       By Joshua Cho / [font=times new roman]FAIR[/font]
       SNIPPET:
       Bloomberg (7/5/19) offered the victim-blaming headline “Why
       Roots of US Border Crisis Lie South of Mexico,” and noted that
       Honduras and El Salvador have among the “highest murder rates in
       the world.” It depicted Central American migrants as seeking
       economic opportunity, noting that 60 percent of the population
       in Honduras and Guatemala lives below the national poverty line,
       and characterizing those countries as “a hotbed of poverty,
       corruption, gang violence and extortion.”
       In all these reports, the US’s contributions to the violence and
       corruption in Central America during the Cold War, and more
       recent US support for a 2009 military coup in Honduras deposing
       the democratically elected left-wing President Manuel Zelaya,
       and its funding for death squads in the country, are completely
       obscured. This despite the evidence (Migration Policy Institute,
       4/1/06) that US-backed violence in Guatemala, Honduras and El
       Salvador during the Cold War “institutionalized” a migration
       pattern to North America that had been “very minor” beforehand.
       But if these reports shrouded the connection between US
       &#129421; foreign policy and the “violence” and “unrelenting
       turmoil” in the region, they more deeply buried the connection
       between increasing violence and climate change.
       Full article: [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418200416.png[/img]<br
       />
  HTML https://www.truthdig.com/articles/the-inconvenient-truth-about-migration-media-brushes-off/
       Agelbert NOTE: And now a word from our "loyal servants", the
       &#129429;&#129430; Hydrocarbon [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-200714191329.bmp[/img]<br
       />Hellspawn:
       [center]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100216204839.gif[/center]<br
       />
       #Post#: 13072--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 2, 2019, 3:46 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       THINKPROGRESS
       AUG 2, 2019, 8:00 AM
       [center][img
       width=800]
  HTML https://ci4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/DsaIBbC5mBZ46bWzKdg-SpVhLY9IoKRBitnbJG82-DLUdAelqqUrPXkP9qiYW6pKIcr4FbtsFkdKuumMoEaXxZprcrP7GX2TnUpbJbR7emHqkEMqSvHWTw-7P9ZkI5uLfVXRP5XrQi0Qm0sHvcC9DJw=s0-d-e1-ft#https://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/GettyImages-electric-cars-China.jpg?w=600[/img][/center]
       [center]AERIAL VIEW OF ELECTRIC CARS AT KANDI ELECTRIC &#9889;
       VEHICLES GROUP CO. IN CHANGXING COUNTY ON OCTOBER 24, 2017 IN
       HUZHOU, CHINA. CREDIT: TAN YUNFENG/VCG.[/center]
       [center]Trump [img
       width=60]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301216165623.jpeg[/img]is<br
       />trying to kill electric cars but will kill jobs and the climat
       e
       instead[/center]
       
       By JOE ROMM
       SNIPPET:
       Two new analyses from Bloomberg this week make clear just how
       bad President Donald Trump’s policies are for the domestic
       electric car market and U.S. workers.
       In the first report, Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF)
       explains that Trump’s plan to roll back Obama-era fuel
       efficiency and emissions standards for vehicles would eliminate
       any federal requirement for carmakers to build electric vehicles
       (EVs). BNEF also explains that the deal Ford, Honda, Volkswagen,
       and BMW struck with California last week to avoid the full
       rollback will not undo most of the damage.
       In the second, BNEF concluded that the rapid price drops in the
       cost of batteries that have driven the energy storage and EV
       revolutions this decade will continue for the next decade. In
       short, while Trump can slow adoption of high-efficiency EVs in
       the United States, other countries — the E.U. and especially
       China — will simply keep adopting them so quickly that he cannot
       stop the global EV revolution. All he will succeed in doing is
       hobble job creation and the U.S. economy.
       Full article:
       [center]The global electric car boom can't be stopped, but
       Trump policies would insure U.S. workers miss out on it.
  HTML https://thinkprogress.org/trump-is-trying-to-kill-electric-cars-but-will-kill-jobs-and-the-climate-instead/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-letters[/center]
       #Post#: 13097--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 3, 2019, 5:08 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       THINKPROGRESS
       [center]&#129429; Interior secretary will be allowed to meet
       with[b] &#129430; former fossil fuel clients starting this
       weekend[/b] [img
       width=30]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817134648.gif[/img]<br
       /> [/center]
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/jb1QwodTtnivUkeEKlVOPjEiRc2FCNm1u-VrIbc5doyV8G_OO3zwOQvMOVVO0TM2D0i1PDyhdpayH9wmUK9gyfCtVs5eOMUzwowbi38sRlSQtlkNwUOzX-UE-agvFT9t8UdvqVT8hZw=s0-d-e1-ft#https://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/GettyImages-1133268564.jpg?w=600[/img][/center]
       Prior to taking the helm at the Interior Department in 2017,
       Secretary David Bernhardt worked as a lobbyist for the oil and
       gas industry via the Colorado law firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber
       Schreck.
       When he joined the administration, he [img
       width=60]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-080419191019.png[/img]<br
       />agreed to recuse himself from certain matters on ethical
       grounds. His pledge banned Bernhardt from decisions involving
       his former firm’s clients for two years. Bernhardt was also not
       able to meet with these companies, unless five or more other
       stakeholders were present, and nothing relating specifically to
       the companies was discussed.
       But all of this is set to change on Saturday, when his recusal
       expires.
       Read more:
  HTML https://thinkprogress.org/interior-secretarys-ethics-pledge-is-set-to-expire-this-weekend-729e7e959374/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tp-letters
       #Post#: 13179--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 9, 2019, 2:45 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Excellent comment: [img
       width=40]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418202709.png[/img]<br
       />
       [quote]Shale oil production was never anything more than a
       scheme to extend and pretend this version of industrial
       civilization.  It was a jobs program in reality, employing many
       thousands of workers at good wages and supporting all the
       restaurants and car salesmen and home builders -- all on debt.
       Without shale oil production this global economy would have
       realized Peak Oil is here and now and collapsed years ago.  So
       the gambit worked, and is still working, but apparently not for
       much longer, as many of us who have kept tabs on the shale
       industry have known all along.
       Like everything else about this global economy, it was a debt
       fueled fantasy, and is nearing the point where all fantasies end
       -- when reality reasserts itself.
       [/quote]
       Fri, 08/09/2019 - 14:04 [img
       width=60]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-16281948.gif[/img]
       [center]Time Is Almost Up For U.S. Shale
  HTML https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-08-09/time-almost-us-shale[/center]
       [center][img
       width=300]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210316151047.png[/img][/center]
       [center][img
       width=100]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-010519192158-2201430.jpeg[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 13186--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 9, 2019, 6:13 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       EcoWatch
       Friday, August 9, 2019
       By Jessica Corbett
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://ci4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/xGVxXqEnez3p6Tysafrvmwki5VwRVCUbrZTE4QKbLjwkYpz1WcJCO2-1ecFCesDtayVhthdKDcWuXA6IfxxQ47dhzp8yWTnx0KPBVsmVJICm5aFoayRx945TnfKyc79WFM_qBGHkFl53xiJ0AedXUwYc8mUus-mr-E0=s0-d-e1-ft#https://gallery.mailchimp.com/214ab5fbb3f6015d74ffab4ec/images/52f6e6bf-747f-41b5-8ca9-b89ba9e3e911.jpg[/img][/center]
       [center]&#129430; ExxonMobil Accused of Pressuring Witnesses in
       Climate Fraud Case
  HTML https://www.ecowatch.com/exxon-climate-fraud-case-witnesses-2639740178.html[/center]
       #Post#: 13188--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 10, 2019, 11:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img
       width=150]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-170218174357.png[/img]
       By Mike Schuler on Aug 09, 2019 06:02 pm
       [center]Trump [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png[/img]<br
       />Delay Casts Doubt on First Big U.S. Offshore Wind Farm [img
       width=70]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818204546.gif[/img]<br
       />[/center]
       The &#129408; Trump &#129429;&#129430; administration cast the
       fate of the nation’s first major offshore wind farm into doubt
       by extending an environmental review for the $2.8 billion
       Vineyard Wind project off Massachusetts.
       The  [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-311013201314.png[/img]<br
       />Interior Department has ordered an additional  ;) study of the
       farm, proposed by Avangrid Inc. and Copenhagen Infrastructure
       Partners, Interior Secretary &#129430; David Bernhardt said in
       an interview with Bloomberg News Friday.
       &#129430; Bernhardt said it’s crucial the impacts be thoroughly
       studied. “For offshore wind to thrive on the outer continental
       shelf, the federal government has to dot their I’s and cross
       their T’s,” he said.
       [center][img
       width=650]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-111214174727.png[/img][/center]
       Read full story...
  HTML https://gcaptain.com/trump-delay-casts-doubt-on-first-big-u-s-offshore-wind-farm/
       Agelbert NOTE: This is that very same "former" ;) &#129430;
       Bernhardt Fossil Fuel Lobbyist who never seemed to have any
       concerns about the Federal Government's [img
       width=100]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-020818201645-1486464.jpeg[/img]<br
       />MASSIVE ABSENCE OF  dotted I’s and crossed T’s in regard to co
       al
       mines, offshore oil plaform spills and flaring pollution, land
       fracking caused poisoning of groundwater and air pollution from
       flaring. These Hydrocarbon Hellspawn bastards are WORLD CLASS
       HYPOCRITES! [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817134648.gif[/img]<br
       />
       Bernhardt is following in the footsteps of his hero, [img
       width=20]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-250817135149.gif[/img]<br
       />John D. Rockefeller.
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ddojs8sU8AA1M4B.jpg[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 13218--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 13, 2019, 5:48 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML https://ci6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/7Iwt1Obw1A9OF4rmgyl-UYRo4MEJDf68gFtbGNW6JHUtpykjdICNc8oASCFbrYsucF5Fg17XbLG86FfHFO8yE4EkX6gjGVlOvmRAD7s5dGscLlHcisQ_pzhkscbiV_-D4oBdJi6nkSe_a2el9qT1VJhzoNSsAEZvHHg=s0-d-e1-ft#https://gallery.mailchimp.com/d1f5797e59060083034310930/images/2f11cead-050f-4018-bfed-c12fb45691e5.png[/img][/center]
       Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
  HTML http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7c84c08aaa<br
       />to subscribe.[/i]
       Aug 12, 2019, 8:20 AM
       [center]&#129421; FBI Facebook stalking OR pipeline protesters,
       Germany pauses cash for Brazil, & more
  HTML https://mailchi.mp/83ec165e10e7/fbi-facebook-stalking-or-pipeline-protesters-germany-pauses-cash-for-brazil-more?e=0fd17c5b57[/center]
       #Post#: 13224--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 13, 2019, 8:13 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241216151049.png[/img][/center]
       [center]Trump's &#129408; Profits Will Tear Web of Life
       &#9760;&#65039; Apart! [img
       width=50]
  HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-300115234833.gif[/img]
       [/center]
       1,262 views
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/qPin_Wub9II[/center]
       Thom Hartmann Program
       Published on Aug 13, 2019
       [center]Donald Trump and his &#128520; billionaire,
       &#129429;&#129430; oil drilling buddies are trying to get rid of
       the Endangered species [img
       width=80]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418203111.png[/img]<br
       />Act. [img
       width=70]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818204546.gif[/img][/center]
       Biodiversity is the foundation on which all life depends,
       including human life.
       Biodiversity provides for our water, food, shelters, and health.
       It's the air we breathe, the nutrients we take in and the soil
       that our food is grown on.
       Now, with Trump’s attack on the Endangered Species Act, the web
       of life is more at risk than ever before. &#128561;
       [center][img
       width=240]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-100718164155-14511755.jpeg[/img][/center]
       [center][img
       width=340]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-301216142007.png[/img][/center]
       #Post#: 13270--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Hydrocarbon Hellspawn Mens Rea Actus Reus
       By: AGelbert Date: August 17, 2019, 10:24 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [center][img
       width=640]
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-241216151049.png[/img][/center]
       [center]Trump
  HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040718162655-14212306.gif<br
       />Endangers the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water
       Act[/center]
       August 16, 2019
       The protection of threatened species will now be weighed against
       the economic benefit their extinction might mean. Meanwhile,
       states would no longer be able to review the impact of projects
       on water quality, in accordance with the decades-old the Clean
       Water Act
       [center]
  HTML https://youtu.be/qlZcwGAT4ek[/center]
       [center]Story Transcript[/center]
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: This is Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News
       Network.
       Recently, the Trump administration has announced a twofer: a
       swing at the Clean Water Act and a whack at the Endangered
       Species Act. There are proposals aimed at weakening the laws
       that are now staples of the federal environmental review process
       that were ushered in during the Nixon era.
       For the Clean Water Act, the US Environmental Protection Agency
       announced a shortening of the time period for regulatory review
       of major projects to a time period of no more than one year for
       states and tribes. It also allows the federal agencies to
       override state’s decisions on water issues to deny permits for
       projects in some situations. And for the Endangered Species Act,
       just days later, the Trump administration announced that the US
       Department of Interior finalized a rule calling on the federal
       government to weigh economic factors before categorizing a
       species as endangered or threatened, despite what the science
       may say about the matter. Further, those species listed as
       threatened will no longer have the same level of safeguards as
       those who are endangered.
       But what will this mean in action in real life for environmental
       and climate protections? Well, we have some guests to talk about
       these seismic shifts in the environmental regulatory landscape.
       One of them is Ryan Shannon, a staff attorney for the Center for
       Biological Diversity. Welcome, Ryan.
       RYAN SHANNON: Thanks for having me.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And the other is Elizabeth Klein, Deputy
       Director of the State Energy and Environmental Impact Center at
       New York University School of Law. Welcome, Elizabeth.
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Thank you.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Thank you both for joining me. So let’s
       start, Elizabeth, with the Clean Water Act. I want to ask, the
       compliance with the act, it’s a routine part of federal
       environmental reviews for major projects. What exactly is the
       Trump administration’s proposal? What are they changing and what
       will the potential impact be if this change is adopted?
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Well, what they’re considering here is really a
       fundamental shift in how water quality certifications have been
       reviewed and processed by states. The Clean Water Act sets out a
       pretty clear process that’s been used for decades now that
       allows states, actually gives them the authority to ensure that
       major infrastructure projects like pipelines or other projects
       that might be on the landscape for years and years, even
       decades, won’t impair the water quality of bodies of water in
       their states. The act is very clear that states have the
       authority to review requests for these certifications.
       And what the administration is doing is really a full frontal
       assault on the states’ authority to review and decide whether or
       not projects are going to impair water quality. And so they are
       shortening the timeframe. You mentioned a year. In fact, the EPA
       wants to make it possible for certain agencies, like the US Army
       Corps of Engineers and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
       to shorten that timeframe to as little as six months. They want
       to be able to exercise an amount of federal oversight that’s
       really inappropriate and reach in and decide whether or not they
       think the state has made a good decision on whether or not a
       project will impair water quality, which is inconsistent with
       the act and just decades of implementation of this process.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And the proposed changes to the Clean Water
       Act would also impact tribal authority. Could you explain a
       little bit how that would change if this rule is adopted?
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Well, what they’re trying to do, again, is
       really reach into these processes that states, and in some
       limited cases tribes, have the authority to also issue these
       water quality certifications. The federal government is trying
       to impose a process where they could, for instance, decide that
       a state or a tribe’s review of whether a project meets the water
       quality certifications of an area in fact does or does not do
       that and they are going to inject apparently their views on
       whether or not the project is something that should trump the
       water quality of these bodies of water. So again, it’s really –
       it’s an assault on the whole system of cooperative federalism
       that had been set up by the act that gives the authority to
       states and tribes, the ones who are actually on the ground and
       understand the bodies of water that are going to be affected. It
       really trumps their authority to do what they have done for
       years, which is determine whether projects are going to impair
       water quality.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: That pun I’m sure is completely intended. So
       now over to you, Ryan. Let me ask you. The Trump administration
       said that economic factors will now be a major part of its
       endangered categorization process in regard to the Endangered
       Species Act. Is there any legitimacy to the claims of negative
       economic impact to designating an area that contains a
       threatened or an endangered species, that was the reason that
       was cited that this change, this rule change, would be
       implemented? Is there any legitimacy to that claim?
       RYAN SHANNON: No. There really is none, and we should be clear
       about what this exactly is proposing to do. What they’re
       intending to do is inject economic considerations into what is
       fundamentally a scientific decision. Is a species threatened or
       endangered? And Congress was very clear when it wrote the
       Endangered Species Act and when they amended it, that listing
       decisions are solely based on the best available science. That
       amendment to the Endangered Species Act actually came about
       because the Reagan administration tried to do the very same
       thing and inject economic considerations into the listing
       process. And what this is going to do is either result in
       listing decisions that are undermined by undue economic
       considerations. Or at best, it’s going to bring the listing
       process to a grinding halt, as the service goes through these
       costly and time-consuming economic impacts analysis.
       Now, we should be clear that there’s two pieces. There’s the
       listing of an endangered or threatened species, and then there’s
       the designation of critical habitat. When designating critical
       habitat, they can take into account the economic decisions and
       then they may decide to exclude certain areas from a critical
       habitat decision. But when they’re considering listing a
       species, it’s very, very clear that it’s only based on the best
       available science and economic considerations play no role. So
       that begs the question, if economic considerations are entirely
       irrelevant to the listing process, why do them at all?
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And that does bring us to the next question,
       which is a question I want to ask both of you. For both of these
       rules changes, what’s the motive for these rules changes? In
       other words, cui bono, who benefits? And how strictly enforced
       where these laws and regulations? And did they ever serve to
       slow down federal project proposals, which is another excuse
       that has been used, or I should say another justification, that
       has been used from making these claims? Elizabeth, what do you
       have to say about that?
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Well, honestly the proposal to strip and
       fundamentally weaken the authority of states and tribes to
       review water quality certification applications – I’m not
       exactly sure who benefits. If I were a proponent of a large
       infrastructure project, for instance, if I was working for an
       energy company or for a housing development or for any of the
       large infrastructure projects you can think of that might affect
       or impair water quality in some way, I would be very concerned
       about what they’re proposing here.
       The proposal is fundamentally at odds with what’s in the statute
       itself. EPA even went so far in its proposal to suggest that it
       disagreed with an opinion of the Supreme Court, of all things,
       that the Supreme Court had gotten a decision wrong about the
       ability of states to decide what the scope of water quality
       means. And so, it’s not clear to me who this benefits.
       Potentially the administration thinks that this will benefit
       their ability to be reelected. It seems very political and
       separate and apart from what’s actually called for by the Clean
       Water Act.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And Ryan, what’s your take on this in regard
       to the Endangered Species Act? Who benefits from this rule
       change?
       RYAN SHANNON: What we know for certain is that endangered and
       threatened species will not benefit at all from these rule
       changes. And then I think the folks that do benefit are David
       Bernhardt’s former clients. The Department of Interior right now
       is staffed with numerous individuals who have described
       endangered species as incoming Scud missiles. And Karen
       Budd-Falen, who’s the acting Assistant Deputy of Fish, Wildlife
       and Parks, once said that if given the chance, she would repeal
       the ESA in a heartbeat.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So in fact, climate and environmental
       activists, which both of you have expressed, say that the
       proposed changes in the Clean Water Act and the Environmental
       Protection Act could lead to expedited permits for pipelines,
       especially in regards to the Clean Water Act and other related
       infrastructure. And interestingly, EPA administrator, Andrew
       Wheeler, who is a former fossil fuel industry lobbyist, agreed
       in an interesting and odd way with the environmental activists
       when he said in a comment, “Under President Trump, the United
       States has become the number one oil and gas energy producer in
       the world. When implemented, this proposal, the change to the
       Clean Water Act, will streamline the process for constructing
       new energy infrastructure projects that are good for American
       families, American workers, and the American economies.”
       So clearly these rules changes are for the benefit of, at least
       from the administration’s perspective, the energy suppliers that
       want to circumvent these laws to build their infrastructures, to
       extract more fossil fuels from the ground and destroy our
       ecosystem in the process. So this brings us to the next
       question. Ryan, what’s the significance of the change to the act
       that’s calling for species categorized as threatened, which is
       one step below endangered, no longer receiving the same
       protections as species in the endangered category? What will
       this mean in real life and how will that be carried out if it’s
       adopted?
       RYAN SHANNON: So what this means in real life is that species
       that are listed as threatened in the future, won’t receive the
       protections that they have received for the past 40 years. The
       Fish and Wildlife Service, early on in the implementation of the
       Endangered Species Act, decided that presumptively it was going
       to provide all of the protections provided to endangered
       species, to threatened species as well. Primarily, this means
       that they’re protected from take. Take is a term of [inaudible],
       which basically means that you can’t harm, harass or kill an
       endangered species. And so threatened wildlife presumptively had
       that protection provided to them as well. Now, the act always
       has had this provision called the Section 4(d). And under
       Section 4(d), fish and wildlife was always free to issue a
       species-specific 4(d) rule. And that could change that blanket
       protection and provide certain exemptions or provisions that
       were intended to benefit the species— basically allow a little
       bit of flexibility.
       So they always had that ability to provide certain flexibilities
       around threatened species. What this administration has decided
       to do is just remove the presumptive protection altogether and
       instead only provide protections if and when they issued these
       species-specific 4(d) rules. And these species-specific 4(d)
       rules historically have not been good for species. For instance,
       in 2014 there was a species-specific 4(d) rule issued for the
       Lesser Prairie Chicken and it effectively exempted oil and gas
       ranching and energy development projects from any restrictions
       on the Endangered Species Act. And was those very same actions
       that were threatening the Lesser Prairie Chicken in the first
       place. So you end up having a species that is listed as
       threatened, but doesn’t enjoy the protections that it should
       underneath the act.
       And so going forward, threatened species just won’t receive the
       same kind of protections that they have in the past. These
       lifesaving protections that have prevented 99% of the species
       listed under the Endangered Species Act from going extinct. And
       what I think we’ll see is more and more species being listed as
       threatened rather than endangered, so that they do not receive
       the protections provided to endangered species.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And will the advent, the onset of climate
       change, the climate crisis as seeing the results of climate
       change, will that make this situation with the endangered
       species and threatened species, will that make the situation
       worse with this rule change?
       RYAN SHANNON: Yes, it certainly will. I mean, we are living
       through the sixth mass extinction right now and more and more
       species are feeling the full brunt and effects of climate
       change. And what these rule changes do is both look to disregard
       climate science, the best available science. When listing a
       species, they seek to disregard the impact of climate. When
       considering listing a species as threatened, they look to
       disregard protecting critical habitat that is threatened because
       of climate change. And then also, there is a regulation that’s
       going to change the way that the US Fish and Wildlife Service
       and other federal agencies conduct Section 7 consultations under
       the act. These consultations ensure that federal agency actions
       do not jeopardize listed species or destroy or adversely modify
       their critical habitat, and they’ve effectively written climate
       change out of that process.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So Elizabeth, it looks like many states have
       already stated their intent to sue the Trump administration in
       regard to these changes to the Clean Water Act and the
       Endangered Species Act. Do you expect more states to jump in to
       sue the administration, to stop the implementation of these
       rules in their states? And what do you see as the potential
       success of these actions?
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Well, state Attorneys General have really from
       the beginning of this administration had been clear that they’re
       not going to stand by and ignore the administration’s attempts
       to flout the law and roll back really bedrock environmental
       protections under a whole suite of acts— the Clean Air Act, the
       Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act. The list is long.
       And although there is a large number of things they’ve had to
       become engaged in, state AGs really are continuing to fight
       against what they see as unlawful rollbacks that are harmful to
       public health, to their constituents and to the environment. And
       so with respect to the Endangered Species Act, that was a final
       rule that’s been issued by the administration, and you saw
       Massachusetts Attorney General Healey and California Attorney
       General Becerra come out strong out of the gate and indicate
       that they are upset and believe that these final rules are
       unlawful and they will challenge them.
       With respect to the Section 401 proposed rule that’s come out
       from the EPA, there is still a process to go through before we
       would get to litigation necessarily. And so I would expect a
       number of states to jump in with pretty forceful comments to the
       EPA about how they view this new proposed rule as unlawful under
       the Clean Water Act and an inappropriate abdication of
       responsibilities that have been provided to the states. If EPA
       chooses to ignore those comments, I would assume that there will
       be legal challenges down the road. But right now, we’re in a
       rulemaking process. And so I suppose we could always have hope
       that the administration will listen and come to reason and
       decide that this is not the direction they want to go in.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: It’s a pretty incredible state of affairs
       when what we have left is hope that the administration will
       listen to science. But that is where we are. And I want to thank
       both of you so much, Ryan Shannon and Elizabeth Klein, for
       joining me today to really dig into what could happen with these
       rules changes and what is happening with these rules changes to
       these two important pieces of environmental legislation. Thank
       you for joining me today, both of you.
       RYAN SHANNON: Thanks for having me.
       ELIZABETH KLEIN: Thank you.
       JACQUELINE LUQMAN: And thank you for watching. This is
       Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network in Baltimore.
  HTML https://therealnews.com/stories/trump-endangers-the-endangered-species-act-and-the-clean-water-act
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page