DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Sober Thinking
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Hydrocarbon Based Fuels Folly
*****************************************************
#Post#: 94--------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: March 29, 2022, 7:53 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/43cyNWLVuac[/center]
[center]
HTML https://youtu.be/YhDacrl1aSA[/center]
#Post#: 95--------------------------------------------------
UCLA Study found that replacing residential gas appliances in
California would save $3.5 billion in reduced health
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: March 29, 2022, 8:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-270521170028.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
March 29, 2022
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-121217195108.png[/center]
[center]Methane 🦕 Gas 👿 Industry Turning Up Heat
on Induction Stove and Electrify Everything Campaigns [/center]
Stoves that burn dirty methane gas, which the industry wants you
to think of as “natural,” are, it turns out, dirtier than
electric stoves, because burning stuff is generally not great
for your lungs. Homes with gas stoves have approximately 50% to
more than 400% higher average concentrations of NO2 pollution
than homes with electric stoves, which among other things, can
lead to elevated COVID19 death rates. One research team found
12% of all childhood asthma could be attributed to gas stoves,
while another calculated that kids in homes with methane stoves
are 42% more likely to suffer asthma symptoms. Another study
from UCLA found that replacing residential gas appliances in
California would save $3.5 billion in reduced health costs
alone.
It’s not surprising that the industry is fighting back, but we
are a little shocked by how bad their arguments are.
Three recent pieces characterize the industry’s rebuttal, and
like its denial of climate science, the disinfo here is
particularly thin and embarrassing. Media Research Center,
recently posted, “environmentalists deserve to lose their war on
natural gas,” and while MRC is all about criticizing green group
funding, they don’t seem keen to disclose their own history of
Koch funding. MRC also doesn’t actually provide any
counter-arguments, just a list of complaints about
environmentalists successfully pushing to “electrify
everything.”
Meanwhile at the 🐍 Cato Institute, the intellectual
vacuum that remains after it had to close its climate (disinfo)
program
HTML https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/5/28/1860852/-CATO-Quietly-Folds-Center-For-Study-of-Science-After-Pat-Michaels-Finally-Tells-A-Truth-About-Heart?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=208309301&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_Bs3yvQ4-NPADA-FrLwLnb2Zj7m3VmBfL1NsIRvknrCNqPYMH6YauRXyJDScZSxa_Rmj4WfuXNMMveRfX6TJlGQjo8AQ&utm_content=208309301&utm_source=hs_email,<br
/>is making itself felt, as the latest issue of its Regulation
magazine has a piece asking “Why kill natural gas” that tries,
and fails, to mount a defense.
How badly does it fail? Well, 🐍 Kenneth Costello writes
a section on how “the benefits of natural gas exceed the costs,”
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185040-16582181.gif<br
/>
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-1625583.gif<br
/>which contains zero actual figures of costs, and lists dubious
benefits like “abundant domestic availability” and “low prices
for the foreseeable future.” Apparently Costello didn’t get the
memo about prices being so high the Biden administration should
cut regulations!
In fact, Costello manages to dodge the price issue throughout,
never once mentioning the actual cost of methane gas these days,
though he implies it. For example, a paragraph that begins with
a sentence about how “in economic terms, a gas ban fails
miserably,” but then it switches to the climate terms, not
economic. And “as public policy,” Costello scribbles, “a ban is
off the charts as being exceptionally bad.” There is no chart of
“policy bad,” but he instead complains that gas in homes and
buildings is “less than 9%” of US emissions, which as a country
is 15% of global emissions, so in all, electrifying buildings
“reduces worldwide emissions by less than 1.5%.”
Now, considering that global emissions must drop 100%, getting
every 1.5% matters just as much as any other, thus defeating
this argument.
But since one country acting on one part of a global problem
doesn’t solve that global problem, it’s bad policy? Yes, for
Costello, at least. “GHG emissions mitigation is a global public
good. It can’t benefit anyone without benefiting everyone, and
no matter how much one country or region benefits, there always
are benefits for others. So, even if a natural gas ban has a
detectable effect on climate change, the locale implementing it
would receive a trivial share of the global benefits.”
The best argument Costello could come up with as for why kicking
a methane gas addiction is bad, is that its benefits are global!
Seems the $2,163,000 the Koch Institute gave Cato in 2020 (the
latest year available) was not sufficient to maintain any sort
of coherent climate argument through to 2022.
Similarly, past Koch money for RealClearEnergy seems to have
triggered an echo of Cato, with its own defense of “natural gas:
essential for American’s [sic] cleaner energy future.” What’s
interesting about this isn’t its projection-dripping line about
“biased media coverage” regarding methane stoves’ health and
climate impacts, or its copying of the industry’s propaganda
attacking the science showing those risks, or even its requisite
delivery of the industry’s talking point that “Americans love
natural gas and the affordable, reliable and clean benefits it
delivers.”
What’s interesting is that it’s bylined simply as “The Editors
at RealClearEnergy,” one of only two pieces there by “The
Editors”, with the other being an aggregated link out to a
Bloomberg editorial. According to its “About” page, unlike the
RealClear pages for Defense, Politics, Investigations, Religion,
Science, Life, Markets, World, Policy, and Education, there is
no editor listed for RealClearEnergy.
So who wrote this editorial? Well, an 🦖 oil industry
😈 PR person most likely, but who put it up on RCE?
Because up until last summer, Jude Clemente was bylined as “the
editor of RealClearEnergy” for a post at RealClearPolitics. Note
the singular “the”- he worked alone!
Same for prior bylines for posts back at the Energy vertical,
save for that one time it read “Jude Clemente is editor at
RealClearEnergy” so it’s unclear if he was “an” or “the” editor,
but it does seem that the editor’s unedited byline is an
indication of his abilities, as now he’s neither, and instead
relegated to posting on Forbes once a month or so.
#Post#: 266--------------------------------------------------
Wall Street Journal Climate Disinfo MORE in a Month Than Since
2009 😬
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: April 19, 2022, 5:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-270521170028.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
April 19, 2022
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-121217195108.png[/center]
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-040718162655-14231561.gif🦖<br
/>Wall Street Journal Pushed More Climate Disinfo During Putin’s
Fossil-Fueled Invasion Of Ukraine Than It Has In Any Month Since
2009 [/center]
Here’s a fun fact! According to our records of more than 1,000
editorials, op-eds and columns, the Wall Street Journal’s
opinion page published more climate disinformation in March than
it has in any month in more than 10 years: Twenty-six pieces
covered for the fossil fuel industry’s massive profits resulting
from the pandemic and Putin’s fossil fueled war on Ukraine, and
otherwise advanced pro-industry propaganda.
The last time climate got so much play in the WSJ opinion pages,
it was in 2009 when the Journal pushed “climategate”
disinformation. That December during the Copenhagen climate COP
negotiations, the Journal ran 28 op-eds, columns and editorials,
24 of which were a who's-who of climate disinfo, featuring Pat
Michaels and Bjorn Lomborg, false attacks on climate science,
and cheering political obstruction of climate policy and
negotiations. The month kicked off with a column by Bret
Stephens advancing the climategate lie and an op-ed by Richard
Lindzen headlined “The Climate Science Isn’t Settled.”
In the years since, the Journal has churned out plenty of
climate hit pieces, like Steve Koonin’s 2014 WSJ op-ed with the
Lindzen-like headline “Climate Science Is Not Settled” (Couldn’t
it at least come up with something new?), which Koonin then used
for the title of his 2021 “Unsettled” book (Guess not…).
Most of the time, the quantity of content ranges from a handful
to around a dozen pieces a month, with November and December,
COP season, generally being the busiest. Climate disinfo during
the Trump years was a bit less frequent than when there was
policy to oppose under the Biden and Obama administrations.
The Journal more or less kept up that cadence until October of
2021, when in just three weeks, it ran 21 pieces on the UN COP
negotiations and high gas prices, and every one pushed
industrial disinformation.
In November 2021, it published a dozen pieces, just one of
which, by U.S. Climate Envoy John Kerry, wasn’t full of fossil
fuel disinformation. There were nine in December (all dumb),
fifteen in January (uniformly uninforming), and 16 in February,
as the Russian invasion began.
This set up the disinfo boom in March, when the opinion page ran
26 pieces of fossil fueled disinformation.
On March 1st, a WSJ editorial blamed Europeans for buying
Russian oil. The Journal then ran two pieces on the 4th
promoting fossil fuels and attacking Biden, and rounded out the
week with an anti-ESG op-ed (denierland’s new hobby horse).
On March 8th, the Editorial Board ran editorials criticizing
renewables and Biden’s climate and energy agenda. On the 11th
they ran another one headlined “Democrats for Higher Gas Prices”
and an op-ed by birdbrained Robert Bryce blaming California for
high gas prices, “not Moscow.”
Apparently the Journal is playing to an audience eager to attack
Democrats for trying to save the planet from fossil fuels
instead of a petro-dictator committing war crimes.
On the 13th the Journal ran an op-ed claiming “Biden’s War on
Oil Hits Consumers” by oil tycoon Harold Hamm, who has made so
much money off of consumers he’s got to dodge taxes to pass it
to his children and whose fracking company is returning billions
to shareholders based on profits made by high prices.
Then on March 14th came a full Opinion page press, with
editorial writer Gerard Baker running a column attacking Biden
for blaming Putin for recent inflation; an editorial echoing the
one it ran days earlier, but this time more specific because
recycling ideas is easy: Whitmer Wants Higher Gas Prices.
Another editorial praised Joe Manchin for opposing Sarah Bloom
Raskin’s appointment to the Fed because praising fossil fuel
millionaires is important content; and a final editorial calling
on Biden to deregulate the fossil fuel industry, just in case
anyone wasn’t sure where the paper stood in relation the
industry (under its boots, tongue out).
The next day the Journal ran a piece blaming climate policy for
oil and gas prices, and another dancing on Raskin’s Fed
appointment grave. (The sole exception to the onslaught of
climate lies on the WSJ opinion page the entire month was an
op-ed on March 2nd rebutting the industry’s false attacks
against Raskin, whose mere nomination is still cited as a reason
for high fuel prices.)
On March 17th, the WSJ opinion page featured yet another combo
of Biden/climate attacks and oil/gas defense. And on the 20th,
it gave space to some Republicans to complain about the SEC’s
overdue decision to require companies to disclose climate risks,
which it followed up with an editorial on the 21st making the
same points, because propaganda and disinformation is only
effective when repeated. That’s why we’ll breeze past the last
bunch, as they’re largely repeats, like an energy lawyer
shamelessly using Ukraine to attack FERC, and the closing act,
stalwart climate disinfo pro Bjorn Lomborg.
Halfway through April, and the Journal appears back on pace for
more like 18 disinfo opinion pieces this month, suggesting we’re
past the peak for the Wall Street Journal’s Putin-excusing and
petro-praising propaganda push.
We’ll call it a Special Disinformation Operation
HTML https://theconversation.com/war-time-media-reporting-is-shaping-opinions-about-russias-ukraine-invasion-180107?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-95MwEZKLQRMRaJywTYN1-Xz9gmmO_9nOjvA4IMGIF9L2ilooNrEAbLFoJCm7Je5JnXc-Hw.<br
/>And unlike Putin’s so-called Special Military Operation, this
one might be succeeding
HTML https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-31/biden-embraces-oil-as-ukraine-war-overwhelms-his-climate-agenda?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-95MwEZKLQRMRaJywTYN1-Xz9gmmO_9nOjvA4IMGIF9L2ilooNrEAbLFoJCm7Je5JnXc-Hw.<br
/>
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422141413-627726.png
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/ripples-from-russias-war-will-set-off-a-climate-damaging-wave
#Post#: 282--------------------------------------------------
Re: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: May 2, 2022, 11:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-270521170028.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
May 2, 2022
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-121217195108.png[/center]
[center]Daily Caller Has A Facebook-Approved Fact Checker, But
Is Now Run By Koch-Trained Career Disinformer Michael
Bastasch.[/center]
The Daily Caller has a fact checking project called Check Your
Fact, that Facebook considers legitimate and both it and Daily
Caller look like a legitimate news organization. They're not.
The Daily Caller is once again a Koch propaganda machine, as the
new Managing Editor for the Daily Caller’s News Foundation is
Michael Bastasch, whose entire career, save for a stint at Fox
News, has been Koch-dependent. We noted his new position in
early April, and a month later can confirm Bastasch is back at
publishing climate disinformation through the Daily Caller.
If you need a reminder, Bastasch has zero real journalism
experience or training. Instead, as we noted back in 2016 before
he deleted his LinkedIn profile, he’s got a degree in politics,
followed by internships at the Charles Koch Institute and
various other Koch propaganda appendages, including a journalism
training fellowship at the Daily Caller and something called the
American Journalism Institute, which sounds legit, but more on
that momentarily.
Now, to be fair, Bastasch hasn’t been 100% addicted to Koch, nor
has Daily Caller. From 2019 to 2022, he was a writer for Fox
News, which might be considered journalism experience, except he
was at the opinion program Ingraham Angle, which is … not news
so much as school shooting conspiracies, mask/covid disinfo,
climate denial, and violent political propaganda.
So that’s who’s steering the ship now over at the “oops we kept
hiring white nationalists” Daily Caller News Foundation, where
“all complaints about a story’s accuracy or fairness must be
taken seriously,” according to its About page, where they say
they’re “committed to giving everybody a fair hearing if they
believe a story is unfair or incorrect.”
Oh really? Yes, “complaints about a story should be emailed to
MichaelBastasch@DailyCallerNewsFoundation.org. If a correction
is warranted it will be published as soon as possible. Serious
errors will be highlighted at the top of a story.”
Now that’s particularly rich, because Bastasch has embraced a
stinging criticism of his work as a point of pride on his
Twitter bio, which reads “Critics used to say this of my
reporting: ‘You can't prove it false’,” characteristically
cherry-picking a quote out of context.
The context for that snippet? Susan Joy Hassol described how
“you can really mislead people without outright lying, and in a
way that’s more dangerous. You can't prove it false; you can't
say what they've said is inaccurate, that it's a lie; you can't
say any of that. Then somebody would have to say it's true —
well, it's not true because it's not the whole truth."
So the criticism that what the Daily Caller is doing is worse
than simply lying, because they’re selectively presenting facts
to create a false argument (known as “paltering”) in a way that
can’t be innocent or unintentional, and in fact is a deliberate
lie.
And that’s exactly what Bastasch embraces. It’s how he was
taught to do “journalism,” during his fellowship at the Daily
Caller with the American Journalism Institute, which has its
curriculum online. In “It’s Not Easy Being Green” class, the
propagandists-in-training will be treated to “a look at
environmental regulations and the well-funded network of
environmentalists who champion them. This will include an
examination of the Republican-created Environmental Protection
Agency, the burgeoning taxpayer-funded green jobs industry, and
the consequences of European attempts to “‘green’ their
economies.”
You know, just like in real journalism school!
Since his return to lead the Daily Caller, the climate content
has taken a turn towards explicit climate disinformation. Gone
are the lazy rewrites of AP and other news outlets’ coverage of
climate and energy events, and back are the Bastasch-era
dressing-ups of Republican and Koch propaganda and industry
talking points, like tobacco lawyer/climate denier Steve
Milloy’s prebunked disinfo-op-ed calling Biden “the ultimate
energy wrecking ball.”
Someone should send them an email, surely as a very real
journalist at an outlet dedicated to serious and ethical
reporting, Bastasch will honor their commitment to accuracy and
retract it, before the Daily Caller’s very objective fact
checkers have to debunk it!
How embarrassing would that be? You know, if any of them were
actually journalists or capable of feeling shame!
Read more:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
Heat, wildfires, droughts, child brides, and big profits for Big
Oil
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20220502-big-oil-profits-while-children-are-desperately-married-off
#Post#: 316--------------------------------------------------
InfluenceMap manager Faye Holder said, "what's changed in
recent months is the intensity of the message."
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: May 25, 2022, 5:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-270521170028.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
May 25, 2022
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-121217195108.png[/center]
[center]Ad'ing Insult to Injury: 🦖 Big Oil Ran 761 Ads
Exploiting Russian Invasion Of Ukraine To
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-130418203402.gif<br
/>Push Agenda[/center]
MONEY QUOTE:
"As InfluenceMap's analysis reveals," Clean Creatives founder
Christine Arena said, "the kind of climate disinformation
proliferating since the invasion of Ukraine is more misleading,
widespread, and dangerous" than traditional climate denial, and
this version is happening "with direct participation from
🦖😈💰industry CEOs and a nearer-term
impact on public policy.”
Read more:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
NOAA forecasts busy, dangerous
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-300919160022-22802205.png<br
/>hurricane season
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20220525-noaa-2022-forecast-oandg-threat-map-exxon-knew-mass-lawsuit
#Post#: 352--------------------------------------------------
If you've missed the last 2 'roundups, we're exploring (mostly
online) climate disinformation
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: June 13, 2022, 11:01 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-270521170028.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click
[i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
June 13, 2022
[center]
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-121217195108.png[/center]
[center]2 Key Steps To Clean Up Climate Denial: Define
Disinformation, Deplatform It
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422155724.pnghttps://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/2/3-241119204318.png<br
/>
HTML https://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818185040-1659929.gif[/center]<br
/>
SNIPPETS:
Today we're turning to the really fun stuff, the top two of
seven recommendations to clean up climate disinfo described in
"Deny, Deceive, Delay: Documenting and Responding to Climate
Disinformation at COP26 and Beyond."
HTML https://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/COP26-Summative-Report.pdf?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=216252588&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8aTtytRawpdVS6eUvDmrEH5L-uIi5JssYv1BVWwRDgUiq2DEw6or5aypE6wau9cMgeUDOQRM6gk3DE0Z518xXo9R8f_w&utm_content=216252588&utm_source=hs_email<br
/>... ...
And those
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622210450-1415528.gif🦕👿🦖😈🐍<br
/>working the outrage economy thanks to the fossil fuel
industry's
support have certainly figured out how to game the social
algorithms. One of the report's case studies found that "In the
period from October 25 to November 21 2021, the tweets and quote
tweets of just 16 Twitter accounts amassed a total 507,000 likes
and retweets (“interactions”) on climate narratives alone."
Those super-spreaders are well-known names to readers here,
including holocaust denier 👿 Peter Sweden/Imanuelsen,
Koch contractor 🦖 John Stossel, Homeless harasser
🐍 Michael Shellenberger, P.O. Box 🦖 Bjorn
Lomborg, Obama birther and Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist
👿 Tony Heller, and Round-up refuser 😈 Patrick
Michaels.
Given their many non-climate interests, the report noted that
"Repeat offenders have often spread mis- or disinformation on
multiple topics . This is most clearly observed in the number of
high-traction accounts sharing misleading claims on climate and
COVID-19, but encompasses a wider range of issues - from
anti-vaxx sentiment and genocide denial to conspiracies such as
QAnon, the Great Reset and electoral fraud. This should provide
an even greater incentive for platforms to act, since an
effective response against such accounts could have a ‘force
multiplier’ effect and mitigate harm in multiple areas."
Turns out people who lie about climate change also lie about
other stuff, which isn't exactly a huge finding, but it is a
huge reason why social media companies should remove users who
habitually make their websites a toxic and disinformation-filled
mess.
Read more:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20220613-heat-lng-ignoring-disabilities
[move]The thoughts of the righteous are right: but the counsels
of the wicked are deceit. Proverbs 12:5 King James
Version[/move]
#Post#: 493--------------------------------------------------
Re: Fossil Fuel Propaganda Modus Operandi
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: September 4, 2022, 2:55 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
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[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20201214-paris-anniversary-tx-oil-waivers-blm-proud-boys-dc?ecid=ACsprvtP9LIRcx9cfOaFYJGFTo6Wo-VHrrTxoSZXBB1iNg-UWMM2aVQlzF1IwYIVqFD9L7s5CwS4&utm_campaign=Hot%20News<br
/>to subscribe.[/i]
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040922163120.png[/center]
#Post#: 499--------------------------------------------------
Rep. Katie Porter wants to block tax credits for marketing that
promotes oil and gas.
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: September 4, 2022, 4:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Southern California News Group By BROOKE STAGGS |
bstaggs@scng.com |
PUBLISHED: August 24, 2022 at 10:28 a.m. | UPDATED: August 24,
2022 at 11:43 a.m.
[center]Rep. Katie Porter
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-210614221847.gif<br
/>wants to block tax credits for 😈🦖 marketing
that
promotes oil and gas[/center]
SNIPPETS:
[move]“Big 🦖 Oil has been 😈 lying to the
American people for decades about the
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422182057.gif<br
/>[b]damage they’re causing our environment,” said Porter, who
chairs the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations. “It’s bad enough these
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622210450-1415528.gif<br
/>corporations poison the planet; they shouldn’t get taxpayer
dollars
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-010922192452.gifto<br
/>
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202527-13931485.pnghttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622153114-13822364.jpeg<br
/>cover it up.” [/b]... ...[/move]
Critics call these “taxpayer subsidies” and have fought to get
such benefits removed for the five major oil companies:
ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Chevron and ConocoPhillips. Those same
oil companies and their defenders argue that such tax incentives
are standard
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110822211037-18321080.jpeg<br
/>and encourage investment
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110822204109-17662027.png<br
/>in a high-cost industry. ... ...
So what exactly would Porter’s bill 🗽 do?
Advertising is a traditional business expense and most companies
are allowed a tax deduction for a portion of what they spend on
it. But the tax code has a long list of expenses that can’t be
deducted, from golden parachute payments to profits from “the
illegal sale of drugs.” (That last clause is why cannabis
businesses can’t deduct expenses even if they have state
licenses, since cannabis remains illegal at the federal level.)
Porter’s End Subsidies for Fossil Fuel Advertising Act would add
marketing that encourages the “extraction, distribution, and
consumption of oil and gas and their derivatives” to the list of
business expenses that can’t
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-090822141236.gif<br
/>be deducted.
Read more:
HTML https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/08/24/bill-aims-to-end-big-oils-tax-funded-climate-misinformation-campaigns/?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=224818611&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--NRc-4594xwGwjiJCPP-muPSO4eJusMaztXbCWIFwebloNIhSJzJEhRWeoRwa1FkOH8Tdd2SvR1ehnIHUvCkV05hZSpw&utm_content=224818611&utm_source=hs_email<br
/>
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164615-5351419.gif
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-170422173048-7741566.jpeg[/center]
#Post#: 528--------------------------------------------------
🚨 Mendacious Perception Management ON 🦖
Hydrocarbon 😈 Hellspawn STEROIDS!
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: September 22, 2022, 7:19 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211810-2001879.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
September 22, 2022
Manchin Fossil 🦖 Fuel 💰 Streamlining Bill
Panned By Dems 🤔, GOP 🤔: Coal millionaire and
West Virginia senator Joe Manchin III released his long-awaited
bill on Wednesday to streamline the construction of fossil fuel
projects including methane gas pipelines.
[move]House Natural Resources Committee Chair Raul Grijalva: The
bill resembled a draft that had been leaked months ago.
📢 The very fact that this fossil fuel brainchild is
being force-fed into must-pass government funding speaks to its
unpopularity. I don’t want this.[/move]
The bill was promised to Manchin by Sen. Majority Leader
🐍 Chuck Schumer during the negotiation of the Inflation
Reduction Act. Manchin has insisted the legislation be attached
to a government funding bill, setting up the prospect of a
government shutdown. The bill would require the approval of the
beleaguered Mountain Valley Pipeline, a provision on which
Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine was not consulted and to which he would
not support because his constituents "have felt ignored" by the
opaque process, the Virginia Mercury reported. “[The Mountain
Valley pipeline section] is completely unacceptable,” he told
reporters Wednesday night per E&E News. “I will do everything I
can to 🦅 oppose it.”
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-120422122257-657398.png
Multiple Democratic senators have stated Manchin's fossil fuel
streamlining bill should not be attached to a government funding
package and Kaine joins Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in opposing
it even if it is. Manchin has said he is seeking support from at
least 20 🐘 GOP senators for the legislation which he
says 🦖 Republicans have wanted for years and told
reporters Tuesday “There’s no reason Republicans shouldn’t
support it.”
Republicans have responded cooly
HTML http://www.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/3-051113192052.png<br
/>to the bill, however, instead Manchin's fellow West Virginian
senator, Republican Shelley Moore Capito, has released a far
more aggressive bill to slash regulations on fossil fuel
extraction and transportation. The
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080822134118-17091258.gif🦕<br
/>White House said Wednesday it supports
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164519-508103.gifManchin's<br
/>legislation
HTML http://renewablerevolution.createaforum.com/gallery/renewablerevolution/1/3-120818180835-16271224.gif.<br
/>(Manchin bill & reception: E&E News, Washington Post $, E&E
News, CNN, Politico, The Hill, Roll Call, New York Times $, The
Hill, Houston Chronicle, Reuters
HTML https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-senator-manchin-releases-permitting-bill-speed-energy-projects-2022-09-21/?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=226924128&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--3IM5GUTpGZPOWEvhBINRGonBk5_ypCL3EML1Fsz-4MWn2mNGp0eVpC4KhlpSTT9Zif1QFlnGkjdGAg5zFaikR-0dJ0Q&utm_content=226924128&utm_source=hs_email,<br
/>The Hill, National Journal, E&E News; MVP & Kaine opposition:
Virginia Mercury
HTML https://www.virginiamercury.com/2022/09/21/manchins-energy-permitting-plan-roils-u-s-senate-and-house-democrats/?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=226924128&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8G-_WbsZm5eO7xWtYhYZRd5xMDa82eTsJr0jGWCOZsMElf42Rmv6pLwr0CXpYQgd-YIJ2BX8W_fNRxbYeWNf9yK6wr-Q&utm_content=226924128&utm_source=hs_email,<br
/>WFXR; Capito: Politico Pro $; Substantive details: E&E $)
Amnesty Accuses Egypt Of 'Shiny Cover-Up' Of Human Rights
Violations: A second major international human rights group in
less than two weeks accused Egypt of trying to conceal a
decade's worth of “unrelenting violations of human rights” ahead
of COP27 in November. Amnesty International, in a report
released Wednesday, outlined crackdowns on dissent and
individual freedoms, including the imprisonment of political
opponents and journalists over the last ten years. It also
detailed a "shiny cover-up" on the part of the el-Sissi
administration intended to accrue goodwill from foreign
governments and financial institutions ahead of the UN climate
conference. (AP)
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211808-20001173.png
[center]Diversity-Lather, Greenwash, Nature-Rinse, Repeat: EU
Companies Dodging Climate Culpability Online [/center]
In the summer of 2022, a heat wave broke records across Europe,
bringing unprecedented temperatures and drought worse than any
in at least 500 years. Thousands died, wildfires burned out of
control, and the companies complicit or causing the climate
crisis were busy posting through it.
Unsurprisingly, they weren't owning up to the impacts of their
profits. Instead, as a new report from Geoffrey Supran and the
Algorithmic Transparency Institute documents, they were
distracting the public with posts about sports, using images of
nature and diverse communities to improve their public image.
The analysts looked at the social media output of 22 European
companies across three sectors: fossil fuel companies like Shell
and Total, airline industry players like Air France and
Lufthansa, and car companies like BMW and Mercedes-Benz. The
research examined 2,416 posts from 375 social media accounts run
by these companies across five platforms- Facebook, Instagram,
YouTube, Twitter and TikTok.
They found that during the climate-driven extreme weather of the
summer, "the 22 companies remained silent about climate change
in the examined posts, with only a negligible handful (0.3%)
making explicit reference to 'climate change' or 'global
warming'."
But they weren't being quiet. Instead, they found "that
two-thirds (67%) of the 22 companies’ posts communicate a
narrative of ‘Green Innovation’" which "avoids directly
addressing climate change while nonetheless presenting companies
as environmentally-conscious, engaged in or committed to low-
carbon technologies and/or technological innovation."
Another one in five of the posts "offer a narrative of
‘Misdirection’" which "uses messaging about sports, fashion, and
social causes to direct attention away from firms’ core business
roles and responsibilities."
Additionally, they "also show that a number of companies
variously leverage imagery of nature, female- presenting people,
non-binary-presenting people, non-Caucasian-presenting people,
young people, experts, sportspeople, and celebrities to
strengthen their messages of greenwashing and misdirection."
The consequences of climate change, which Europeans were
experiencing over the summer, "were never communicated (0%) by
any industry." That said, they also avoided the explicit denial
of claiming climate change isn't real or human-caused, and
didn't attack the science, scientists or activists calling for
climate action, but that's not surprising given that such toxic
denial is why they covertly fund front groups to spread it,
instead of tainting their brand with it.
What they DID post, though, was content that the report
describes as its titular "Three shades of greenwashing": the
idea that "green innovation" will save us, that other problems
are more important, and that business-as-usual with its "visuals
and language fetishizing luxury and performance, with no
consideration of sustainability."
And as much as the text, the imagery plays an important role,
something these companies know and exploit by something known as
"nature-rinsing", or more formally as "executional
greenwashing." The report explains that "these findings
demonstrate a systematic use of Nature/Environment visuals in
fossil fuel interests’ social media posts to strengthen their
‘green’ messaging."
Similarly,"fossil fuel interests variously leverage visuals of
select demographics - sportspeople, celebrities, young people,
and racial minorities - to misdirect audience’s attention with
discourses about sports, social causes, and fashion and design."
For example "car manufacturers and airlines additionally show
more racially diverse casts to misdirect with posts about social
goods such as LGBTQIA+ issues and Women’s rights" but "when car
companies post about sports, particularly motor racing, the
trend is reversed, with more people - including sportspeople -
being all- Caucasian."
"All told," lead researcher Geoffrey Supran tweeted, "our data
show that 😈 fossil fuel interests are engaged in
strategic brand positioning to establish themselves as 😇
green, 😇 innovative, & 😇charitable. These
subtle, 😈 systematic
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202719-14071062.gif<br
/>trends have been hiding in plain sight for too long."
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040922152530.png[/center]
#Post#: 635--------------------------------------------------
🦖 Big Oil Spent $15 Million 🐍😈 Watering
Down Climate Action In New York
DIR By: AGelbert
Date: November 4, 2022, 11:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211810-2001879.png[/center]
Make Nexus Hot News part of your morning: click [i]here
HTML https://climatenexus.org/hot-news/
to subscribe.[/i]
November 4, 2022
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-220922211808-20001173.png[/center]
[center]🦖 Big Oil Spent $15 Million 🐍😈
Watering Down Climate Action In New York[/center]
In 2019, New York state passed the Climate Leadership and
Community Protection Act, which set emission targets and
spending goals, prioritizing frontline communities and
establishing other social equity goals. Now, if you only judged
New York by what Fox News and other rightwing disinfo outlets
said about it, you may be surprised there are any fossil fuels
left in the state. But there are, and the industry has been
plenty busy using its considerable resources to try and keep it
that way.
A [color=navy]new report from the Public Accountability
Institute and LittleSis
HTML https://public-accountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/LittleSisFuelingObstruction_10.31.pdf<br
/>shows the extent to which fossil fuel interests are lobbying
on
New York's climate standards, and it's not the liberal love-fest
you might expect. In addition to the $15 million spent by 10
fossil fuel interests on lobbying since 2016, they've also held
multiple seats on the state’s Climate Action Council which
oversees the CLCPA's implementation.
[center]
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-041122121714.png[/center]
And then there's the 🦕 industry's front
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622153114-13822364.jpeg<br
/>group, New Yorkers for Affordable Energy (NYAE). Its website
claims the group is simply “dedicated to supporting access to
cleaner
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622202551-13971996.gif,<br
/>reliable and affordable sources of energy for residential and
business consumers," but per the report, its IRS filings admit
the true purpose is "to expand natural gas service."
That IRS filing listed three founding 🦕 directors: Katie
Gibbs; Karen Merkel, a communications manager for National Fuel
Gas Company; and Michelle Hook, Danskammer Energy VP for Public
Affairs. And the address they gave was the same as "the address
of Albany-based law and lobbying firm Plummer & Wigger, which
also represents other fossil fuel industry clients, such as
Millennium Pipeline, where Hook is a former public relations
executive."
Hook is making $10,000 a
month
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-010922192452.gifhttps://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-110422205132-6451602.gif<br
/>lobbying for the 🦕 group, through a contract with
Virago
Public Affairs, for whom NYAE is the only registered lobbying
client.
But Hook's not their only lobbyist. The "Democratic-Party tied
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-080822134118-17091258.gif🦕<br
/>lobbying firm" SKDKnickerbocker, "a powerhouse influencer in
Albany," is "lobbying for the group 'on a pro bono basis'" that
the report explains doesn't mean they're doing it for free, but
rather "likely means that its lobbying is incidental to a
larger, paid, public relations contract."
Unclear what that contract may be, but "one of the
SKDKnickerbocker lobbyists registered to advocate for New
Yorkers for Affordable Energy is the managing director of the
firm’s Albany office, Morgan Hook."
Huh, 🐍 Morgan Hook is working on this project with
🐍 Michelle Hook.
If you're wondering if there's any relation there, congrats! You
win a "suspicious coincidence" prize, because the report states
flatly that "Morgan Hook is married to Michelle Hook."
Talk about playing the long game! Now they're arranging
marriages between fossil fuel front group operatives and public
relations professionals?
Are there any lengths to which the
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040622210450-1415528.gif<br
/>fossil fuel industry won't go?
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-050422132459.gif
(We joke, but there is plenty more serious stuff in the report
that you should go check out!
HTML https://public-accountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/LittleSisFuelingObstruction_10.31.pdf?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=232554023&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9Ndvvp1jDttkD_Dz8aM70iWbsUUV_MgtAE0HklRsm8iMpF5GWO_ATxwV64pfgyiYJQrjdULJ0QFqlmK8SvGR4MvbhH3Q)
Full Newsletter:
HTML https://soberthinking.createaforum.com/gallery/soberthinking/1-040422164555-532108.png
HTML https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/20221104-unesco-glaciers-epa-air-monitoring-gem-methane-30-companies
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page