Tag: Environmental Policies

Trump And Climate Change

This is my continuation of my series looking at the possibilities we can expect from a Trump administration…..this post is about the possibilities in climate change policies…..

Climate change will be a sore spot for many with the incoming Trump administration

World leaders, negotiators, lobbyists and NGOs are meeting in Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, for COP29.

COP (Conference of Parties) is comprised of approximately 200 countries that ratified the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) in 1992. The representatives of these countries meet every year to negotiate the best approaches to tackling the root causes of climate change.

But this year, a black cloud hangs over the conference as the United States is expected to pull out of climate discussions under a Trump administration.

President-elect Donald Trump aims to give a free pass to polluting nations while ignoring the catastrophic weather changes such as massive fires, floods, and storms that have devastated cities and communities around the world.

Many experts see this as not just irresponsible but downright dangerous, risking lives and livelihoods for the sake of short-term political gains.

The UN climate conference – the 29th such gathering, which will run from 11-22 November – has been billed as the “finance COP” as countries are due to set a new global climate finance goal this year.

Ahead of COP30 in Brazil next year, representatives will be submitting strong national climate commitments – known as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

More than 100 heads of state and government have confirmed their attendance, according to UN sources.

But several world leaders and government officials have said they won’t be attending the conference.

The UN’s decision to host COP29 in Baku has been criticized, given the ongoing tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/11/21/trumps-outrageous-disregard-for-climate-change-endangers-the-world/

Trump has nominated a fracking CEO as head of the Energy Department….

President-elect Trump on Saturday announced he’s chosen campaign donor and fracking company CEO Chris Wright for the top job at the Department of Energy. Wright, who runs Liberty Energy, also will be a member of Trump’s planned Council of National Energy, CNN reports. The chair of that body is to be Doug Burgum, the nominee for Interior secretary. Trump called Wright “a leading technologist and entrepreneur” in his statement. He’s been a leading advocate of oil and gas development, including fracking, per the AP, which Trump supports to achieve what he calls “energy dominance” in the global market. The president-elect said Wright and Burgum would drive that effort, per the New York Times, partly by cutting regulations.

Wright has recognized the connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change, though he’s been skeptical that climate change has anything to do with the increase in extreme weather. He’s said the use of fossil fuels is necessary to bring the developing world out of poverty. “The world runs on oil and gas, and we need that,” Wright told CNBC last year, adding that the idea of completely moving away from fossil fuels in a decade an “absurd time frame.”

The earth will soon be suffering from extreme stupidity all in the name of profit….but that is a word the Trump loves above all else.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Climate Change Initiatives

I am so damn old that I remember the first so-called ‘initiatives’ to save the planet from ruin…..as far back as the 1970s and ever since that ‘bold’ step the can has been kicked down the road at every ‘summit’…..the year 2000 was a target and then after another summit it was 2020 and then 2030 and now it is 2050 (but there has not been another ground breaking summit yet).

After all these ‘summits’ it is shown that only a fraction has ever been applied….

A recent analysis of global climate efforts by a coalition of researchers found that only a small fraction of the policies implemented over the past two decades have been effective in reducing carbon emissions. The study, which examined 1,500 climate initiatives across 41 countries, found that only 63 of these strategies made a meaningful impact on reducing greenhouse gas output.

“It is easy for countries to say they will reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases, but these statements do not mean that the policies they adopt will be effective,” said Jesse Smith, the senior editor at the American Association for the Advancement of Science. “This work illustrates the kinds of policy efforts that are needed to close the emissions gaps in various economic sectors.”

The research investigated the success of a variety of policies, including bans on coal plants, fossil fuel taxes and emissions trading schemes. However, the study’s lead author, Nicholas Koch, emphasized that the sheer number of climate regulations does not necessarily correlate with better outcomes. Instead, countries that successfully reduced their greenhouse gas emissions did so by employing a diverse mix of policies tailored to their unique circumstances.

“Meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate targets necessitates better knowledge about which climate policies work in reducing emissions at the necessary scale,” the report reads. “Our insights on effective but rarely studied policy combinations highlight the important role of price-based instruments in well-designed policy mixes and the policy efforts necessary for closing the emissions gap.”

The study also noted that there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution to reducing emissions. Different nations have varying needs and resources, meaning that the most effective strategies for lowering emissions will vary across the globe.

(san.com)

Then there is the waste of cash…..money spent on impotent measures to change the climate degradation.

And as usual the US leads the waste (it is something we do expertly….waste taxpayer money)….

Among the world’s wealthiest countries, the U.S. leads the way in spending public money on so-called climate “solutions” that have been proven to “consistently fail, overspend, or underperform,” according to an analysis released Thursday by the research and advocacy group Oil Change International.

The group’s report, titled Funding Failure, focuses on international spending on carbon capture and fossil-based hydrogen subsidies, which continues despite ample data showing that the technological fixes have “failed to make a dent in carbon emissions” after 50 years of research and development.

The report details how five countries account for 95% of all carbon capture spending, with the U.S. investing the most taxpayer money in the technology, at $12 billion in subsidies over the last 40 years.

Norway comes in second with $6 billion going to carbon capture and storage, while Canada has spent $3.8 billion, the European Union has spent $3.6 billion, and the Netherlands has poured $2.6 billion into the technology, with which carbon dioxide emissions are compressed and utilized or stored underground.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/carbon-capture-2669098434

Sounds like the old “Nero fiddled while Rome burned” approach by our government and others….no one is serious about climate change….and that will eat us all up and spit out our charred remains for future archeologists to find and analyze.

What a wonderful world we are leaving for our grand kids.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Climate Agreements

I have been following the climate debate for decades….it all started with Carter and just kept me interested…..I watched the timeline for clean environment pushed forward year after year until we are at the point where 2050 is the target date for a clean environment.

Not to worry there will be another climate summit to reassess that timeline and it will most likely be pushed yet again.

So what do you think of all this ‘kicking of the climate can’?

Personally I think these agreements benefit only one sector…..

https://www.counterpunch.org/2024/03/25/climate-agreements-suck/

Climate agreements suck. There are no real enforcement provisions. Many signatories cheat. Some don’t rep0rt at all. Moreover, reported data is highly suspect. It’s a worldwide scandal recently exposed by YaleEnvironment360.

Evidence of cheating is found in the atmosphere: Global CO2 is on a rampage, skyrocketing upwards like never before, double-to-triple rates of only one year ago, see: CO2 Bursting into the Atmosphere. This is not supposed to be happening. It is twisting the planet’s climate system into a pretzel that doesn’t know which way to turn next. There are plenty of reasons to believe it is going to get much, much worse. The planet’s climate system is already so far whacked-out that it’s breathing fire.

Meanwhile, greenhouse gas emissions are skyrocketing in the aftermath of the much-touted climate agreement Paris ‘15 when 196 countries agreed to cut to net zero. Oops, wrong, many signatories are “net nothing.”

There is compelling evidence that signatory nations to Paris ’15 don’t give a damn about the agreement or care about Hot House Earth as they cavalierly undercount, when they do report, or they simply refuse to report. As a result, UN climate goals go straight into the trash, worthless.

A little history….the first worldwide climate summit was in 1979….the mandate was “a better understanding of the climate system and the causes of climate variability and change” and “to determine the predictability of climate; and to determine the effect of human activities on climate”.  In practice, the program aims to foster initiatives in climate research which require or benefit from international coordination and which are unlikely to emerge from national efforts alone.

And that agreement has been sliding down the toilet ever since.

So yeah climate agreements suck because it means nothing to the polluters because government will have their backs….until the bitter end.

And that end is not that far away…..but the profits will flow and the planet will eventually burn.

I know a bit dramatic….but what the Hell someone had to say it.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Another Worthless Climate Deal

Just how long has the crisis with the climate been kicked down that endless road?

20 Years…..30 years….endless promise and spineless negotiating…..deal after deal…..and yet the corporations keep destroying the air……how long will this continue?

The new deal essentially does absolutely nothing!

Here is what we get after all the years…..

Negotiators from almost 200 nations reached an accord Saturday in the fight against climate change, acknowledging that the problem isn’t solved but setting up another attempt at more dramatic action next year. The Glasgow summit did not achieve the central goal of agreeing on action to limit the warming of Earth to 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, the Washington Post reports. So the planet then remains on course for increasingly severe damage and weather events. The nations did pressure each other to take greater action, and summit leaders say the agreement at least “keeps 1.5 alive”—a destination possibly to be reached soon.

As the UN climate conference wound down, progress was stalled over what to say about coal, per the AP. At the last minute, India pushed through a wording change saying the nations will “phase down” rather than “phase out” coal. The weakened commitment will make it harder to reach the 1.5-degree goal, a Swedish official said. Without the change, nations were still on track on that goal; the planet already has heated up 1.1 degrees. India received much of the blame. “India has long been a blocker on climate action,” an Australian climate scientist said, “but I have never seen it done so publicly.” Coal is the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions.

John Kerry, the US envoy, was among those emphasizing the positive. “It’s a good deal for the world,” he said Saturday. “It’s got a few problems, but it’s all in all a very good deal.” There was a divide between richer and poorer nations in Glasgow, but they agreed in the end that wealthier nations should “at least double” financial assistance to nations most at risk from global warming by 2025. And there was agreement, per the New York Times, that everyone needs to do more. Nations were asked to return next year with more dramatic proposals for reducing their emissions, but there had been hope that issue would have been settled by now.

Personally I do not think this is the way to help the climate crisis…..but what can I expect from negotiators that are puppets of corporations to act….seriously John Kerry a huge corporate shill?

And apparently I am not alone….the Maldives has a similar view….

Small island nations are especially alarmed by the results of the UN climate conference, making the point that they don’t have time for small, incremental steps to slow global warming. The crisis has reached their homes. Negotiators declined to commit to taking immediate action to hold global warming to 1.5 degrees Celcius above preindustrial levels. “The difference between 1.5 and 2 degrees is a death sentence for us,” Maldives’ environmental minister said. They plan to take the issue up again next year. “What is balanced and pragmatic to other parties will not help the Maldives adapt in time,” Aminath Shauna said, per the Washington Post. “It will be too late for the Maldives.”

Before it adjourned, the European Union’s climate chief had warned the conference that the situation is critical for some nations already, per US News & World Report. Frans Timmermans said there’s urgency for low-lying Pacific islands and other nations vulnerable to flooding now, “because you’re standing with your feet in the water.” That’s how Tuvalu’s foreign minister tried to get his message across to the conference, per the Sydney Morning Herald—sending a video of his speech delivered in a business suit while standing in ocean water past his knees. “We cannot wait for speeches,” Simon Kofe says, “when the sea is rising around us all the time.”

Tuvalu and other at-risk countries are preparing for the worst, even as they press their case to larger nations. Kofe talked about people having to leave behind their homes and incomes because of the changes. Tuvalu and other island nations are pursing legal and diplomatic paths to keep their homes sovereign countries even if they’re underwater in 50 to 100 years. The nations’ negotiators in Glasgow, many of whom traveled for several days to get there, are exhausted by their effort, per New Scientist. “We are a group of very small countries that don’t have a significant amount of political leverage,” said a negotiator for the Alliance of Small Island States, which includes 39 nations. “But we have strength in numbers and the moral high ground—though that’s sometimes not enough.”

This ‘summit’ would be laughable if it weren’t so damn pathetic….the planet suffers and the best they could come up with is allowing the corporations to continue to plunder.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Environmental Thoughts For A Saturday

The weekend begins and we Southerners are praying for some rain…..we had a wet Spring but so far this Summer nothing….which is odd considering where I live has water on three sides…even the heat of the day does not generate a shower or two.

I have always been an activist for the environment….I recycle, do not litter, plant trees, etc etc……so recently with the new coal industry ad that compares a coal burning plant to a tree got my attention…..it shows a tree which captures CO2 as does the new plant…..making it seem that it is totally clean….the problem trees give off O2 as a by-product something a coal burning plant cannot do…..so the comparison is silly.

But there is something simple that can be used to help eliminate the CO2 emissions…..

Carbon capture and storage is a hot topic among researchers striving to save the planet from climate change. Scientists are constantly trying to develop and improve materials which can capture carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere. At the Energy Safety Research Institute (ESRI) at Swansea University, we’ve developed a promising new material from a liquid amine – a chemical which is known for its ability to react with CO₂, but in liquid form can’t do so effectively.

By adding just enough glue to make the liquid amine fluff up into a solid, the resulting new material is capable of capturing one-fifth of its own weight in CO₂. The glue is a type of epoxy resin – used everywhere in paints, varnishes and flooring. Our work shows that epoxy resins can be a key ingredient in making effective carbon capture materials – and they have been staring us in the face for more than 70 years.

Since huge advances are being made in renewable energy – and the UK’s reliance on fossil fuels has reduced – is carbon capture technology becoming redundant? Unfortunately not. There remains about 1.5 times the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere that there was in pre-industrial times. If we are to limit global warming to 1.5°C to avert the worst consequences of climate change, atmospheric CO₂ will have to be captured on an industrial scale, and either made into useful new chemicals or buried deep underground in depleted oil reservoirs.

https://theconversation.com/glue-could-be-the-magic-ingredient-for-cheap-and-efficient-co-capture-119441

Time to use any method available to capture CO2 emissions…..it can only help the climate and planet heal.

The day is done for me…..trying to stay cool in a 100 degree day…..not an easy task…LOL

Say Good Bye To The EPA

Almost daily we hear some story of how Trump, our Supreme Leader, is destroying the EPA and in turn destroying our fragile environment.

Let’s be honest Trump is doing his best for his corporate handlers and does not seem to give one whit about the environment as long as their is money to be made.

Do you agree?

Good!

Then let me go a little further…….Trump is destroying the EPA but Obama had his part in it as well……yes that is Obama with an “O”……

It was a tumultuous tenure, productive by some accounts, lackluster by most, but one thing is for certain, Lisa Jackson’s short time as administrator at the Environmental Protection Agency was anything but dull. On December 27, 2012 the often-fiery Jackson announced she was not going to return for a second term, and it is surely not difficult to see why she’s fleeing her post.

Since President Obama was ushered into office in 2008, the EPA has consistently faced ridicule and criticism from corporate polluters and their greedy allies in Washington. On virtually every occasion Obama refused to side with Jackson’s more rationale, often science-based positions, whether it was cleaning up the air or forcing the natural resource industries to abide by existing regulations. Ultimately, the EPA is only as formidable as the White House allows it to be, and on Obama’s watch the agency has not received the support it has desired or deserved.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/04/26/how-obama-defanged-the-epa-before-trump-gutted-the-agency/

Granted the EPA would have been a target for Trump but to leave out Obama’s part is just outright disingenuous.

The destruction will be complete if Trump gets a second term…..and the damage will not be repaired for many years….if ever.

Can the country afford to lose our fragile environment?

And where is the Green New Deal ….with respect to the EPA?

Parts of the Green New Deal……

Achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers

Secure for all people of the United States for generations to come: clean air and water; climate and community resiliency; healthy food; access to nature; and a sustainable environment

How will these parts be policed and instituted?

Questions need answers!

It’s Clean Coal–Again

Mr. Trump has signed yet another Executive Order (EO)….this time it effects the EPA regulations and as usual he uses an old stand by slogan…it will create jobs.

Once again we are told about the idea of “Clean Coal”……(if one believes this lie then one is a member of the “Ignorati”….clean coal…… it is a LIE!)

President Trump on Tuesday signed an executive order to unwind many of the environmental rules put in place by President Obama. The big change is that he ordered a review of the Clean Power Plan, which was designed to curb emissions at coal-fired power plants. The president celebrated “the start of a new era” in energy production, while environmentalists called it both “dangerous” and “embarrassing.” A look at coverage:

  • Trump signed the “Energy Independence” executive order at the EPA while surrounded by coal miners. “Today I’m putting an end to the war on coal,” he declared. See coverage of the event at the Guardian.
  • The Clean Power Plan hadn’t actually taken effect yet because it had been held up in the courts, explains the New York Times in a primer.
  • Despite the move to ease up on coal regulations, the utility industry is expected to continue its shift toward natural gas, wind, and solar, reports the Wall Street Journal. It points out that US utilities generated more electricity last year from natural gas than coal, and that trend is expected to continue.
  • The AP takes a look at the effect on the coal industry and doesn’t see a quick turnaround in the cards. In terms of jobs, it notes that more efficient ways of extracting coal have reduced the need for miners.
  • Amplifying the point is a quote from Robert Murray, chief executive of coal giant Murray Energy. “These actions are vital to the American coal industry, to our survival, and to getting some of our coal families back to work,” he said of Trump’s action. But he added: “I really don’t know how far the coal industry can be brought back.” See the New York Times.
  • Trump’s move does not pull the US out of the 2015 Paris climate accord, but it seriously undermines the promises made at the forum by President Obama. An NPR interview explains.
  • Not far enough? Conservative critics are unhappy Trump did not order the EPA to re-evaluate a 2009 “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gas threatens human welfare, notes Politico. A writer at Breitbart makes the case that EPA chief Scott Pruitt should resign over this.
  • A takeaway from a Washington Post analysis: “While Trump can unwind Obama’s climate legacy to some extent, the economic and political forces that have spurred those underlying shifts are largely beyond his control.”
  • Now comes the hard part, warns CNBC: Tuesday’s move provides a framework, but the White House must still come up with a detailed replacement for the Clean Power Plan.
  • One of the Obama orders being repealed directed federal agencies to coordinate and prepare for extreme weather, reports Bloomberg, which looks at the ramifications.

Back in 2009 this same argument was made and thanx to archives I found my post from those days……sadly the post was not that popular in ’09 maybe people are better awake these days……

We are hearing a lot in the media about the use of “clean coal”; even the president is pushing this concept…but people…that is all that it is…a concept…..and above all it is a lie…there is NO such thing as “clean coal”.

Source: The Lie Of “Clean Coal” – In Saner Thought

Some lies never change!  What was once old is new again.

This was a wasted use of mental energy…..and jobs?  This industry is embracing automation rapidly and to make it simple for my conserv friends…automation means less jobs……an easy equation even for a republican.

Clean Power Plan Hailed as Ambitious, Insufficient | Al Jazeera America

A few days ago the Prez made his big climate change speech…….it was hailed as an impressive speech and it was belittled by the deniers as a “chicken Little” moment…….but was the speech all that or was there holes in it?

We all know that something must be done…..well anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size…….but is this going to be the cure all that we all search for?

Personally, I think not……anytime you look for reform then the opponents have won…….you either do it or go home!

 

Clean Power Plan Hailed as Ambitious, Insufficient | Al Jazeera America.

Politics Of An Oil Spill

From the VOMITORIUM

By now hopefully you have heard about the world’s largest oil spill and all the drama that has gone with it trying to put a ‘cork in the hole’….all the political back and forth….all the political theater….all the accusations….and all the lunacies…..but with all that said there is another part of the story that few seem willing to cover, other than a 30 second sound bite and the rumblings from the radio loudmouths that have NO idea what is happening other than their convoluted sense of reality……and what would that be, Professor?…….the politics of an oil spill…..

There has been a wealth of hearing on the Hill about the spill and the response and who is to blame…..Newser.com has reported on yesterday’s House hearing with the CEO of BP….

While other congressmen were heaping abuse on BP CEO Tony Hayward in this morning’s hearings, one Republican abruptly shifted gears in his opening remarks and apologized to the man in the hot seat. Rep. Joe Barton told Hayward he was “ashamed” of the pressure the White House put on BP to create the $20 billion escrow fund to cover losses to victims of the spill. “I think it’s a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would call a shakedown,” the Texan said. “In this case a $20 billion shakedown.” Barton said the administration has no authority to ask for this “$20 billion slush fund” and that litigation provides adequate due process for awarding damages. “I apologize,” he said to Hayward. “I do not want to live in a country where every time a corporation does something wrong, it’s subject to a political process that amounts to a shakedown.” Later, Dem Rep. Ed Markey begged to differ, noting that litigation by victims of the Exxon Valdez spill took years to be settled, and criminal charges in the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India more than a quarter century.

Smoking’ Joe Barton of Texas?  Would like very much to see which of the oil companies pays his salary in Washington….of course, the GOP jumped his butt and forced him to apologize to the American people….which he did but he was NOT sincere….

Oh, there is always more when dealing with something as hot and volatile as the oil spill….there is a fight going on in the Senate about the liability of an oil company when they cause an environmental and economic disaster……

From Meredith Shiner of Politico:

Democrats attempted Thursday to create unlimited liability for oil companies, and for the fourth time since the Gulf crisis began, Republicans objected.

But Republicans worry that by setting unlimited liability for companies wishing to drill for oil, smaller domestic companies effectively would be shut out of the market. Inhofe, echoing the sentiments of colleague Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who has rejected Menendez’s requests in the past, said that by passing this bill, Congress would be favoring the Big Oil entities Democrats have been maligning.

The Repubs want to save the “mom and pop” oil ops……..okay reality check!  How many “Mom and Pop” oil ops are there in the gulf?  Sorry but it takes lots of money to drill in the Gulf and if you are drilling there you are NOT a “Mom and Pop” operation.  It sounds good that they are trying to protect us “small” people from the government, but this one is just f*cking silly.
And then we have my fav…the governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour…who recently said:

Mississippi’s Governor Haley Barbour  said Wednesday he has concerns over the $20 billion BP is required to put into an escrow to compensate victims of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Mr. Barbour says he has concerns because BP may need the assets in order to fund drilling and oil operations.

“If they take a huge amount of money and put it in an escrow account so they can’t use it to drill oil wells and produce revenue, are they going to be able to pay us?” the governor told The Associated Press.

“We need them to generate revenue to be able to pay us,” said Mr. Barbour, a Republican. “I worry that this escrow account reduces the chance of that rather than increasing the chances of that.”

The part about this is that there is politics being played with the lives of the people of the Gulf Coast…..I am sorry but this is not acceptable….but at least we as voters can see who is on the payroll of the massive oil companies…..so far I would bet the Vitter and Barton are for sure and possibly Barbour, who is a lobbyist by trade……Remember that at election time!

The Environmental Obama

In the beginning there was an election and the people spoke…they wanted change……

During the election in ’08 Obama wanted to be known as the education president and the environmental president and so far the environmental thing is not going so well….The Congressional Repubs are and will continue to fight the Dems and the President at every turn and will make the cap and trade thing the corner stone of the opposition.

One of this country, as well as the rest of the world, biggest problems is air pollution…..it has been blamed for everything from asthma to lung cancer to global warming or climate change, whichever you choose to use, and the whole cap and trade thing is an attempt to make corporations more environmentally responsible….the President has weighed in and the Dems are trying to make the environment more clean….

Are they?

In a piece written by Hiram Lee for wsws.org:

Up to 130 million tons of coal ash, the waste product created during coal combustion, are produced each year in the US, with approximately 40 percent of it going for use in other products such as asphalt or concrete. Sixty percent of the ash is stored in landfills or ash “ponds” throughout the country.

Exposure to coal ash through contaminated water supplies presents a significant health risk. The waste product contains toxic contaminants such as arsenic, mercury, lead and barium, which can lead to cancer, birth defects or disorders of the nervous system. There are currently no uniform, federal standards in place governing the building or maintenance of coal ash containment facilities.

In addition to treating coal ash as toxic waste in its proposal, the EPA has also named three industries—chemical manufacturing; petroleum and coal products manufacturing; and the electric power generation, transmission, and distribution industry—that could potentially face financial responsibility requirements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. Should CERCLA be amended to include these industries, it would force the companies involved to be financially responsible for the cleanup of any environmental contamination they may have caused.

The role of the Obama administration has been to prevent the EPA proposal from moving forward, acting on behalf of the coal and energy companies. Should the proposal be allowed to go through, it will only be after the administration has worked with the energy conglomerates to revise it in such as way as to arrange the most favorable financial conditions possible for the companies.

It seems that the Obama Admin is using the same tactic it used with the banks…..allow nothing to interfere with corporate profit…and that includes the environment….it will virtually impossible to be the environmental president when working hard against any reasonable attempts to curb air pollution….I am looking forward to see how they, Obama Admin, try and spin this situation…..that is assuming that it will get some press…..

UPDATE:  What happened to “green” technologies?  You remember those?  Wind…..solar….do-dah….but his, Pres. Obama, big deal is a guaranteed loan from a nuke plant….and in the same breath….they announce the closing of Yucca Mtn which is where spent fuel would be stored…..just asking!