Monday, May 29, 2017

What we've been talking about for awhile now: the increasing criminalization of protest, the militarization of policing, and the corruption of democracy and rule of law through privatized (paramilitary) policing: Leaked Documents Reveal Counterterrorism Tactics Used at Standing Rock to “Defeat Pipeline Insurgencies”

All of which offers more support for our thesis about the inherent (and increasing) criminality of the fossil fuel industry.  More troubling, we see the blurred lines between public law enforcement and these private mercenary contractors.  Troubling signs of the lengths that the fossil fuel industry and those sectors of law enforcement without the principle to question them will go to defend the interests of private fossil fuel capital.

Leaked Documents Reveal Counterterrorism Tactics Used at Standing Rock to “Defeat Pipeline Insurgencies”

See also, Ruth Hopkins' earlier report on private security at NoDAPL: http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/40681-footing-the-15-million-bill-for-the-dakota-access-pipeline-s-private-army







Monday, May 15, 2017

Dakota Access Pipeline security arrested. - Native Daily Network



Dakota Access Pipeline security arrested. - Native Daily Network




Monday, May 8, 2017

Flood near coal-fired power plant raises concerns about water contamination

Flood near coal-fired power plant raises concerns about water contamination

Exam review: How does #hegemony work? #coercion and #consent: Oklahoma Governor Signs Anti-Protest Law Imposing Huge Fines on “Conspirator” Organizations

Oklahoma Governor Signs Anti-Protest Law Imposing Huge Fines on “Conspirator” Organizations

By Alleen Brown, The Intercept... (click image for full story)

A STATUTE AIMED at suppressing protests against oil and gas pipelines has been signed into law in Oklahoma, as a related bill advances through the state legislature. The two bills are part of a nationwide trend in anti-protest laws meant to significantly increase legal penalties for civil disobedience. 
Photo: Mike McCleary/The Bismarck Tribune via AP (via The Intercept)


Friday, May 5, 2017

Exam review: What legislation might help or hinder the fight against carbon lock-in? Indiana’s governor just signed a law that will cripple the state’s solar industry

Indiana’s governor just signed a law that will cripple the state’s solar industry

Exam review, The #Grid: As utilities embrace DERs, pilot projects emerge as key element of compromise

As utilities embrace DERs, pilot projects emerge as key element of compromise

As in Bakke's book, see here a couple of key points:

1) Utilities are generally reticent to change ("first to be second")

2) Issues of incoporating new technologies slowly

3) Regional variation (NE and Cali most advanced, the rest laggards)

4) Political and policy challenges

5) Importance of regional and state level grassroots action and pressure

The Paris Agreements aren't enough, but they are something, and Trump is dead wrong: via Timmons Roberts: From Harrisburg come two profound misconceptions about the Paris Agreement | Brookings Institution

Timmons Roberts

Highlights:

“The United States pays billions of dollars while China, Russia, and India have contributed and will contribute nothing.”
This statement is misguided and misleading. India and China are industrializing countries. China’s emissions have leveled off over the past three years, 13 years ahead of the deadline they agreed as part of their Paris pledge and with per capita emissions one-third that of the U.S. India’s are still rising, but from a per capita level of emissions one-tenth of the U.S. and with per capita incomes only 3 percent of the U.S. Both countries have invested massively in expanding renewable energy with generation capacity that now surpasses the U.S. by a large margin. Meanwhile, the U.S. remains by far the country most responsible for today’s carbon pollution.... 
Trump’s claim appears to draw from a Heritage Foundation report, which looks narrowly at the costs of climate action, without factoring in the enormous cost of doing nothing. This oversight is crucial: If we don’t act on climate change quickly, rising seas will cost hundreds of billions to hold back from damaging coastal cities. Fires, droughts, and more intense hurricanes will continue to drive up disaster relief costs. The 2006 Stern Review back pioneered the economics of trying to understand those costs, and they are huge. Sir Nicholas Stern and his co-authors found that not acting to prevent climate change was far more expensive than acting on climate change, and the point has been confirmed repeatedly since then.