Blog For Arizona

Feb 19 City Council Meetings: Bus Fare Hike, Ronstadt Transit Center Redevelopment

by Pamela Powers Hannley

At the Feb. 19 study session and evening meeting, the Tucson City Council will consider two issues that could greatly affect bus service in our town.

During the study session, they will consider a proposal to increase bus fares. At the regular evening meeting, they will hear public comments about the proposed redevelopment of the Ronstadt Transit Center. (Proposals and background here.) In between these two meetings, the Tucson Bus Riders Union will have a rally outside of the City Council Chambers, beginning at 4 p.m. (Details and related articles below.)

The Price of Fracking: Earthquakes, Explosions, & Water Contaninmation

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Politicians and energy industry enthusiasts have touted fracking as the path to US energy independence, while environmentalists have battled against the proliferation of fracking and the resultant damage to the Earth. Despite environmental concerns, 18 states have jumped onto the fracking bandwagon (map.)

Fracking now is being blamed for an outbreak of earthquakes in North Texas, the explosion (pun intended) of crude oil train disasters across the country, and water contamination in four states. (Fracking accident map pictured here.)

Texas Is Shaking

More than 20 earthquakes have rocked North Texas since October 2013. Seventeen of those earthquakes have hit the small town of Azle, Texas, and residents are up in arms.

Why is North Texas shaking and sinking? Fracking.

I'm not saying Japan's schools are failing or its government doesn't work, but . . .

by David Safier

It's been more than two years since a tsunami caused six reactor meltdowns and massive radiation leakage at the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster, and the place is still being held together with chewing gum and bailing wire. The reactors are in critical condition, one mishap or geological event away from a second disaster that could be worse than the first.

Surprisingly, no one is spending much time blaming the problems at Fukushima on the undereducated Japanese who weren't able to avert the disaster or fix the problems once they occurred, and we don't hear much about Japan's government being inept. Because, well, we're talking about Japan, not the U.S. Everyone knows Japan's schools are wonderful. In the recent international tests, they scored 4th in Reading, 4th in Science and 7th in Math, unlike the failing schools in the U.S. that came in around 20th place overall. And, well, those Asian countries know how to get things done, unlike our inept, debt-riddled, bureaucracy-laden, Kenyan/socialist-run U.S. government.

But for a moment, let's play the blame game, like it might be played by conservatives if this were a U.S. problem, complete with bold, underlined, all-caps pronouncements.

According to an AP story, Japan lacks decommissioning experts for Fukushima:

JAPAN HAS TO IMPORT EXPERTS TO DECOMMISSION FUKUSHIMA!! EXPERTS FROM THE UNITED STATES AND FRANCE!!

Japan is incapable of safely decommissioning the devastated Fukushima nuclear plant alone and must stitch together an international team for the massive undertaking.

Imagine if the U.S. lacked the expertise to handle its technological messes and had to bring in people from other countries. That would be one more incontrovertible proof that our schools are failing.

The complicated transformation of the kingdom of oil

By Karl Reiner

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia occupies the largest part of the Arabian Peninsula's land mass. Approximately the size of the U.S. east of the Mississippi River, the country is predominantly uninhabited desert. Having one of the lowest rates of rainfall in the world, Saudi Arabia suffers from severe water scarcity. It also has the distinction of being the world's largest country without a permanently flowing river. As the birthplace of Islam, Saudi Arabia has two of the religion's holiest shrines in Mecca and Medina. These locations attract millions of religious travelers annually.

For centuries, nomadic, patriarchal tribes migrated through the desert lands with their animals, changing location with the season. In 1932, ibn Saud, the leader of the Al-Saud family, unified the country after a 30 year struggle. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy. Its people follow a conservative form of Sunni Islam. The nation's legal system is based on Sharia law, the king is the chief of state as well as the head of government. When oil was discovered in commercial quantities in 1938, the country began to make economic changes. After the oil price increases of the early 1970s, development took off.

At Fukushima Nuclear Plant: Removing fuel rods

by David Safier

Another of my semi-regular updates about the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant, since the story isn't picked up in the local news.

In March, 2011, a tsunami crippled the Fukushima nuclear power plant, and it's pretty much the same mess today it was then, except that millions of gallons of radioactive water have leaked in the meanwhile. And earthquakes keep shaking the ocean floor nearby. A 7.3 magnitude quake hit 230 miles away October 25.

So how are things progressing? Well, they're finally ready to begin moving fuel rods from where they've been submerged in one of the reactor sites to a more stable location. Lots of fuel rods. Best case scenario, they'll finish the move by the end of 2014.

Plant engineers will use a crane to lift the fuel assemblies from the pool and put them into giant casks of water. Each cask will be placed on a trailer and moved to a more secure pool at ground level.

“There are potentially very big risks involved,” Shunichi Tanaka, the head of Japan’s nuclear regulator, said last week. “Each assembly must be handled very carefully.”

This won't fix anything. If all goes well, it just means one contaminated, damaged reactor will be emptied of spent fuel rods and they'll be placed elsewhere. Two and a half years later, they're trying to take a baby step forward from the held-together-by-spit-glue-and-bailing-wire stage, which is where they still are. This is the real world of nuclear power, where everything's fine until it's not, and when something happens, first reaction is, "We had no idea that [fill in the blank] could happen," and the second reaction is, "What the hell do we do now?"

'Kochtopus' dark money and Arizona solar energy

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Arizona Republic reported this week, APS, solar companies clash over credits to customers:

APS recently acknowledged to The Arizona Republic that it provided money to a Washington, D.C.-based conservative organization called 60 Plus, which focuses on seniors’ issues such as taxes, Social Security and Medicare.

It also gave money to another non-profit called Prosper, which was launched this year by Republican Kirk Adams, a former Arizona House speaker.

The non-profits have supported APS’ position in websites, online videos and television advertisements.

John Hatfield, APS vice president of communications, said the utility is contributing money to the non-profits, and potentially other groups, through political consultant Sean Noble and his firm, DC London.

“We needed to respond to these ridiculous assertions that we do not support solar,” Hatfield said, adding that APS does not agree with all political positions at 60 Plus and Prosper.

Early this year, APS initiated a series of meetings with solar companies and other interested parties to address net metering.

In March, California rooftop-installation companies SolarCity Corp. and Sunrun Inc., with other partners, formed TUSK, or “Tell Utilities Solar won’t be Killed.”

The group opposed changes to net metering even before APS formally submitted its proposed changes to the Corporation Commission, which approves rates and related policies for most of the state’s utilities.

Fukushima accidents keep piling up

by David Safier

It may not be a daily occurrence, but I've been reading accounts of new accidents at the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant on a weekly basis. I'm tempted to put up one of those Three Stooges images of them "fixing" the plumbing, but this is too goddamned scary for flippancy.

Last week it was an overflow of one of the holding tanks for radioactive water. The water was 6,700 times higher than the legal radioactive limit, but it was a comparatively small spill compared to the regular leakage from the defective tanks.

Today comes the news that six workers were doused in radioactive water.

The workers removed the wrong pipe from equipment at the plant, sending toxic water spilling onto them and the entire floor of the facility housing a set of three units designed for primary, partial water treatment, said Yoshimi Hitosugi, the spokesman for Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co.

We keep getting stories of mishaps large and small at Fukushima. We never hear stories about the crippled plant being stabilized. It's still as unstable as ever. Bottom line, they have no idea how to fix the thing. Really, the best plan floated recently is to freeze the ground around the plant to stop the leaking radioactive water from reaching the ocean. It's apparently a feasible plan. It would be slow and costly to complete and its effectiveness would, ironically, depend on an uninterrupted flow of electricity to keep the ground frozen. But if the best they can hope for is to build an ice wall instead of fixing the problem at the source, that reinforces how out-of-control the situation is.

A "FORGOT ONE" UPDATE: Monday, a pump moving radioactive water from the damaged reactor cores shut down. The reason? Either a faulty electrical switchboard or worker error. Neither is comforting.

Let's Negotiate!

Republicans have been demanding negotiations over the government shutdown. A few minutes ago, President Obama gave in to their demand. In a private meeting with House leaders, he said:

Let's negotiate. I understand that you want to repeal Obamacare, or at least delay it for a year. Now let me tell you what I want:

Japanese ex-Prime Minister "Scared Solar"

by David Safier

They take kids who look like they're headed for trouble and use the Scared Straight tactic to show them what their lives will be like if they continue down their current path. Call Japan's former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi Scared Solar.

He used to be a big supporter of nuclear energy. Then came the Fukushima meltdown. Now he's saying Japan should close its nuclear energy plants and go with renewable energy.

As a pro-growth prime minister from 2001 to 2006, Mr. Koizumi had backed the business lobby by calling for Japan to become “a nation built on nuclear power,” calling it cheap and clean, and sided with the Tokyo Electric Power Company in deciding to end tax-supported subsidies for solar panels. But he said in Tuesday’s speech that he had reversed his stance after the nuclear accident at Tepco’s Fukushima complex two and a half years ago, which left at least 83,000 people homeless and forced a multibillion-dollar cleanup that has been riddled with mistakes and accidents.

“There is nothing more costly than nuclear power,” Mr. Koizumi, 71, was quoted as saying. “Japan should achieve zero nuclear plants and aim for a more sustainable society.”

I'm sure I'm being unfair to Koizumi to say he's scared. It's just that, once a line like "scared solar" pops into my head, well, there's no denying it. Let's say he's seen the future, and it's either safe, sustainable energy or the constant threat of another Fukushima, or worse, wreaking havoc on the only country that's ever had an atom bomb dropped on its people.

Climate Smart Southwest: Are YOU Ready for Climate Change?

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Is it hot enough for ya?

In the coming years, as temperatures rise, weather patterns evolve, and plant and animal species become extinct, that wry, old country greeting will lose it’s quaint humor. Thanks to global warming.

The Southwest is already the hottest and driest part of the US. And our region is already experiencing longer and more intense heat waves, a dramatic spike in forest fires and severe dust storms, and changes in rainfall and seasonal snowmelt. These changes threaten water resources, food security, and public health.  As extreme weather events continue to increase, we will see higher rates of heat stress, newly emerging infectious diseases, asthma, and other respiratory illnesses.

How will the Sonoran Desert change as climate change progresses? Will we have enough water? What will our air quality be like if Arizona’s dirty coal-fired power plants continue to balk at environmental regulations?  How will Arizona cope with rolling brown outs if electrical demand spikes? How will Tucson’s vulnerable populations fare with more days over 100 degrees? What can we do NOW to lessen the impact of climate change on our fragile environment?

This coming weekend, Sept. 20-21, the Arizona Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR) is sponsoring an important conference for us desert dwellers:Climate Smart Southwest, Ready or Hot? Check out the details after the jump.

New leak at Fukushima nuclear power plant

by David Safier

Recently the Tokyo Electric Power Co. admitted there are underground leaks of radioactive water reaching the Pacific Ocean -- 80,000 gallons every day -- after repeatedly denying the leaks. In a non-apology apology, a spokesman said,

"We have made efforts not to cause any leak to the outside, but we might have failed to do so."

Might have failed indeed.

Today, another story, another leak. This time, 300 tons of water leaked from a storage tank -- one of a thousand above ground storage tanks strewn among the litter of what was once a nuclear power plant. This is very toxic stuff. If you stand a foot away from the leaking water for an hour, you'll receive 5 times the maximum yearly radiation dose for nuclear workers.

The tanks, which are only 500 yards from the ocean, are supposed to last 5 years. This one is leaking after 2 years. No telling how well the other 999 tanks will hold up. To hold back the radioactive spillage, workers are putting up sandbags, which sounds ludicrously inadequate. To make things worse, heavy rains are expected in the region.

Since it doesn't look like they're going to be able to keep the water from leaking out any time soon, Japan's nuclear regulator has suggested -- I'm not making this up -- creating an underground wall of ice to hold back the leaks.

Japan isn't even close to figuring out how to stabilize the Fukushima plant, which is being held together by the scientific equivalent of duct tape, bailing wire and chewing gum. The only leaks they've been moderately successful in containing are leaks to the press about how dire the situation is.

The attempt to deregulate electricity in Arizona and to reduce Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) standards

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Ealier this year, Republican Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce proposed but later withdrew a plan that would have effectively reduced the renewable-energy procurement requirement under the state’s Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) for Arizona Public Service Co. by excluding more large customers from the formula used to calculate total retail sales, in which the standard is based. Cuts to renewable-energy incentives blasted - Arizona Daily Star:

[APS] interpreted the proposal to mean the commission would effectively reduce its standard requiring utilities to obtain 15 percent of their retail energy sales from renewable sources by 2025 to 13.35 percent for APS.

Utilities are required to meet certain goals each year as they work up to the 15 percent standard, and APS is currently ahead, Rebecca Wilder, spokeswoman for the Arizona Corporation Commission, said.

But Wilder said that in order to reduce the standard, the commission would have to reopen and revise the 2006 regulations, which she said it has no plans to do.

They're baaack! Energy deregulation in Arizona?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Many of the states that went down the path of deregulation in the 1990s did an about-face when the results, typically, were not what was expected. The California Energy Crisis of the early 2000s and the Enron scandal -- remember them? -- led some states to reconsider deregulation. In Arizona, the Court of Appeals in 2004 ruled parts of the state’s deregulation rules were unconstitutional. Quick Reference Guide to Electricity Deregulation - Arizona's Energy Future (APS).

Unbridled greed and market manipulation in the commodities market is endemic. The banksters of Wall Streetare not to be trusted. Just last week, Goldman Sachs was disclosed to be manipulating the price of aluminum. Goldman Sachs's Aluminum Pile - NYTimes.com:

Unlike investors in the past that bought up the commodities they were trying to control, Goldman is not buying the world’s aluminum. Rather, it is storing the metal for other banks, traders and aluminum producers in a complex of warehouses outside Detroit that it acquired in 2010. The problem, as described in The Times by David Kocieniewski, is that since the bank entered this business, the time it takes buyers to get the metal from those warehouses has shot up to more than 16 months, from 6 weeks. Goldman has attributed the delays to a shortage of trucks and forklift drivers. But Goldman also pays incentives to owners of the metal to keep it in the bank’s warehouses.

Fukushima fesses up

by David Safier

Two years after a tsunami knocked out the Fukushima power plant, you would hope the damage would have been contained. But the only thing that's been contained is the flow of information about the instability of the reactor site and the continuing damage to the environment.

Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) has finally admitted what scientists have known and reported. Radioactive water is leaking from the plan into the sea. Oh, and

. . . the number of plant workers with thyroid radiation exposures exceeding threshold levels for increased cancer risks was 10 times what it said released earlier.

The company spokesman actually hasn't said for certain there are leaks into the  sea, even though the radiation levels in the water have risen. He issued this half apology.

"We are very sorry for causing concerns. We have made efforts not to cause any leak to the outside, but we might have failed to do so."

"Causing concerns." "Have made efforts." "We might have failed." I guess you can't say the situation is beyond your control and may get worse before it gets better, can you?

Two years after the tsunami, the reactor is being held together by chewing gum and bailing wire. It's an exposed pile of dynamite waiting for a spark to set it off. The disaster at Fukushima, as horrific as it was, is only part of the story. The story now is the inability to stabilize the plant. It looks like the problem isn't ineptitude, though that might be a contributing factor. The problem is, the damage was so severe and the site is so contaminated, it's virtually impossible to complete the necessary repairs.

California nuke plant closing

by David Safier

In another cautionary tale about the nuclear energy industry, the San Onofre nuclear plant in southern California is closing. The reason is, steam generators installed recently had dangerous levels of damage to hundreds of tubes.

[T]ests found some generator tubes so badly eroded that they could fail and possibly release radiation, a startling finding for nearly new equipment.

Federal investigators last year concluded that a botched computer analysis resulted in design flaws that were largely to blame for the heavy tube wear. Edwin Lyman, a nuclear expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a watchdog group, said the mistake raises broad questions for an industry that regularly relies on computer tools.

This is the second time San Onofre reactors had to be mothballed. The first was in 1992, due to decaying generator tubes.

Of course, the owner of the plant, Southern California Edison, fought the closure. It's always worth taking a little risk with leaked radiation to keep the energy pumping out and the money rolling in. With the shutdown a done deal, Edison is planning to sue Mistubishi, which designed the reactor. Consumer groups are asking for a refund to users that could total $1.3 billion. Whatever the financial outcome, the 8 million people who live within 50 miles of the plant (between L.A. and San Diego) can breathe a little easier.

Fukushima: enough radioactive wastewater to fill 112 Olympic-sized swimming pools -- and counting

by David Safier

By now, the danger from the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear power plant that was hit by a tsunami two years ago should be contained, or at least the cleanup should be heading in the right direction. Instead, it's a frightening, cautionary tale about how difficult it is to deal with a nuclear-related problem like this, and how politics and business interests make the situation even worse.

The latest problem. Groundwater that flows from nearby mountains to the sea flows through the contaminated area, something that didn't worry the plant's operators who are in charge of the cleanup (bad idea) or the oversight committee made up of nuclear industry insiders and government apologists (worse idea). Their solution? Store the water, decontaminate it as well as they can and dump it in the ocean. Right now, with 75 gallons of groundwater flowing in every minute,

A small army of workers has struggled to contain the continuous flow of radioactive wastewater, relying on hulking gray and silver storage tanks sprawling over 42 acres of parking lots and lawns. The tanks hold the equivalent of 112 Olympic-size pools.

They're running out of storage space, so they plan to chop down a small forest to make room for more tanks. Meanwhile, the plant is in such a precarious state, an earthquake could create another disaster.

Some hair-raising passages from the article:

ExxonMobil media censorship of Mayflower oil spill

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

As has often been said, "the cover-up is worse than the crime." Multinational corporate behemoth ExxonMobil is strong-arming the local media into not reporting on its Mayflower oil spill in Arkansas. Samuel Knight reports at the Political Animal blog, Crude censorship on Arkansas oil spill story:

The March 29 ExxonMobil oil spill in Mayflower, Arkansas might not come close to being the worst environmental disaster in recent American history, but it does, nonetheless, warrant significant media attention.

The spilled substance, after all, is diluted bitumen (“dilbit”) from Alberta’s tar sands: the same gunk that will grace the Keystone XL Pipeline if its construction is approved by the State Department. Dilbit presents a unique challenge to clean up crews when efforts to transport it go pear-shaped.

Unlike conventional oil, which floats to the surface when excreted into a body of water, dilbit is a peanut butter-like substance that sinks. It’s like a high maintenance partner - stubborn, clingy, and around long after you’re desperate to be left alone. A 2010 dilbit spill in the Kalamazoo River near Marshall, Michigan, for example, is taking years, not months, to clean and might have irreparably harmed the locals.

It's not an oil spill - it's a revolutionary energy distribution system

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The brilliant Andy Cobb from Second City has put together a parody video of those annoying Exxon-Mobil ads telling us how friggin wonderful they are. Exxon - Energy Everywhere:

America's oil industry is terribly misunderstood. When a lot of people hear "364 pipeline spills in 2012" they think it's a big mess, like a nearly realized advent calendar of crap. What they fail to see is a revolutionary energy distribution system about to achieve NATIONWIDE COVERAGE.

And remember, that's not just gas or oil flowing through the streets of Arkansas--it's dilbit, the thick toxic hydrocarbon stew produced by tarsands. So roam wherever, and take your energy source with you! That s--t is sticky as hell, it's not like you're going to be able to get it off.

Video below the fold.

Safety problem in all U.S. nuclear plants, says ex-regulator

by David Safier

Consider the source. Gregory B. Jaczko is the former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, not someone from an anti-nuke group. Jaczko says every nuclear power plant in the U.S. -- 104 in all -- has an unfixable safety problem, and they need to be replaced.

Dr. Jaczko cited a well-known characteristic of nuclear reactor fuel to continue to generate copious amounts of heat after a chain reaction is shut down. That “decay heat” is what led to the Fukushima meltdowns. The solution, he said, was probably smaller reactors in which the heat could not push the temperature to the fuel’s melting point.

As NRC chair, Jaczko often voted for greater safety measures for nuclear plants, contrary to the other commission members. He stepped down last summer.

The nuclear industry, eerily echoing George Wallace's famous "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" speech, said the plants were safe before Jaczko was NRC chair, were safe during the Fukushima tsunami disaster and are safe today.

Another day, another power failure at Fukushima

by David Safier

To recap: Fukushima nuclear power plant was hit by a tsunami 2 years ago, knocking out the plant and spilling all kinds of dangerous radiation into the environment. Surely the highly competent Japanese engineers have had plenty of time to stabilize the system, right?

How do you say "Three Stooges" in Japanese?

Last month, cooling systems at the power plant were knocked out for 30 hours because a rat got into a switchboard, gnawed into a cable and short-circuited the system. They know, because they found a fried rat at the scene of the crime.

Now they're trying to fix the rat problem by installing wire nets. (Let's pause for a moment here to note: a disabled state-of-the-art nuclear power plant is putting up wire nets to catch rats so they won't chew up the electrical cables and create another nuclear disaster.) But one of the nets caused another power outage Friday. They took care of it in a few hours. Nothing to see here, folks.

After two years, according to the Times, Fukushima nuclear plant is "debris-strewn" and "still relies on makeshift cooling systems, some of which were hastily put together in the accident’s frantic aftermath."

From Reuters, we learn that Tokyo Electric Power Co. just reported a leak of 120 tons of radioactive water from a storage tank. The company didn't say how long the tank has been leaking but assured us the radioactivity won't reach the sea. Which is a good thing, because they caught a fish near Fukushima in February that has the honor of being the most radioactive marine life ever tested, so there's plenty of radioactivity out there already.

New power failure at Fukushima Nuclear Plant: Nothing to see here

by David Safier

On Monday, crucial cooling systems at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the one hit by the 2011 tsunami creating the second largest nuclear plant disaster in history, were knocked out for 30 hours. The power company says there was no danger, because it takes 4 days for the fuel to reach dangerously high temperatures. Others aren't so sure it was nothing to worry about.

[T]he cutoff of the vital systems appeared to support fears by some experts and critics that the plant remains dangerous in part because some vital safety systems were makeshift fixes devised at the height of the nuclear crisis.

The latest information says the blackout was caused by a rat that they think chewed on the cables of a switchboard and short-circuited the system. A blackout caused by a rat is the definition of a system without the necessary safeguards.

The affected cooling system is there to keep the temperature of the spent fuel pools low. The system "still relies on makeshift cooling systems, some of which were built as stopgap measures in the frantic weeks and months after the accident." The fact that these systems are still makeshift two years later is frightening.

In other news,

A fish caught near the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant last month [in February] now officially holds the dubious honor of being the world's most radioactive marine life ever tested, according to the Tokyo Electric Power Co., which owns the plant and has been testing marine life in the area.

Building a Sustainable Economy in Tucson: Public Forum Tonight

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Tonight-- February 11-- Sustainable Tucson will host a panel discussion and public forum focusing on creative ideas for building a sustainable economy in Tucson.

Tucson is one of the poorest cities in the southwest, has a fragile desert ecosystem, and relies far too heavily on defense, the University of Arizona, and tourism for its vitality. We need diversification and creativity in our economic development efforts.

Tonight's speakers represent wide-ranging ideas from public banking and time trading to TREO's efforts in building Tucson's economy. The meeting will be held in the downtown library's lower level meeting room. Doors open at 5:30 p.m.; program begins at 6 p.m. Details after the jump.

This week in "Safe, affordable nuclear power"

by David Safier

Florida's Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant is being shut down permanently. It's been closed since 2009 when it was discovered its concrete containment building was cracked, then the repair attempt opened new cracks.

The site will still be around another 60 years -- 3 generations -- before it's completely decontaminated and dismantled.

Rate payers will get money back, given by one of Duke Energy's hands, then that money and more will be taken away by the other. An insurance settlement to the company will mean $835 million in customer refunds because they've had to pay for higher cost power while the plant was offline. But then Duke will try to get $1.65 billion back from the same customers to recoup its investment (because, I guess, the company shouldn't have to pay for its risky investment in nuclear power). Net loss to customers: $815 million.

There are so many cautionary tales in this short news item, I don't know where to begin, so I'll leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions.

The New New Deal ... a book by Michael Grunwald

book review posted by John Denker

The New New Deal is a recent book by Michael Grunwald. It is very interesting, important, informative, readable, thorough, and persuasive. It revolves around the so-called Stimulus Act of 2009. There are three parts to the story: (1) The economic collapse and the election in the autumn of 2008; (2) the drafting and passage of the Stimulus Act in the winter of 2008–2009; and (3) the implementation and the consequences from 2009 to 2012.

I wish everybody would read this book, in order to know what was done and how well it worked. This is important, because many of the same policy issues are still with us, in connection with today’s fiscal negotiations and in the longer term, forever. We need public support for making the right decisions.

Steve Benen called this “the best book on the Obama presidency to date.” It injects some desperately needed reality into the discussion.

<...more...>

Republican’s Support for Real Estate ‘Sprawl Subsidy’ May Have Decided Corporation Commission Race

By Will B. Greene 

  Full Disclosure: The author was Paul Newman’s 2012 Campaign Manager for Arizona Corporation Commissioner.

Special interests won the day in the race for the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) in 2012, while the Arizona public got legally swindled. 

 On Tuesday it was revealed the Arizona and National Association of Realtors spent $186,000 supporting Republican ACC candidates, Bob Stump, Susan Bitter-Smith and Bob Burns, who beat Democrats Paul Newman, Sandra Kennedy, and Marcia Busching on November 6th.  The realtors, and Chicago based utility-giant Exelon (who contributed $10,000 for good measure) made their purchase under the political committee moniker “Taxpayers’ Voice Fund”, with the money funding two mailers targeting swing voters just days before election day.

Tucson's grey water ordinance promotes greener desert, wise water use

by Pamela Powers Hannley

In 2008, the City of Tucson passed a grey water ordinance requiring new homes to include a stub-out to enable grey water usage. 

Four years later, City of Tucson Development Services Manager Ernie Duate wants the City Council to march backwards and dump the ordinance. Why? Because homebuilders are whining. Grey water plumbing can add $600-1000 to the cost of a new home. On a $150,000 home, that's 0.04% to 0.06% of the cost. According to home builders, that extra cost prices people out of the housing market. (In some ways, this story is similar to the dirty coal story I published yesterday because capitalists are lobbying government to lessen or eliminate envrionmental laws.) 

Duarte also claims that no one wants the grey water piping. According to the Arizona Daily Star, more than 800 homes have been built with grey water piping since 2008 and not one homeowner has come to Development Services and paid the $800-1000 permit fee to complete the grey water installation. Many Tucsonans have "grey water system" like mine, pictured here. It is amazing how much water gushes out of that old washing machine's hose during just one load of wash. (I wish I had the piping in my house.) 

I take issue with Duarte's claim that no one wants grey water piping. What happened to the US and Tucson economies since 2008? The housing and financial markets colapsed. Millions of people lost their jobs and their homes. Tucson became the most empoverished city in the Sun Belt. People who still own homes are just trying to keep them. Just because no one volunteered to pay an extra $1000 to install grey water doesn't mean that no one installed grey water or that no one wants it. More wrangling after the jump.

Barber sides with haze & coal in Cochise County-- not EPA

by Pamela Powers Hannley

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with keeping our air and water clean. Clean air and water are tied directly to public health and long-term well-being of our citiznes, so you'd think everyone would be on board with these goals. 

Not so much.

Keeping air and water clean costs money. Capitalist polluters prefer low costs and high profits, and consequently, they fight EPA regulations at every level (particularly in the halls of Congress) or try to get someone else (like taxpayers) to clean up their subsequent messes.

Arizona has multiple coal-fired power plants. The EPA recently reviewed the Apache Generating Station operated by Arizona Electric Power Cooperative (AEPCO) in Cochise, Arizona and recommended extensive upgrades-- like $160-200 million worth-- to reduce emissions and minimize haze in Southern Arizona. AEPCO wants to make less extensive upgrades-- like $21 million worth-- and threatens to raise rates on consumers 20% if the EPA insists on continuing their quest for reduced emissions and haze in the valley near the Cochise Stronghold. 

In a raucus public hearing, the people of Cochise County, said, "Hell, no!" to the EPA back in August. Environmental activists at this meeting were woefully outnumbered, and some were even booed when they spoke in favor of the EPA recommendation to the crowd of 250-300 people. Is it surprising that Bensonites prefer haze over the Chiricahuas? NO. What is Congressman Ron Barber's position? Keep reading after the jump.

Gov. Jan Brewer at the Western Governors Association - sound of crickets chirping

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Too funny! Great catch by Steve Benen. Jan Brewer struggles to draw a crowd:

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer hosted a meeting of the Western Governors Association over the weekend, where she was scheduled to deliver a speech on energy policy. Beforehand, the governor chatted with local TV station KTVK, which asked whether Brewer believes in climate change.

"Everybody has an opinion on it, you know, and I, you know, I probably don't believe that it's man made," she said. "I believe that, you know, that weather elements are controlled maybe by different things."

Once the interview was over, Brewer asked the local reporter, "Where in the hell did that come from?"

Of course. Because nothing's more outlandish than asking a governor about climate change before a speech on energy policy.

Tucson Progressive Film Festival: 6 films: 3 days: $15

Progressive Democrats of America Tucson Chapter is teaming up with Tucson MoveOn.org and The Screening Room to host a weekend of progressive films, this weekend, October 26-28.

Six films on wide-ranging topics from the Koch Brothers to urban farming will be aired. You can come to one film or buy a weekend pass for only $15-- cheaper than Net Flix!

Prices: $8/film, $10/ individual day pass, $15/entire festival. You can buy tickets at the box office before the shows or buy day passes and festival passes via Pay Pal by going to the PDA Tucson website and clicking the "Buy Now" link in the right column. Be sure to bring your Pay Pal receipt to The Screen Room as your ticket for admission.

http://pdatucson.blogspot.com/

Friday, Oct. 26, 6:30 
Former State Senator and PDA Tucson Chair Phil Lopes will introduce the Festival and welcome everyone

Friday, 7 p.m.
Heist: Who Stole the American Dream 
followed by a discussion led by filmmaker Frances Causey
http://www.heist-themovie.com/index.html

Saturday, October 27, 3 p.m. 
Urban Roots (the Greening of Detroit)
followed by a discussion led by Tucson urban gardeners and a representative from the Community Food Bank

Saturday, 7 p.m. 
Koch Brothers Exposed, 
http://www.kochbrothersexposed.com/

Sunday, Oct. 28, 1:30 p.m. 
Cyanide Beach
followed by a discussion led by filmmaker John Dougherty
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPuxQkHzMJ0

Sunday, 2:45 p.m.
Vote
followed by a discussion led by State Senator Paula Aboud

Sunday, 4 p.m.
Laramie Inside Out
followed by discussion led by filmmaker Beverly Seckinger
http://laramieinsideout.com/

If you don't think your vote counts, watch this... (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College vote in 2000. In the historic recount of Florida's vote, he lost that state by 537 votes--out of more than 6 million cast.

Check out this historic video of an alternative universe where President Al Gore became president.

Gore State of the Union

 

 

 

President Clinton campaigns for Carmona in Arizona, as polls show race tightening (video)

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Despite Arizona’s reputation as a stalwartly red state, with a capital R, Democrats are hoping to take back one of the state’s US Senate in November.

Although Democrats have held a percentage of the state’s Congressional seats for years, the Republican Party has controlled both Arizona US Senate seats since 1994, when embattled Senator Dennis Deconcini retired, and Arizona Congressman Jon Kyl won it.

Since early 2012, former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona has been crisscrossing the state, campaigning tirelessly to move that Senate seat to the D column. Over the summer, Carmona climbed steadily in the polls against Kyl’s heir apparent and six-term, conservative Congressman Jeff Flake. A recently released poll shows Independent-turned-Democrat Carmona leading Flake by four percentage points—a statistical dead heat.

This close—and important—Senate race has attracted the attention of heavy hitters from both parties. While the Koch Brothers’ Freedom Works PAC has been pumping money into Flake’s campaign, this week Democrats sent their secret weapon—President Bill Clinton—to Arizona to help Carmona.

Wednesday night, Carmona and Clinton addressed an estimated 5500 Arizonans at an outdoor rally on the Arizona State University (ASU) campus.

More details and a videos after the jump.

SunZia: The Making of a Slave State, First Power then Transmission

Why does Arizona tolerate it? Why do its citizens tolerate it? Who benefits by creating a slave-state status for Arizona?

by Russell Lowes, www.SafeEnergyAnalyst.org and

Energy Chair for the Sierra Club Rincon Group

Some states in this fine nation export goods in such a way as to benefit all or many within the state. Let’s take the examples of maple syrup from Vermont, fish catch from Alaska, honey from Utah, or high-technology solutions from California. All of these examples incur some handsome benefits for many or all of the state population in export revenue. That revenue can come in the form of tax revenue or in the form of business income, and perhaps high numbers of jobs provided or even more intangible benefits, like crop pollination.

Not so with energy exports of Arizona. With more than a third of our electricity being exported, there is very little benefit to any significant population of this state. Sure there are some construction jobs that actually don’t go to out-of-state construction workers, and really do go to in-state residents. Sure there are some maintenance jobs for running these plants that also go to in-state residents of Arizona.

However, there are a scant number of jobs in coal, gas or nuclear power production. For every million invested in coal production, only 6 jobs are produced. Fossil-fuel and nuclear plants are capital intensive industries, where the money goes largely for capital-intensive power plant and construction components, many of which are produced overseas.

In contrast to 6.9 jobs for coal and 4.2 jobs per million dollars spent on nuclear energy, solar energy installation produces about 13 jobs per million dollars spent.  Whenever you put money toward low job-producing options, you deplete funds for higher jobs-producing options. To put money into coal and nukes reduces overall employment, because that money would have gone to other projects, or perhaps even just into more discretionary spending, which has a much higher jobs output than 4.2 or 6.9 jobs per million dollars spent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Energy exports from Arizona are not taxed in any significant way that would bring further benefits to the state, except for property taxes that benefit the local areas a bit.  We do not tax the payroll that goes for power plant components from out-of-state -– and mostly out-of-country -– workers who create these parts and machinery for the coal, nuclear and natural gas plants. We do not put a sales tax on the exported energy. We do not tax the income of the out-of-state corporations like Bechtel, GE-Hitashi, Toshiba-Westinghouse or others who build these plants.

Then comes SunZia, which some think of as Sunzilla, a monster transmission facility. This system would transport electricity from coal and natural gas producing plants right through Arizona. The company behind SunZia, SouthWestern Power Group, would have you believe that the 16-story high transmission lines would primarily transmit renewable energy. However, every one of their many options for routing their transmission lines goes by a planned fossil-fuel plant in southeastern Arizona.

The owners of the Bowie fossil-fuel plant and SunZia apparently own no renewable energy facilities to speak of. This is a good example of green-washing, where they promise renewables and then you actually deliver dirty energy. Explicitly put, they are using renewables as a cover to deliver their dirty fossil fuel plant.

Learn more about the SunZilla, after the click...

Indian electrical grid failure: US politicians and power brokers should take note

by Pamela Powers Hannley

Buried in the back of today's Arizona Daily Star was this story about massive electrical blackouts in India. 

'Decisions not made' at root of massive India blackouts

Who cares? Right? Americans are focused on how many gold medals US Olympians have won yesterday and how many gaffes presidential hopeful Mitt Romney made in that same time period. 

But, we should care about the Indian electrical grid failure. In this story is a warning for our do-nothing, fiscally conservative, business friendly, low-taxes-for-corporations lawmakers: If you ignore the country's infrastructure long enough, you'll be sorry... in a big way.

Does this sound familiar? From the Star article...

...But taken another way, Tuesday's massive blackout, the second in two days, underscored the yawning gap between India's superpower dreams and a sweltering, gritty reality. Problems with an aging electrical grid, pricing system and inefficient mining practices combined to darken a stretch of northern and eastern India that is home to 600 million people, illustrating deep structural problems.

Among them, analysts say, are a weak and indecisive national government, entrenched bureaucracy and a singular focus on local issues at the expense of the common good, all of which threaten foreign investment and undercut the aspirations of a young, vibrant population.

"The size of this is a surprise," said Pramit Pal Chaudhuri, foreign editor of the Hindustan Times newspaper. "But the fact it happened as a consequence of a whole series of micro-decisions not made, is not."

The trouble started shortly after midnight on Monday. India's northern grid failed, affecting 300 million people in seven states. With the help of power diverted from neighboring states and as far away as Bhutan, service was restored by evening.

It collapsed again shortly after 1 p.m. on Tuesday, taking two more of the country's five grids with it. That left the capital with only 1 percent of its usual power supply and tempers fraying in 90-degree heat. [Emphasis added.]

Maybe we can learn from India's mistakes and address our aging electrical grid before the US has a major, life-threatening power failure. Gosh, aren't there millions of people unemployed or under employed? What if we paired the nation's unmet infrastructure needs and our employment needs? What a concept.

No-teeth regulation led to Fukushima nuclear disaster

by David Safier

A report by the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission concluded that the earthquake preceding the tsunami might have been the initial cause of the disaster, bursting the pipes that carried coolant to the reactors.

It's become more difficult for nuclear power supporters to maintain the reactor meltdowns were caused by an unpredictable calamity, the tsunami. Reactors in earthquake-prone Japan are supposed to be able to withstand the impact of the worst quakes. But the "cozy relationship" between the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) and regulators meant that upgraded standards weren't followed by Tepco, and the regulators didn't perform the necessary inspections.

The report placed blame for the tepid response on collusion between the company, the government and regulators, saying they had all “betrayed the nation’s right to safety from nuclear accidents.” Tepco “manipulated its cozy relationship with regulators to take the teeth out of regulations,” the report said.

The Fukushima meltdown gives three reasons to be wary of nuclear power plants. The unforeseeable calamity, like a tsunami, is always a possibility. The foreseeable calamity, like an earthquake, can't be prepared for with any degree of certainty. And even when the technology is available to make the plant safer -- not absolutely safe, but safer -- the collusion between big money and government can mean the necessary safeguards won't be put in place.

I Presume Due Credit Will Be Given To Obama?

By Michael Bryan

KOLD 13 reports: AZ gasoline prices down for 10th week in row.

I presume that Arizona's GOP candidates are now cutting ads praising President Obama for his leadership in using that lever labeled "Gas Prices" hidden under his desk? You can't have it both ways, guys and gals. If you blame him for high prices, you have to credit him when they come down, don't you?

Oh, that's right. They don't. IOKIYAR.

 

Can a President Affect Gas Prices? Yes, But Only One Way.

By Michael Bryan

So, this is a meme now:

In case you can't see this image for some reason, it expresses shock at how, in 2006, three-quarters of Democrats thought Bush affected oil prices, yet, in 2012, only one-third of Democrats think Obama is doing so. So, for the GOP who don't seem to get how this could possibly be consistent, let me explain.

There is one way a President can have a major effect on the price of gas: start some wars in the Middle East. You can be sure that the resulting uncertainty about future oil supply security in the region will cause prices to rise by much more than is entirely rational.

Bush happened to start a stupid, unneccessary war right smack in the middle of the Middle East. Thus, Democrats - rightly - thought that high gas prices at the time were affected by Bush's fuckwitted policies. 

Now, Obama has wound down that stupid war in Iraq, and has us on a glidepath to ending the arguably neccessary one in Afghanistan. However, gas prices remain high for a number of reasons, a major one being the escalating tensions with Iran (which GOPs love, BTW, and Romney would further escalate recklessly). So gas prices are again high.

So the question is, can Obama bring those prices down substantially? Not really. He could try to ratchet down tensions in the Middle East, but he can hardly control the perception that conflict with Iran could result in major distruptions to the oil supply, unless he tells the world there is no way in hell we're going to war with Iran, which he feels he can't do - and would be crucified for doing by the GOP, in any case. Thus, Obama has little control over the price of oil, because it is not primarily his actions that are causing the concerns which keep speculation in the price of oil percolating. Thus, Democrats mainly feel that the President can't do much to affect the price of oil.

Really, was that so hard to figure out? Presidents can have a major effect on the price of oil, but only in a bad way. Thus, Bush's policies did raise the cost of gas, but Obama hasn't much ability to lower it, and isn't really doing anything truly stupid to increase prices. No hypocrisy here; just reality.

To be fair, Obama might be able to change the law back so that only actual end-users, who are going to make something out of it, could buy crude oil, instead of allowing purchases by speculating commodity traders who just want to manipulate the market to make a killing and never take delivery. That would remove much of the speculative investment in futures that makes the market so sensitive to security fears. But I doubt Obama would get any cooperation on the subject from a Congress so focused on thwarting anything that might help Obama.

Who made the stupid change in the law allowing hedge funds and other financial idiot-savants - who are now holding your SUV hostage - to dick around with our oil prices you might ask? Thank President George H.W. Bush, Senator Phil Gramm, and his wife and Chairwoman of the CFTC, Wendy Gramm, who pushed through dereg of the oil market as a favor to Enron and Koch Industries (whom she immediately took a job lobbying for... ); i.e. the 1% and their handmaidens.

Of course, both parties have some culpability here: Clinton signed an additional massive oil dereg bill, the Commodities Futures Modernization Act, just before leaving office. It was written by lobbyists from Enron and Goldman Sachs, so you know it had to have been good for the country, right? Well, it was the origin of credit default swaps that gifted us with our current economic melt-down, in addition to removing the final stops preventing full-on casino gambling on oil prices. So, you know what? Fuck Billy, too.

Jesse Kelly's energy/jobs 'pipe dreams' take another hit from reality

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

Brad Plumer has a post today at Ezra Klein's WonkBlog that delivers another blow of reality to Jesse Kelly's energy "pipe dreams." Will cheap shale gas revive U.S. manufacturing? Not so fast:

It’s hard to think of an extravagant prediction that hasn’t been made about America’s recent natural-gas boom. Let’s see: Cheap natural gas will wipe out coal. It will make the U.S. energy independent. And, oh yes, it will create one million manufacturing jobs and revitalize the Midwest. [Cue Jesse Kelly]

That last claim comes via a recent report from PricewaterhouseCoopers. But over at the Council on Foreign Relations, Michael Levi casts a more skeptical eye on arguments that the age of cheap natural gas from shale will really lead to a dramatic revival of U.S. manufacturing.

There are reasons to think the overall impact will be fairly muted. Energy costs are still a small factor for many manufacturers. Levi points to a 2009 paper (pdf) by Joseph Aldy and William Pizer finding that “only one tenth of U.S. manufacturing involved energy costs exceeding five percent of the total value of shipments.” Aldy and Pizer estimated that a carbon tax, which raises energy prices, would affect manufacturing employment slightly — less than 3 percent — in the most energy-intensive industries like aluminum, cement, glass, and steel. The flipside is that lower energy costs, thanks to cheap natural gas, would have a similarly marginal impact.

Jesse Kelly Shoots Mouth Off at Marana Chamber of Commerce

By Michael Bryan

Jesse Kelly is trying to run from his past radical statements regarding eliminating and privatizing Social Security and Medicare, eliminating the minimum wage, slashing taxes on the wealthiest, and eliminating vital oversight of the free market to ensure the public is protected. 

Well, he's still a radical, and it comes out when he's not appearing in carefully crafted campaign ad. In the video after the fold, we see Kelly addressing his base at the Marana Chamber of Commerce, where he is more comfortable showing his true colors, even though he knows that he is being filmed by Democrats (as he acknowledges at the end of the video). He just can't help himself. He's a true believer, a simple (some might say simplistic) man, and a straight talker. Those can be admirable qualities, but in a Member of Congress, convictions as radical and unrealistic as Mr. Kelly's are just downright dangerous to the public welfare.

On minimum wage:

When asked for his position, he scoffs, and uses an absurd scenario to denigrate the minimum wage. He hypothesizes that we could set it at $150 a hour, and that would just result in increased prices. Apparently, he is unable to discriminate between a small measure of fairness, and an absurdity.

Clearly, he thinks the minimum wage should not exist, and that free market forces alone should set all wages. He does not understand that the purpose of the minimum wage is not a naive attempt to vote ourselves wealth, it is to ensure that a person who works for a living does not have to live in abject poverty, and that even unskilled workers have enough money to afford the neccessities of life and a measure of dignity.

We accept as a society a slight increase in labor price imputs in order to achieve that meagre measure of economic equity. Americans overwhelmingly support the minimum wage, and even want to see it higher. But Kelly just can't understand that at all.

Energy resources:

"We are sitting on top of a mountain of money in this country."

Kelly continues to claim that the solution for our economic recovery is energy exploitation. He still ignores the fact that Arizona doesn't have any significant oil, natural gas, or coal resources and won't benefit from Kelly's dream of a Russian-style natural resource led boom. As in Russia, the primary beneficiaries of Kelly's dream are the oligarchs who have the wealth and political clout to exploit those resources, not the broad American public.

Kelly asserts he's a strong supporter of the Keystone XL Pipeline and he just can't imagine any reason to delay it. He says, "it's anti-the-American-people to stand against the pipeline..." He doesn't express any concern about the fact that we have no idea the environmental impact of a spill, nor any idea of how to clean up such a spill.

And, of course, his support for the pipline won't do a damned thing for Arizona: there are no direct economic benefits or jobs created in Arizona by this boondoggle. Kelly cites the price of gas as a reason to approve the pipeline, but TransCanada's own application, and indpendent analysis both indicate that the effect of the pipeline will be to strengthen price leverage for Canadian crude, increasing prices for refined products in the U.S. That result may seem counter-intuitive, but the pipeline moves gas production using tar sands oil to a deepwater port for world export, thus reducing local oversupply of gasoline products in the U.S and thus raising the local price. You know, supply and demand? That central idea of market economies seems beyond the intellectual scope of Mr. Kelly. Just who is Kelly really seeking to represent in supporting the pipeline: the people of Arizona, or the energy lobby and Canadian oil?

Oh, and the fact that his family business is a pipeline contractor wouldn't have anything to do with his position, would it? Surely, Mr. Kelly wouldn't be so crass as to support a dangerous environmental boondoggle that would raise gas prices just because it might profit his daddy's company in some way?

Job creation:

Kelly claims that Arizona is a number one location nationally for computer chip fabricators because of the dry air and geological stability. We do have those features. But Jesse then claims that the reason those jobs aren't in Tucson is "We told them they're not welcome. We told them we don't want them in Pima County, we don't want them in Cochise County. And that's just flat wrong." Yes, what you just said is just flat wrong, Jesse. Intel has long ties to Chandler, and Tucson was never seriously considered by Intel.

Kelly exclaims, "We should be booming down here. We should be Scottdale. We could be Scottsdale." I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in Scottdale, Jesse. If you like Scottsdale so much, move up there and run for office there. BTW, Jesse, Intel's plants are in Chandler, not Scottsdale. Disturbing that he doesn't even know that.

Environmental protection: 

"I will be attempting to defund the EPA and to strip them of their regulatory power."

Enough said. It's clear that Kelly has no concern whatever about protecting the health of citizens and the quality of our environment. Kelly is stuck in the mode of framing every protection of our environment as anti-business.

Kelly blames the EPA's regulation of coal plants' carbon emissions for there being no new coal energy plants being built in the U.S. He does not seem to grasp that plummeting natural gas prices due to domestic fracking has made them largely price non-competitive, in any case.

It goes without saying, perhaps, that Kelly is an anthropogenic climate change denier. So, to him, the idea of regulating carbon emssions to avoid catastrophic costs of climate change just doesn't make any sense.

It's very telling of Kelly's view of economic development that he would like us to be more like China, where the environment is not protected from pollution, and the people are suffering terribly as a result.

Kelly claimed:

"Everthing is made in China because we chased all that industry out.  Sadly, in many ways, right now... communist China is more elightened in business than the free United States of America."

We chased business out of America and into China? If you mean incentivized companies to move labor costs to low-wage Chinese factories with our tax code, your party did that thing and is blocking President Obama from undoing it, Mr. Kelly.

Multi-national companies have no loyalty; they go where they can maximize profit and externalize as many costs as possible. Part of that process of externalizing costs is not having to pay to prevent or remedy environmental pollution. Kelly's comments seem to indicate that he wants to kill the EPA to make it easier for companies to pollute America's environment like they do China's. That is insane and radical.

Tax Rates:

Mr. Kelly also claimed:

"We have the highest corporate tax rate in the world."

Problem is, that's just not true. The marginal combined effective corporate income tax rate (what a company actually pays doing business in a country, combining all taxes at the national and sub-national levels and taking into consideration deductions and credits) in America is about average for OECD countries, and significantly lower than many other advanced industrial nations.

Of course, such nuance is really beyond an ideologue like Kelly. He thinks the proper corporate income tax rate is zero, so, of course, he thinks it's too high, regardless of what it actually might be.

Of course, Mr. Kelly thinks that real people should pay taxes, even if corporations should not. He thinks that every person should pay the same rate, regardless of income. He says with almost unseemly enthusiasm:

"I love the flat tax... Every American should pay same small percentage of income to the federal government."

Really, even if they make very little? Yep. Even if they make billions? Yep. Kelly has completely abandoned the idea of progressivity in taxes: from those who benefit the most from our societies' services, more is required. He considers that "demonizing wealth".

Kelly's philosophy is "Keep what you earned, you earned it, and pass it on to the next generation." Never mind that nobody earns a fortune alone; the society around a capitalist allows and enables that accumulation of wealth through services to the individual and creation of the business environment.

Kelly's comment about passing it to the next generation would indicate that he doesn't favor an estate tax, either. No surprise that Kelly is in favor of such unearned wealth, that's how he makes his living after all.

Kelly reminds me of a teenage boy who is frantically trying to deny his dependence on his parents while worshipping at an altar dedicated to Ayn Rand, even as he lives in his parents' basement. Kelly works for his dad's constuction company, which gets up to 90% of it's business from government contracts. I'm sure that his position at the company was earned solely on merit, and has nothing to do with his position as scion of the family...

Let's get real: Kelly has never been exposed to the "free market" he worships so assiduously. His whole poltical persona is a smirking, swaggering, cock-sure denial of any collective responsibility or accountablity. He's all about getting the "nanny state" out of our lives, even as he nurses at that nanny's tit like an overgrown man-child. A recent article by Sara Robinson, "How the Ayn Rand-Loving Right Is Like a Bunch of Teen Boys Gone Crazy", perfectly embodies the childish political phenomenon that is the modern GOP right wing and, especially, the person of Jesse Kelly.

Watch the video after the click (Hat tip to AZ08RawFootage)...

Is Jesse Kelly So Dumb That He Doesn't Know Cap and Trade Is Dead?

By Michael Bryan

Jesse Kelly's latest salvo criticizes Ron Barber for support of a bill (Waxman-Markey's cap and trade bill) that he's never (that I can find) taken a position on, and which has been as dead as a doornail since 2010.

Gabby Giffords did support and vote for Waxman-Markey when it passed the House in 2009. I assume that Kelly is basing his allegation that Barber supports it on Gabby's vote. That might be a fair assumption, or it might not. But it is certainly deeply irrelevant to any possible current cap and trade bill before the House: there is none.

Is Kelly swinging at a strawman, or is he just stupid? A bit of each, perhaps?

Kelly's ad claims that cap and trade would cost consumers an additional $1000 a year in energy costs and destroy 40,000 jobs. Given that no cap and trade legislation is pending, I suspect that Kelly is freaking himself out by playing Fantasy Congress, only with the Dems in charge. I certainly would like to see Jesse's little nightmare come true...

Kelly's newest ad is simply not relevant to the real world, but let's take a quick look at the numbers anyhow, just to see how accurate his fantasies are.

When Waxman-Markey was still pending legislation with a chance of becoming law, the non-partisan Congression Budget Office scored its likely economic impact, concluding that it would have negligable impact on jobs, and only a very slight impact on energy prices for most consumers because the revenues from cap and trade would be redistributed to consumers to offset price increases. Further, given the likely very substantial costs of climate change in future years, the ecnomic impact of not avoiding those costs by passing such legislation could be catastrophic.

Of course, fossil fuel industry shills (like Kelly) spared no expense in attacking Waxman-Markey as a job killing nightmare that could cost the U.S. as many of 2.4 million jobs. Spread that number out proportionately over the country somehow, and I'm guessing that is where Kelly got his 40K job loss claim. I'm sure some right-wing or energy industry scoring is behind the $1000 annual cost claim. Something like ALEC's hit on cap and trade (though it claims more like $1,500 to $3,000 annual cost). The sort of impacts that Kelly's ad claims are, of course, the most pessimistic estimates by hacks in the pocket of the energy industry.

Independent FactCheck.org indicates that the jobs impact of a cap and trade regime is uncertain and really depends on exactly how the bill is structured and how quickly the green energy sector would expand to replace jobs lost in the dirty energy sector. In any case, the impact would be much more moderate than any of the industry scare scenarios.

So, Kelly is misleading voters again about the effects of Democratic policies on climate change and carbon emissions, just like he does about Obamacare's impact on Medicare. His consistent modus seems to be to scare voters into casting their ballots for him, which is the lowest and most deceitful form of political campaigning: and just so happens to be what wingnuts like Kelly are really good at.

But that's all pretty much beside the point. Waxman-Markey is dead, dead, dead. Republicans and Blue Dog Dems killed it. Barber hasn't taken a position on it, and doesn't really have to. America is (unfortunately) not passing any legislation to address climate change any time soon with the do-nothing GOP in charge of the do-nothing House.

Electing Jesse Kelly, who denies the existence of anthropogenic climate change due to CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, is certainly going to continue gridlock on this particular issue, among others. So, to the extent that Kelly's ad is really just saying, "vote for me and I will do my best to make Earth look like Venus by ensuring the energy industry pumps out unlimited CO2 emmissions," I guess it might contain a sliver of truth.

See the ad after the click, if you can stomach it...

Fact Check: Jesse Kelly's 'pants on fire' - 'saving' social security and Medicare through increased domestic energy production

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

One of the statements from Jesse Kelly that is a sort of "six degrees of Kevin Bacon" kind of analysis is when he claims that he is going to "save" social security and Medicare through increased domestic energy production in the United States. It is an attempt to connect together the two focus group tested issues that his campaign wants to run on.

No part of mineral severance, or royalties, or energy taxes, etc. are used for social security and Medicare. These programs are funded through payroll tax deductions from workers.

So unless Kelly' is proposing new taxes on energy producers to be dedicated to social security and Medicare -- rest assured he is not -- his statement requires some explanation: Kelly is arguing that producing more domestic energy --> creates more jobs --> creates more payroll tax deductions for social security and Medicare.

Have you noticed that he never estimates how many new jobs (from a credible source)?

For April, the Bureau of Labor Statisitics estimates there are 12.5 million unemployed actively seeking work. There are another 7.9 milliom who are considered involuntary part-time workers. And another 2.4 million who are marginally attached to the work force -- persons who want and are available to work, but who have looke for work marginally in the past year, many of whom have given up hope. The Employment Situation - April 2012 - US Bureau of Labor Statistics (.pdf).

That's 22.8 million Americans who are either unemployed or underemployed. The Bush years were a "lost decade" of job creation compounded by the catastrophic job losses of the Bush Great Recession. Repost: The Bush Years Were a Lost Decade. The U.S. is still digging out of the unemployment hole that GOP economic policies produced in the last decade, let alone creating enough jobs for new workers entering the work force today. (If the Bush tax cuts actually encouraged the so-called "job creators" to create jobs, "Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?")

The one energy production project that has received the most attention this year is the Keystone Pipeline. TransCanada, the company that wants to build the pipeline, says Keystone would create 20,000 "direct" jobs. That includes 13,000 construction jobs and 7,000 jobs making stuff like pump houses and the pipe itself. It also projects nearly 120,000 "indirect" jobs -- think restaurant workers and hotel employees to support the construction. Keystone pipeline: How many jobs it would really create - CNN Money:

But TransCanada numbers count each job on a yearly basis. If the pipeline employs 10,000 people working for two years, that's 20,000 jobs by the company's count.

The estimates also include jobs in Canada, where about a third of the $7 billion pipeline would be constructed.

The U.S. State Department, which must green light the project, forecasts just 5,000 direct U.S. jobs over a two year construction period.

Even according to TransCanada, the amount of permanent jobs created would be only in the hundreds.

Another study from Cornell University said the pipeline could actually lead to a decline in jobs in the long run. One reason is that the pipeline would lead to higher fuel prices in the Midwest, the study said, and that would slow consumer spending and cost jobs.

So TransCanada says only "hundreds" of permanent new jobs. When we have 22.8 million Americans who are either unemployed or underemployed. This is only one project, but it is illustrative of the fact that increased domestic energy production is not going to create anywhere near the millions of new jobs needed --> to create more payroll taxes for social security and Medicare --> or substantially reduce the unemployment rate. Massive numbers of new jobs in domestic energy production is a "pipe dream."

Arizona is a regressive outlier in renewable energy production

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

For at least two decades now, we have heard it repeated often that Arizona could be the "solar capitol of the world." Not even close. Check out the map below. Arizona sticks out like a sore thumb among our western state neighbors in renewable energy production.

Brad Plumer posts today at Ezra Klein's Wonk Blog, Who uses renewable power, in one map:

We keep hearing that renewable energy is booming in the United States, but where is it? Here’s a handy map from the U.S. Energy Information Administration showing how much electricity each state gets from wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal (but not hydropower):

Maine was the clear winner in 2011, getting 27 percent of its electricity coming from renewable sources — a lot of it wind power and biomass. But Maine had a lot of renewable energy back in 2001, too. South Dakota and Iowa, at 21 percent and 17 percent, have seen far more impressive growth. Both of those states got almost none of their electricity from renewable sources a decade ago.

Why do some states do better than others? Policy helps. Some 30 states have laws that require utilities to get a certain portion of their power from renewable sources. (The Southeast is the big exception here.) The strictness of the laws varies from state to state, but by and large, states with stricter standards get more renewables. But simply having natural resources helps, too: Idaho, Wyoming, and South Dakota don’t have strict standards, but there’s so much wind up there that turbines are going up anyway.

What’s less clear is whether this rapid growth will continue. A good portion of the recent boom in wind and solar power has been thanks to the federal production tax credit and assorted grants in the stimulus bill. Those grants have now expired and the tax credit for wind will expire at the end of 2012. Clean-energy advocates are hoping it gets renewed when Congress tries to avert “Taxmageddon” and the end of this year, but that’s not a sure bet.

The EIA has data on total renewable generation, not including hydropower, here (Excel file).

Back in 2006, the Arizona Corporation Commission adopted Renewable Energy Standard & Tariff (REST). These rules require that regulated electric utilities must generate 15 percent of their energy from renewable resources by 2025. The Commission’s Renewable Energy Standards encourage utilities to use solar, wind, biomass, biogas, geothermal and other similar technologies to generate “clean” energy to power Arizona’s future.

Vote Kelly for Oil Industry Subsidies

by Michael Bryan

Jesse Kelly notoriously and repeatedly, and falsely, claims that the U.S. has more oil than Saudi Arabia.

This has several implications that need examination.

First, his fact-free sloganeering indicates that Kelly doesn't really give a crap about reality or facts. Nor is he interested in offering real solutions to kitchen-table problems of American families. Kelly lacks any plan to address the pain of the middle class. His nostrum, oft repeated, for addressing the economic pain of Americans is that we'll put folks back to work in good paying jobs by exploiting all that oil. That's pure fantasy. Maybe it's a solution for a country like Russia, not a solution for the challenges faced by the world's most advanced and complex economy. Kelly won't seriously address creating jobs - he would rather mouth the tired GOP talking-points about oil exploitation and giving further tax breaks to 'job creators' (as if the last 10-year grand social experiment of the Bush tax cuts hadn't proven such cuts ineffective).

Kelly can't and won't address the inequity of our tax policies causing middle class workers to fall further behind - he would rather talk vaguely about a flat tax scheme that would further shift the burden onto middle and lower income workers.

Kelly won't address the fraying of America's safety net - he would rather talk about eliminating Social Security and Medicare.

Kelly won't talk about investing in education to allow Americans to raise themselves into a decent standard of living - he would rather talk about killing the Department of Education.

Kelly won't talk about how to address the real economic concerns of Americans because he doesn't have any clue what they might be. He's an incurious man-child who failed to educate himself even when given opportunities to advance his education others can only dream of. He is an anti-government crusader whose family feeds off government contracts. He's the n'ere-do-well scion of a government contract empire, who has never held a real job other than the sinecure his daddy gave him.

A man who can't be bothered to ground the central theme of his campaign in reality cannot be trusted with legislative authority.

Second, Kelly's constant pimping on the stump for oil exploration and exploitation clearly indicates his enthusiastic support for the industry. Direct oil industry subsidies are costing taxpayers at least $4 billion every year. Total subsidies for fossil fuels, including tax breaks and favorable liability and regulatory treatment have been estimated to top out at over $40 billion a year.

The GOP has now blocked cutting even the most direct of those subsidies by filibustering their removal, which would have saved over $40 billion over the next decade. This despite the deep popularity of the proposal, garnering an amazing 74% support. This despite the GOP being willing to literally take food and medicine out of children's mouths in the zeal to slash the budget.

Given his monomania on the subject, one has to ask Kelly - and why, for God's sake, has he not been asked by anyone in the goddamned media - whether he would support eliminating oil industry subsidies? Whether he supports more federal spending to develop the new technologies to get at those unproven reserves he wants to tap? Whether he's willing to further subsidize the new oil production he supports to make that oil price-competitive?

Maybe I'm asking too much, but shouldn't Kelly also be asked whether he's aware that the fracking he wants oil companies to do causes earthquakes? What he would do to help folks whose property is damaged by those earthquakes? Whether he knows what's in the fracking solutions being used (hint: no one does, it's a 'trade-secret')? What he would do to keep those fracking solutions out of people's ground water? Whether the EPA has any legitimate role in regulating what goes in the ground to frack oil?

Given that his entire economic program relies on "drill here, drill now" shouldn't someone ask him these basic questions?

Third, if Kelly were elected, just how long would it be before he resigned to take a job as an oil industry lobbyist? Kelly is a young and wildly ambitious (and deeply unprincipled) man. How long will he be content with a $160K government salary when a million-dollar-a-year gig with big oil beckons? Congress is clearly just a stepping stone to a big pay-day in the influence pedalling biz for Kelly. Why doesn't anyone ask him about that? Why doesn't anyone ask him to pledge not to become a oil lobbyist?

Or maybe the oil industry can just save the citizens of CD8/2 the pain of having Kelly as their representative and just offer him a goodamn job now? Please?

Finally, with Kelly claiming we can drill our way out of our economic problems, isn't he at all concerned about the CO2 that will release into the atmosphere? Hasn't anyone thought to ask him about the effect on climate change such a fossil-fuel driven renaissance will have? Is it really a solution to America's problems to "drill here, drill now" when that causes the oceans to die and rise, and our climate to fluctuate wildly, causing extreme weather disasters? Does Kelly deny the reality of anthropogenic climate change, too?

Fact Check: Jesse Kelly's 'pants on fire' - U.S. has 1/10 the oil 'reserves' as those of Saudi Arabia

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

The Washington Post's fact checker Glenn Kessler has his Pinocchios, and Annenberg's PolitiFact has it truth-o-meter that goes goes up to "pants on fire!" lie. Blog for Arizona has "the kid" with his own "pants on fire" rating.

Tucson Weekly editor jimmy Boegel this week calls out Tea-Publican candidate for the CD 8 Special Election, Jesse Kelly, for his lie about U.S. oil production. Editor's Note | Tucson Weekly:

When did it become acceptable for a candidate for office to flat-out lie?

I have been pondering this query ever since Jesse Kelly—the GOP choice for Congressional District 8—started claiming that the United States has more oil than Saudi Arabia, and therefore, it's unacceptable for Americans to be paying $4 a gallon for gasoline.

* * *

It is fact—provable, verifiable, absolute fact—that the U.S. circa 2012 does not have the oil that Jesse Kelly claims it does. This is not a matter of spin or nuance or shades of gray or anything that is debatable. Period. It's a fact. Even if you stretch and extend to cover oil shale, the United States today does not have the technology to get usable oil from it.

* * *

I use the Jesse Kelly example just because it's one of the more-prominent and more-recent examples. No matter the party or the politics, when someone starts spreading blatant, verifiable falsehoods, other public servants and civic-minded folks have a duty to call bullshit. Period.

Words to live by. But you are going to need way more information than this blurb from the Weekly.

E.J. Montini gets (partially) sucked in by Melvin's nuke waste dump argument

by David Safier

E. J. Montini, a reliably smart and readable Republic columnist, got took just a little bit by Al Melvin's nuclear waste dump propagandizing. Here's the passage from today's column, presenting Melvin's figures with no rebuttal.

"The French recycle 96 percent of their nuclear material into new reusable fuel rods," Melvin told me. "That leaves only 4 percent that has to be disposed of. It's that kind of facility we're proposing.

This is one of those times when you have to call an expert on the other side of the argument. No, not Dem Rep. Chad Campbell, who gives a bit of a rebuttal but probably knows less about this issue than I do, and I'm no expert. Someone who knows as much or more about the French nuke dump process as Melvin pretends to.

Then Montini might learn, the reprocessing of nuclear waste creates four to seven times the amount of nuclear material, or more. Here's a passage from an article on the Union of Concerned Scientists website:

[T]he French company AREVA, which reprocesses French spent nuclear fuel, claims that reprocessing "reduces the volume of waste by a factor of at least four."[i] This statement is contradicted by recent data from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), which show that reprocessing greatly increases the total volume of radioactive waste, compared to direct disposal of spent fuel.

[snip]

In addition to high-level waste, reprocessing generates other types of radioactive waste that require secure disposal. These wastes are more dilute than high-level waste (and hence have greater volume). Although most of the waste falls into the low-level waste category, reprocessing increases the volume by a factor of six to seven relative to the once-through cycle. The United States has three NRC-licensed, commercially operated low-level waste disposal sites that currently accept waste. Reprocessing increases the volume of "greater-than-class-C" low-level waste by a factor of 160. DOE is responsible for disposing of this waste, which contains long-lived radioactive isotopes and cannot be placed in a regular low-level waste site, but as yet has no policy on how to do so.

Montini remains skeptical about Melvin's scheme in the column, but he shouldn't have let Melvin get away with his "4% solution" lie.

The Cap'n Al Melvin Memorial Nuclear Waste Dump in Saddlebrooke, AZ

Posted by azBlueMeanie:

"Elections have consequences." Well, the right-wing lunatics in Saddlebrooke elect Sen. Cap'n Al Melvin to office, so they should pay the consequences.

"Atomic Al" as he is otherwise known, actually convinced the Tea-Publicans in the Arizona legislature to pass his resolution to Congress asking for a nuclear waste dump facility in Arizona. Write your congressmen and tell them you want the "Cap'n Al Melvin Memorial Nuclear Waste Dump" in Saddlebrooke, AZ. AZ legislators favor nuke waste storage site | Arizona Capitol Times:

The House on Tuesday approved a Senate-passed memorial that says placing a permanent storage site for spent nuclear fuel in Arizona would create thousands of jobs both during construction and afterward.

The legislation sponsored by Republican Sen. Al Melvin of Tucson has no binding effect. Passage means the memorial will be sent to congressional officials.

David Safier previously posted about "Atomic Al's" plans to build nuclear power generators in Arizona. A layman's rebuttal of Al Melvin's "Nuclear waste recycling is wonderful" argument. And I have posted about how AZ Republicans vow to desecrate the Grand Canyon by opening it up for uranium mining.

You may want to peruse Tea-Publican campaign finance disclosure forms for campaign contributions from individuals associated with the mining industry or their lobbyists.

Commodity Futures Trading Commission claims first victory against oil market manipulator

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

U.S. regulators claimed their first victory in a four-year old effort to crack down on oil market manipulation on Thursday, announcing a $14 million settlement with high-frequency trading firm Optiver. High-frequency trader Optiver pays $14 million in oil manipulation case:

In a ruling that came just two days after U.S. President Barack Obama proposed a renewed campaign against illegal oil trading schemes, the Amsterdam-based company agreed to disgorge $1 million in profits and pay a $13 million civil penalty over allegations it used a rapid-fire tool nicknamed "The Hammer" to influence U.S. oil prices in 2007.

It was the first case brought by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in its 2008 effort to curb market malfeasance, launched as prices soared toward a record near $150 a barrel in the middle of that year.

The case alleged that traders in Optiver's Chicago office reaped a $1 million profit by engaging in a practice called "banging the close", in which the firm attempted to move U.S. oil prices by executing a large volume of deals during the final moments of trading.

While far from the agency's largest fine, the case was viewed as an important milestone in the CFTC's efforts to get more aggressive over market manipulation - a charge that has historically been difficult to prove, despite mounting political pressure to take rogue traders to task.

"The CFTC will not tolerate traders who try to gain an unlawful advantage by using sophisticated means to drive oil and gas futures prices in their favor," David Meister, the CFTC's enforcement chief, said in a statement.

Martha McSally Slaps Jesse Kelly Around for his Absurd Energy Claims

By Michael Bryan

About time one of the CD8 Republican candidates pointed out what an ill-informed, truth-twisting dolt Jesse Kelly is when he talks about energy policy.

Martha McSally outright contradicted Kelly's claim that the U.S. has "significantly more oil than Saudi Arabia" during a recent debate. Of course, right-wingers jumped on her, claiming she "appeared unsure and reluctant about using American oil and gas resources for our own domestic energy needs — apparently content to remain dependent on costly foreign imports." Apparently, working with the actual facts is now defeatism among GOPers.

What McSally said was:

"We need a strategy that uses all the resources we have to get on the path to energy independence. And, Jesse, we don't have more oil than Saudi Arabia. The oil your talking about is cost prohibitive in order to actually get to it, because we don't have those technologies, yet. So we need those to be developed. And maybe you should use your G.I. Bill to go back and get a geology degree, and you can help with that. But the reality is that that is not available."

Oh, smack! The crowd starting oohing and laughing when McSally recommended Kelly get himself some actual education on the topic. It has to sting a little for college drop-out Kelly to get told by the candidate with two Masters degrees, and a stint as a professor of National Security Studies at the George C. Marshall Center in Germany, to get back to school and learn some shit.

It's nice to see a little reality-based discussion on the Right. Let's see if McSally keeps up the criticism of Kelly's less-than-real energy policy talking points.

See the video after the click...

Rampant speculation by the banksters of Wall Street is driving up gas prices

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

As I posted back in March, the real reason for rising gasoline prices today is the same as it was during the 2008 election -- these guys. OK, let me be clear, not these guys in the photo specifically, but speculators in the commodities futures trading and derivatives markets in general.

Shannon Stapleton/Reuters
Traders on the floor of the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The rise in gasoline prices has almost nothing to do with energy policy. It has everything to do with America’s continuing failure to adequately regulate Wall Street. The Huffington Post reported last week Gas Price Experts: Wall Street 'Casinos' Raise Pain at the Pump:

Americans are paying for $4-a-gallon gasoline because Wall Street "casinos" have blocked regulators from cracking down on rampant oil speculation, finance experts argued on Capitol Hill [last] Wednesday.

In an effort to counter Republican claims that gas prices are high because the Obama administration does not allow enough drilling, House Democratic leaders staged a hearing featuring former Reagan and Clinton administration oil and trading analysts who blame the surge on speculation.

And the vast profits from that speculation do not go into developing more oil or creating jobs, the analysts argued.

"Your constituents should know that every time they break their heart by buying $4 and maybe soon $5 gasoline, that money isn't going into production," said University of Maryland professor Michael Greenberger, who served as director of the division of trading and markets for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Clinton administration. "It's going into homebuilding in the Hamptons and yacht building."

And the big finance firms are working overtime to ensure that the speculative commodity keeps flowing, he said.

"They've got hundreds of millions of dollars that they are using in lobbying on the Hill" or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Greenberger told HuffPost after the session. "Now they are bringing all these lawsuits; they are stopping the action that has already been asked for by Congress to stop the speculation."

He was referring to suits that seek to limit certain Dodd-Frank financial reforms that, among other things, grant the commission the power to crack down on excessive oil speculation.

Frack! Earthquakes and poisoned water are 'safe, clean energy'?

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

I do not watch much television, and yet I have seen these ads from Exxon-Mobil for what seems like a million times.

A century's supply of natural gas was right here in North America.
With technology, ExxonMobil is safely unlocking this important resource.

 

Oil Sands projects like Kearl and the Keystone Pipeline will create jobs,
while providing secure and reliable energy to North America.

And a series of ads like this one from energytomorrow.org featuring this actress/spokesperson a million times more:

With advanced drilling, we can access more domestic oil from a
single location, increasing our energy while decreasing our impact.

The money you are paying at the gas pump is being used for a saturation advertising campaign to influence public opinion for the oil & gas industry, the single most profitable business in the history of the world, for things not directly mentioned in these ads: eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency; rolling back provisions of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act; exempting their practices from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund, and other environmental quality laws and regulations; continuing taxpayer subsidies for oil and gas; limiting their exposure to legal liability, etc.

At the state level, disturbing legislation like Pennsylvania's Act 13 gives gas companies the right to drill anywhere. Fracking Democracy: Why Pennsylvania's Act 13 May Be the Nation's Worst Corporate Giveaway (This is the first of two articles about Pennsylvania’s Act 13, perhaps the worst new environmental law in the nation, and the effort to stop it from taking effect. You can read the second one here.) The law strips rights from communities and individuals while imposing new statewide drilling rules that favor oil and gas companies.

If you have seen the documentary film Gasland, a film by Josh Fox, there is reason to doubt the "safe, clean energy" claims of the oil and gas companies. Our dwindling fresh water supplies are threatened with contamination by the "fracking" process. Fresh water is the one resource humans cannot live without. People have and wil kill each other over water.

There are two recent reports about the U.S. Geological Survey study that has linked oil and natural gas drilling operations to a rash of recent earthquakes from Alabama to the Northern Rockies. Scientists: Increase in US Earthquakes Almost Certainly Manmade:

As hydraulic fracturing has exploded onto the scene, it has increasingly been connected to earthquakes. Some quakes may be caused by the original fracking — that is, by injecting a fluid mixture into the earth to release natural gas (or oil). More appear to be caused by reinjecting the resulting brine deep underground.

Fukushima, again

by David Safier

Remember the Fukushima nuclear plant? The damage wasn't so bad, then it was worse, then it was contained, then it was . . . not so contained.

Here's today's news, an AP piece I read in the NY Times. It's short enough, I'm including the whole thing.

Japan: Plant Leaks Radioactive Water

The operator of Japan’s crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant says tons of highly radioactive water appear to have leaked into the ocean from a purification unit. The Tokyo Electric Power Company is struggling to keep the melted reactors cool and contain radiation; the leak raises concerns about its ability to keep the plant stable. Similar leaks have occurred several times since last year, and officials say they do not pose an immediate health threat. Workers spotted the leak on Thursday coming from a section of hose on a device used to decontaminate cooling water leaking from reactors. The company said it appeared to have stopped the leak.

Let me pull out a few phrases: "Tons of highly radioactive water." "Leaked into the ocean from a purification unit." "Struggling to keep the melted reactors cool and contain radiation." "Similar leaks have occurred several times since last year." "The company said it appeared to have stopped the leak."

The plant, held together with duct tape and baling wire, is one good jolt away from another serious disaster. "Safe nuclear power" is like "clean coal." Both are dangerous public relations fabrications.