Money pits at tax payers expense will overcome us before mother nature does, or both as the script runs it course. I am in the reference of thought again, as we conveyed before, that we are in GD context to be
assailed from the right and the left since between the two we are running to event horizons.
I have more regard for underwater volcanoes being found as encyclical drivers also of weather activity's and ph ocean issues other than the usual suspects to obscene amount of chemical weapons dumped in the oceans and now nuclear wastes from reported and unreported on some sources of regard to acurracy's. Finite resource management issues and proposed dependant varable drivers are being used as leverage against reality. This is cost factoring upwards and will finish off the rest of consumers already and hopelessly unable to recover and in truth never will. Policy drivers are and will push millions more also it appears.
Sierra Club Took $26 Million in Gas Industry Contributions:
According to a blog post from
Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune, the environmentalist organization accepted millions of donated dollars from the natural gas industry to fight against coal-fired plants nationwide. Here are the details. Brune stated he became aware of the $26 million in donations from individuals and subsidiaries of Chesapeake Energy, one of the largest natural gas companies in the U.S., shortly after he became executive director in 2010. The funding began in 2007, he said. According to a blog post from
Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune, the environmentalist organization accepted millions of donated dollars from the natural gas industry to fight against coal-fired plants nationwide. The
club's views on natural gas had changed by 2010 when Brune became executive director, he explained, and he made the recommendation that the funding be stopped. Brune posted the
Sierra Club opposes natural gas development that poses a risk to the environment and the organization is now insisting the recipes of fracking fluid be disclosed and toxics eliminated from the mix. In spite of the decision by
Sierra Club to withdraw from its funding agreement with Chesapeake in 2010, the United Mine Workers of America -- which just found out about the funding -- called foul, with union President Cecil E. Roberts issuing a statement accusing the organization of putting people at risk with its practices.
Gas industry funding highlights
Sierra Club hypocrisy:
For immediate release: [TRIANGLE, VA.] United Mine Workers of America International President Cecil E. Roberts issued the following statement today: “The admission by the
Sierra Club that it took $26 million from the natural gas industry to fund its long running anti-coal campaign explains a lot. Now we know why this so-called ‘independent’ organization has been such an advocate for another form of fossil fuel and against using cutting-edge technology that would make using coal to generate electricity just as clean as natural gas. “The
Sierra Club used secret gas industry funding to actively work to suppress the building of hundreds of next-generation coal-fired power plants across the country, plants which would significantly reduce emissions of mercury and other harmful substances. “By doing so, the
Sierra Club was able to continue to point to the higher emissions levels from aging plants that were not being replaced like they were supposed to be, which played into the false notion that coal can’t be used cleanly. “But this campaign also means that the very people the
Sierra Club says it wants to help will continue to be exposed to higher levels of mercury and other emissions – levels that would not occur if the new generation of coal-fired plants are built. “They’ve cynically put people at risk for years to come with this campaign, and made themselves little more than tools of an energy industry competitor in the bargain. Let’s get real here: Just like any business, the gas companies are about selling gas, period. And they will gladly funnel cash to any organization that will help them do it. “If the
Sierra Club really wanted to make a long-term, positive impact for our nation’s energy future, it would support all potential ways to generate electricity cleanly and in a carbon-neutral way. The next generation of clean-burning coal-fired power plants, combined with the wide-spread deployment of carbon capture and storage technology, is one of those. “Instead of merely being a knee-jerk shill for a competing industry, the
Sierra Club would do well to take a step toward joining with those of us who seek not just a cleaner, but also a more stable and secure long-term energy future for our children and grandchildren.”
Let us not be naive on the preference .gov exports list, Coal is on that list.
Keynes also made the following clear and unequivocal declarations:
I believe the future lies with,
1.State trading for commodities;
2.International cartels for necessary manufactures; and
3.Quantitive import restrictions for nonessential manufactures.
Yet all these future instrumentalities for orderly economic life in the future you seek to outlaw.
Everybody know's what is going on. The STFU money to
Sierra Club did its work for gas and the Hill.
http://duckduckgo.com/?q=chicago%20coal ... 20closings