air pollution


The bottom line here is that we don’t know. But I would hazard guess here, and that is, yes he did describe many sensitive issues. And not in a flattering way. Still we will have to wait and see what comes out.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/mikehayes/rex-tillerson-allegedly-used-alias-email-for-climate-change?utm_term=.ck4DmZVl2#.saoD91Vmb

 

Rex Tillerson Allegedly Used An Alias Email To Discuss Climate Change While At Exxon

The New York Attorney General’s Office is investigating whether ExxonMobil made “significant misrepresentations” about the risks posed by climate change to its shareholders.

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson used a second alias email address to discuss climate change while he was chairman and CEO of ExxonMobil, according to a letter filed in court Monday by the New York Attorney General’s Office.

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman alleges that from “at least 2008 to 2015” Tillerson, whose middle name is Wayne, used the “Wayne Tracker” pseudonym email “to send and receive materials regarding important matters, including those concerning to the risk-management issues related to climate change.”

Schneiderman is investigating whether ExxonMobil made “significant misrepresentations” about the risks posed by climate change to its shareholders.

“Despite the company’s incidental production of approximately 60 documents bearing the ‘Wayne Tracker’ email address, neither Exxon nor its counsel have ever disclosed that this separate email account was a vehicle for Mr. Tillerson’s relevant communications at Exxon,” the letter, which was filed in New York Supreme Court as part of a fraud investigation into the company, states.

:}

Go there and read. More next week.

:}

I have said for awhile that the US would survive the Trump Era. Apparently it is going to be expensive for us and the planet. Hopefully this will limit Trump to one term.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/03/06/rolling-back-fuel-efficiency-standards-would-cost-americans-800-billion-add-six-billion-tons-co2/#54beb2e33642

Rolling Back Fuel Efficiency Standards Would Cost Americans $800 Billion, Add Six Billion Tons CO2

The Trump Administration has signaled its intent to roll back existing federal fuel efficiency targets of 54.5 miles per gallon for model year 2022-2025 cars and light trucks, a move endorsed by U.S. auto dealers and auto manufacturers. But going in reverse on fuel efficiency would be a terrible deal for American drivers that would cost the economy approximately $800 billion while adding nearly six billion tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by 2050.

Energy Innovation utilized the Energy Policy Simulator (EPS) to analyze the effects of lowering U.S. fuel efficiency standards. The open-source computer model estimates economic and emissions impacts of various energy and environmental policy combinations using non-partisan, published data. It is freely available for public use through a user-friendly web interface or by downloading the full model and input dataset.

Our analysis compared a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario (based on existing policies as of mid-to-late 2016, including the existing fuel efficiency standards) to a scenario that freezes fuel efficiency for new passenger cars at 2017 levels

:}

Go there and read. More next week.

:}

A friend of mine, Nelson Oller, lives in Mason City Illinois and is in Ameren’s service territory. They have a whole house approach to reducing their residential customers electricity consumption. This program is great. They are helping with insulation and state-of-the-art equipment. He has to spent 2 grand for 10 thousand dollars worth of stuff. One of the thinks he was telling me about was a vent fan for the bathroom that could act as a whole house plan. I had never herd of such a thing, but according to this article it has been around for several years now.

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/musings/bathroom-exhaust-fans

 

musingsheader image

Bathroom Exhaust Fans

Bath fans help remove odors and moisture — and can be used in some homes to satisfy whole-house ventilation requirements

Posted on Aug 7 2014 by Martin Holladay
Older homes often lack bathroom exhaust fans. In the old days, if the bathroom was smelly or steamy, you were supposed to open a window to air it out.

This isn’t a very logical ventilation method, especially when temperatures are below zero, or when the weather is 90°F and humid. Yet this time-honored method of bathroom ventilation is still enshrined in our building codes. According to the 2009 International Residential Code (sections R303.3 and M1507.3), a bathroom with an operable window does not need to have a bath exhaust fan.

Why do we need exhaust fans?

In spite of the code’s archaic loophole, builders should install an exhaust fan in every bathroom or toilet room — even when the bathroom has a window.

A bath exhaust fan can perform several functions:

  • It can exhaust smelly air, allowing fresher air to enter the bathroom.
  • It can exhaust humid air, allowing dryer air to enter the bathroom.
  • When operated for 24 hours per day or when controlled by a timer, it can act (in some cases) as the most important component of a whole-house ventilation system.
Designing an exhaust-only ventilation system is a topic unto itself, and is beyond the scope of this article. For more information on exhaust-only ventilation systems, see Designing a Good Ventilation System.

Where does the makeup air come from?

When the bathroom door is closed and the fan is operating, where is the makeup air coming from?

If the bathroom has an exterior wall, some of the makeup air is coming from the exterior — for example, through leaks around the window or baseboard.

:}

Go there and read. More next week.

:}

 

 

Yes, I warned anybody who would listen, that Pres. Trump would finish off this planet and 5 days into he is guaranteeing that some of the dirtiest energy on the planet will be burnt (haha burned). Tar sands for God’s sake. What about leave it in the ground. Nah he wants to toss it up in the air. I am not saying I like McKibben, I do not. I mean on tactics. I think his analysis is right on.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/opinion/on-pipelines-donald-trump-looks-backward.html?_r=0

The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Contributor

On Pipelines, Donald Trump Looks Backward

IF you’re searching for a lens to understand just how President Trump sees the world, his executive orders on Tuesday reviving the Keystone XL and expediting the Dakota Access pipelines provide a sharply focused glimpse. In a word, he looks backward at all times. We’re beginning to get a better sense of what he means by “again” in “Make America Great Again.”

On questions of jobs and industry, he looks back at least to the 1950s. If something is big and made of steel, then it’s great. Like some Soviet Realist painter, Mr. Trump seems to have an image stuck in his head of brawny men building a nation. Those are real jobs, and all the other innovation in the economy doesn’t amount to much.

In fact (a phrase that suddenly seems politically charged) that’s not how economies work any more: If something is big and steel, it’s probably going to be run by robots. If the Keystone XL Pipeline is ever completed, for instance, it will employ about 35 full-time workers, relying for its operation on a vast network of sensors, drones and the like. The number of workers in our labor-intensive solar industry alone now surpasses those employed extracting coal, gas and oil combined

:}

Just imagine what he can do in 1,400 days. Go there and read.  More next week.

:}

THIS!  Donald Trump wants to return the United States to the 1950s. Unfortunately the Earth doesn’t have the atmosphere for it. We used it up. Yet, they are gonna try. We could die as a result.

http://trib.com/business/energy/bill-would-penalize-utilities-for-wind-generated-electricity-for-wyoming/article_fa25328e-aa4b-561f-9955-0995b9118e23.html

featured

Bill would penalize utilities for wind-generated electricity for Wyoming customers

A bill proposed by six state lawmakers would charge utilities a penalty if they use wind or solar energy to provide Wyoming consumers with electricity.

If Senate File 71 were law, there would be six permissible resources for generating electricity for Wyomingites, including natural gas and coal. Wind and solar are not on the list, except for individual use.

Utilities would have a year to reach the first compliance milestone of the bill, in which each company would have to get 95 percent of its Wyoming-sold energy from the approved resources.

The following year, 2019, companies must reach 100 percent compliance.

Under the bill, if electricity were generated by wind or solar in Wyoming to serve customers in the state it would come with a $10-per-megawatt-hour penalty. That penalty would be double the suggested tax hike on wind also under consideration this legislative session.

:}

Go there and read while you can. More next week.

:}

Instead of investing in renewables and conservation. They fought them tooth and nail. Now they are paying the price.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/06/29/power-to-the-people

Power to the People

Why the rise of green energy makes utility companies nervous.

     Mark and Sara Borkowski live with their two young daughters in a century-old, fifteen-hundred-square-foot house in Rutland, Vermont. Mark drives a school bus, and Sara works as a special-ed teacher; the cost of heating and cooling their house through the year consumes a large fraction of their combined income. Last summer, however, persuaded by Green Mountain Power, the main electric utility in Vermont, the Borkowskis decided to give their home an energy makeover. In the course of several days, coördinated teams of contractors stuffed the house with new insulation, put in a heat pump for the hot water, and installed two air-source heat pumps to warm the home. They also switched all the light bulbs to L.E.D.s and put a small solar array on the slate roof of the garage.

The Borkowskis paid for the improvements, but the utility financed the charges through their electric bill, which fell the very first month. Before the makeover, from October of 2013 to January of 2014, the Borkowskis used thirty-four hundred and eleven kilowatt-hours of electricity and three hundred and twenty-five gallons of fuel oil. From October of 2014 to January of 2015, they used twenty-eight hundred and fifty-six kilowatt-hours of electricity and no oil at all. President Obama has announced that by 2025 he wants the United States to reduce its total carbon footprint by up to twenty-eight per cent of 2005 levels. The Borkowskis reduced the footprint of their house by eighty-eight per cent in a matter of days, and at no net cost.

:}

Go there and read. More next week.

:}

I hope Donald Trump listens to all the people telling him that Climate Change is real. Not some hoax made up by the Chinese.

http://illinoistimes.com/article-17943-perishing-planet.html

Wednesday, Nov. 23, 2016 12:14 am

Perishing Planet

Call to action on climate change

About the article

In 2015 Illinois Times and dozens of alternative weeklies and other newsmedia outlets participated in Letters to the Future, a project published ahead of the Paris climate talks that compiled letters from nationally acclaimed writers, scientists, intellectuals and other concerned citizens. As part of the project, the letters were dispatched to hundreds of targeted delegates and citizens before they convened at the Paris sessions.

Now, with the election over, we pick up where Letters to the Future left off with an article that examines what Donald Trump’s administration could mean for climate change – and a call to action list for what must come next.

If President-elect Donald Trump actually believes all the warnings he issued during the election about the threats of immigration, he should be talking about ways to slow global warming as well. Rising sea level, caused by the melting of the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps, will probably displace tens of millions of people in the decades ahead, and many may come to North America as refugees.

Climate change will cause a suite of other problems for future generations to tackle, and it’s arguably the most pressing issue of our time. A year ago December, world leaders gathered in Paris to discuss strategies for curbing greenhouse gas emissions, and scientists at every corner of the globe confirm that humans are facing a crisis. However, climate change is being nearly ignored by American politicians and lawmakers. It was not discussed in depth at all during this past election cycle’s televised presidential debates. And, when climate change does break the surface of public discussion, it polarizes Americans like almost no other political issue. Some conservatives, including Trump, still deny there’s even a problem.

:}

Go there and read. Call your congressman or woman. Pass this on to your friends. More next week.

:}

There are times when I do not think words do a story justice. But if this story is true then I just had my “I told you so” moment.

http://www.alternet.org/environment/how-disappearing-arctic-ice-could-lead-global-climate-catastrophe

How Disappearing Arctic Ice Could Lead to Global Climate Catastrophe

The monumental loss of sea ice is triggering a cascade of effects that could destabilize the global climate system.

This article first appeared on Yale Environment 360.

The news last week that summer ice covering the Arctic Ocean was tied for the second-lowest extent on record is a sobering reminder that the planet is swiftly heading toward a largely ice-free Arctic in the warmer months, possibly as early as 2020.

After that, we can expect the ice-free period in the Arctic basin to expand to three to four months a year, and eventually to five months or more.

Since my days measuring the thickness of Arctic Ocean ice from British nuclear submarines in the early 1970s, I have witnessed a stunning decline in the sea ice covering the northern polar regions — a more than 50 percent drop in extent in summer, and an even steeper reduction in ice volume. Just a few decades ago, ice 10 to 12 feet thick covered the North Pole, with sub-surface ice ridges in some parts of the Arctic extending down to 150 feet. Now, that ice is long gone, while the total volume of Arctic sea ice in late summer has declined, according to two estimates, by 75 percent in half a century.

The great white cap that once covered the top of the world is now turning blue — a change that represents humanity’s most dramatic step in reshaping the face of our planet. And with the steady disappearance of the polar ice cover, we are losing a vast air conditioning system that has helped regulate and stabilize earth’s climate system for thousands of years.

:}

Go there and be horrified. more next week.

:}

Right out of the gate the Trump administration appears monstrous. Based on Trumps belief that Climate Change is a myth made up by the Chinese, he appoints someone who does not believe in global warming to be the head of the EPA transition team. Then announces that he will drop out of the Paris Accord. The environment is about to get raped.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeremy-symons/meet-trumps-pick-to-disma_b_12832350.html?gclid=CjwKEAiApLDBBRC8oICb9NvKsg0SJAD9yOHsv6XBNAqaSVrhPsMVfFPvEcoGSLKQeyHM-AdU5t66ixoChITw_wcB

THE BLOG

Meet Trump’s Pick To Dismantle EPA

11/06/2016 04:17 pm ET | Updated 3 days ago

[Update 11/10/16: A post-election org chart of the Trump transition team, provided to Politico, confirms that Myron Ebell is leading the EPA transition.]

Even though the moderators of all three presidential debates failed to ask any question about climate change or the environment, Donald Trump has made no secret of his disdain for America’s Environmental Protection Agency. In October, he promised to cut EPA regulations “70 to 80 percent” (watch this video at the 4 minute mark). In explaining how he will cut spending to pay for tax cuts, he has singled out the Environmental Protection Agency for budget cuts, promising to:

“get rid of [EPA] in almost every form. We are going to have little tidbits left but we are going to take a tremendous amount out.” – Trump, March 2016

[In reality, EPA’s entire budget equals about one percent of the national deficit, estimated at $590 billion for 2016.]

If you are wondering how Trump will dismantle EPA regulations and staff, meet Myron Ebell, the man Trump has picked to lead his EPA transition team. Ebell is Director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the industry-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). Ebell’s official bio is here. DeSmogBlog, which tracks PR experts who are funded by polluters, has an alternative rundown here.

:}

Go there and read alot of stuff. More next week.

:}

The things the Donald says about the environment are insane. I am sure he will try to get rid of the EPA and put an antienvironmental lawyer on the Supreme Court. We are going to have to be very aggressive with this man.

http://www.vox.com/2016/11/9/13571318/donald-trump-disaster-climate

There’s no way around it: Donald Trump is going to be a disaster for the planet

This is happening. Donald Trump is going to be president of the United States.

And there’s no way around it: What he’s planning to do looks like an absolute disaster for the planet (and the people on it). Specifically, all the fragile but important progress the world has made on global warming over the past eight years is now in danger of being blown up.

Trump has been crystal clear about his environmental plans. Much of the media never wanted to bring it up, never wanted to ask about it in debates, never wanted to turn their addled attention away from Hillary Clinton’s email servers to discuss what a Trump presidency might mean for climate change. But all the indications were there:

  • Trump called global warming a Chinese hoax. He couldn’t have been blunter about this.

:}

Go there and read. (probably more like cry) More next week.

:}

Next Page »