Desmog Hoggan

honorary invest rep on exxon knew"

almost half of Americans are living in places with unhealthy air? That’s the conclusion of the latest report from the American Lung Association, which also lays out the public health implications of the Trump administration’s environmental rollback

shell knew desmog UK

https://kpfa.org/episode/upfront-june-13-2018/

https://www.ecowatch.com/keystone-xl-approval-2538558599.html

Inside the Trump Admin's Fight to Keep the Keystone XL Approval Process Secret

By Steve Horn

At a Feb. 21 hearing, a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the Trump administration must either fork over documents showing how the U.S. Department of State reversed an earlier decision and ultimately came to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, or else provide a substantial legal reason for continuing to withhold them. The federal government has an order to deliver the goods, one way or the other, by March 21.

DeSmog has reviewed the court evidence from the environmental groups bringing the case, records which help illuminate their argument that the government is, in fact, withholding such documents. The judge will decide if those documents, legally, should be made public.

The case, which began in March 2017, pits the Indigenous Environmental Network and the North Coast River Alliance against the State Department, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of interior and TransCanada, the owner of Keystone XL. During his first week in office, Donald Trump signed a memorandumcalling for the State Department to perform an expedited 60-day permit review of the pipeline. Two months later, the State Department gave Keystone XL the permit it needed to cross the U.S.-Canada border.

Under the Obama administration, the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry oil from Alberta's tar sands, underwent a years-long environmental review process which culminated in President Barack Obama nixing it in November 2015. For the better part of the past decade, the pipeline has served as a central mobilizing force for the environmental movement.

Dispute Over Records

At the center of this case is a dispute over the administrative records of federal agencies, which in other lawsuits are routinely made public as part of the pre-trial process.

Generally, releasing such documents gives a snapshot of the full deliberative process behind federal agencies' decisions. DeSmog, in fact, published a story on such documents in 2015 related to a different tar sands pipeline project, which involved Enbridge's Alberta Clipper (also known as Line 67), part of a broader pipeline system DeSmog calls the "Keystone XLClone."

In the TransCanada case, the State Department has argued for keeping these pre-trial records sealed while the plaintiffs, the environmental groups, have argued they should be made public. These documents, which might include emails and memos, would offer the plaintiffs and the general public an idea of how the Trump administration decided to approve the Keystone XL.

The plaintiffs say that not all of those records have been turned over.

"Federal Defendants have wrongly omitted an unknown number of emails and other internal communications considered by the agencies during their review of the Keystone XL pipeline," the plaintiffs in the case argued in court documents on Jan. 8.

In an affidavit exhibited as part of that filing, Cecilia Segal, an attorney for one of the plaintiffs, cited a Dec. 19 phone call she had with the federal defendants, in which they said that agency emails and other records do not need to be disclosed as part of the case.

Another letter exhibited as part of the Jan. 8 filing, written on Nov. 30 by attorneys for the Center for Biological Diversity, further complained that the documents already handed over were not adequately comprehensive or organized in a manner useful for the case. And many documents, they allege, seem to be missing entirely and without explanation.

"We are concerned that both the State Department and Service have withheld records as privileged without identifying and certifying them on a privilege log," wrote the attorneys....

With the rise of new technologies like fracking and horizontal drilling, oil and gas development in the U.S. has exploded over the last 15 years. As development expands, it's also pushing ever closer into areas where people live. It's been estimated that today more than 15 million Americans live within one mile of oil and gas development.

The drilling process, of course, has the potential to emit toxic substances, including the carcinogen benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and diesel exhaust, into the surrounding air and waterways. But researchers have long been trying to determine to what extent oil and gas drilling operations may threaten public health, particularly around cancer risk.

However, new research suggests that children living in areas of high-density oil and gas development may face increased risk of health impacts, namely a certain type of leukemia, as a result of their exposure to pollutants associated with this activity.

In some parts of Colorado where oil and gas development is especially concentrated, hundreds of oil and gas wells reportedly lie within one mile of residential areas. And according to a recent study, children and young adults who were diagnosed with acute lymphocytic leukemia were 4.3 times more likely to live within 10 miles of an active oil and gas well than kids with other types of cancer.

This finding, published in the scientific journal PLOS One, applied to youth between 5 and 24 years old. The study did not find a connection between other types of cancer, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma and proximity to oil and gas wells.

"Over 378,000 Coloradans and millions of Americans currently live within a mile of at least one oil and gas well and petroleum development continues to expand into residential areas," Dr. Lisa McKenzie, professor with the Colorado School of Public Health at the University of Colorado Anschutz and the lead author of the study, said in a statement.

"The findings from our registry-based case control study indicate that young Coloradans diagnosed with one type of childhood leukemia are more likely to live in the densest areas of oil and gas sites. More comprehensive research that can address our study's limitations is needed to understand and explain these results."

While oil and gas development can and does happen in urban areas (see: Los Angeles), McKenzie's team limited their research to Colorado's small towns and rural areas with populations under 50,000 people. They used data collected by the Colorado Central Cancer Registry to find more than 740 young Coloradans under 24 years old who were diagnosed with cancer between 2001 and 2013.

In order to analyze these children's proximity to oil and gas development at diagnosis, the researchers then employed information from the Colorado Oil and Gas Information System to determine both the coordinates of all oil and gas wells in rural Colorado and timing when each well was active.

The study team notes in the PLOS One paper that environmental factors such as pollution from oil and gas wells are unlikely to fully explain incidence of cancer on their own, but that they are a significant influence:

A number of factors, including genetic predisposition and susceptibility, as well as environmental factors, come together in the development of childhood cancers through a two step process, the first of which likely occurs in utero. Environmental factors that may be associated with [acute lymphocytic leukemia] include in-utero and postnatal exposures to vehicle exhaust fumes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and chemicals including benzene and other hydrocarbons.

McKenzie and her co-authors called for more research to confirm their findings, recommending that those studies take into account nuances such the type and level of oil and gas development and production, the amounts of benzene and other pollutants and pollutant levels at locations such as schools and childcare facilities.

But a key takeaway of the study seems to be that fracking and horizontal drilling have enabled oil and gas development to encroach more and more into places where people live (something the city of Greeley, Colorado, is grappling with firsthand) and as the researchers noted, "This has the potential to expose a large population to oil and gas development related pollutants."

Reposted with permission from our media associate DeSmogBlog.

http://www.ecowatch.com/exxon-climate-research-2190240911.html

nolink img

Exxon Ordered to Fork Over 40 Years of Climate Research

Lorraine Chow

ExxonMobil was dealt a major blow on Wednesday after a Massachusetts judge ordered the company to hand in more than 40 years of climate research.

On Wednesday, Suffolk Superior Court Judge Heidi E. Brieger denied the oil giant a protective order that would have blocked Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey's subpoenas for Exxon's internal research on climate change.

"This affirms our authority to investigate fraud," Healey tweeted after the decision. "ExxonMobil must come clean about what it knew about climate change."

Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers told Reuters the company was "reviewing the decision to determine next steps."

In June, the company filed a lawsuit at a federal court in Texas to block Healey's investigation. However, a Texas judge later ruled that the court had no jurisdiction over an investigation in Massachusetts.

Exxon is cooperating with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's own subpoena and has already turned over thousands of pages of documents.

Healey and Schneiderman are among 20 state attorneys general who have launched an unprecedented investigation into whether "Exxon knew" about man-made climate change for several decades but disseminated false information to shareholders and the public in order to boost profits.

In April, DeSmog uncovered Exxon corporate documents from the late 1970sstating unequivocally "there is no doubt" that CO2 from the burning of of fossil fuels was a growing "problem" well understood within the company. Despite having this information, multiple reports have surfaced over the company's efforts to lobby the government against emissions regulations and funding of climate change denial.

The ruling is not just a huge win for Healy, it also raises significant questions over the country's next presumptive secretary of state. On the same day of the court's decision, former Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson faced off with the U.S. Senate over his nomination as Donald Trump's top foreign affairs adviser.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeSmogBlog

The DeSmogBlog, founded in January 2006, is a blog that focuses on topics related to global warming. The site describes itself as "the world's number one source for accurate, fact based information regarding Global Warming misinformation campaigns."^[1] DeSmogBlog opposes what it describes as "a well-funded and highly organized public relations campaign" that it says is "poisoning" the climate change debate.^[2][3]

Since its inception, the site has received several mentions in the media regarding its involvement in global warming issues. The site was co-founded by James Hoggan, president of a public relations firm based in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. The website was recognized in December 2007 with an award by a trade organization for its standards and content.^[4]

[hide]

Content:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

Mission and audience:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

The blog was co-founded in January 2006 by James Hoggan, president of the public relations firm Hoggan and Associates. In a February 2007 interview with the Vancouver Sun, Hoggan conveys his anger at industry interests who he believes mislead the public about the scientific understanding of global warming. He referred to this alleged misrepresentation of the facts as, "public relations at its sleaziest". Hoggan used his public relations skills to start a blog that would "clear the PR pollution that clouds the science of climate change" and expose organizations and individuals which he considered to be unethical. DeSmogBlog says it reports on the credibility of experts who appear to misrepresent the science of global warming in the media by investigating their scientific background, funding sources, and industry interests. The site originally targeted a Canadian audience but is now involved in global climate change coverage.^[5]

Contributors to the site assist in researching organizations that the site's staff believe are phony, grassroots organizations, or astroturf groups sponsored directly or indirectly by industries seeking to thwart climate change-related legislation. Organizations alleged by the blog to be astroturfs include Friends of Science, Natural Resources Stewardship Project, Global Climate Coalition, and International Climate Science Coalition.^[6][7] Individuals that the site has identified as pushing an anti-climate change point of view are listed in the site's "Denial Database", with accompanying information about their industry affiliations and professional biographies.^[8] In a Financial Post column, Canadian environmentalist Lawrence Solomon stated that the organization was, in Solomon's words, "specifically created for the purpose of discrediting skeptics." ^[9]

In a report in the Globe and Mail, Hoggan stated that the most frequent visitors to the site came from Calgary, Ottawa, and Washington D.C..^[10]

Notable issues or media mentions:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

In one instance, the site responded to a 2006 open letter opposing the Canadian Government's climate-change plans, claimed to be signed by "accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines", by analyzing the list of the signatories. The site concluded that those checked had few peer-reviewed publications on the topic and/or had fossil-fuel industry connections.^[2]

DeSmogBlog has criticized Financial Post editor and columnist Terence Corcoran, claiming he impedes progress on climate change and environmental protection legislation in Canada.^[11] In turn, Corcoran has criticized Hoggan and his website, accusing both of serving the interests of large corporations hoping to make money on emissions trading.^[12]

The blog has been referenced in The Guardian by George Monbiot, who most recently cited a study by the website showing that in 2008 "the number of internet pages proposing that man-made global warming is a hoax or a lie more than doubled".^[13] In another column, Monbiot noted that DeSmogBlog posted a video critical of Anthony Watts's blog Watts Up With That that Watts had deleted from YouTube for copyright reasons.^[14] Monbiot has also mentioned DeSmogBlog's efforts to expose efforts by oil, coal, and electricity companies to manipulate media views on climate change.^[15]

Heartland Institute documents

In February 2012, DeSmogBlog posted a number of internal documents purportedly from The Heartland Institute, a libertarian think tank.^[16] According to a statement posted on the Heartland Institute website, "Some of these documents were stolen from Heartland, at least one is a fake, and some may have been altered ... the authenticity of those documents has not been confirmed."

Days after the document posting, blogger and journalist Megan McArdle wrote on The Atlantic website of a comment to a blog post that suggested that one of the documents, a memo titled "2012 Heartland Climate Strategy," was likely a fake based on the document being a scan which included metadata with a US west coast time zone.^[17][18] DeSmogBog responded that they had "no evidence supporting Heartland's claim that the Strategic document is fake" and then included a number of references to McArdle's first piece on the topic.^[19] McArdle then said of the DeSmogBlog response that "The first two links are to my post, and they are an egregious misrepresentation of what I said," and goes on to note that "the stubborn willingness to ignore obvious problems becomes the story."^[18]

On February 20, 2012, Peter Gleick issued a statement in the Huffington Post explaining that he had received an anonymous document in the mail that seemed to contain details on the climate program strategy of The Heartland Institute. He admitted to soliciting and receiving additional material from the Institute "under someone else's name," calling his actions "a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics."^[20][21]

Founder and staff:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

The site's co-founder, James Hoggan, is President of the Vancouver-based public relations firm James Hoggan & Associates, chair of the David Suzuki Foundation, a trustee of the Dalai Lama Center for Peace and Education, and an executive member of the Urban Development Institute. He is the author (with Richard Littlemore) of the 2009 book Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming (ISBN 978-1-55365-485-8), which criticizes global warming denial and conspiracy theories. The sources do not identify the site's other co-founder.^{[1][8][22][23]}

The website names John Lefebvre as a benefactor. Frequent contributors to the blog include Ross Gelbspan and Richard Littlemore. Littlemore is a science writer who formerly worked for the Vancouver Sun. The site's project manager was Kevin Grandia, who left to become the Director of Online Strategy at Greenpeace . The site is now managed by Brendan DeMelle.

Awards:{:(style="margin-right:0.25em"):}:[edit:{]}:

The site was recognized in December 2007 by three British Columbia chapters of the Canadian Public Relations Society, the Vancouver, Victoria (CPRS-vi) and Northern Lights in Prince George, with an award for demonstrating "The highest ethical and professional standards while performing outstanding work". In a CPRS press release which accompanied the award, Hoggan stated that the site had been viewed by 520,000 people over its history, had been cited as a source by 24 media outlets, and mentioned in more than 4,500 other blogs. According to the press release, the blog was selected for the award by a panel of journalists and public relations professionals in Victoria, Vancouver, and Prince George.^[24]

DeSmogBlog was also listed by Time magazine as one of the "best blogs of 2011" in June, 2011.^[25]