Make Your Voice Heard… While Time Remains

Tags

4Necessity, Bill McKibben, Enbridge, KAXE, KBXE, Line 3

I have been doing a lot of reading of late. Not books, mind you, but screens. The internet is the new library and we’re all writers. You think that Facebook post you made of your silly dog was just an update to your grandkids but indeed, depending on your settings, it could be the post that brings a needed smile for a lonely dog lover who just lost his sole companion. We really never realize the extent of our deeds and I am here today to cheer on humble writers of that seemingly small tool of democracy, the Letter to the Editor.

Lowell Shellack of Park Rapids, MN gets credit for instigating this blog as his recent piece on Enbridge’s 99.999% safe record was exactly what I needed to see as this ridiculous number, posted in ad after ad in Minnesota papers, frustrates me and attempts to delude readers.

Thanks to Melodee Monicken for this photo of a not yet showing online PR Enterprise LTE

Lowell has a history of revealing to the public that which has not been clearly and fully presented by the local press on their own. In his LTE from 2017, he exposed three major Enbridge pipeline spills in Minnesota as shown below.

• August 1979, west of Bemidji: 449,000 gallons oil spilled, a quarter of the oil oozed through sandy soil into a wetland and water table. It has never been cleaned up entirely and is the subject of an ongoing study to see how petroleum products break down naturally.
• March 1991, near Grand Rapids: A state record 1.7 million gallons spilled when Enbridge employees misinterpreted alarms and did not respond immediately. A similar mistake happened almost two decades later in 2010, at Marshall, Mich., when almost a million gallons of tar sands spilled into the Kalamazoo River. The river was shut down for two years and the river still isn’t completely cleaned up.
• July, 2002, near Cohasset: 252,000 gallons of crude oil spilled when the pipeline ruptured as a result of pipeline fatigue developed while shipping the pipe. It took a controlled burn sending black smoke over a mile high to dispose of some of the oil.

This is the kind of thoughtful and well-written journalism we hunger for as mainstream media becomes more and more of a sound-byte propaganda machine for government and corporate interests. Where is the news coverage that looks like this kind of debunkery? Where are the articles that truly reveal the nature of this pipeline project? Where are the voices of the non-human entities? Hell, where are the voices of everyday citizens who oppose Line 3? Mostly in LTEs and Op-Eds. The only time we hear these voices in the mainstream news seems to be when they become so loud in utter frustration to bring change that we see people marching in the streets.

Big corporations like Enbridge have plenty of money to buy ads but more importantly, influence.

Locally, I refuse to give money to the KAXE/KBXE public radio stations because they air misleading Enbridge ads. On the surface, this seems like a freedom of enterprise issue, yes? I mean, Enbridge pays them for the ad time just like any local business. What’s the problem? Well, the problem is that this ad revenue seems to have brought with it an associated willingness to look the other way with regard to their big pipeline project which runs directly through the KAXE/KBXE listening area. What kind of coverage is the station giving to those in opposition to Line 3? Not much. Even with the local trial ongoing regarding 4 Necessity Valve Turners.

Search results for “Enbridge Line 3” on KAXE 4-15-19

Even their coverage of what was a horrible night for Enbridge seems to press as much as it can of the positive by focusing on pro-Enbridge views. The reporter, Scott Hall, spoke with the Enbridge representative, a landowner on the pipeline, and three Enbridge construction workers giving feedback from each of these conversations. But while he mentions speaking with a “dozen or more” in opposition to Line 3, there is not a single quote or summarized comment from any of the tribal members present or the non-natives working to prevent Line 3 construction. The voice of the opposition was barely represented in the KAXE/KBXE reporting, consisting of basically the question Winona LaDuke asked.

Someone asked for quiet and the leader of Honor the Earth, Winona LaDuke from White Earth, asked the Enbridge staff if the company was going to use the same tactics against pipeline protesters in MN as were used recently by law enforcement in North Dakota.  At one point she asked “are you going to bring tanks here?”

The extent of Scott Hall’s coverage for the voice of Line 3 opposition.

We’ve made it clear via phone conversations and survey responses with KAXE/KBXE that we will not support their efforts until they refuse to take Enbridge money. It seems they are doubling down with Enbridge though, recently having them as a sponsor for a major community event.

Because I so appreciate those who write in to the paper, I called and left a message for my new friend Lowell. He returned my call the next day and we chatted about our beautiful region and our dedication to the work we hope will result in saving this place from the destruction of the fossil fuel industry. I encourage you to not only reach out to those who do write with thanks but to take a shot yourself at sharing your own views, ideas, concerns, and hopes. You never know who you might be helping.

Another area where I believe we are losing ground is in our televised satire. I love the coverage given to the inside story by our satirists but I truly wish the American public were mature enough to digest this information without all the distracting name-calling and ridiculous humor. How about we simply talk about the facts which, if really understood, would astonish most citizens? Our government spying on everyone should be front page news until it stops. Unfortunately, our mainstream media is owned by corporations who work in cahoots with the government to continue the capitalistic profits, regardless of the effect to the environment or the very citizens the government is meant to serve and corporations claim to benefit. Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Sam Bee, and even more mainstream Stephen Colbert and Seth Meyers all use silliness while discussing subjects that would be terrifying if we could only see the full truth. This Assange case could mean the end of a free press, though it may only be a short step from the bound press we already have.

In fact, in this era of murder and prosecution of journalists who are speaking out against the powers that be, we need to hear MORE from everyday people from LTEs to Op-Eds to outright direct action. While the recent arrest of Julian Assange may well be a sign of the end, corporate ownership has bound the press to a large extent already. Outside MSM (mainstream media) we still see independent journalism that informs of the darker side of the workings of government, corporations, or even simply racist asshats. The livestream video-capture subversive public, especially that of those in the Resistance to the Empire may be our last best hope. Just ask Princess Leah.

#RebelForLife

My Letter to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Tags

Bill McKibben, Civic Duty, climate change, Line 3, MN PCA, PCA, Pipeline, Tar Sands

Mr. Stine & Associates,

I truly hoped to send hand-written letters but I find that the electronic communications offers so much more opportunity to share links to data which I feel are crucial in this issue of deciding whether or not to allow Enbridge, a foreign corporation, to install a new Line 3 pipeline to carry risky Tar Sands through our precious watersheds so they can sell it offshore.

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has been giving me hope ever since the first DEIS hearing on Line 3 in Rice Lake.  It was there that I met two MPCA folks and I wish I’d kept better notes to tell you their names but I believe Willis Mattison was one contact.  It was made clear to me that the New Line 3 would have to receive permits from the MPCA in order to be approved for build. As we spoke of the dangers of Tar Sands and the importance of the Mississippi River watershed, I got the impression that the MPCA could very well find reason to not approve a pipeline crossing under the Mississippi River or traversing through wetlands, the most dangerous places for a Tar Sands pipeline regardless of what the fossil fuel industry says. This MPCA permitting process has been giving me hope during the 18 months since that June day.

The DEIS meeting was an enlightening experience.  I was horrified with the lack of concern given to Indigenous rights that was presented by the DOC. Jamie MacAlister herself explained to me that Tribal Resources were NOT being given priority consideration in this DEIS. The fact that a people’s way of life – the very people who gave us rights to this land nonetheless – was of no more importance than a Canadian corporation’s desire to make mere money was beyond my comprehension. I was sickened by the thought of all those Tar Sands coming through along a new 220′ wide and hundreds of mile long corridor of destruction through our state. I have since learned of some of the destruction done to the land even before they begin putting pipe into the ground – the trees that are turned into sawdust and ground into the dirt, the beings quietly hibernating whose lives are cut short by these preparations. [Watch the Press Conference video link below to hear Doug Rasch’s eloquent but ominous description of the pipeline construction process, one he watched on his property when the Koch brothers line was constructed.]  But I was inspired to hope that day by the PCA reps in attendance.  I can’t recall now if I wrote thank you notes to them, as I’ve since done with Bill Grant and the DOC more recently.  I am hopeful that you have their names so you can give them a pat on the back for their representation there. I believe they were also present at the DEIS in Park Rapids the next day.

But more importantly I fear for the very viability of our planet that a new Line 3 would threaten.  It is clear if you watch the news in the last 60 days that information on the rapidly (much more rapidly than even predicted) deteriorating planet we inhabit.  From the loss of insect life and annihilation of wildlife to the shifting climate zones and the overwhelming costs of drought, fire, flood, and storms, it is clear we are running out of time to act.  Rather than add NEW fossil fuel infrastructure, we need to be dialing back on the use of fossil fuels as quickly as possible.  The IPCC says we have about a decade to save ourselves.

The MPCA has the ability to scientifically show that a new Tar Sands pipeline has no place in Minnesota, especially considering the Next Generation Energy Act and Renewable Energy Standard that was signed into law by Governor Tim Pawlenty in 2007 and is helping drive Minnesota as one of the most progressive in this transition time away from fossil fuels.  This is why I moved from Indiana to Minnesota in 2014 – to live in a place where it seemed progress based on science and morals was happening.  A place where education was important because critical thinking matters.  A place where the environment was not a resource for exploitation but an interconnected part of human life, critical for not only sustenance but also for solace.

I write now to strongly encourage you to DENY the 401 permit needed by Enbridge to continue its assault on the planet.  Together we can stop Line 3 from being built in our fair state and we can help prevent the extraction of Tar Sands which must remain in the ground for planetary viability. The majority of citizens oppose the new Line 3.  We are not paid by Enbridge to support the pipeline like many of those are who shout for Line 3 approval, all wearing their matching green t-shirts.   We are scientists, engineers, parents, educators, and others who are voluntarily giving our time and energy to oppose Line 3.

I am hopeful that your work will include transparency to the public, including a chance for public notification of your findings and a place and time for public feedback on your conclusions. I understand this will bring a possibility for pro-pipeline opinions but I am confident in the science to prove their economic arguments carry no weight when compared to the devastation Tar Sands are already causing for our planet.  I am hopeful that, as scientists, you will give due consideration to the evidence, rather than deferring to Enbridge’s statements which basically request that we trust them without skepticism, even if their data is vague, unproven, and/or untrue.  Please consider giving full transparency to the public on this vital decision.  As many comprehend, economic opportunities mean little if we don’t have a safe place to live.

The timing for consideration is perfect as every day there is a new report either on the prospects for our future, the dangerous results of Climate Change – from the North, South, East and West, the science that says we have a short window of opportunity to mitigate the effects of all the carbon and methane we are putting into the atmosphere and that it will take a global effort, or the growing protests of massive groups and individuals around the world saying it’s time we think about the future we will leave our children.  Minnesota is already changing.  Yes, adults like you and me have less time to eek out a survival on this planet.  But our children’s lives will see much more chaos and change, some of it I’m sure we cannot even yet imagine, if we continue on the path we have been with fossil fuels.

Bill McKibben makes it plain in this 4 minute video, which notes that in less than 15 years – ten now as this video was from 2013 [and this figure was recently confirmed by the IPCC report] we will have used ALL the gigatons of C that will take us past 2 degrees Celsius for the planet’s warming. We must leave the Tar Sands in the ground if we hope to have a planet that is livable for our grandchildren.  And his more recent article explains this situation from a current perspective.

Meanwhile, the current Republican President doesn’t believe in his own administration’s report.  And his administration is cutting the funds needed to continue to understand and address this issue.  When we can’t count on our national government to assure the security of its citizens, we need State agencies to take a stand to protect us and our homeland.

What we do know is that Pipelines Leak.  Spills are inevitable and Enbridge’s record shows a spill every 20 days.  And cleanup of the process appears to be less possible than originally reported by companies like Syncrude.

We need scientists, using critical thinking, and being unmotivated by dollars from industry, to assure that we are making the best decisions for our state.  Please do all you can to STOP Line 3 from becoming a reality.  Your recent posting about the We Are Water MN exhibit in Bemidji indicates you understand the importance of protecting water.  I am counting on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to help prevent a disastrous Tar Sands Pipeline and the chemicals it would contain from bringing devastation to our state.  From the perspective of Treaty Rights, the rights of our Youth for a livable planet, and the health and safety of our people, our animals, plants, land, air and water, a new, bigger Line 3 makes no sense.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jami Gaither

Environmentalists for Hillary?

Tags

350.org, Bill McKibben, sustainability

To me, this is a total oxymoron.

In June 2015, Clinton’s campaign announced their new consultant…  TransCanada’s former lobbyist Jeff Berman.  In the period ending at that time, Hillary also had large sums of bundled contributions coming from associates from the fossil fuel industry: http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/827/201507159000221827/201507159000221827.pdf

There has been much debate about Sanders “lying” regarding the funds going to Clinton from the fossil fuel industry.  But is he lying?  This link, which appears now to have crashed due to excessive traffic, gives a good account of the millions going to Hillary from the Fossil Fuel industry: http://fair.org/home/did-sanders-lie-about-clintons-oil-money-npr-factchecker-cant-be-bothered-to-check/   But a Greenpeace link can give you a good summary as well: http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaign-updates/hillary-clintons-connection-oil-gas-industry/

 

Nicholas Kamm | AFP | Getty Images

And Clinton says, “Anybody who knows me, who thinks they can influence me, name anything they’ve influenced me on. Just name one thing.”

How about two?

• http://www.ibtimes.com/colombian-oil-money-flowed-clintons-state-department-took-no-action-prevent-labor-1874464 “At the same time that Clinton’s State Department was lauding Colombia’s human rights record [while Colombian military rounded up (union organizers) at gunpoint and threatened violence if they failed to disband], her family was forging a financial relationship with Pacific Rubiales, the sprawling Canadian petroleum company at the center of Colombia’s labor strife. The Clintons were also developing commercial ties with the oil giant’s founder, Canadian financier Frank Giustra, who now occupies a seat on the board of the Clinton Foundation, the family’s global philanthropic empire.”  Did she think we’d forgotten?  Well, most of us never even knew this, let alone forgot it.
• Or, more near and dear to my heart, subsequent to three Enbridge lobbyists funding Clinton’s campaign, as Secretary of State, she signed off on the Enbridge pipeline. http://www.bemidjipioneer.com/content/us-secretary-state-hillary-clinton-signs-permit-enbridge-pipeline-work-may-start-today

I think pipelines in general and Keystone in particular were a big factor turning my opinion on Hillary.  She took WAY TOO LONG to take a stance against the Keystone XL pipeline (KXL).  Based on Bill McKibben’s article in Rolling Stone (7/19/12) http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719, it should have been obvious years ago that, not only do we need to leave most of the remaining fossil fuels in the ground, but we also should cease and desist with all exploratory ventures to find more!  If we took half the money we’re currently spending to subsidize this work, and instead spent it on supporting renewables, we’d be fossil fuel free in no time.  Certainly by 2030 which many see as a looming deadline.  Not to mention the funding we could also free up for public health initiatives like curing cancer or public education to train the next generation of innovators.

Yet Clinton continues to support fracking, even on a global scale, though it is now being exposed as an even bigger threat to climate than ever imagined.  http://www.thenation.com/article/global-warming-terrifying-new-chemistry/

Josh Lopez photo from 350.org

 Side note: Bill McKibben also discusses his fall into activism in his 2013 book Oil and Honey: The Education of an Unlikely Activist.  This is an interesting read, especially its look behind the curtain on the 350.org movement and the workings of our government.  Oh, and there are bees! 🙂

As both O’Malley and Sanders have noted (this quote is from O’Malley), “On issue after issue–marriage equality, drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants, children fleeing violence in Central America, the Syrian refugee crisis, and now the Keystone Pipeline, Secretary Clinton has followed – not forged – public opinion.”  http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-finally-comes-out-against-keystone-pipeline

We need a leader, not a follower.  Especially when we have no idea whether she WILL follow our lead once elected.  I’m thinking she might just keep following the money.  I’m suspicious that she will continue to be influenced by those who paid her entry fee… and it by-and-large ain’t us.

Hillary has too many ties to the fossil fuel industry.  In addition to those mentioned in links provided above and the tie to TransCanada I noted at the onset of this piece, her good friend Paul Elliott was TransCanada’s Director of Government Relations in Washington, D.C. while she was Secretary of State.  What was his job just before taking on this latest venture?  He was National Deputy Director & Chief of Staff for the Hillary Clinton for President campaign.  https://www.linkedin.com/in/paul-elliott-21755959  With Hillary working as Secretary of State and involved with the approval of KXL, there was an obvious potential for conflict of interest.  http://greenliving.about.com/od/scienceandtechnology/a/Hydraulic-Fracturing-Fracking.htm

Perhaps I should leave it to Susan Sarandon who explains it better than me in the first five & 1/2 minutes of this interview.  “If you think that it’s pragmatic to shore up the status quo right now, then you’re our of touch with the status quo.  The status quo is not working.” http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/truthdigger_of_the_week_susan_sarandon_defender_of_those_wholl_vote_for_ber

You can argue that it’s impractical to not support Hillary if she’s the nominee.   And I hear you.  But you’re naive if you think you can guilt people into voting for Hillary when they are convinced she is not going to have their back on the issues; when they are convinced she is on the wrong side of history.  This is why many are saying, “Anyone but Hillary.”  They are not pleased with her record.  And I am convinced Bernie is the only one who can bring out the voters we need to defeat Republicans at the polls in November, no matter who they nominate. Our ONLY chance to beat Republicans.  Are you hearing me?  

I simply have no faith that Hillary will represent We the People with regard to Climate Change (and a whole host of other issues as well).  She certainly won’t be changing her ways soon enough to save this planet from the devastating effects of Climate Change, which is rapidly changing the world as we know it.  Especially if we have to continue dragging her forward to finally catch up to the rest of us.