In Atlanta, we started having wildfire forecasts this week, thanks to extreme drought. About 13,000 acres are on fire three counties over. The Rough Ridge fire is one of many in the region. So it's been the perfect week to elect a climate change denier with no curiosity to read or learn into office.
The T---- transition team’s “plan” for “energy independence” is the house of horrors we knew it would be:
Rather than continuing the current path to undermine and block America's fossil fuel producers, the Trump Administration will encourage the production of these resources by opening onshore and offshore leasing on federal lands and waters. We will streamline the permitting process for all energy projects, including the billions of dollars in projects held up by President Obama, and rescind the job-destroying executive actions under his Administration. We will end the war on coal, and rescind the coal mining lease moratorium, the excessive Interior Department stream rule, and conduct a top-down review of all anti-coal regulations issued by the Obama Administration. We will eliminate the highly invasive "Waters of the US" rule, and scrap the $5 trillion dollar Obama-Clinton Climate Action Plan and the Clean Power Plan and prevent these unilateral plans from increasing monthly electric bills by double-digits without any measurable effect on Earth's climate.
But last year, it was discovered that Exxon conducted extensive research and knew about climate change as early as 1977, according to a recent investigation from InsideClimate News.
Exxon refused to acknowledge climate change for decades. And spent millions to promote misinformation about it.
They found that the company’s knowledge of climate change dates back to July 1977, when its senior scientist James Black delivered a sobering message on the topic. “In the first place, there is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels," Black told Exxon’s management committee. A year later he warned Exxon that doubling CO2 gases in the atmosphere would increase average global temperatures by two or three degrees—a number that is consistent with the scientific consensus today.
Is there a way to leverage information like this in a legal action to halt T----‘s plans? If Exxon’s own research shows that climate change is real, wouldn’t it be a crime for his administration to turn back progress on it? Hello Erin Brockovich?
The “climate kids” case against the Obama administration is moving forward. This means T--— inherits the lawsuit:
A federal judge on Thursday denied the federal government's motion to dismiss the "climate kids" case, meaning their lawsuit over climate change will go to trial in federal court in Oregon, likely next year.
The kid plaintiffs, ages 9 to 20, allege the federal government is doing far too little to keep dangerous global warming in check, and is actually creating warming by leasing federal property for fossil fuel extraction.
Legally, can it be argued that there should be no new fossil fuel extraction in our land and shores until this case is resolved? And make it take eight years to resolve? Can we make these kids the heroes that really do save the planet? Can we create a nationwide “citizen’s climate case?”
I’m reading all the emails from the different environmental groups I support. They all say the same thing – we will fight. But no one is saying how. That’s unnerving. We need to figure out how. Right away.
And we need to be SOB’s about this fight.
In the meantime, what on earth happens to all the different species of wildlife during a wildfire?