Wednesday, May 11, 2016

EcoAlert Update - Exxon Torrance Hazard Announcement


Many are now aware of the danger presented by the restarting of the EXXON Torrance Refinery.  This is happening so the sale to PBF Energy, Inc. can be completed.  Exxon needs the cash and to dump the enormous potential for liability the refinery now presents. 

What appears to still be hidden is the fact the formula for modified HF being used is proprietary and owned by Exxon.  It has never been independently tested.  

If a major rupture occurs Exxon and PBF can hide behind the formula's proprietary status.  This tactic has always worked for the industry.  


From the Wiki on HF:

"Hydrogen fluoride gas is an acute poison that may immediately and permanently damage lungs and the corneas of the eyes. Aqueous hydrofluoric acid is a contact-poison with the potential for deep, initially painless burns and ensuing tissue death. By interfering with body calcium metabolism, the concentrated acid may also cause systemic toxicity and eventual cardiac arrest and fatality, after contact with as little as 160 cm2 (25 square inches) of skin."

Tuesday, May 10, 2016

Exxon scrambles to contain climate crusade

From:  Politico


A green campaign to make the company pay for climate change is besieging the oil industry and its conservative allies. Editor' Note -  Supporters of Exxon are not Conservatives.  They are NeoCons.
An Exxon sign is pictured. | AP Photo
Activists plan to make a public stand at Exxon’s annual shareholder meeting May 25, where several resolutions intended to force the company into acknowledging the climate threat will come to a vote. | Getty


On Nov. 3, ExxonMobil dispatched its top lobbyists to Capitol Hill on an urgent mission — tamping down an escalating campaign aimed at making the country’s largest oil company pay a legal and political price for its role in warming the planet.
The meeting marked a striking shift in Exxon’s handling of the controversy. The notion of holding oil companies responsible for global warming, in the same way tobacco companies had to pay billions of dollars in damages over the health effects of cigarettes, had long been seen as a quixotic quest led by scruffy, oil-hating extremists. But POLITICO’s interviews with dozens of activists, industry officials and lawmakers suggest that support for a legal crusade against Exxon is growing far beyond the political fringe — and now poses the biggest existential threat the company has faced in decades.

Just five days before the meeting on Capitol Hill, Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton had urged the Justice Department to investigate whether the petroleum giant spent decades deceiving the public about the threat of climate change. State attorneys general had Exxon in their sights as well, preparing to issue subpoenas that would eventually rope in virtually all of Washington’s conservative policy apparatus. A four-year effort by green activists, scientists and lawyers to turn Big Oil’s biggest player into the poster child for climate change — deliberately patterned after the successful campaign to take down tobacco — was shaking the descendant of John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil empire to its core.  MORE

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Exxon – What They Are Still Hiding





Written for EcoAlert

By Melinda Pillsbury-Foster and David Lincoln

About the article


We have been investigating the connection between Exxon’s Climate change denial and their policies towards refinery maintenance and operations policy. In particular, we are interested in how decisions at the highest levels of the major oil companies have impacted the rate of accidents and other major refinery incidents.



Today we sent information to the Attorneys General in each state with evidence of further wrong doing by Exxon. You need to know about this, too.
 

While we all know Exxon is being charged civilly for withholding information on Climate Change, the company was at the same time carrying out a campaign of climate change denial. This distracted our attention from an ongoing shell game involving the refinery industry. 
 

Research done by our organization, EcoAlert, revealed further acts by Exxon, and other oil companies, which resulted in the deaths of plant employees because the companies failed to maintain their equipment or provide adequate training and oversight. Further implications of refinery sales, fires and shutdowns are enormous. 
 

While we were still doing the research we realized the strategy Exxon followed was really very simple, so simple a child could easily 'get' it. We began calling this Greedville – The Oil Game. We refer to the game in the article and use some graphics. We may actually produce the game, as it worked well explaining these events to our associates.

Here is what we found out. 

What Exxon is Still Hiding 



At about the time Exxon defunded their studies on climate change, decisions were being made and a strategy agreed on to cut costs on refinery operations. Exxon began its campaign of Climate Change Denial to distract you. Now, for the real story.

The very small group of individuals who run ExxonMobil are highly motivated and extraordinarily well compensated for the work they do. Each of these individuals, vice-presidents up, expected to leave the company at least as a multi-millionaire. The last ExxonMobil CEO Lee Raymond, received a compensation package of about $400,000,000 when he retired in 2006. Raymond came onboard Exxon while these events were playing out.

Their present CEO, Rex Tillerson, made a little over $40,000,000 last year and is expected to retire with a very nice golden parachute soon.

These men had ambitions, dreams, and in 1985 they were firmly invested in a sense of entitlement for what they were then earning and for their future compensation.

This is the real governing body, the club, the people who can be trusted with the facts and would actively carry out the decisions made.

If the public had known the damage oil was already doing, and the potential for more, steps would have been taken to get us off oil far sooner, cutting off the millions to be paid to the individuals making these decisions. Of course, many vice-presidents also sit on the Board of Directors of other companies.

Exxon did not tell their stockholders, lower level employees - or us, about their plans.

Exxon's management must have been shocked when they realized what was causing climate change. It may even have been shattering for them. A very vocal faction of the public was becoming ever louder and more active on the issue of oil in the 80s. At the same time, expectations for long term goals were irrevocably altered.

These men did not view themselves as bad guys, quite the contrary. But they were also angry. Those of us around then saw that boiling anger in this bumper sticker. 

 

Perhaps the penny that dropped was due to advances in solar energy. We'll never know. But it is probably safe to assume they realized their industry was not going to remain the dominant energy source for as long as they had believed. Each of them would feel the impact personally so they decided to take steps to protect themselves. If there were problems to be handled, they would give the orders.


One of those problems was liability. Their strategic group included attorneys and seasoned geologists and engineers. They knew the risks of doing nothing to fight climate change and they knew the implications for the supply and price of their products.



Did they think about those ordinary people making maybe $10 - $40 an hour who their orders would intentionally place in harm’s way? It seems the risk to their employees was something they were willing to accept as long as they could avoid paying for the consequences.



Liability would be hard to avoid, however. Since the victims did not know the full nature of the risks and injury and death could result from neglect and cost cutting, (to say nothing of the losses to stockholders), they needed a way to immunize themselves from what could amount to enormous damages.



Oil refineries were shut down frequently and refinery ownership was often shuffled between the major players. In a market with a growing demand for gasoline and other petroleum products they all began to cut back on maintenance and upgrades for their refineries. This would save them money in the long run. Knowing most people knew nothing about their business, lying worked when questions were asked.



Excuses were made about why major incidents kept reoccurring – but the evidence shows they were deliberate falsehoods. They also knew failure to maintain the refineries would lead to more incidents – and explosions and malfunctions can kill people.



Restitution was definitely something to be evaded, and the Exxon Club, and their fellow corporations, successfully avoided being found out by obscuring the records and providing misleading and contradictory statements. 




Greedville – Ticket to Lie Card



For example, the 10,000 clean up workers from the Exxon Valdez, harmed in 1989 have never been fully compensated and Exxon has made health studies difficult. Another stall to keep a precedent from being created. Exxon never followed up on what happened to these people, who trusted Exxon and cleaned up their mess. Exxon applies the same tactics when it comes to the poor residents near refineries. Exxon knew if they had no information nothing could be subpoenaed. The last time someone, not Exxon, tried to contact the clean-up workers most were dead.



Notice the form the Exxon disinformation campaign took. Instead of looking at the impact on air, water and land, and human health, (where damage already could have been proven in many cases), they focused on the impact to the climate, a subject they knew, better than most, was more complex and harder to prove.



It was the best possible approach for their purpose. Using the uncertainties of science and politics they divided possible opposition, stalling so they could take steps to reduce their potential liabilities, which would only increase over time. It would be a long stall focused on ensuring the appearance of forward momentum and increasing the value of their stock.



That brings us to what is going to seem a completely different set of players, beginning with a man named Thomas D. O'Malley. You can usefully think of Mr. O'Malley, CEO of PBF Energy, Inc., as a trash collector who makes sure companies like Exxon are not found liable for the failure of critical infrastructure. It is a shell game; you have to keep your eye on the liability to understand what is happening. This has made Mr. O'Malley very wealthy. 



This was a step toward the going out of business sale or bankruptcy sell offs which were inevitable. The step was taken to save them money, and it has. 



By taking this step, intentionally and covertly, corporations, run by similar management 'clubs' cooperated in actions which took the lives of employees and also impacted the health of tens of thousands of people living near the facilities. The companies likely realized this opened them up to charges of conspiracy and decided the risk was worth it.



Offsetting costs to others had always been part of their business strategy. The game involved selling obsolete, damaged or derelict refineries to O’Malley through his numerous corporations and shell companies, who would then pretend to add value by pushing these facilities to their productive capacity while at the same time cutting operations and maintenance costs to the bone. This would push up his stock value and give the appearance of maximum efficiency while those in the trenches would know something really bad was about to happen. Then when the inevitable fire or explosion occurred, he would quickly close the facility, cash in on insurance, subsidies or development schemes and restructure into a new company with no track record.



Just today Californians are learning how much this really cost them. In an article published this morning in the Daily Breeze by Nick Green, said, the February 2015 explosion, “that shuttered the ExxonMobil plant in Torrance was the costliest disruption at a California refinery in the past 16 years, with motorists paying at least $2.4 billion in higher pump prices in the following six months, according to a recent RAND study.

Soaring prices stemming from the lost gasoline supply sucked a staggering $6.9 billion from the California economy in the first six months after the explosion alone.

But the total economic loss is likely more than double that figure, RAND researchers noted.”


Our research into Exxon introduced us to Thomas D. O'Malley and his interesting career. He has used the 'Greedville Lie Card' multiple times. He has also known the Exxon Club folks for a long time and assisted them before. 
 

We are running out of time, this week Exxon will restart their refinery in Torrance, Calif which blew up in Feb 2015. If it doesn’t catch fire in the next 15 days, ownership will transfer to O’Malley’s PBF Energy company. We know what he will do next, he has done it a dozen times before. He will cut costs to the bone and push production to maximum capacity. When the inevitable happens, he will once again declare bankruptcy and leave the employees and residents with a lifetime of hurt.



Tom O'Malley and Rex Tillerson shaking hands



We know the number of employees who were previously ordered into danger after management had refused to carry out routine maintenance. We know how many died, as a result. The number of incidents, including explosions, has been steadily increasing since the 1980s. Many refineries are now closed, no longer in use. 

The number of incidents taking place since 1987 has risen dramatically.



 


This has happened in ten states.


And which state had the most 'incidents?' California, with 47. Texas is second with 34. 

 

And which company caused the most 'incidents?'
Exxon owned refineries suffered 19 explosions followed by Valero, 12, Conoco Philips and Tosco, ten each, BP and Sinclair, 9 each, and Chevron, 8. The evidence for how they managed to evade accountability is now in the hands of the Attorney Generals. The states have stepped in to do what the Federal government ignored.


An accident is not an accident when the conditions which caused explosions were planned.

Fatalities for the industry were 134 dead. The number of people injured was over 20,000.



There are steps to be taken now. The first has already been carried out. The evidence we compiled went by email to the Attorney Generals in the 10 states where the fatalities and injuries took place. Several of these have already filed civil lawsuits against ExxonMobil on their evasions over Climate Change. Other corporations, following the same strategy, can be added and the matter tried criminally.

The goal must include real compensation for those harmed, not just fines. Officers for the corporations should not be allowed to hide behind their corporate shields. Sign the petition demanding action be taken. MovetoAmend.org.
 

What Next?

 We must get off oil.

This project started over three years ago. As we wrote this we talked about solutions. Every one of us is vulnerable. You do not have to work in a refinery to suffer major health damage from petroleum. Right now, 1,000 children are dying each year in the Central Valley of California from asthma caused by the air quality. This is due to multiple uses of petroleum products.

Knowing this, the second step is to confront all presidential candidates with this issue. We need to know the candidate elected will stand with us, not with the corporations. 

This will happen via petition and by targeting their appearances.  

Corporate greed has done enormous damage to all of us and the environment.

The next step is to start, simultaneously, providing justice for those harmed by corporate greed and get off the grid which put all of us under their control. To do this we must achieve sustainable energy, rebuild our failing infrastructure, and home those most in need.

This can be done much faster than people now realize because energy is only one part of the equation. The other factor is the materials used for building. We will need far less energy using Geopolymer based materials which last for generations. These inexpensive NetZero materials are now available. This way, we will also solve the problem for rebuilding infrastructure across the country.  

We call this Sustainable Social Justice. Help those most at risk first.  

It is a sad fact that the best Green technologies have been reserved for the wealthiest among us. Today, using these materials, we can give the best to those who need it most and demonstrate to all Americans what the future can hold.

You can find us at EcoAlert.






Copyrighted May 6, 2016 by EcoAlert and the Arthur C. Pillsbury Foundation. This article may be quoted with accurate attribution.

Graphics are from Greedville – The Oil Game. Copyrighted May 6, 2016 by EcoAlert and the Arthur C. Pillsbury Foundation.

Friday, May 6, 2016

Torrance refinery explosion cost California drivers $2.4 billion in high pump prices, study says



Flyers were placed on nearly every door within a mile radius of the ExxonMobil refinery notifying residents of  the impending restart of the facility. Thursday, May 5, 2016, Torrance, CA. (Steve McCrank/Staff Photographer)
Flyers were placed on nearly every door within a mile radius of the ExxonMobil refinery notifying residents of the impending restart of the facility. Thursday, May 5, 2016, Torrance, CA. (Steve McCrank/Staff Photographer)

Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Trump Alleges Rafael Cruz Tie To JFK Murder Suspect Oswald



On the morning of Indiana's crucial GOP primary, Donald Trump seconded on May 3 the explosive allegation that Rafael Cruz, father of presidential rival Ted Cruz, helped Lee Harvey Oswald distribute pro-Castro leaflets in New Orleans three months before President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas in 1963.

Lee Harvey Oswald, Aug. 16, 2016 Johann Rush/WSDU-TV“His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald's being — you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous,” Trump said May 3 during a phone interview with Fox News, referring to the man in the necktie at center in the photo. “What is this, right prior to his [JFK] being shot, and nobody even brings it up? They don't even talk about that. That was reported, and nobody talks about it.”

"This is nuts," Ted Cruz responded in defending his father from Trump's charges as voting began during Indiana's crucial primary May 3. "This man [Trump] is a pathological liar....The man is utterly amoral. Morality does not exist for him."

Regardless of what one thinks of Trump, reaction to his comments May 3 illustrate how he threatens the Washington establishment, including reporters and pundits who suppress and otherwise slant important news regarding election campaigns and other major events.
Federal authorities and the major media have always argued in essence that Oswald acted alone to kill JFK on Nov. 22, 1963. True, the establishment occasionally floats also oddball theories attributed to cranks and "conspiracy theorists."

Ted Cruz Father Linked To JFK Assasination (National Enquirer)But their repeated conclusion is that Oswald killed JFK alone, as we reported in Major Media Stick With Oswald 'Lone Gunman' JFK Theory, even though many serious researchers, law enforcement and scientific whistle blowers, and other suppressed voices have long argued that Oswald was a scapegoat who acted with others at a minimum, and may even have been innocent of killing either JFK or a Dallas policeman that day.
Update: Ted Cruz suspended his campaign after Trump trounced him in Indiana's primary by a 53-37 percent margin. Trump was winning also the vast majority of the 57 delegates at stake. In the Democratic race, Bernie Sanders upset Hillary Clinton 52-48 percent with most votes tabulated.
Critics of the 1964 Warren Commission draw on a vast array of evidence to show involvement, often compartmentalized by those who did not know the ultimate result of their actions, by rogue elements of government, business, the mob, and Cuban refugee community, with the result that Kennedy was replaced.

To hint at such a monstrous concept means career oblivion even now for prominent officials, pundits and academics. That has long been the case. Declassified 1960s documents show that the CIA orchestrated a campaign to discredit as a "conspiracy theorist" those who suggested government misconduct in the JFK case and subsequent mysterious events extending to the present. We summarized the evidence in a 2014 column: Don't Be Fooled By 'Conspiracy Theory' Smears.

That pattern helps explain the instant attacks on Trump May 3 and absence of virtually any commentator willing to explore whether his comments might have a basis in fact worth exploring.

In contrast, investigative reporter Wayne Madsen first reported April 7 evidence strongly suggesting that Rafael Cruz was the mystery man photographed handing out literature on Aug. 16, 1963 outside the International Trade Mart. New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison later unsuccessfully prosecuted the trade mart's leader Clay Shaw on claims of conspiring to murder the president in a plot involving the president's opponents.

Nonetheless, Madsen was careful not to conclude definitively it was Cruz and indeed appeared on a New Orleans radio station that week asking listeners for help in an ongoing investigation on the mystery man's identity. Similarly, Trump supporter Scottie Nell Hughes aptly told a CNN audience that Trump was raising questions about the photo and related research, and not accusing Ted Cruz's father of plotting murder. By contrast, dishonest commentators are fudging all distinctions to ridicule any further inquiry.

In the photo above by the late Johann Rush of WSDU-TV in New Orleans, Oswald is at front left in a white shirt and necktie. He stands next to man never publicly identified by the Warren Commission, center, and also in white shirt. They were handing out leaflets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee outside the International Trade Mart in New Orleans on Aug. 16, 1963. The National Enquirer reported that is has determined through photo analysis that the man is Rafael B. Cruz, father of GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz.

The mainstream media of major newspapers, wire services and broadcast networks have always been virtually unified in denunciations of Garrison and his team. Their chorus that has remained largely in place until today in a way that can only be understood by those exploring the key roles of the CIA and its empire-building, anti-Communist goals on behalf the agency's Wall Street and other oligarchial controllers and using such allies as major media, the Cuban exile community, organized crime, and military contractors.

Thus Madsen's reporting -- which has been amplified by an Indiana blogger Gary Welsh (found dead over the weekend), the McClatchy News Service, then the National Enquirer in a cover story last week, and now Trump -- represents a remarkable challenge to the government and media establishment and all who hope for career success within those career paths. 
But that does not mean that Rafael Cruz was not passing out literature in New Orleans with Cruz. Indeed, a full examination of the circumstances would suggest it is highly likely that those with Wallace were not simply heavily comprised of government assets and Cubans. Indeed, Rafael Cruz has lived his life in largely mysterious fashion in key details, despite publishing a memoir this years and advocating as a that God's will is that Americans elect his son as president.

Our own Justice Integrity Project reporting through the years and more intensively since Madsen's scoop suggest compelling evidence that the elder Cruz was indeed part of Oswald's effort in New Orleans. Yet major media are now nearly unanimous in continuing the cover up of any thorough inquiry, which could readily be accomplished with in-depth interviews of surviving participants, release of suppressed documents or even a grand jury investigation.

Instead, Madsen (shown in a file photo) and the National Enquirer are now the targets of venom by both the mainstream media and those on alternative website whose chose tool is snark, not any demonstrable knowledge of the JFK or other political assassinations or sex scandals.

By contrast, Madsen with a three-part series in 2006 broke the story that House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) was a gay pedophile hiding his past as a lecherous high school wrestling coach. The mainstream ignore the series and now never gives him credit despite Hastert's guilty plea and sentencing. Similarly, the Enquirer has broken many major scandals covered up elsewhere and yet is automatically ridiculed even though it has almost never had to pay a verdict for defamation for wrong reporting.

Wildfire rages in Fort McMurray as evacuees settle in Edmonton

From:  CBC News 

Editor's Note - EcoAlert:  Go to the site to see the video.   The town is the a former Native American settlement used by the Tar Sands incursion to house workers.  Much of the tar sands is at ground level and it is likely this, and other tar sands related infrastructure which is burning. 

Fire officials battling a raging wildfire in Fort McMurray, Alta., are braced for another hot, dry and windy day, warning that the situation could be as bad or worse than the day before, when whole neighbourhoods burned down and the entire city was evacuated.
With strong winds likely to fuel the fire, thousands of residents have fled the city and up to 20,000 evacuees are expected to arrive in Edmonton.  MORE

Monday, May 2, 2016

This Could Explain One Of The Biggest Mysteries Of Cheap Oil

From:  HuffPost 

Ben Walsh Business Reporter, The Huffington Post 
 
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Ali Al-Naimi, Saudi Arabia’s oil minister, has confused many by not cutting production. 
 
 
The price of oil has crashed over the last year and a half. In the middle of 2014, a barrel of crude cost over $100. Now it’s worth just over $30.

Normally, such a collapse would lead OPEC to pump less oil. The idea is that less oil on the market helps keep prices up. But despite a historic fall in oil prices, the Saudi Arabian-led international oil cartel hasn’t budged: The biggest step it has taken so far is offer to freeze production at its current record levels. Production cuts are not on the table.

The big question is, why? One theory is that OPEC simply has less control over the oil market than it used to, thanks to the shale gas revolution. Another possibility is that OPEC wants oil prices to be low precisely in order to drive shale oil producers, which have higher costs, out of business.   MORE