b e r n a r d o’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  There's much that should be said about this matter, but just a quick comment in response to LLogan, and perhaps it bears on the larger issue of this post, but I'm not going into that now. Yes, Hansen was recognized with one of these Heinz Awards from John Kerry's wife Teresa Heinz. But that was how long ago? 2001. Since then Hansen has been outspoken in support of a carbon tax and against cap and trade -- views that put him at odds with the agenda to address climate change as put forth in Kerry's proposed legislation. LLogan, maybe I've missed your previous commentary in regards to IPCC, but if you make such strong accusations, I think your point would have greater strength if you provided a reference and/or link for such charges. I'll try to look up the matter you refer to, but if anything, I've gathered that the ultimate IPCC report has been criticized at times for being to conservative in regards to the risk it puts forth for the likelihood and severity of greenhouse gas related chaos. My recollection is quite superficial on the matter, but if anything, I'd hazard that these govt. officials and NGO types that you refer to are responsible for toning down the IPCC reports. Cheers,On Is John Broder embarrassed to have a baseless hit job on Gore under his byline? posted 4 days ago 21 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  SHELLYT, if Exxon were joining many of the other oil companies and supporting Waxman Markey and USCAP, would you then be as equally suspicious of that agenda? I'm cynical enough to ponder whether Exxon might be adopting the stance to feign some concern and as empty gesture to take some heat off of itself, or perhaps with the explicit purpose of undermining the critics of cap n trade. And by the the way, Exxon is not that distant from some of the leading proponents of WaxmanMarkey/KerryBoxer.On ‘No compromise’ faction attacks climate bill posted 1 month ago 104 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  No Regrets re Sue

  Mr. Romm, you strike me as a straight shooter and I'm often pleasantly surprised and impressed by the extent to which you on occasion will challenge other enviros on policy that you view as misguided.  However, regarding Sue Tierney, I believe your assessment is flawed.

  To me, she's the embodiment of conflicted environmentalism:  she consults for energy companies while currently chairing the board of a Energy Foundation (EF), a major funder to environmentalists.  

  Critics have take the foundation to task for having driven the deregulatory agenda on electricity that manifested during the Clinton years, favoring with financial largess groups supportive of deregulation while cutting off critics.  These same groups favored by EF are the ones pushing the trading agenda towards dealing with global warming.

  I'm sure that Tierney is quite personable, capable and smart, but gross conflicts of interest are what got us into the current economic abyss, opened up California to be looted by Enron and its ilk, and  I fear that the same amongst elite enviros doesn't bode well for the future of the planet.

  While I don't regret that she's had to pull out, I imagine that whoever replaces her will be no better regarding these matters that concern me.On Sue Tierney withdraws her name as candidate for deputy secretary of energy posted 8 months, 1 week ago 1 Response

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Sorry ED, can't help but believe you are corrupt

  based on the below bio of one of your trustees as well as looking closely at you in the past.  

  Feel scared of entrusting the future to an agenda of a group that gave us NAFTA and defended utility deregulation in California while playing footsie with Enron and in the past tried to offset a "self-chilling beverage can" which released a potent greenhouse gas (one can was deemed comparable to driving 100 miles).

  The below is excerpted from "Crony Environmentalism: Do conflicts of interest taint EDF's Advocacy on climate change?"
  http://www.nonprofitwatch.org/edf/
  ( ED hadn't dropped Fund from its name at the time, thus is referred to as EDF)  In the actual report are footnotes for the below.

  Noting that this trustee Benkard has defended polluters and Wall Street interests, wouldn't you expect that a group he's affiliated with would pursue a controversial corporate-oriented global warming policy?  But should we trust our planet to such people with their "Enronic" policies?

  James W.B. Benkard

  Partner, Davis, Polk & Wardwell
  . . . . defends polluters, despoilers, and fiascoes

  Benkard has been a trustee of EDF since 1982.

   As a longtime partner at the law firm Davis, Polk & Wardwell, Mr. Benkard has represented numerous corporations, including General Electric(GE), Freeport McMoRan, International Paper, NCNB(Nations Bank's predecessor), Melville(CVS Drugstore Chain), Prudential Insurance Co., Morgan Stanley, Morgan Guaranty Trust, and other financial services companies. For ten years
  he defended International Paper from charges that the company had polluted Lake Champlain. One of his clients, GE, constructs nuclear reactors, power turbines, and incinerators. Another client, Freeport McMoRan, has long been accused of reckless mining in ecologically important rainforests and of human rights violations for its treatment of indigenous peoples. Benkard's presence on EDF's board is therefore troubling, at best.

  Benkard's law firm Davis, Polk & Wardwell as a whole has an equally questionable record of environmental consciousness, boasting that it "successfully represented Merrell-Dow, Babcock & Wilcox, Manville, and Exxon in major cases concerning prescription drugs, nuclear power, asbestos, and oil spills . . . [and represents] Suzuki Motors in litigation concerning the Samurai sport-utility vehicle." The firm has also represented Philip Morris and RJR Nabisco on company business and in tobacco liability matters.

  Davis Polk even represented Exxon's board
  of directors in the matter of Exxon Valdez oil spill. Not coincidentally, years earlier the law firm had counseled Morgan Stanley when the finance company was raising money for Exxon to build the Alaska pipeline later serviced by the Valdez. Exxon has also benefited from Davis Polk's legal representation in New York and New Jersey investigations of an oil spill that occurred . . .

  Benkard has developed expertise in cases of financial catastrophe. Benkard has been
  defending Morgan Stanley in a lawsuit by Orange County which alleged that Morgan Stanley "allowed county officials to engage in a 'speculative investment scheme' thereby violating the California constitution and government
  code requirement," according to American Lawyer. Previously he had defended Morgan Stanley in a similar case involving the state of West Virginia which sued the investment firm for liability in the state's loss of $ 300 million
  on the stock market.

  . . .

  ( there's more about him in the report )On Getting something done is the priority posted 2 years, 5 months ago 10 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Can't TerraPass Offset Use of the Can for Me?

  On Why we should ban compressed chemical dusters posted 2 years, 6 months ago 31 Responses