Home | About | Donate

'Radical Agents of Physical and Social Chaos': Campaigners Target Big Banks Over Destructive Fossil Fuel Projects

#1

'Radical Agents of Physical and Social Chaos': Campaigners Target Big Banks Over Destructive Fossil Fuel Projects

Jessica Corbett, staff writer

Environmental campaigners this week are pressuring a pair of big banks to stop pouring billions of dollars per year into destructive fossil fuel projects that drive the global climate crisis.

1 Like

#2

The author of this article says, “ Simply Nuts?”… That’s funny! What’s isn’t “Simply Nuts?”

0 Likes

#3

I find it ironic that the same people who wine about these banks’ financing of energy projects related to natural gas and/or other fossil fuel industries would need to resort to undemocratic eminent domain enforcement to implement the the major GND infrastructure.

0 Likes

#4

The radically ‘social democratic’ solution to this core problem of the Disguised Global (crony) Capitalist EMPIRE is that a popular progressive people’s peaceful “Political/economic and social Revolution Against Empire” continuing and completing our original American “Revolution Against Empire” [Justin du Rivage] will need to implement and enforce a new “Positive Externality Profits” [PEP], (rather than the disastrous ‘Negative Externality Costs’ financial structure that is both looting & sweeping all dirty faux-profits upwards to only the Global Empire’s tiny UHNWIs.

A revolutionary change to financial investments (far beyond currently weak, naive, and even corrupted “Socially Responsible Investment Funds”) will have to be focused, with tax incentives, into the new structure of “Positive Externality Profit” investments which directly focus on only "Positive Externality Profit’ investment instruments which are analysed, rated, monitored, and ranked purely by their positive (not negative) externality impact on social democracy and our overall ‘society’.

1 Like

#5

trftctvor (whatever that means), you are totally wrong!

What I call the “Shared New Green Deal” would simply, effectively, and decisively reverse the deadly current Disguised Global (crony) Capitalist EMPIRE — which produces the vast majority of all products and services today ONLY by hiding/dumping massive ‘Negative Externality Costs’ (as essentially Corporate Externality Taxes) on our government, our people, and our environment — some of which (like cigarette smoke in our lungs ‘causing’ cancer, fossil fuel causing slower long-term environment death, and “Merchants of Death” global weapons making corporations causing wars) are only using the facade of faux-profits — while delivering the reality of massive multi-trillion dollars ‘negative externality costs’.

The current ‘faux-profits’ go immediately to the current wealthy corporate crooks, and the longer term ‘real externality costs’ only appear years latter when old Disguises are revealed to have been ‘front-end-loaded’ Ponzi scams!!

WakeTF-up — EMPIRES are designed to be super looting schemes. — they always have been and still are the same (just with less visible, extended and geographically expanded ‘negative externality cost’ dumping scams).

0 Likes

#6

Anti Democratic or not… We don’t have 10 years to argue about Fossil Fuels vs Green Clean. In fact, we are out of time, as not one Plant has been shut down or any new Laws written to make any changes at all. It’s game over for all of us idiots.

3 Likes

#7

Alan, clearly you didn’t read the article I posted. From the article itself:

_One would be hard pressed to find a utility-scale solar project that has not been stopped or significantly slowed by local opposition and environmentalist lawsuits. A quick review of some major projects shows that it generally takes six to eight years from when a solar farm is proposed until it starts generating electricity.

Since the wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine, power would have to be shifted via high-voltage transmission lines quickly from place to place across the whole country to prevent local blackouts. The proposed solution to that problem is the North American Supergrid, consisting of about 50,000 miles of high-voltage power lines. Yet these also tend to provoke considerable landowner and environmental activist opposition. For example, it took the American Electric Power Company 14 years to obtain approval for a 90-mile high-voltage transmission project in West Virginia and Virginia._

The same people complaining about “indigenous land abuse” in the CD article are going to complain about the massive landgrab needed to institute the GND. Can you at least respond directly to my point and avoid the long-winded diatribes?

0 Likes

#8

Well at least you’re being honest. You’re happy to have an autocratic communist regime institute the GND. And that, to you, doesn’t outweigh the potential costs of climate change? (And of course there are many other alternatives to the GND that are not the status quo: (1) no subsidies for any energy company, fossil fuel or renewable, so everyone is on an equal playing field; (2) nuclear energy).

0 Likes

#9

“Autocratic communist regime” ? Must be a faux noise talking point ?

For the past 40 years Murka has been ruled by the autocratic fascist GOP tantamount to an organized crime syndicate, and a corporate money addicted Democratic Party that has redefined bipartisanship to actually be capitulation, with both parties owned by Wall Street. Recall Illinois Senator Dick Durbin reminding us that “Wall Street owns the place (Washington DC)” in 2004. Wall Street’s too-big-to-fail banks controlled 10% of US bank assets in 2004 and they now control more than 50% as they accelerate their march to monopoly.

The GND is not legislation, it is a playbook for reducing the use of energy sources that are responsible for climate change.

The last sizable autocratic communist regime disbanded 30 years ago and turned into an autocratic fascist regime currently led by Putin. Putin was a KGB agent highly skilled in psychological warfare when he made Trump his bitch during Trump’s 1987 trip to Moscow to expand the Trump empire there.

0 Likes

#10

An avoidance investing strategy is good. However, we need some type of positive investing strategy.

Let me describe the word “need”.

First, we expect an Arctic meltdown which will raise greenhouse gas levels to about 1200 ppm, best estimate, and this will lead to chronic and massive world food shortages.

Second, the climate catastrophe scenario may be avoidable, except we need to engineer a bunch of new tools that the market economy seems to be running the h— away from. Just like in war, businesses want to get away. Either the governments (federal, state, regional, coalitions, some smart foreign governments…) step in and win this one, or else see scenario number one. And no, we don’t have much luxury of time.

Four generations ago, your ancestors ran the March of Dimes and polio disappeared from the United States and elsewhere. One generation ago, your parents’ generation signed a set of protocols that prevented the destruction of the earth’s ozone layer. So, what’cha got?

As I often do, I’m ignoring the fossil fuel industry’s paid troll on this comments forum and the huge ad agency behind her.

1 Like

#11

Read the article I posted and read the quote. To actually implement the ideas of the GND, it would take an autocratic government and the trampling of private property. This CD article is complaining about that for a pipeline. The Reason article clearly shows that the same complaints have been made for these wind farms. You can’t have it both ways.

0 Likes

#12

I’m not a paid troll, Paul. I even wrote in a second comment chain that I’d support getting rid of all subsidies for fossil fuel companies (alongside getting rid of all subsidies for every other energy company including renewables). I have no love for fossil fuel companies. They deserve no better treatment than any other industry. We should all be competing on the same level playing field in a free market.

But the GND would need to destroy our democracy to be able to be implemented. Getting to 100% renewables by 2030 would take such a monumental investment that our entire country would have to be overhauled. Sounds lovely to you all until you realize what that would actually mean to basic liberties. We would be living in a war state. Even AOC is transparent about this since she compares the GND to WWII.

0 Likes

#13

There are plenty of bad examples out there where it comes to energy but the renewable energy push is actually more decentralized than the matrix of transmission lines that now dominate our grid. The needed research for intermittent generation is storage and those technologies are being developed as funds are available. Sadly as I have seen capitalism play into the funding mechanism there are a lot of bad actors out there more interested in the money than the actual technology.

1 Like

#14

The renewable energy projects that have failed to be completed are small compared to the big nukes and other central generation project failures. Think WOPS in the Pacific Northwest and the southeastern states where it got so bad that gubmit approved utilities charging customers for nuke plants that have not yet started construction and will likely never generate power. The gubmit has already made sure that all of those big plants are reinsured by US taxpayers.

Perhaps the most accurate characterization of “autocratic communist regime” is to use it in the past tense and make it plural ?

Hayduke lives.

1 Like

#15

Again, you’re missing the very straightforward point I’m making. As the article states, in order to actually install the amount of renewable infrastructure necessary to meet the standards that the GND wants to meet (100% renewables by 2030 without using nuclear energy), the only way to do this is through the most expansive use of eminent domain, i.e. centralized confiscation or private property, that this country has ever seen. It would take the greatest implementation of autocratic/authoritarian control that this country has ever seen.

It’s not complicated. The research isn’t the issue. It’s the actual infrastructure.

0 Likes

#16

When one realities that this has been the norm since before the Hudson Bay Co. was a gleam in a capitalist’s eye it is a wonder that it took so long for us to get on this. Boycotts be damned, rule one has always been “Follow The Money” .

0 Likes

#17

I advise the author of the article linked to look at real world examples of decentralized energy generation such as that in Germany. The roof top solar was financed by small public banks at low interest rates with guaranteed rates for the excess energy produced. Germany is generating a large portion of its electricity from solar and wind right now without incurring onerous debt. Part of the GND is the establishment of public banks to fund their program. It has worked in Germany. I think even in America it could be duplicated.

0 Likes