Once upon a time there was a monarchy. The citizenry were divided into two distinct groups. The folks who belonged to the group the king belonged to were afforded more rights than the folks who were in the other group.
After a while the folks in that second group looked around them and decided that since no one was going to take up their cause that they would have to do it themselves. So they demonstrated and they called for basic human rights.
But the king defied them. He ordered their leaders to be arrested, jailed and tortured. Still the people carried on. They rallied for democracy. They rallied for equal rights.
But the king stood firm and ordered the army to break up the demonstrations.
More folks were arrested, jailed and tortured.
Then they got their day in court. Only the result was pre-determined. The only question was how long they would be behind bars.
Sixteen protesters were branded as terrorists and sentenced to 15 years in prison. Four others were sentenced to 10 years. Thirty others were sentenced to five years. More than a dozen of those convicted were tried in abstentia.
Now how would a government that pats itself on the back and proclaims itself a champion of human rights deal with this king and his repressive policies? Would its president stand up and announce to the world that this type of behavior is unacceptable? Would he push for some sort of sanctions to punish the kingdom for its blatant violation of human rights? Would he seek to work with the opposition to force reforms?
Or would he sit back and do nothing for fear of pissing off a little tyrant with a whole lotta money?
If you chose the last option, you'd be right. Despite the crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators in Bahrain, President Obama carries on like nothing ever happened. You see, the US Navy's Fifth Fleet is housed in Bahrain and the last thing President Obama wants to do is raise a stink about how Bahrain treats its own residents.
Human rights mean nothing to our government. It's but a phrase bandied about when someone needs an excuse for carrying out some policy. Oh, and I guess there's that little matter of the oil under the desert, too.
If this story had come out of a country with a leftist-leaning government that refused to sacrifice the well-being of its citizens for the good of global capital, President Obama would whip himself into a frenzy telling the world how awful it is for a government to treat its citizens that way. But that so-called concern for human rights goes away in a flash when the government in question flashes cash or barrels of oil.
These are the musings, ramblings, rantings and observations of Houston DWI Attorney Paul B. Kennedy on DWI defense, general criminal defense, philosophy and whatever else tickles his fancy.
Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts
Thursday, October 3, 2013
Thursday, August 29, 2013
School district climbs in bed with oil industry
What a surprise to find, on my way back from lunch, that HISD's new Energy Institute High School is practically just around the corner from my new office.
The Energy Institute is a partnership between the IPAA (Independent Petroleum Association of America) and HISD and is designed to train students for careers in the energy industry.
Whatever.
This latest magnet school in Houston is just another example of the abdication of government responsibility in providing an education to our nation. We can spend billions of dollars a year killing innocent men, women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen - but we can't provide adequate funding for education. We can spend millions of dollars to build shiny new playpens for billionaire owners of professional sports franchises - but we can't provide adequate funding for education. We can subsidize entire industries to "protect" them from foreign competition - but we can't provide adequate funding for education.
Local school districts are left to beg for money from local industry to make up for shortages in funding. Those industries - in this case the energy industry - then helps plan a curriculum that (and let's not be naive here, folks) puts themselves in the best light.
Don't believe me? Just listen to Houston's NPR station, KUHF and listen to the number ofcommercials mentions of donors that are in the energy industry. Then listen carefully to whether or not the local reporters ever cover a story that is critical of the oil or gas industry. Actually, listen carefully and you'll find that very few of the local stories the station broadcasts during its hourly news updates are anything more than reworded press releases from government agencies or local industry.
(And, what do you know, here's a reworked press release turned into a "news" story from KUHF about the opening of the school.)
So just how do you think a high school funded by the energy industry will cover major oil spills such as the Deepwater Horizon explosion? What about the dreadful environmental record of the nuclear industry? How about the ways in which the US government has carried out foreign policy directives aimed at making life easier for the oil companies? And how exactly would the practice of fracking be covered in science class?
The school district even provided a listing of what oil companies make up the Advisory Board for the new school on its blog:
But what does Superintendent Terry Grier care? He's already gotten plenty of money from the IPAA to fund indoctrination efforts at two other high schools. As the old adage goes, we aren't discussing what you are, we're just negotiating a price.
The Energy Institute is a partnership between the IPAA (Independent Petroleum Association of America) and HISD and is designed to train students for careers in the energy industry.
Whatever.
This latest magnet school in Houston is just another example of the abdication of government responsibility in providing an education to our nation. We can spend billions of dollars a year killing innocent men, women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen - but we can't provide adequate funding for education. We can spend millions of dollars to build shiny new playpens for billionaire owners of professional sports franchises - but we can't provide adequate funding for education. We can subsidize entire industries to "protect" them from foreign competition - but we can't provide adequate funding for education.
Local school districts are left to beg for money from local industry to make up for shortages in funding. Those industries - in this case the energy industry - then helps plan a curriculum that (and let's not be naive here, folks) puts themselves in the best light.
Don't believe me? Just listen to Houston's NPR station, KUHF and listen to the number of
(And, what do you know, here's a reworked press release turned into a "news" story from KUHF about the opening of the school.)
So just how do you think a high school funded by the energy industry will cover major oil spills such as the Deepwater Horizon explosion? What about the dreadful environmental record of the nuclear industry? How about the ways in which the US government has carried out foreign policy directives aimed at making life easier for the oil companies? And how exactly would the practice of fracking be covered in science class?
The school district even provided a listing of what oil companies make up the Advisory Board for the new school on its blog:
To kick off the grand opening, Energy Institute High School hosted its first Advisory Board meeting at the Hattie Mae White Educational Support Center. The board, which consists of executives from Halliburton, Shell, Apache, and other top energy companies, is charged with providing HISD and Energy Institute staff insight into the field and how to prepare for energy careers. They will collaborate with the district to develop and continually update the institute’s curriculum.
Energy Institute students will explore the energy field through guest speakers, mentoring, field trips, summer camps, paid externships, and scholarships. All classrooms will utilize state-of-the-art technology, and teachers will receive training and real-world insight from industry leaders. The institute will begin with ninth-graders and add a grade level each year, eventually serving grades 9-12.So the oil companies will "collaborate" on the curriculum with the district. Is that we call it these days. These are companies that have an agenda. They have a mission - to maximize profits. That's not what public schools are about.
But what does Superintendent Terry Grier care? He's already gotten plenty of money from the IPAA to fund indoctrination efforts at two other high schools. As the old adage goes, we aren't discussing what you are, we're just negotiating a price.
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
The myth of foreign oil
I've gotten just a bit tired of hearing politicians like Mitt Romney and his ilk arguing that we need to do more drilling off the Gulf Coast, the Pacific Coast and in the Arctic in the name of reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
Guess what? There is no such thing as "foreign oil."
Oil is a fungible commodity. That means oil from Alaska, oil from Venezuela, oil from West Africa and oil from the Middle East is essentially the same and can be exchanged in much the same way as money or gold. Sure, some oil has a higher sulfur content and some oil is more viscous than other oil. But, at its core, oil is oil.
With a global marketplace, the days of the Texas Railroad Commission setting the price of oil are long since gone. These days the price is set by speculators trying to guess what's going to happen in the near-term and long-term futures.
Oil companies will sell their product wherever they can make the highest rate of profit. Exxon, for instance, couldn't care less whether their oil is sold in the U.S., in Europe or in Asia. The same goes for every other oil company.
So it doesn't matter how much oil is taken out of the ground in this country. It's not staying here. It's going into the global pool of oil to be distributed according to market forces throughout the world. It's the reason why trying to prevent Iranian oil from entering the global pool will fail - how are you going to tell the difference between a barrel of oil from Iran and a barrel of oil from Nigeria?
As an example, the Trans-Canada Keystone XL pipeline being built on stolen land in East Texas isn't going to benefit anyone in this country. The idea behind the pipeline was to get the tarsand oil from Alberta down to the Gulf Coast so it could be exported overseas. So, all of Mr. Romney's rhetoric about President Obama making us more energy dependent by blocking construction of the pipeline through the middle of the country was wholly and completely irrelevant.
If the United States really wants to become energy independent, the only way to do so is to develop energy from sources for which there is no global market. Since no one has figured out how to commoditize sunlight or wind, those are two sources which can reduce the need for petroleum or carbon products to produce electricity.
But since wind and solar generators don't have millions of dollars in cash lying around from their subsidized profit-making operations, Mr. Romney doesn't have the time, nor desire, to pay then any attention.
Guess what? There is no such thing as "foreign oil."
Oil is a fungible commodity. That means oil from Alaska, oil from Venezuela, oil from West Africa and oil from the Middle East is essentially the same and can be exchanged in much the same way as money or gold. Sure, some oil has a higher sulfur content and some oil is more viscous than other oil. But, at its core, oil is oil.
With a global marketplace, the days of the Texas Railroad Commission setting the price of oil are long since gone. These days the price is set by speculators trying to guess what's going to happen in the near-term and long-term futures.
Oil companies will sell their product wherever they can make the highest rate of profit. Exxon, for instance, couldn't care less whether their oil is sold in the U.S., in Europe or in Asia. The same goes for every other oil company.
So it doesn't matter how much oil is taken out of the ground in this country. It's not staying here. It's going into the global pool of oil to be distributed according to market forces throughout the world. It's the reason why trying to prevent Iranian oil from entering the global pool will fail - how are you going to tell the difference between a barrel of oil from Iran and a barrel of oil from Nigeria?
As an example, the Trans-Canada Keystone XL pipeline being built on stolen land in East Texas isn't going to benefit anyone in this country. The idea behind the pipeline was to get the tarsand oil from Alberta down to the Gulf Coast so it could be exported overseas. So, all of Mr. Romney's rhetoric about President Obama making us more energy dependent by blocking construction of the pipeline through the middle of the country was wholly and completely irrelevant.
If the United States really wants to become energy independent, the only way to do so is to develop energy from sources for which there is no global market. Since no one has figured out how to commoditize sunlight or wind, those are two sources which can reduce the need for petroleum or carbon products to produce electricity.
But since wind and solar generators don't have millions of dollars in cash lying around from their subsidized profit-making operations, Mr. Romney doesn't have the time, nor desire, to pay then any attention.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Blurring the line between science and propaganda
This past weekend my wife and I took our daughters to the Houston Museum of Natural Science. It had been a while since I was last there and it looked like a fun way to spend the afternoon. The kids were excited because Daddy was coming this time.
One of the first exhibits we looked at was the Weiss Energy Hall. All you need to know about the exhibit can be summed up with a list of corporate donors. Every energy company you've ever heard of, and some you haven't, threw the museum a few bones. It was a paean to the oil industry.
There were samples of drill bits and casing. They had little tanks with marbles and cranks so the kids could see the relative "weight" of various kinds of oil. They had games were the kids could take turns trying to be wildcatters. There was an exhibit about offshore drilling. They even had an example of slant drilling - a unique Texas way of stealing your neighbor's oil without him even knowing it.
There was a ride that simulated a trip down to the bottom of a well - and we even got to hear about the wonders of hydraulic fracturing.
But, interestingly enough (though not unexpected) there was not a single word about the environmental hazards of oil exploration or transport. Nothing about the Deepwater Horizon. Nothing about the dangers of fracking. Nothing but sterile, hygenic corporate propaganda about how wonderful the oil industry is.
I guess that's to be expected, seeing that the last thing the museum wants to do is piss off its corporate donors by putting in an exhibit that looks at the science of the oil industry. Heaven forbid we allow our children to see both the good and the bad of oil exploration and transportation. We certainly don't want out little tykes growing up and questioning the very foundations of the Texas economy. Better to turn them into quiet little sheep who won't go looking under rocks to find out the truth.
Of course the whole donor problem is nothing new to those of us who listen to NPR or watch PBS. Whenever the announcer tells us who gave the money so that the show could be broadcast you know you won't hear a critical word about that company during the broadcast.
But there is at least a little bit of hope. The other day on the local news segment on NPR there was a story about a University of Texas researcher, Cliff Frohlich, who came to the conclusion that the process of storing the used fracking fluid in deep underground injector wells was causing a multitude of minor earthquakes in North Texas. The Houston Chronicle even picked up on the story.
There was even an article that dared to look at the contamination of ground water by hydraulic fracking fluid. Here is a link to the study that looks at five ways in which fracking fluid can contaminate surrounding drinking water.
If the museum actually wanted to educate the public about the science involved in the oil industry these are some of the topics that should have been discussed in the exhibit. But, instead of putting together a science exhibit, the museum, instead, put together an industry-sponsored commercial. Now why should any of that be tax deductible?
One of the first exhibits we looked at was the Weiss Energy Hall. All you need to know about the exhibit can be summed up with a list of corporate donors. Every energy company you've ever heard of, and some you haven't, threw the museum a few bones. It was a paean to the oil industry.
There were samples of drill bits and casing. They had little tanks with marbles and cranks so the kids could see the relative "weight" of various kinds of oil. They had games were the kids could take turns trying to be wildcatters. There was an exhibit about offshore drilling. They even had an example of slant drilling - a unique Texas way of stealing your neighbor's oil without him even knowing it.
There was a ride that simulated a trip down to the bottom of a well - and we even got to hear about the wonders of hydraulic fracturing.
But, interestingly enough (though not unexpected) there was not a single word about the environmental hazards of oil exploration or transport. Nothing about the Deepwater Horizon. Nothing about the dangers of fracking. Nothing but sterile, hygenic corporate propaganda about how wonderful the oil industry is.
I guess that's to be expected, seeing that the last thing the museum wants to do is piss off its corporate donors by putting in an exhibit that looks at the science of the oil industry. Heaven forbid we allow our children to see both the good and the bad of oil exploration and transportation. We certainly don't want out little tykes growing up and questioning the very foundations of the Texas economy. Better to turn them into quiet little sheep who won't go looking under rocks to find out the truth.
Of course the whole donor problem is nothing new to those of us who listen to NPR or watch PBS. Whenever the announcer tells us who gave the money so that the show could be broadcast you know you won't hear a critical word about that company during the broadcast.
But there is at least a little bit of hope. The other day on the local news segment on NPR there was a story about a University of Texas researcher, Cliff Frohlich, who came to the conclusion that the process of storing the used fracking fluid in deep underground injector wells was causing a multitude of minor earthquakes in North Texas. The Houston Chronicle even picked up on the story.
There was even an article that dared to look at the contamination of ground water by hydraulic fracking fluid. Here is a link to the study that looks at five ways in which fracking fluid can contaminate surrounding drinking water.
If the museum actually wanted to educate the public about the science involved in the oil industry these are some of the topics that should have been discussed in the exhibit. But, instead of putting together a science exhibit, the museum, instead, put together an industry-sponsored commercial. Now why should any of that be tax deductible?
Monday, December 5, 2011
Book review: Vulture's Picnic
Prince William Sound. Southern Louisiana. The Gulf of Mexico. The Caspian Sea. Ecuador. Nigeria.
In his latest book, Vultures Picnic: In Pursuit of Petroleum, Pigs, Pirates and High Finance Carnivores, investigative journalist Greg Palast takes us on a frenzied world tour of the damage wreaked by the oil companies and financial speculators (or thieves, as the case may be).
From Houston to New Orleans to Alaska to Liberia to Switzerland, Mr. Palast does as Woodward and Bernstein were told to do in All the President's Men - follow the money.
What follows is a tale of how transnational capital has decimated the lives of the poor across the planet. The oil companies polluted the people and the environment and the vultures of high finance have swooped in and forced foreign governments to kowtow to the will of their corporate overseers. The result of his investigation will open your eyes and make you think twice about what you think you know.
You'll recall that after the Exxon Valdez ran aground that folks cut up their Exxon credit cards, dipped them in oil and mailed them back. My wife refuses to go to an Exxon station to this day. But guess who was really at fault for the disaster in Prince William Sound. Not Exxon. BP - you know the company that portrays itself as green as a hemp-wearing tree hugger - was in charge of the terminal at Valdez. BP was in charge of ensuring that the clean up equipment was there. But guess what? There was no clean up equipment. But, for the good of the Seven Sisters, Exxon bent over and grabbed its ankles.
After the Transocean disaster in the Gulf, it was BP's turn to grin and bear it. But the boys in green weren't the ones making the decisions out there. All of the sisters were supposed to have a plan in place just in case a deep water well went to hell - and, as you know by now, there was no plan.
But what you probably didn't know is that the Transocean disaster wasn't BP's first rodeo. Out in the Caspian Sea, BP used a nitrogen-concrete blend to seal a well and, let's just say that didn't work out so well. But we're sold the line that what happened out in the Gulf was an accident. Once, my friends, is an accident. Twice is a pattern.
And, if you have trouble staying awake late at night, just read the section on the backup diesel generators at nuclear plants around the world. Here's a hint... Mother Nature wasn't to blame for the meltdown at Fukushima.
In his latest book, Vultures Picnic: In Pursuit of Petroleum, Pigs, Pirates and High Finance Carnivores, investigative journalist Greg Palast takes us on a frenzied world tour of the damage wreaked by the oil companies and financial speculators (or thieves, as the case may be).

What follows is a tale of how transnational capital has decimated the lives of the poor across the planet. The oil companies polluted the people and the environment and the vultures of high finance have swooped in and forced foreign governments to kowtow to the will of their corporate overseers. The result of his investigation will open your eyes and make you think twice about what you think you know.
You'll recall that after the Exxon Valdez ran aground that folks cut up their Exxon credit cards, dipped them in oil and mailed them back. My wife refuses to go to an Exxon station to this day. But guess who was really at fault for the disaster in Prince William Sound. Not Exxon. BP - you know the company that portrays itself as green as a hemp-wearing tree hugger - was in charge of the terminal at Valdez. BP was in charge of ensuring that the clean up equipment was there. But guess what? There was no clean up equipment. But, for the good of the Seven Sisters, Exxon bent over and grabbed its ankles.
After the Transocean disaster in the Gulf, it was BP's turn to grin and bear it. But the boys in green weren't the ones making the decisions out there. All of the sisters were supposed to have a plan in place just in case a deep water well went to hell - and, as you know by now, there was no plan.
But what you probably didn't know is that the Transocean disaster wasn't BP's first rodeo. Out in the Caspian Sea, BP used a nitrogen-concrete blend to seal a well and, let's just say that didn't work out so well. But we're sold the line that what happened out in the Gulf was an accident. Once, my friends, is an accident. Twice is a pattern.
And, if you have trouble staying awake late at night, just read the section on the backup diesel generators at nuclear plants around the world. Here's a hint... Mother Nature wasn't to blame for the meltdown at Fukushima.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)