Big Oil and citizenship

[mrgybe]

"Fake news!! Wow!! That's shocking. CBS and SFGate are in on it too!!

A civil rights complaint filed this week on behalf of West Oakland residents alleges air pollution from diesel emissions at the Port of Oakland disproportionately impacts communities of color. West Oakland residents suffer from diesel emissions that are up to 90 times higher than California’s average and has led to West Oakland having one of the lowest life expectancies of all Oakland communities."

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/04/06/west-oakland-air-quality-issues-prompts-civil-rights-complaint/

http://www.sfgate.com/news/bayarea/article/Environmental-Group-File-Civil-Rights-Complaint-11055803.php

Exxon made a huge mistake for which it rightly paid a high price to its finances and its reputation. It took responsibility, learned from its mistake and made big changes which, thus far, have had a large impact. The Port of Oakland has been quietly ruining the health of local residents for decades. If the Port's response to the law suits and myriad complaints from local community groups mirrors that of its long time representative...........fingers in ears, fake news!, fake news!, la la la la.........is it any wonder that they are still perpetrating devastating health impacts on the community?

People in glass houses.

[mac]

So tiresome that someone who knows almost nothing, but hates mightily, repeats lies. It must be his strong Christian faith that he is ignoring. But what else would we expect from the spin meister? For the record, during my tenure at the Port of Oakland, the port started spending money to reduce particulate emissions. I negotiated the settlement of lawsuits and convinced the port to make those investments in the community. Diesel emissions at the port have now been reduced by over 75%--and citizen activists deserve much of the credit for those reductions. Emission inventories are readily available for those who care about the truth--and they could be compared to the emissions of Exxon tankers going into the port of Long Beach for perspective.


Mrgybe is coy about his role in the oil industry, but certain that he knows everything. During his career, Exxon was always part of the problem, not part of the solution. From fighting health-based regulations to lying to their stockholders and using secret emails.

If he actually did anything to reduce the risks to the environmental and the health risks of the oil industry, he can spill his guts on something useful he has done instead of snark.

[mac]

As a postscript, it is astonishing and pretty funny to see mrgybe try to find the higher ground in the Alaskan spill issues and California emissions. I covered most of the emissions questions in my initial posting on Exxon in California. The short summary is that Exxon spent decades fighting any regulation of the emissions from their OST's and shipping fleet. I'm sure that the emissions in question were trivial, and posed no health risk. Ya think?

Not surprisingly, Exxon pursued the same "stall them to death" strategy in Alaska. It threw the full weight of their corporate law offices into stalling the payment of damages to those who made a living from the habitat they had damaged--trusting that enough people would pass away to reduce the eventual payout.

The point that mrgybe quickly posted a diversion to is that the damage is still present--and Exxon is still resisting.

He must be so proud.

[mrgybe]

A lot of spluttering about progress, and yet the community around the port is still getting sick, and, after all these decades and lawsuits, clearly seeing an inadequate response from the source of their ailments. They think it's because they are black......thus their actions of just a few weeks ago. They probably think this is more pressing than a 28 year old oil spill in Alaska.

".....at every opportunity the City of Oakland has chosen to put port expansion before our health and well-being. What’s even more appalling is that city leaders have gone so far as to reject funding offers from state and local agencies to reduce the unhealthy fumes from the Port of Oakland that end up in our homes and our lungs.”

Acceptance of the problem is the first step in healing for people in glass houses.

[mac]

So let me be clear. Rather than respond to the ongoing pollution of the arctic, or the ever increasing emissions from Exxon as they fight regulation, mrgybe wants to hold me responsible for the actions of the City of Oakland more than a dozen years after I retired? I guess we need to blame this on the British educational system, not on the schools that NW occasionally attended.

A mind is indeed a terrible thing to waste.

[mrgybe]

"For decades, the City and Port of Oakland have issued approvals to expand polluting freight activities in West Oakland while ignoring input from the community, betraying a deep disregard for the health of local families. That pattern continues to this day, causing West Oakland residents to suffer from diesel emissions that are up to 90 times higher than California’s average".

I'm confused! First he says this was fake news and lies......then he says it's 75% better than when he was there..........now he says he can't be held responsible for this decades long problem (previously referred to as fake news and lies), and that anecdotal reports of small amounts of oil in Alaska are more important that the coughing and wheezing down the street from where he lives. He's probably right. It must be my lack of education. We probably should return to something I can actually grasp. For example, he just referred to....

"...the ever increasing emissions from Exxon as they fight regulation"

Perhaps he can direct us to some evidence of that, because, once again, I'm confused. In their Environmental report, Exxon says...

"ExxonMobil’s combined emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) have decreased more than 45 percent over the past 10 years across all of our businesses."

Is this fake news and lies too?

[mac]

Facts matter. Exxon ships through the Port of Long Beach, and owns an extensive fleet. As I said, inventories are available on line. Looking only at tanker traffic, here are the numbers

2015 Port of Long Beach tanker ship emissions. 30.5 tons/year of PM 10, 1,143 tons/year of NOX

(considering all port operations, PM emissions were 173 tons/year and NOX were 8212 tons/year. )

2012 Port of Oakland emission iinventory, all sources, PM 10, 88 tons/year. NOX--3398 tons/year.

Emission reductions in PM 10 at the Port of Oakland between 2005 and 2012--68%.

As said, emission reductions started when I was running the environmental department and have continued.

Perhaps mrgybe will provide a source for his claim, and what his role was?

I'm not holding my breath.

[mac]

And just in case some of you thought my claim of "stall them to death" was exaggeration:

[mrgybe]

He must have misunderstood. I didn't ask for tanker emissions at West coast ports, I asked him to substantiate his claim of...........

"...ever increasing emissions from Exxon as they fight regulation"

Exxon has told their shareholders that emissions are down 45% over the last 10 years. Our man from the ports says that's not true, that Exxon's emissions are "ever increasing". If Exxon is lying I would like to know that. A credible source please. Thank you.

[mac]

He must have misunderstood. I noted that Exxon's spill still fouls the beaches in Prince Andrews Sound, and that Exxon waited out the 3000 people who died before they were compensated. Waiting for comment on how much money that saved him personally.

Mrgybe crows about Exxon finally dealing with emissions--after how many decades of resisting? Perhaps mrgybe would post the total of Exxon's emissions--the number is staggering--and put it in comparison to the emissions of the port of Oakland that he is so worried about? How many orders of magnitude greater are they?

Oh, it was really about diversion and smarm.