Subscribe: SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Special:Recentchanges&feed=rss
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
accessed february  accessed  coal  february ref  february  gas  jaigarh port  janus  line line  line  port  ref  revision  state 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]

SourceWatch - Recent changes [en]



Track the most recent changes to the wiki in this feed.



Last Build Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:20:49 GMT

 



Turkey and coal

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:18:58 GMT

10 million tons per year building heating

←Older revision Revision as of 12:18, 19 February 2018
Line 80: Line 80:
 
==Building heating==
 
==Building heating==
  
Some older buildings are still heated by burning coal even in urban areas, where natural gas is available.
+
Every year about 10 million tons of coal is burnt to heat older buildings, even in urban areas, where natural gas is available.
  
 
==Industry==
 
==Industry==



Garanti Bank and Coal

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:13:38 GMT

External articles: added wikiped

←Older revision Revision as of 12:13, 19 February 2018
Line 30: Line 30:
  
 
===External articles===
 
===External articles===
 +
* [http://en.wiki.admicos.cf/wiki/Garanti_Bank Wikipedia:Garanti Bank]
 
* [http://www.caneurope.org/publications/press-releases/1287-turkey-s-top-climate-killer-bank-praised-as-climate-champion Garanti, Turkey’s top climate killer bank praised as climate champion,] Climate Action Network Europe, 12 December 2016 .  
 
* [http://www.caneurope.org/publications/press-releases/1287-turkey-s-top-climate-killer-bank-praised-as-climate-champion Garanti, Turkey’s top climate killer bank praised as climate champion,] Climate Action Network Europe, 12 December 2016 .  
  



Cenal Elektrik

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 12:06:15 GMT

remove redlink ←Older revision Revision as of 12:06, 19 February 2018 (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1: −{{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Turkeycoal}}'''Cenal Elektrik''' is a joint venture between the Turkish companies [[Alarko Holding]] and [[Cengiz Holdings]]. The company is constructing the 1380 megawatt coal-fired [[Cenal power station]] near Karabiga on the southern shore of the Sea of Marmara in Canakkale province, Turkey. [http://www.cenal.com.tr/index.html "Cenal Elektrik Üretim A.Ş."], Cenal website, accessed Jan 2018.+{{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Turkeycoal}}'''Cenal Elektrik''' is a joint venture between the Turkish companies [http://en.wiki.admicos.cf/wiki/Alarko_Holding Alarko Holding] and Cengiz Holdings. The company operates the 1380 megawatt coal-fired [[Cenal power station]] near Karabiga on the southern shore of the Sea of Marmara in Canakkale province, Turkey. [http://www.cenal.com.tr/index.html "Cenal Elektrik Üretim A.Ş."], Cenal website, accessed Jan 2018.  +[http://www.cengizgroup.com.tr/en-us/Sectors/Energy/Pages/Cenal-elektrik-uretim.aspx "Cenal Electricity Production"], Cengiz Holding website, accessed Feb 2018. [https://www.alarko.com.tr/en/groups/energy-group?proje=canakkale-karabiga-ithal-komur-santrali-en "Çanakkale Karabiga Import Coal-Based Power Plant"], Alarko Holding website, accessed Feb 2018.    −==Background information==  −  −On its website Alarko states:  −  −:"our Company Cenal Electricity Generation Inc. has rented the 670.000 m² land from Alarko Energy Generation Inc. (owner of the land) by the sea coast at Karabiga, Çanakkale, and has duly applied to the Environment and Urbanism Ministry to obtain a favorable EIA decision in 2011 and to the EMRA for the license to build an imported hard coal fired thermal power plant with an installed power of 1320 MWe and an annual generation capacity of 9.900 GWh on the land. Our imported hard coal fired thermal power plant with an installed power of 1320 MWe, which we plan to build on our own land in Çanakkkale Karabiga, will be further developed based on the financing and environmental conditions in 2012."Alarko Group of Companies, [http://www.alarko.com.tr/eng/faaliyet_gruplari_eng.asp?id=54 "Energy Group - Generation"], Alarko Group of Companies website, accessed April 2013.  −  −A January 2013 report by an investment analyst stated that Alarko and Cengiz Holdings were each 50% shareholders in the joint venture. The report stated:Erste Group, [http://reports.aiidatapro.com/brokers/Erste/2013-01-16_CR_TR_Alarko_Holding.pdf "Alarko Holding"], January 2013, page 9.  −  −:"Alarko obtained the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report in March 2012, which is a critical milestone for the project. The project’s estimated investment amount is around USD 1.5bn. The power plant will be built on a 664.000 m² plot owned by Alarko Holding. The power plant’s construction is expected to commence in 2013, while the port design, which is an important step for coal fired power plant, already started as of August 2012 and the project is expected to be completed in 2016."  −  −:"Yet, Alarko has not currently secured the necessary financing for the project. However, it plans to finance it with 25% equity and a 75% loan mix. Alarko expects to receive approximately half of the loan from the China Development Bank as the equipment to be used in the power plant will be imported from China."      ==Articles and resources== ==Articles and resources== [...]



Cenal power station

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:49:31 GMT

categories changed to match status

←Older revision Revision as of 11:49, 19 February 2018
Line 47: Line 47:
 
[http://www.cmo.org.tr/resimler/ekler/c5c65dca866427f_ek.pdf?tipi=72&turu=X&sube=0 NO2 and SO2 emissions (Turkish)]
 
[http://www.cmo.org.tr/resimler/ekler/c5c65dca866427f_ek.pdf?tipi=72&turu=X&sube=0 NO2 and SO2 emissions (Turkish)]
  
[[Category: Proposed coal plants in Turkey]]
+
[[Category: Existing coal plants in Turkey]]
[[Category: Proposed coal plants in Europe]]
+
[[Category: Existing coal plants in Europe]]



Karaikal Port

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:35:30 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 11:35, 19 February 2018 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 13: Line 13:  Karaikal Port project began with a Letter of Interest issued by Govt. of Puducherry for development of a port at Karaikal in September 2005. MARG Ltd. signed the concession agreement in 2006 {{cite web  | title = Marg Constructions achieves financial closure for Karaikal Port Project | publisher = domain-b.com  | date = November 14, 2006  | url = http://www.domain-b.com/economy/infrastructure/ports/20061114_financial.html  | accessdate =  2006-11-14}} and construction began in February, 2007. Phase 1 was envisaged to be operational in Aug 2009 but commenced commercial operations four months early, receiving its first vessel in April 2009. Phase 1 of the port project comprises two Panamax size berths capable of handling 5.2 million MT of cargo per annum (3 MT at Berth 1 and 2.2 MT at Berth 2). KPPL has partners in Ocean Sparkle (marine operations) and PSTS (Stevedoring). Cargo evacuation is assisted by MARG Logistics, a sister concern of KPPL. Karaikal Port project began with a Letter of Interest issued by Govt. of Puducherry for development of a port at Karaikal in September 2005. MARG Ltd. signed the concession agreement in 2006 {{cite web  | title = Marg Constructions achieves financial closure for Karaikal Port Project | publisher = domain-b.com  | date = November 14, 2006  | url = http://www.domain-b.com/economy/infrastructure/ports/20061114_financial.html  | accessdate =  2006-11-14}} and construction began in February, 2007. Phase 1 was envisaged to be operational in Aug 2009 but commenced commercial operations four months early, receiving its first vessel in April 2009. Phase 1 of the port project comprises two Panamax size berths capable of handling 5.2 million MT of cargo per annum (3 MT at Berth 1 and 2.2 MT at Berth 2). KPPL has partners in Ocean Sparkle (marine operations) and PSTS (Stevedoring). Cargo evacuation is assisted by MARG Logistics, a sister concern of KPPL.    −Karaikal Port is a multi-cargo handling terminal. According to MARG's website, the port is currently equipped to handle coal, fertilizer, sugar, gypsum, agricultural products, bagged cement, stell plates & pipes, project cargo, crude oil, edible oil, petroleum, oils & lubricants.[http://marggroup.com/marg-karaikalport.php "MARG Karaikal Port"] MARG Karaikal Port website, accessed February 2015.  On completion, the port will be capable of handling all types of cargo. Karaikal Port is also a hub for oil exploration activities and OSV/PSVs belonging to companies such a Hindustan Oil Exploration Company (HOEC)and Reliance Petroleum regularly call at the port.+Karaikal Port is a multi-cargo handling terminal. According to MARG's website, the port is currently equipped to handle coal, fertilizer, sugar, gypsum, agricultural products, bagged cement, stell plates & pipes, project cargo, crude oil, edible oil, petroleum, oils & lubricants.[http://marggroup.com/marg-karaikalport.php "MARG Karaikal Port"] MARG Karaikal Port website, accessed February 2018.  On completion, the port will be capable of handling all types of cargo. Karaikal Port is also a hub for oil exploration activities and OSV/PSVs belonging to companies such a Hindustan Oil Exploration Company (HOEC)and Reliance Petroleum regularly call at the port.     Karaikal Port is a deep draft, all weather port. The current depth of 14.5 m allows for handling of Gearless Panamax size vessels (up to 80000 MT). The final depth of 16.5 m will allow cape size vessels (up to 120000 MT) to call at the port. The lagoon type basin pro[...]



Kakinada Port

Mon, 19 Feb 2018 10:26:14 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 10:26, 19 February 2018 Line 15: Line 15:     According to a 2014 IHS report, the mechanized coal handling facility at the port has a 14 million tonne per annum capacity, after a fifth dedicated coal berth with a 6 mtpa capacity became operational in May 2013.[https://www.ihs.com/pdf/IHS-Coal-Insight_201028110913060132.pdf "IHS McCloskey Coal Report,"] Feb 7, 2014 According to a 2014 IHS report, the mechanized coal handling facility at the port has a 14 million tonne per annum capacity, after a fifth dedicated coal berth with a 6 mtpa capacity became operational in May 2013.[https://www.ihs.com/pdf/IHS-Coal-Insight_201028110913060132.pdf "IHS McCloskey Coal Report,"] Feb 7, 2014  +  +As of February 2018, Kakinada Port has two berths handling bulk coal: the dedicated mechanized coal terminal at berth 5, capable of handling 22,000 tonnes per day, and a multi-use berth (berth 4) capable of handling 15,000 tonnes of coal per day, in addition to other cargoes such as raw sugar, bagged sugar, and fertilizers.[http://samsarashipping.com/port/KakinadaDeepwaterPort.php "Kakinada Deepwater Port"] Samsara Shipping website, accessed February 2018.[http://kakinadaseaports.in/ "Port Layout (map)"] Kakinada Seaports website, accessed February 2018.     ==Project Details==   ==Project Details==   [...]



Cilacap Sumber power station

Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:49:23 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 22:49, 18 February 2018
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Indonesiacoal}}The '''Cilacap power station''' is a 600-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power station in Central Java Province, Indonesia.  
+
{{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Indonesiacoal}}The '''Cilacap power station''' is a 600-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power station in Central Java Province, Indonesia. An expansion project is known as '''Java-8.'''
  
 
==Location==
 
==Location==



Haldia Port

Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:58:01 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 12:58, 18 February 2018 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1:  {{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Indiacoal}} {{#badges: CoalSwarm|Navbar-Indiacoal}}    −'''Haldia Port''' is a major seaport and industrial city approximately 120km south of Kolkata in West Bengal, India. The port lies near the mouth of one of the tributaries of the Ganges River, known as the Hugli River. Haldia Port contains 15 berths, including four for coking coal and one for coal. Main imports include coking coal, petroleum and metallurgical coke, soda ash, iron and steel, limestone, machinery, scrap, vegetables, and general cargoes.[http://www.worldportsource.com/ports/IND_Port_of_Haldia_3509.php "Port of Haldia"] World Port Source, accessed October 17, 2011.+'''Haldia Port''' is a major seaport and industrial city approximately 120km south of Kolkata in West Bengal, India. The port lies near the mouth of one of the tributaries of the Ganges River, known as the Hugli River. The port has four terminals: one dry bulk cargo terminal, one liquid bulk cargo terminal, a container terminal, and a multi-purpose terminal.[http://kolkataporttrust.gov.in/index1.php?layout=3&lang=1&level=2&sublinkid=2690&lid=44 "Terminals"] Kolkata Port Trust website, accessed February 2018. The dry bulk cargo terminal includes four berths for coking coal and one for thermal coal.[http://kolkataporttrust.gov.in/show_img.php?fid=2927 "Dry Bulk Cargo Terminal"] Kolkata Port Trust website, accessed February 2018.    −The port's mechanized coal processing operations have been disrupted indefinitely since October 2012, when Haldia Bulk Terminals (HBT) - the company in charge of unloading cargo at Haldia Port's mechanized berths 2 and 8 - abandoned the port, citing unsafe working conditions.  +Since 2012, direct coal-handling operations at Haldia Port have been disrupted, with coal being delivered to the port via transloading from larger vessels to smaller ships and barges at Sandheads and Kanika Sands in the Bay of Bengal. Daughter vessels related to these transloading operations continue to be handled exclusively at Haldia Port berths 2 and 8. In 2016, the port announced plans to build two new outer terminals, along with a riverine coal-handling jetty at Outer Terminal I equipped with integrated mechanized systems to handle all types of coal and coke, with construction of the Rs 590-crore project to start in 2017-18.[http://www.uniindia.com/haldia-dock-complex-to-spend-rs-100-cr-to-set-up-coal-jetty-by-august/other/news/423122.html "Haldia Dock Complex to spend Rs 100 cr to set up coal jetty by August"] United News of India, March 22, 2016.[http://tariffauthority.gov.in/writereaddata/UploadFile/KOPTG349ORDRPASD16082016ALL_1122.pdf "Setting up of Outer  +Terminal-I"] Tariff Authority for Major Ports, September 16, 2016.     {{#display_map:22.037654,88.091404|width=600|height=500|type=satellite|zoom=14}} {{#display_map:22.037654,88.091404|width=600|height=500|type=satellite|zoom=14}} Line 12: Line 13:  *'''Status:''' Coal imports indefinitely suspended October 2012 *'''Status:''' Coal imports indefinitely suspended October 2012    −==February 2015 Update==+==Background== −Mechanized coal operations at Haldia Port remain indefinitely suspended as of February 2015. The work disruption dates back to October 2012, when Haldia Bulk Terminals (KBT), the company in charge of unloading cargo at Haldia Port's mechanized berths 2 and 8, dismissed all of its employees and announced its intention to leave the port due to unsafe working conditions[...]



Jaigarh Port

Sun, 18 Feb 2018 09:38:35 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 09:38, 18 February 2018 (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1:  {{#badges:CoalSwarm}} {{#badges:CoalSwarm}} −'''Jaigarh Port''', also known as Jaigad Port, is an all-weather, multipurpose port in Jaigarh, Maharashtra, on India's west coast. It is operated by JSW Infrastructure. With installed capacity of 15 million tonnes per annum (mtpa), JSW Jaigarh Port handles various types of commercial cargo like coal, coke, iron ore, and limestone. There are plans to expand the port's capacity to 65 mtpa.[http://www.eximin.net/NewsDetails.aspx?name=28982 "JSW Jaigarh Port crosses another milestone by handling Capesize vessel,"] ExIm, Apr 22, 2015+'''Jaigarh Port''', also known as Jaigad Port, is an all-weather, multipurpose port in Jaigarh, Maharashtra, on India's west coast. It is operated by JSW Infrastructure. With installed capacity of 40 million tonnes per annum (mtpa), JSW Jaigarh Port handles various types of commercial cargo like coal, coke, iron ore, and limestone. There are plans to expand the port's capacity to 80 mtpa.[http://www.jsw.in/infrastructure/about-jaigarh-port "About JSW Jaigarh Port"] JSW website, accessed February 2018.       {{#display_map:17.303945,73.208429|width=600|height=500|type=satellite|zoom=15}} {{#display_map:17.303945,73.208429|width=600|height=500|type=satellite|zoom=15}}     ==Background== ==Background== −According to JSW's website, Jaigarh Port is operated by JSW Jaigarh Port, a subsidiary of JSW Infrastructure. The company was created to develop the port, on a build-own-operate-share-transfer (BOOST) basis, under a 50-year concession licensed by the State Government of Maharashtra. JSW Jaigarh Port was established in 2006, to support the coal import requirements of the 1200 MW [[Ratnagiri Power Plant|JSW Energy thermal power plant]] (also known as the Ratnagiri Power Plant), directly adjacent to the port. The port was officially inaugurated in August 2009.[http://www.jsw.in/infrastructure/about-jaigarh-port "About JSW Jaigarh Port"] JSW website, accessed February 2015.  +According to JSW's website, Jaigarh Port is operated by JSW Jaigarh Port, a subsidiary of JSW Infrastructure. The company was created to develop the port, on a build-own-operate-share-transfer (BOOST) basis, under a 50-year concession licensed by the State Government of Maharashtra. JSW Jaigarh Port was established in 2006, to support the coal import requirements of the 1200 MW [[Ratnagiri Power Plant|JSW Energy thermal power plant]] (also known as the Ratnagiri Power Plant), directly adjacent to the port. The port was officially inaugurated in August 2009.       In May 2011, Jaigarh Port set a record for coal handling at an Indian port by unloading 71,740 tonnes of South African steam coal within a 24-hour period.[http://www.steelguru.com/indian_news/JSW_Jaigarh_Port_achieves_coal_discharge_record/208711.html "JSW Jaigarh Port achieves coal discharge record"] Steel Guru, June 8, 2011.[http://www.steelguru.com/indian_news/JSW_Jaigarh_Port_creates_a_landmark_coal_storage_and_handling_facility/330184.html "JSW Jaigarh Port creates a landmark coal storage and handling facility"] Steel Guru, December 26, 2013. In May 2011, Jaigarh Port set a record for coal handling at an Indian port by unloading 71,740 tonnes of South African steam coal within a 24-hour period.[http://www.steelguru.com/indian_news/JSW_Jaigarh_Port_achieves_coal_discharge_record/208711.html "JSW Jaigarh Port achieves coal dis[...]



Hazira Port

Sun, 18 Feb 2018 08:54:33 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 08:54, 18 February 2018 (5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 3: Line 3:  '''Hazira Port''' is a multipurpose port in Gujarat, India.   '''Hazira Port''' is a multipurpose port in Gujarat, India.      −In 2012 [[Adani Group]] obtained an agreement with Hazira Port Ltd to operate non-LNG facilities planned at the port. The first five-year phase of Adani's plans include construction of a coal berth, along with container berths and multi-purpose berths for bulk cargo. Longer-term plans call for a total of 12 berths, including two coal berths.[http://www.adaniports.com/hazira_port_about_us.aspx "About Hazira Port"] Adani website, accessed February 2015.[http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/adani-s-multi-cargo-port-at-hazira-gets-moef-nod-113051000946_1.html "Adani's multi-cargo port at Hazira gets MoEF nod"] The Business Standard, May 10, 2013.  +In 2012 [[Adani Group]] obtained an agreement with Hazira Port Ltd to operate non-LNG facilities planned at the port, and in 2013 India's Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) granted environmental clearance (EC) and coastal regulation zone (CRZ) approval for a total of 12 berths, including two coal berths. The first five-year phase of Adani's plans called for construction of a coal berth, along with container berths and multi-purpose berths for bulk cargo.[http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/adani-s-multi-cargo-port-at-hazira-gets-moef-nod-113051000946_1.html "Adani's multi-cargo port at Hazira gets MoEF nod"] The Business Standard, May 10, 2013..  +   +In 2016, Adani proposed an outer port expansion at Hazira which would add 19 new multi-purpose berths to the 12 already approved in 2013, bringing the total number of berths to 31. In August 2017, India's Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change approved Terms of Reference (ToR) for the outer port expansion, giving Adani three years to prepare an environmental impact assessment for the expansion.[http://environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/Form-1A/TOR/5MLZQX3H080220171AdaniHaziraPortToRletter.PDF "Expansion of Outer Harbour Development of Hazira Port - Terms of Reference,"] Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, August 1, 2017  +  +As of February 2018, Adani's website shows six berths in operation at Hazira Port: two for dry cargo, two for liquid cargo, and two for containers.[http://www.adaniports.com/hazira-port "Hazira Port,"] Adani website, accessed February 2018 The port handles all types and grades of coal, including steam coal and coking coal, both imported and domestic. Hazira Port's deep draft berths and mechanized facilities, including an integrated conveyor system, can accommodate fully-laden panamax and capesize bulk carriers up to 14 mtrs draft.[http://www.adaniports.com/coal "Coal: Hazira,"] Adani website, accessed February 2018       ==Location== ==Location== Line 10: Line 14:     ==Ownership== ==Ownership== −Hazira Port Pvt Ltd (HPPL) - a joint venture of Shell BV and Gaz De France - operates a LNG terminal at Hazira Port under a concession agreement signed with the government of Gujarat in 2002.  +Hazira Port Pvt Ltd (HPPL) - a joint venture of Shell BV and Gaz De France - operates a LNG terminal at Hazira Port under a concession agreement signed with the government of Gujarat in 2002..[ht[...]



Janus vs. AFSCME, U.S. Supreme Court Case

Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:04:40 GMT

←Older revision Revision as of 00:04, 17 February 2018 Line 1: Line 1: −'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018. Mark Janus is a child support specialist working for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay agency fees (also known as fair share fees) to compensate the union representing state workers (AFSCME) for the cost of his representation. This case is part and parcel of a coordinated legislative and and other legislation and litigation dismantling unions have been advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and state-based groups.  +'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018. Mark Janus is a child support worker  for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay the agency fees (also known as fair share fees) required to compensate the union representing Illinois state workers for the cost of his representation. This case is part and parcel of a coordinated legislative and legal strategy to dismantle unions being advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and state-based groups.       ==Origins of Janus== ==Origins of Janus== Line 11: Line 11:  Rauner knew the unions would fight back in court, so he also filed a federal lawsuit, Rauner v. AFSCME, seeking to have his decision declared legal and hoping to move the issue rapidly to the friendly venue of the U.S. Supreme Court.  Because the federal court found he did not have standing, a small group of effected workers were put forward as intervenors, including Mark Janus.   Rauner knew the unions would fight back in court, so he also filed a federal lawsuit, Rauner v. AFSCME, seeking to have his decision declared legal and hoping to move the issue rapidly to the friendly venue of the U.S. Supreme Court.  Because the federal court found he did not have standing, a small group of effected workers were put forward as intervenors, including Mark Janus.      −The panoply of ideas Rauner has thrown out there impacting unions did not originate in the Land of Lincoln. They can all be found in the library of union-busting bills housed at the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC was founded in 1973 to bring together politicians and corporate lobbyists to write and vote upon “model” state bills behind closed doors. The group is funded by Koch Industries as well as big tobacco, [[PhRMA]] and other fossil fuel companies. In 2010, ALEC bills, exploded out of state legislatures when Republicans were swept in to office, after the devastating 2008 financial crisis. In red state, ALEC along with it sister group the State Policy Network (SPN) and the Kochs’ astroturf operation Americans for Prosperity pursued ALEC “right to work” bills. In blue states, they pursued other tactics including anti-union lawsuits.  +The panoply of ideas Rauner has thrown out there impacting unions did not originate in the Land of Lincoln. They can all be found in the library of union-busting bills housed at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ALEC was founded in 1973 to bring together politicians and corporate lobbyists to write and vote upon “model” state bills behind closed doors. The group is funded by Koch Industries as well as big to[...]



Colorado and fracking

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 23:52:18 GMT

External links: resource: KGNU radio Boulder. is there a better page location for this, e.g. a media reference section?

←Older revision Revision as of 23:52, 16 February 2018
Line 356: Line 356:
 
===External links===
 
===External links===
 
* [http://FracTracker.org FracTracker]
 
* [http://FracTracker.org FracTracker]
 +
* [http://news.kgnu.org/category/fracking/ Boulder/Denver community radio station KGNU fracking coverage] including ballot items, state capitol/legislature, county commission
  
 
===External Articles===
 
===External Articles===



Janus vs. AFSCME, U.S. Supreme Court Case

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 23:46:58 GMT

‎Funding for National Anti-Union Efforts ←Older revision Revision as of 23:46, 16 February 2018 (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1: −'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018. Mark Janus, a child support specialist working for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay agency fees (also known as fair share fees) to compensate the union for the cost of his representation. This case and a larger effort to dismantle public sector unions has has been advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and the groups they fund. Key players include the National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, the [[Center for Individual Rights]], the [[American Legislative Exchange Council]] (ALEC), the [[State Policy Network]] (SPN), the Koch’s [[Americans for Prosperity]] group, the [[Koch Network]] of funders and the [[Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation]] among others.  +'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018. Mark Janus is a child support specialist working for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay agency fees (also known as fair share fees) to compensate the union representing state workers (AFSCME) for the cost of his representation. This case is part and parcel of a coordinated legislative and  and other legislation and litigation dismantling unions have been advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and state-based groups.       ==Origins of Janus== ==Origins of Janus== Line 13: Line 13:  The panoply of ideas Rauner has thrown out there impacting unions did not originate in the Land of Lincoln. They can all be found in the library of union-busting bills housed at the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC was founded in 1973 to bring together politicians and corporate lobbyists to write and vote upon “model” state bills behind closed doors. The group is funded by Koch Industries as well as big tobacco, [[PhRMA]] and other fossil fuel companies. In 2010, ALEC bills, exploded out of state legislatures when Republicans were swept in to office, after the devastating 2008 financial crisis. In red state, ALEC along with it sister group the State Policy Network (SPN) and the Kochs’ astroturf operation Americans for Prosperity pursued ALEC “right to work” bills. In blue states, they pursued other tactics including anti-union lawsuits.   The panoply of ideas Rauner has thrown out there impacting unions did not originate in the Land of Lincoln. They can all be found in the library of union-busting bills housed at the American Legislative Exchange Council. ALEC was founded in 1973 to bring together politicians and corporate lobbyists to write and vote upon “model” state bills behind closed doors. The group is funded by Koch Industries as well as big tobacco, [[PhRMA]] and other fossil fuel companies. In 2010, ALEC bills, exploded out of state legislatures when Republicans were swept in to office, after the devastating 2008 financial crisis. In red state, ALEC along with it sister group the State Policy Network (SPN) and the Kochs’ astroturf operation Americans for Prosperity pursued ALEC “right to work” bills. In blue states, t[...]



Janus vs. AFSCME, U.S. Supreme Court Case

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 23:32:01 GMT

nl ←Older revision Revision as of 23:32, 16 February 2018 (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 1: Line 1: −'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018 Mark Janus, a child support specialist working for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay agency fees (also known as fair share fees) to compensate the union for the cost of his representation. This case and a larger effort to dismantle public sector unions has has been advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and the groups they fund. Key players include the National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, the [[Center for Individual Rights]], the [[American Legislative Exchange Council]] (ALEC), the [[State Policy Network]] (SPN), the Koch’s [[Americans for Prosperity]] group, the [[Koch Network]] of funders and the [[Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation]] among others.  +'''Janus vs. AFCME Council 31''' will be argued before the U. Supreme Court on February 26, 2018.SCOTUS Blog, [http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/janus-v-american-federation-state-county-municipal-employees-council-31/] Accessed February 15, 2018. Mark Janus, a child support specialist working for the State of Illinois who does not want to pay agency fees (also known as fair share fees) to compensate the union for the cost of his representation. This case and a larger effort to dismantle public sector unions has has been advanced in a systematic manner by an interlocking group of right-wing funders and the groups they fund. Key players include the National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, the [[Center for Individual Rights]], the [[American Legislative Exchange Council]] (ALEC), the [[State Policy Network]] (SPN), the Koch’s [[Americans for Prosperity]] group, the [[Koch Network]] of funders and the [[Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation]] among others.       ==Origins of Janus== ==Origins of Janus== Line 7: Line 7:  On the campaign trail, Rauner promised a Reaganesque showdown with the state’s public workers. Just weeks after being sworn-in in January 2015, Rauner blamed the state’s significant financial woes on public-sector unions, called for union membership to be voluntary,  for the introduction of local level “right to work” ordinances, and for a repeal of prevailing wage laws that boost wages for construction workers. (Misnamed “right to work” laws  allow workers in the private sector to free ride, leading to weaker unions and lower wages.) On the campaign trail, Rauner promised a Reaganesque showdown with the state’s public workers. Just weeks after being sworn-in in January 2015, Rauner blamed the state’s significant financial woes on public-sector unions, called for union membership to be voluntary,  for the introduction of local level “right to work” ordinances, and for a repeal of prevailing wage laws that boost wages for construction workers. (Misnamed “right to work” laws  allow workers in the private sector to free ride, leading to weaker unions and lower wages.)    −Faced with a defiant Democratic legislature, Rauner acted unilaterally issuing an Executive OrderIllinois.gov, [https://www2.illinois.gov/Pages/government/execorders/2015_13.aspx] Accessed February 15, 2018 blaming budget deficits on public workers and fair share fees and directing Illinois to st[...]



International Chinese coal projects

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 22:33:00 GMT

UAE

Show changes



Colorado and fracking

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 22:10:30 GMT

‎Citizen groups: add Frack Free Colorado ←Older revision Revision as of 22:10, 16 February 2018 (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)Line 242: Line 242:  ===Broomfield=== ===Broomfield===  The Denver suburb of Broomfield passed a five-year fracking moratorium on the by 20 votes of 20,000 cast in November 2013. In February 2014, a judge upheld the results stating that while the election had flaws it was not illegal, which some pro-fracking supporters had claimed.[http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25244920/judge-upholds-broomfield-fracking-ban-vote "Judge upholds Broomfield fracking ban vote"] Associated Press, February 28, 2014. The Denver suburb of Broomfield passed a five-year fracking moratorium on the by 20 votes of 20,000 cast in November 2013. In February 2014, a judge upheld the results stating that while the election had flaws it was not illegal, which some pro-fracking supporters had claimed.[http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25244920/judge-upholds-broomfield-fracking-ban-vote "Judge upholds Broomfield fracking ban vote"] Associated Press, February 28, 2014.  +  +In summer 2017, concerned citizens launched a campaign for a [http://www.coloradologic.org/citizens-file-measure-to-include-health-and-safety-on-oil-and-gas-in-city-charter/ citizen initiative to prioritize health and safety] concerns in future oil and gas development decisions. In the fall elections, voters passed [http://www.coloradoindependent.com/167542/broomfield-301-oil-and-gas-colorado Question 301] to give the city/county “plenary authority to regulate all aspects of oil and gas development” which should “not adversely impact the health, safety and welfare” of residents, the environment or wildlife resources.     ===El Paso County moratorium=== ===El Paso County moratorium=== Line 298: Line 300:  * [http://earthjustice.org/features/colorado-and-fracking/ Earthjustice]   * [http://earthjustice.org/features/colorado-and-fracking/ Earthjustice]    * [https://erierising.wordpress.com/ Erie Rising] * [https://erierising.wordpress.com/ Erie Rising]  +* [https://www.frackfreecolorado.com/ Frack Free Colorado]  * [http://frackingcolorado.wordpress.com/ Fracking Colorado] * [http://frackingcolorado.wordpress.com/ Fracking Colorado]  * [http://www.grandvalleycitizensalliance.org/ Grand Valley Citizens Alliance] * [http://www.grandvalleycitizensalliance.org/ Grand Valley Citizens Alliance] [...]



Eastern Shore Gas Pipeline

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:32:34 GMT

‎Location ←Older revision Revision as of 21:32, 16 February 2018 Line 3: Line 3:  ==Location== ==Location==  The pipeline runs from Lancaster and Chester Counties, PA to Cecil County, MD, and New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Counties, DE.[http://www.esng.com/project/2017-expansion/ 2017 Expansion], Eastern Shore Natural Gas, accessed January 2018 The pipeline runs from Lancaster and Chester Counties, PA to Cecil County, MD, and New Castle, Kent, and Sussex Counties, DE.[http://www.esng.com/project/2017-expansion/ 2017 Expansion], Eastern Shore Natural Gas, accessed January 2018  +  +{{#display_map:  +|lines=40.075414, -76.037729:39.959447, -75.917140:39.602515, -75.757588:39.158258, -75.526468:38.742243, -75.604155:38.556343, -75.571346:38.457411, -75.576576:38.360190, -75.592808;38.742243, -75.604155:38.694096, -75.772191:38.635796, -75.861288:38.562713, -76.079465;38.635796, -75.861288:38.712549, -75.909308: 38.772199, -76.074188;38.923749, -75.578375:38.909826, -75.429508:38.777334, -75.310331:38.689026, -75.389349:38.591379, -75.291557:38.517970, -75.234363:38.447453, -75.192147;39.606741, -75.833393:39.607059, -75.716625:39.578360, -75.589647;39.607059, -75.716625:39.787971, -75.697974;39.578360, -75.589647:39.294355, -75.634301|center=39.038820, -75.529931|width=400|height=300|type=normal|zoom=7}}     ==Project Details== ==Project Details== [...]



Colorado and fracking

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:31:35 GMT

‎Thorton: corrected: Thornton ←Older revision Revision as of 21:31, 16 February 2018 Line 282: Line 282:  In August 2014, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper announced that a compromise with the oil and gas industry to keep measures off the 2014 election ballot was made. It was reported that, "U.S. Rep Jared Polis, D-Boulder, agreed to drop two measures he supported aimed at requiring drilling rigs to be set back 2,000 feet from homes and bolstering local control by adding an environmental bill of rights to the state constitution. Backers of two industry-supported measures — Initiative 121, which would have withheld state oil and gas revenue from communities banning drilling, and Initiative 137, which required a fiscal impact note for all initiatives — said they, too, would pull back."[http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_26272493/hickenlooper-tries-broker-last-minute-deal-oil-gas-colorado "Hickenlooper compromise keeps oil and gas measures off Colorado ballot"] Mark Jaffe, The Denver Post, August 4, 2014. In August 2014, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper announced that a compromise with the oil and gas industry to keep measures off the 2014 election ballot was made. It was reported that, "U.S. Rep Jared Polis, D-Boulder, agreed to drop two measures he supported aimed at requiring drilling rigs to be set back 2,000 feet from homes and bolstering local control by adding an environmental bill of rights to the state constitution. Backers of two industry-supported measures — Initiative 121, which would have withheld state oil and gas revenue from communities banning drilling, and Initiative 137, which required a fiscal impact note for all initiatives — said they, too, would pull back."[http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_26272493/hickenlooper-tries-broker-last-minute-deal-oil-gas-colorado "Hickenlooper compromise keeps oil and gas measures off Colorado ballot"] Mark Jaffe, The Denver Post, August 4, 2014.    −===Thorton===+===Thornton===    −The city of Thorton came under criticism after posting a map listing the addresses of 14 fracking opponents, and homeowners, labelled “address of interest.” In November 2015 the city removed the map.[https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/americas/93315/city-removes-map-showing-addresses-of-fracking-opponents/ "City removes map showing addresses of fracking opponents"] Rita Brown, Energy Voice, November 1, 2015.+The city of Thornton came under criticism after posting a map listing the addresses of 14 fracking opponents, and homeowners, labelled “address of interest.” In November 2015 the city removed the map.[https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/americas/93315/city-removes-map-showing-addresses-of-fracking-opponents/ "City removes map showing addresses of fracking opponents"] Rita Brown, Energy Voice, November 1, 2015.     ==Citizen groups== ==Citizen groups== [...]



Comet Ridge to Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:28:07 GMT

create page

New page

{{Navbar-FossilTracker}}The '''Comet Ridge to Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline''' is an operating natural gas pipeline.[https://www.aer.gov.au/publications/state-of-the-energy-market-reports/state-of-the-energy-market-may-2017 State of the Energy Market, May 2017], Australian Energy Regulator, May 2017

==Location==
The pipeline runs from the Bowen-Surat Basin in Queensland to the Wallumbilla gas hub near Roma in Queensland.[https://www.aemc.gov.au/Energy-Rules/National-gas-rules/Gas-scheme-register/QLD-Comet-Ridge-to-Wallumbilla-Pipeline QLD: Comet Ridge to Wallumbilla Pipeline], Australian Energy Market Commission, accessed February 2018

==Project Details==
*'''Operator:''' GLNG Operations Pty Limited (GLNG)
*'''Parent Company:''' GLNG Operations Pty Limited (GLNG)
*'''Current Capacity:''' 1125 terajoules per day
*'''Proposed Capacity:'''
*'''Length:''' 79 Miles / 127 kilometers
*'''Status:''' Operating
*'''Start Year:''' 2007

==Background==
The Comet Ridge to Wallumbilla Gas Pipeline (CRWP) is operated and owned by GLNG Operated Pty Limited (GLNG). GLNG is owned by Santos 30%; PETRONAS 27.5%; Total 27.5%; KOGAS 15%.[https://www.aer.gov.au/publications/state-of-the-energy-market-reports/state-of-the-energy-market-may-2017 State of the Energy Market, May 2017], Australian Energy Regulator, May 2017 The CRWP is an uncovered pipeline under the National Gas Law and is therefore not subject to regulation under the National Gas Rules.[https://www.aemc.gov.au/Energy-Rules/National-gas-rules/Gas-scheme-register/QLD-Comet-Ridge-to-Wallumbilla-Pipeline QLD: Comet Ridge to Wallumbilla Pipeline], Australian Energy Market Commission, accessed February 2018

==Articles and resources==
===References===
{{reflist}}
===Related SourceWatch articles===
===External resources===
===External articles===
[[Category: Global Fossil Projects Tracker]][[Category: Natural Gas Pipelines in Australia]]



Colorado and fracking

Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:26:12 GMT

‎Industry groups: tweak wiki/external links ←Older revision Revision as of 21:26, 16 February 2018 (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)Line 303: Line 303:  * [http://ourlongmont.org/ Our Longmont] * [http://ourlongmont.org/ Our Longmont]  * [http://www.ran.org/ Rainforest Action Network ] * [http://www.ran.org/ Rainforest Action Network ] −* [http://routtcountyfrack.org/index.html Routt County Frack]  −* [http://www.savecoloradofromfracking.org/ Save Colorado from Fracking]   * [http://www.sanjuancitizens.org/ San Juan Citizens Alliance] * [http://www.sanjuancitizens.org/ San Juan Citizens Alliance]  * [http://www.savethompsondivide.org/ Thompson Divide Coalition] * [http://www.savethompsondivide.org/ Thompson Divide Coalition] Line 313: Line 311:  *[http://www.coga.org/index.php/Natural%20Gas Colorado Oil & Gas Association] *[http://www.coga.org/index.php/Natural%20Gas Colorado Oil & Gas Association]  *[http://commonsensepolicyroundtable.com/ Common Sense Policy Roundtable] *[http://commonsensepolicyroundtable.com/ Common Sense Policy Roundtable]  +* Environmental Policy Alliance / [[Big Green Radicals]] project - [https://www.biggreenradicals.com/colorado/ "Colorado: Ground Zero for the Hydraulic Fracturing Debate"]  *[http://www.westernenergyalliance.org/ Western Energy Alliance] *[http://www.westernenergyalliance.org/ Western Energy Alliance]  +     ===Industry actions=== ===Industry actions=== [...]