CNN put together a montage of Trump saying as far back as March 9 that his war against Iran "is going to be finished pretty quickly," then him saying that same thing over and over for the past six weeks
Congratulations! I think you should just add a comma and rename the podcast to "Well, Enough"
So much great news in this latest @iea.org report, helpfully summarized by @drsimevans.carbonbrief.org as usual!
Through a sanctions loophole, the U.S. imports fuel made from Russian crude oil refined elsewhere. California’s top foreign refinery supplier of gasoline is the Reliance Industries refinery in western India, whose biggest oil supplier since 2022 has been Russia. Imports correspond w/ gas prices.
Through a sanctions loophole, the U.S. imports fuel made from Russian crude oil refined elsewhere.
California’s top foreign refinery supplier of gasoline is the Reliance Industries refinery in western India, whose biggest oil supplier since 2022 has been Russia.
Imports corresponded w/ gas prices.
I don’t think I’ve seen Chris quite so strident in a thread like this before and it’s worth reading, as his podcast over the last 10 years has been creating some of the most insightful analysis of the energy transition globally, but in particular the US. It’s worth your time to read.
Thank you sir!
Today in Shrödinger's Strait, according to the Sunday shows:
The strait is open.
The strait is closed.
There will be new peace talks in Islamabad. JD Vance will be presiding. JD Vance will not be participating. Or he might.
Also there will not be new peace talks.
Long thread worth reading that adds additional context and analysis to the SCOTUS piece by the NYT.
Hard to know these days…. It sure is clean
Unusual for Chris to do a long thread - but I quite see why. His Energy Transition Show, BTW, is just exceptional!
Very kind of you, thanks Charles!
Thanks buddy
the fossil fuel industry, and those who protect its capital interests. Roberts and the rest are mere tools. Look instead at the hand that wields them.
end/ (and sorry for the long thread!)
that gets continually obscured by mere details of legislative and judicial action. That far too few observers (and fellow podcasters) even dare to name or even call an enemy, lest they become the targets of the wrath of the most powerful industry in the world: 17/
but only after a year of contest, during which time the actors of the energy transition endure enormous damage and the fossil fuel industry cements its gains.
And that’s the real game being played out here. The real game that major media seldom talk about... 16/
And now we are one year into another term in which the fossil fuel industry is running the entire show in national legislation, with the advocates of the energy transition and climate action relegated to playing an excruciatingly slow defense—often winning its battles... 15/
And it left the one actual, albeit flimsy and oddly appropriated, legislative support for US action on climate—the EPA endangerment finding on CO2—exposed, such that this GOP was able to overturn it, and leave the US utterly rudderless on climate action at the federal level. 14/
somebody in the US Government was going to take climate action seriously, directly, intentionally, without handouts to the fossil fuel industry. Roberts saw that threat and invented a way to shoot it down.
And that was the real, and most essential, legacy of the major questions doctrine. 13/
It was actually pretty modest in its ambitions (as others have noted, in the end, the coal industry was cleaned up in excess of the plan’s ambitions even without it). But it would have set a really important precedent by showing that finally, for once... 12/
with inevitable sops to the fossil fuel lobby to gain a few votes, because that’s the art of the possible in the US. But it’s not climate leadership.
Obama tried (VERY belatedly) to exercise actual leadership for a change with the Clean Power Plan. 11/
Instead, we bounce back and forth between administrations that are utterly beholden to it (like the current one) and ones that are less so, using one-off incentive packages to try to stimulate progress on the energy transition that are almost entirely implemented through the bloody tax code 10/
The US has *never* been able to muster that. Congress has never committed the US to any kind of climate action or any decarbonization goal. Because too many of its legislators, the occasional president, and yes, too many SCOTUS justices are in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry. 9/
Check out our @transitionshow.bsky.social miniseries on the UK's energy transition: xenetwork.org/ets/category...
It starts with a clear *legislative* commitment to achieve a decarbonization goal, and proceeds to implement that goal over many years regardless of the party in power. 8/
Nations with leaders who are not all tools of the fossil fuel industry, like the UK, have made far more progress on the energy transition than those that are ruled by it, like the US. If you want to see what a government that actually intends to do something about global warming looks like... 7/
The NYT article doesn't even ask why Roberts made his unprecedented move, or why the conservative justices backed it. Their motivations aren't examined within its legalistic forensics. But Sirota’s podcast answers the question: Because they dance to the tune of fossil fuel capital. 6/
There was no attempt to defend the legitimacy of the doctrine or to even engage with the purpose of the Clean Power Plan. As the NYT article notes, “not a single justice, conservative or liberal, mentioned the dangers of a warming planet as one of the possible harms the court should consider.” 5/
Season 1 of @davidsirota.com’s excellent Master Plan podcast details it all out brilliantly, starting with Ep. 7: www.levernews.com/master-plan-...
Roberts' invention of the ‘major questions doctrine’ was just another move to protect the interests of capital—fossil fuel capital, in this case. 4/
Like most fights in modern politics, this comes down to another chapter in the long struggle of Capital vs Labor as Marx framed it.
Chief Justice Roberts has a long history of doing the bidding of capital. 3/
The authors say “In the end, the legacy of those five days was more about the transformation of the court than it was about the fate of the Obama effort to confront climate change” but I disagree.
2/
