Katie Klabusich

Host

Who Cares About Keystone?

Feb 20, 2014·78 visitors

Steve Horn

Cohost

Stage· 135 messages

Feb 20, 2014

Keystone XL is at the forefront of public consciousness when it comes to environmental issues. More than 76,000 citizens have signed pledges to commit civil disobedience to prevent approval. But, as Steve Horn has reported, KXL isn't just one project & serious damage is already being done. So, how do we wake people up and broaden the discussion to save our climate, air and water?nRead Steve's piece on the State Dept's Impact Statement http://ow.ly/ttjek & join us for this important chat!

Katie Klabusich · 12:30 AM

Hi, everyone! Thanks for coming to “Who Cares About Keystone? ” with the fantastic, investigative climate reporter Steve Horn!

Katie Klabusich · 12:30 AM

Real quick, if you’re new to Tawkers, Steve and I will be chatting on the left. And if you’re signed in (it only takes two minutes to set up a profile!), you can add comments/questions on the right. Those are only seen by people who are signed in.

Katie Klabusich · 12:31 AM

Steve and I can spotlight comments to toss them into our conversation for everyone to see, so be sure to “thumbs-up” anything you want us to respond to! (That also makes it easier for us to see them.)

Katie Klabusich · 12:32 AM

Most people know about Keystone XL. It’s become a rallying point for the climate movement w/more than 76,000 citizens pledging to commit acts of civil disobedience should it be approved.

Katie Klabusich · 12:32 AM

But, as Steve has reported at http://www.desmogblog.com and other outlets, Keystone is hardly the biggest threat to the climate. It’s not even one project and people haven’t seemed to notice.

Katie Klabusich · 12:33 AM

So, tonight, Steve has graciously donated an hour of his time to answer every question you’ve never been able to ask about KXL, pipelines, & the environment! (Ok, maybe not everything…) Thanks so much, Steve!

Steve Horn · 12:33 AM

I'm here! Sorry for the delay all. Got locked out of my apartment. :-)

Katie Klabusich · 12:33 AM

Oh no! I was just doing the annoyingly long intro so new folks know what's happening.

Katie Klabusich · 12:33 AM

You're in Wisconsin -- that's a cold place to get locked out!

Steve Horn · 12:34 AM

No worries! I was in the lobby, just forgot my key. Anyway, excited to answer questions and talk about this hugely important topic.

Steve Horn · 12:34 AM

★ Spotlighted from Doug Grandt

“Pipelines are like the snakes in Medusa's hair … so we need to stop the excavation … OR the REFINING … We need to retire and decommission 3-4 refineries a month … that would eliminate the need for the pipelines AND the tarsands.”

Katie Klabusich · 12:34 AM

Thanks for coming tonight!

Katie Klabusich · 12:34 AM

Real quick, for people who haven’t read your reporting or heard you talk on podcasts/radio shows smart enough to have you, tell us how you ended up focused on the environment?

Steve Horn · 12:35 AM

Sure, started out on this beat by accident. Was more focused on foreign policy (mostly Israel/Palestine, also Middle East at-large), but got thrown into covering fracking for Center for Media and Democracy where I started working in early 2010.

Katie Klabusich · 12:36 AM

Interesting -- accident is a great way to get into things. It's more organic and can be more exciting.

Steve Horn · 12:36 AM

I created their "Water Portal" that's now FrackSwarm and way updated since I left in mid-2011. That was a college job for me. Got lucky, fracking took off then, tar sands got big and there's a lot of reporting that needs to be done that no one's doin

Katie Klabusich · 12:37 AM

So, the demise of our environment has been a real career boost.

Katie Klabusich · 12:37 AM

;)

Steve Horn · 12:37 AM

Hahaha - sadly. Doesn't pay as well as destroying the planet, though, not gonna lie there.

Katie Klabusich · 12:37 AM

True, that. Activism and truth-telling aren't the big money makers. Probably because the climate destroyers have all the money.

Steve Horn · 12:38 AM

Yep. But it's fun, sort of like the Izzy Stone quote about watching a house burn down and reporting on it. It's so fun, but you realize there are people in it and it's real human lives you're reporting on.

Katie Klabusich · 12:38 AM

yeah, it's a weird balance. I have that in repro healthcare.

Katie Klabusich · 12:38 AM

I think the headline to your piece on the Environmental Impact Statement pretty much says it all: "State Department Releases Flawed Keystone XL Final Environmental Review In Super Bowl Friday Trash Dump."

Katie Klabusich · 12:39 AM

Can you unpack that a bit? Why would they be trying to minimizing reporting on the study if, as it says, “this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution?"

Katie Klabusich · 12:39 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“Repeating what I posted on facebook: For the people who want this for the dozens of temporary jobs, why not build a national sewage to fuel and flood management pipeline? Instead of just putting a few dozen to work for a couple of years, a nation”

Steve Horn · 12:40 AM

Because they know what they're doing is scandalous and corrupt. They know the process - as U.S. Rep Raul Grijalva said himself -- has been a sham from day one. And they wanted to sweep the sham under the rug on a weekend where people only care (1/2)

Katie Klabusich · 12:41 AM

A looonnnnggg sham process.

Steve Horn · 12:41 AM

about football and drinking. The American Dream. But the American Dream only makes sense when you're sleeping, as comedian George Carlin once quipped. And this report is more fiction than reality.

Katie Klabusich · 12:41 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“The not impacting statement refers to the fact that they intend to keep trying until they find a way to sell and burn it”

Katie Klabusich · 12:42 AM

Yeah, Carlin is great on everything -- but especially pointing out the misdirection our elected officials are attempting.

Katie Klabusich · 12:42 AM

That's what Keystone feels like to me -- misdirection.

Steve Horn · 12:42 AM

Yeah, I'm with Michael about that. There is something very important about the Final Environmental Impact Statement most would prefer to ignore or brush aside.

Katie Klabusich · 12:42 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“Since the materials will be refined in the US and the tar sands contain a large amount of heavy radionuclides (uranium, thorium and others) Who is going to pay to safely dispose or take care of the materials for thousands of years?”

Steve Horn · 12:43 AM

That is, as the map introducing this conversation pointed out, there are a bounty of ways to get oil sands to market. So, there's truth in the Final Environmental Impact Statement.

Katie Klabusich · 12:43 AM

Almost no one saw the "final" version.

Steve Horn · 12:44 AM

Keystone XL's northern half is but one leg of a multi-legged pipeline project (it's actually called the Keystone Pipeline Project for a reason, it's many parts), but there are many other pipelines, too. And that's the Medusa Doug pointed out.

Katie Klabusich · 12:44 AM

How has that been kept under wraps, so to speak?

Steve Horn · 12:45 AM

Yeah, the final version is fascinating. But who reads long reports anyway? More fun to watch the Seahawks!

Katie Klabusich · 12:45 AM

Most people are under the impression that we're still waiting to see if Keystone will be approved -- until I heard you talking about it, I didn't realize that the southern half opened in January.

Katie Klabusich · 12:45 AM

Pppfftttt. That game was a snooze fest.

Steve Horn · 12:46 AM

Well, the environmental community is in part culpable. They just call it "Keystone" or "Keystone XL," but don't explain the difference between the parts. I get most of my information from business/industry press because it's written for investors.

Katie Klabusich · 12:46 AM

Heh. So they're honest with investors. Of course they are.

Steve Horn · 12:47 AM

And others in the industry. So, they give sober accounts of what's happening in terms of business transactions. I think most would be shocked to hear my favorite news sources are Wall St Journal, Bloomberg, Oil and Gas Journal, etc.

Katie Klabusich · 12:47 AM

How did you end up with that approach?

Katie Klabusich · 12:48 AM

Because you pump out an amazing amount of reporting -- and those aren't automatically places I'd think to look.

Steve Horn · 12:48 AM

Meanwhile, I think unfortunately, many activists would rather ingest "hopium" and don't look at the market landscape with a sober viewpoint. But if you do that, you're just going to get beaten even more severely by the industry and its investors.

Katie Klabusich · 12:48 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“The clean-up crew (11,000 people) from the exxon valdez spill are nearly all dead. How will this more extreme version of material be safely handled even without an accident?”

Katie Klabusich · 12:49 AM

That's a good question, Mitchell. Do the environmental impact statements take potential spills and toxins into account, or are they just looking for carbon/pollution outputs from business as usual?

Steve Horn · 12:49 AM

Haha, ended up with that approach by default. Wasn't learning a whole lot about my topics from an investigative viewpoint by reading progressive media, hate to say it.

Katie Klabusich · 12:49 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“Is something wrong? I don't see any other Tawkers”

Katie Klabusich · 12:50 AM

Sometimes you have to refresh/reload the page. Beta version/new platform.

Katie Klabusich · 12:50 AM

So, if you're there tawkers, just hit the refresh.

Katie Klabusich · 12:51 AM

Steve, do you know if the impact statements consider spills/problems?

Steve Horn · 12:51 AM

Yeah, it does mention spills. And admits spills will happen, inherently as part of production/marketing process. But because the premise is "drilling/extracting" = inevitable, basically written off as moot point in the report.

Katie Klabusich · 12:52 AM

That blows me away.

Katie Klabusich · 12:52 AM

We know this will happen and we're cool with a certain amount of destruction.

Steve Horn · 12:53 AM

The report also talks about climate change impacts of KXL northern half. But again, because drilling the hell out of the tar sands is taken as a given, just says climate change impacts would happen anyway. Sick thing is that's not true.

Katie Klabusich · 12:54 AM

Is that what the whole "not much impact" language is about? They assume that it'll get drilled by somebody, so, meh?

Steve Horn · 12:54 AM

It's not true because it of course would have MULTIPLYING effect to have more and more tar sands pumped out of the ground and pipelined to market. It's disingenuous, which makes sense because the study was done, essentially, by Big Oil.

Katie Klabusich · 12:55 AM

Yeah. Who authored the study?

Steve Horn · 12:55 AM

Yes, that's correct Katie. But of course, that's not the cause because it's a multiplying impact.

Katie Klabusich · 12:55 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“If there is a problem in the supply of the chemical solvent that makes the slurry possible, will there need to be a re-permitting to use nastier chemicals or once the pipeline starts is it open-season”

Steve Horn · 12:56 AM

case*

Katie Klabusich · 12:56 AM

What is the disconnect with people not understanding just how awful tarsands is? Do people think it's "just oil" or take drilling as a given? Or is it that the media doesn't know how to talk about it

Steve Horn · 12:57 AM

ERM Group (Environmental Resources Management) Group authored the study. Part of what PLATFORM London calls the "Carbon Web," long-time industry consultant, paid to greenwash and shed the industry in a favorable light. PR firm with scholarly veneer.

Katie Klabusich · 12:58 AM

Faux scholarship -- a huge problem in a number of industries.

Steve Horn · 12:58 AM

Built in conflict of interest in way contractors chosen, company proposing project to State Dept. gets to pick the contractor, State Dept supposed to check for conflicts of interest thereafter.

Steve Horn · 12:59 AM

Obama's State Dept. has turned the other cheek on this one, even though clearly this contractor is essentially a consultancy wing of Big Oil and has done past contracting work with TransCanada.

Steve Horn · 12:59 AM

Yep, including for fracking. I call it "frackademia.'

Katie Klabusich · 12:59 AM

Fracademia. Nice. Well, not nice...

Katie Klabusich · 1:00 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“Will the solvent have any attraction to children or animals? For instance many cats die after drinking antifreeze that drips from cars.”

Katie Klabusich · 1:00 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“If they use a solvent derived from a Florida agricultural product, will it raise the cost of food?”

Steve Horn · 1:00 AM

And yeah, disconnect is people think it's "just oil." When I say people, I mean average people. Blue color folks. But policy elites know better, they just realize who calls the shots in Washington and around the world: energy companies.

Katie Klabusich · 1:00 AM

Yeah. I hear people not knowing the difference. I think much of the corporate media is willfully ignorant.

Steve Horn · 1:01 AM

So, they get themselves to believe garbage or they're simply cynical and thirsty to hold onto power. Hard to say, but the people who work for the State Department and other DC policy elites aren't stupid. Anything but.

Katie Klabusich · 1:01 AM

Exactly. They don't really have plausible deniability.

Steve Horn · 1:01 AM

Well, corporate media has structural problems that make it hard to "see." Like Upton Sinclair said. There are boundaries they're simply not allowed to cross. Goes back to Noam Chomsky's book.

Katie Klabusich · 1:02 AM

To Mitchell's Q, what if the solvent -- which is potentially more dangerous than the actual oil -- is attractive to kids?

Katie Klabusich · 1:02 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“The pipelines must draw an awful lot of electricity to push all that thick stuff through pipes that far. Won't a significant portion of that power be coming from the Cooper nuclear plant at Fremont Nebraska. This power plant is extremely vulnerabl”

Katie Klabusich · 1:02 AM

Mitchell -- that's a huge problem with tarsands AND tracking. It's not just the output from the gas/oil. It's how much water and energy are required to dig out the fuel.

Steve Horn · 1:03 AM

Mitchell, you raise great questions. I'm not sure I'm able to answer them, though! I'd have to do research.

Katie Klabusich · 1:03 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“The cooper nuclear plant is vulnerble to flooding. What happens if the nuclear plant goes offline and the grid is unable to supply enough power. Will the pipeline suffer a disaster?”

Katie Klabusich · 1:03 AM

Mitchell is making me feel even worse about Keystone. I didn't think that was possible. lol

Steve Horn · 1:04 AM

Haha! Well there are serious related issues.

Katie Klabusich · 1:04 AM

(Mitchell, I don't see other people commenting either -- maybe they're just listening. It happens.)

Steve Horn · 1:05 AM

For example, how do you dilute the tar sands into a product that's useful to industry, aka oil? Diluents. Which means gas/gas condensate. Which means more pipelines and other fossil fuel extraction just to get the tar sands fossil fuel.

Katie Klabusich · 1:06 AM

Shit. More pipelines.

Steve Horn · 1:06 AM

Exhibit A: Cochin Pipeline. Fracked gas needed to dilute the viscous tar sands in Alberta. Obama approves in Nov. 2013; http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/11/26/obama-approves-border-crossing-fracked-gas-pipeline-used-dilute-tar-sands

Steve Horn · 1:07 AM

So, we're talking about wholesale ecological destruction to burn tar sands and turn it into something useful for refiners and the petrochemical industry complex.

Katie Klabusich · 1:07 AM

Oh, awesome. Fracking in order to extract tarsands. I was just wondering how we could combine the two most awful climate threats.

Katie Klabusich · 1:07 AM

In the FB event, someone brought up the Wisconsin pipeline. Are we neglecting this and other issues like the Grand Rapids river that still isn’t clean when we elevate one project to symbolic status?

Steve Horn · 1:09 AM

Yep, way more study needs to be done on how those two are interconnected. I think most would be horrified to find out the ties that bind.

Steve Horn · 1:10 AM

Yeah, in a way for KXL northern half. I think an equal amount of media/PR should go into Obama's looming decision on the Enbridge Alberta Clipper pipeline if you're serious about the climate change threat.

Steve Horn · 1:11 AM

By PR I mean for environmental groups/activists. For journalists, it means looking into all of these projects and explaining them to people. Not only looking at the royal palace politics of the Keystone XL northern half decision in the State (1/2)

Steve Horn · 1:12 AM

Department/White House. That's a role I try to play: contrarian Think outside the box, look at the situation from 15,000 feet above the air. So the commenter on Facebook was 100% right to point out that pipeline, which runs through my state.

Steve Horn · 1:13 AM

That pipeline (Alberta Clipper) was originally approved by Obama in August 2009, now it is asking the State Department and Obama if it can expand its capacity. Huge issue, almost no one talking about it. Same tar sands, same climate destruction.

Katie Klabusich · 1:14 AM

Yeah, I don't think most people know Keystone isn't one big project. They think the pipeline is stoppable. It feels like "Oh look over there!" but the administration while they go on ahead with EVERY OTHER PROJECT on their agenda.

Katie Klabusich · 1:14 AM

So what do people do, other than read what you're writing and pass it around?

Katie Klabusich · 1:15 AM

What should we as citizens who live here, drink the water, breathe the air and depend on the food grown on threatened land do? How can we make a difference?

Steve Horn · 1:16 AM

Educate, agitate, organize. Genuinely in all there spheres. Simple formula, works like a charm.

Katie Klabusich · 1:16 AM

Is it just a matter of waking people up? WAKE UP, PEOPLE!

Steve Horn · 1:16 AM

Don't lie about the actual state of play when you're educating people. Paint a full picture, show them maps, do what's needed to be done.

Katie Klabusich · 1:17 AM

Got it. No Rosie Sunshine.

Steve Horn · 1:17 AM

Agitate: look for holes in the opposition, exploit them by organizing for power and social change. It's not super complex, takes patience and fearlessness.

Katie Klabusich · 1:17 AM

Do we need to be calling out "green" groups for their singular focus? Or is that focus just my perception because it isn't the issue I spend most of my time on?

Katie Klabusich · 1:18 AM

(Yeah, we're short on patience round here....)

Steve Horn · 1:18 AM

Yeah, Tim DeChristopher is a good model, he was on Dennis Trainor's Show recently. He understands social power and organizing for real victories.

Katie Klabusich · 1:19 AM

★ Spotlighted from Brandon Jordan

“By organize, do you mean inside of the electoral system or does it require a "radical revolution of values" as Dr. King once placed it?”

Katie Klabusich · 1:19 AM

Yeah, DeChristopher's creativity is inspiring.

Steve Horn · 1:19 AM

Hahaha - well, it's possible and wouldn't be wrong to do that. Better just to explain to people who are average citizens not employed by green groups what's going on. The green groups will be forced to move with the tide regardless.

Katie Klabusich · 1:20 AM

Are green groups stuck organizing around big projects b/c they can get people outraged easier?

Steve Horn · 1:20 AM

But of course, if there's corrupt back room dealing with green groups that involves making deals with the White House that compromise nature and ecosystems, sure. Worth calling out and screaming to the moon about it.

Katie Klabusich · 1:20 AM

If you really have to explain something to people, it can be hard to get them involved. (As a professional activist, I know how hard that is.)

Steve Horn · 1:22 AM

No, green groups rely on foundation money for narrow-based projects. They're not funded to go outside the scope of them. Best organizing is done at the genuinely grassroots level by normal people using their social power to demand social change.

Katie Klabusich · 1:23 AM

Yeah. They're stuck in the confines of the non-profit structure. You have to make your donors happy.

Steve Horn · 1:24 AM

To answer Brandon's question, I mean nonviolent organizing for social power and social change here and now. And perhaps with more and more wins, means more and more democracy and in the hands of the people. But one step at a time...

Katie Klabusich · 1:24 AM

I think the anti-fracking movement has been effective on that level.

Katie Klabusich · 1:25 AM

yes, there's a national dialog about it, but it has been local groups moving their elected officials to keep fracking out of their communities.

Steve Horn · 1:25 AM

And yeah, exactly re: non-profit structure. And yes, it has been! It makes big demands, doesn't concede. It's also a pretty non-partisan movement which realizes both parties promote fracking.

Steve Horn · 1:25 AM

Totally. That's where the real fights are.

Katie Klabusich · 1:26 AM

Yeah, a lot of local folks just not wanting their land invaded. It's a pretty simple message.

Steve Horn · 1:27 AM

Yep. But an important one in terms of understanding power dynamics and social structure.

Katie Klabusich · 1:27 AM

For sure!

Katie Klabusich · 1:28 AM

We're running short on time, so everyone go follow Steve on twitter -- @SteveAHorn -- and read him everywhere.

Steve Horn · 1:28 AM

Yes please do! I promise I am very responsible on Twitter.

Katie Klabusich · 1:28 AM

Most everyone was listening and absorbing, so if you have questions later you can find us both on social media! Steve's a great follow.

Steve Horn · 1:28 AM

lol "responsive"

Katie Klabusich · 1:28 AM

lol

Steve Horn · 1:29 AM

And very "irresponsible" :P just kidding

Katie Klabusich · 1:29 AM

Yeah, you're not entirely business. There is the occasional post about running in subzero temperatures.

Katie Klabusich · 1:29 AM

Be careful up there in the tundra, sir, we need your reporting. ;)

Steve Horn · 1:30 AM

Haha yeah. Follow me for political AND exercise/running stuff. :)

Katie Klabusich · 1:30 AM

★ Spotlighted from Mitchell Heldt

“OK, just followed steve”

Katie Klabusich · 1:30 AM

Alright, thanks everybody! And thanks for stopping by, Steve. Really appreciated both the info and some advice on what we can be doing besides crying ourselves to sleep every night. lol

Steve Horn · 1:31 AM

Don't agonize...organize! :-) Adios, all! Hope to come back sometime soon.

Forum · 33

Forum· 33 comments

78 visitors

Tawkers AdminFeb 10, 2014, 4:54 PM

Welcome to the comment section of the Tawk, where audience members can share their thoughts about the main conversation happening on the left. Don't by shy! Entering questions and comments is the only way to get the attention of the two Hosts on stage!

Doug GrandtFeb 20, 2014, 12:31 AM★ Spotlighted

Pipelines are like the snakes in Medusa's hair … so we need to stop the excavation … OR the REFINING … We need to retire and decommission 3-4 refineries a month … that would eliminate the need for the pipelines AND the tarsands.

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:35 AM★ Spotlighted

Repeating what I posted on facebook: For the people who want this for the dozens of temporary jobs, why not build a national sewage to fuel and flood management pipeline? Instead of just putting a few dozen to work for a couple of years, a nation

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:35 AM

A national sewage to fuel project would also remove many times more carbon from the air then the XL pipeline would create and within the first ten years would eliminate the need to import or drill for oil. Two projects of this magnitude (Interstate H

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:35 AM

Interstate Highway System, and NASA's flight to the moon) brought extreme technical advancement, increased safety, and economic benefits that are still continuing after 50 years. Each year, we have massive floods while the south does not have water t

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:36 AM

have water to grow important crops. Each year sewage and farm waste flushed down rivers into the gulf of Mexico create large dead zones from the oil generated from algae consuming the wastes. So, lets build the pipeline, but don't let KXL pump its po

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:36 AM

pump its poison in the pipe. Pump something beneficial instead that cleans up the world in many ways. Don't just say stop the pipeline replace the bad with something very good

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:36 AM

Sorry, had to break it up to post here

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:36 AM

Next 6 posts in reverse order

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:40 AM★ Spotlighted

The not impacting statement refers to the fact that they intend to keep trying until they find a way to sell and burn it

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:42 AM★ Spotlighted

Since the materials will be refined in the US and the tar sands contain a large amount of heavy radionuclides (uranium, thorium and others) Who is going to pay to safely dispose or take care of the materials for thousands of years?

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:47 AM★ Spotlighted

The clean-up crew (11,000 people) from the exxon valdez spill are nearly all dead. How will this more extreme version of material be safely handled even without an accident?

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:49 AM★ Spotlighted

Is something wrong? I don't see any other Tawkers

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:50 AM

Did a refresh. Only see 2 other submissions. I am going to shut down and restart

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:52 AM

I have to appologize to the other Tawkers. I can't see you

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:54 AM★ Spotlighted

If there is a problem in the supply of the chemical solvent that makes the slurry possible, will there need to be a re-permitting to use nastier chemicals or once the pipeline starts is it open-season

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:57 AM★ Spotlighted

Will the solvent have any attraction to children or animals? For instance many cats die after drinking antifreeze that drips from cars.

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 12:58 AM★ Spotlighted

If they use a solvent derived from a Florida agricultural product, will it raise the cost of food?

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:02 AM★ Spotlighted

The pipelines must draw an awful lot of electricity to push all that thick stuff through pipes that far. Won't a significant portion of that power be coming from the Cooper nuclear plant at Fremont Nebraska. This power plant is extremely vulnerabl

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:03 AM★ Spotlighted

The cooper nuclear plant is vulnerble to flooding. What happens if the nuclear plant goes offline and the grid is unable to supply enough power. Will the pipeline suffer a disaster?

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:03 AM

Again, sorry to other tawkers. I can't see you

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:04 AM

I'll try restarting again

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:06 AM

What outlets should we try to announce new environmental projects or technologies? I have several ready to go

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:10 AM

Well, feel free to call me if you have questions.

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:11 AM

You can PM me on facebook with questions.

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:14 AM

hee hee

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:15 AM

I thought that I had one up. I uploaded one to facebook

Brandon JordanFeb 20, 2014, 1:18 AM★ Spotlighted

By organize, do you mean inside of the electoral system or does it require a "radical revolution of values" as Dr. King once placed it?

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:18 AM

My cat Wyktor, does not like to see me unshielded from cameras

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:20 AM

Wyktor likes to makes sure that I am still breathing and swats me if I stop breathing.

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:22 AM

I find KXL and related pipeline keratsu to be diversions from Fukushima, climate chaos, and NEO's. I took disaster planning course in grad school and the instructor said that my answers gave him nightmares

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:24 AM

Filter free radio covers organizing activists a lot. Catch the podcast

Mitchell HeldtFeb 20, 2014, 1:30 AM★ Spotlighted

OK, just followed steve