exxon

And now a word from big energy

This could just easily be a Duke Energy commercial instead of an Exxon commercial. It's a sad commentary either way.

New twist in NC's offshore drilling debate

Show of hands: How many of you knew about this?

The prospects of hitting a trove of oil or gas (considered more likely) off our coastline are slim, perhaps one in a hundred, notes Alexander, a former Charlotte News writer, and Lazell. In 1950, they write, Exxon drilled to a depth of 10,000 feet off Cape Hatteras and found nothing. "More than 50 wells have been drilled both onshore and in coastal waters controlled by the state," including three wells in Dare and Hyde in 1965. "Neither oil nor gas was found in any of these operations," they added.

Related story: The world's largest red herring was discovered swimming in the political waters of North Carolina...

$0.0018 per second

That's how much Americans on minimum wage struggling with high gas prices now earn per second since the Federal increase just this month.

In contrast, CNN is now reporting Exxon Mobil made nearly $1,500 per second last quarter.

Exxon Mobil once again reported the largest quarterly profit in U.S. history Thursday, posting net income of $11.68 billion on revenue of $138 billion in the second quarter.

That profit works out to $1,485.55 a second.

But as AP has questioned, just where is all that money going?

In North Carolina’s 8th District, the answer is easy – Republican Congressman Robin Hayes, who’s 2006 oil interest portfolio of up to $15 million is suddenly up to $23 million according to his own personal finance disclosures.

19 years later... Still no "public purpose"

This is a disgrace.

WASHINGTON — The Exxon Valdez oil spill, which caused a 3,000-square-mile oil slick and still affects Alaska’s fisheries after nearly 19 years, was a “tragedy,” Exxon’s lawyer told the Supreme Court on Wednesday.

But the company has been punished enough by $3.4 billion in criminal fines, cleanup costs and compensation payments, the lawyer added, arguing that the $2.5 billion in punitive damages approved by a federal appeals court served no additional "public purpose."

It's actually ironic that as Exxon lawyers argued their 19 year old case to the Supreme Court yesterday that no "public purpose" is served by punitive damages for the Exxon Valdez oil spill, that Congress happened to pass the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008.

I'm glad Congress is trying to do something for a change about the energy crisis, but it's not enough to send non veto-proof legislation taxing big oil to a White House that is headquarters for big oil. Unfortunately it is in all likelihood headed straight for President Bush's veto.

Send Money Oil and Lawyers

Rob Schofield in the Progressive Pulse posted an interesting piece about the recent US Supreme Court's hearing on the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Exxon was hit with a $5 billion punitive award after being held liable for creating the worst environmental disaster to hit this country. Exxon is asking the Supreme Court to eliminate the punitive award. Their lawyer, notes Schofield, is North Carolina's own . . .

Ethanol doesn't deliver

Presidential candidates from both main parties are singing the praises of ethanol, particularly the E-85 variant. Iowa, home of the first presidential caucus in the country, just happens to be a corn state. Coincidence? Ummm - of course not.

Larry Kissell, Brad Miller and Elizabeth Dole

Larry endorses Brad, Brad protects the environment, and the attorney scandal hits home.

Syndicate content