JasonLewis_STrib AngieCraig

The Terrible Mini-Trump of Minnesota — and the Progressive Who’s Running Against Him

This is an odd article.  Lewis is indeed terrible, and doesn’t even live in the district (not a requirement for Congress — that needs to be changed), and Angie Craig is a “progressive” NOT!  They’re both wealthy corporate toadies, with Craig’s flavor distinctly DFL and edging a bit left, but more in the middle, and not nearly far enough to be labeled “progressive” nor to offset the extreme reactionary Republican politics of Lewis.

But what’s most odd about this is the articles’ digging into the politics of oil in Minnesota, of pipelines, and of environmental groups doing the deals that benefit the Koch Bros.  It’s good to see this receive some scrutiny.  From the article:

Environmental issues are big in Minnesota, and one of the biggest polluters in the state is located in the district: the Pine Bend refinery, south of St. Paul, owned by the Koch brothers.

NOTE: PINE BEND/KOCH REFINERY IS LOCATED IN THE 2nd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.

The article then starts in on the EPA and the Clean Water Rule, contested by Republicans, and we know well of Republican efforts to eliminate the EPA.  But it also correctly reports that “our” Sen. Amy Klobuchar vote with Republicans against the Clean Water Rule, and only after pressure changed her vote the next time it came up.  There’s nothing green about Sen. Amy Klobuchar!

As for the refinery, here’s how they work, buying out local governments and “environmental” groups — from the article:

The refinery became notorious in the 1990s for toxic pollution, especially of the water. Flint Hills Resources, the Koch brothers’ company that runs the refinery, paid millions of dollars in environmental fines in the 1990s and 2000s. At the same time it launched a major greenwashing effort, which continues today: help for Minnesota ducks, support for Minnesota Public Radio, funding a children’s theater festival in St. Paul. An example of the Koch spin: As part of a 2013 plan to expand the refinery, the company announced that it had signed an agreement with two environmental groups to “cut greenhouse gas emissions at the refinery by about 52,000 metric tons per year.” Cutting emissions—what could be better? Except that the “cut” is “about a fifth of the total expected increase from the project.” That means the net increase in greenhouse-gas emissions will be 260,000 metric tons—into the air south of the Twin Cities—every year.

“… pollution… especially of the water.”  ???  Here’s the deal referenced above, one that anyone challenging pipelines, refineries, water pollution, and air emissions, should be aware of, a deal between “Flint Hills Refinery,” Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) and the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) (can you believe that name?!?!) where the “environmental” orgs backed off on their air emissions permit challenge:

FHR Pine Bend Settlement Agreement- FINAL SIGNED

This deal was found online, on the EIP website, and then was removed from the page but the link remains (Here’s the link to EIP posting — download HERE NOW before it disappears).  I’d posted this back in 2013:

MCEA deal with the Koch Bros?

A cool $1 million went into a fund to “reduce PM 2.5” through a diesel program, that’s the part that was made public.  Is there other money passed out for this agreement?  And there’s this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP1And this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP2And this:

FHR_MCEA_EIP3aFHR_MCEA_EIP3bAnd most importantly, the Confidentiality clause!

FHR_MCEA_EIP_ConfidentialityClauseWere there other deals?  This one was to be kept “confidential.”  (Again, the link to EIP posting — download HERE NOW before it disappears)  From my years of work and association with United Citizens Action Network (U-CAN) against the CapX 2020 transmission project, and knowledge of their isolation in fighting the MinnCan pipeline, which went from the Bakken oil fields to the Pine Bend/Koch refinery, that NO “environmental” groups intervened against that pipeline, and that only MPIRG tried to help U-CAN, it’s hard to believe that there was not a deal of some sort.  The silence was deafening.

To look up the MinnCan pipeline docket, go HERE and search for dockets 05-2003 for the Route Permit and 06-02 for the Certificate of Need (Note the pipeline company is sometimes “Minnesota Pipeline Company” and “Koch Pipeline Company.”).  Note the lack of an Environmental Impact Statement, the due process issues, and NO intervenors in the Certificate of Need, and none of the “environmental” orgs in Minnesota intervened in routing either… what a mess that was.

Do tell — what are the positions of Jason Lewis and Angie Craig on the air and water pollution from the refinery in CD2?  Where are the Minnesota “environmental” organizations on the air and water pollution from the refinery and the Bakken BOOM! oil trains in CD2?

ows_136616444072418Photo fair use from the Star Tribune

Flint

Here we go again.  Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA) and… get this… the Environmental Integrity Project, have teamed up to do a deal with Flint Hills Resources, owned by Koch Industries, our great and good fiends, the Koch Bros.

Why is Environmental Integrity Project, a Washington D.C. entity, even involved in this?

Here’s the deal — download HERE it NOW before it disappears (they took it off the page, but the link still works) — here’s the captured Agreement:

FHRPineBendSettlementAgreementFINALSIGNED

Both are bragging about it in press releases:

EIP-MCEAPressRelease4-16-2013

Here are the parts of the above agreement that are a problem — they have agreed to not object to this project, and they have agreed to SUPPORT the project — does this sound like CapX 2020 all over again?  They have also agreed not to assist others in any way, and to keep these requirements confidential!  It’s enough to make me wonder if there are, as there have been in other deals, other agreements.  Well, here are the specific parts that are so offensive and which are deemed confidential (click each piece for larger view):

MCEAsnapshot1

MCEAsnapshot2

The confidentiality provisions are disturbing — that they’re not to disclose the fact that they’re making their supportive comments as a material term of this agreement, and not to disclose these terms to anyone, “including but not limited to local, state or federal governing or regulatory bodies and agencies, and members of the public.”  GOOD GRIEF!

screamhomer

Thanks to the STrib for getting this out in the open:

Flint Hills refinery signs deal with environmental groups over expansion

The owner of the state’s largest oil refinery reached out to environmental groups and modified a planned upgrade to win their support.

++++++++++

The Flint Hills Resources oil refinery in Rosemount has agreed to limit the growth of greenhouse gas emissions and curb other air pollution in a deal that removes potential obstacles to its planned $400 million upgrade of the refinery, the company said Tuesday.

Under the agreement reached with two environmental groups, Flint Hills also will contribute $1 million to a Minnesota effort called Project Green Fleet that helps owners of school buses, construction equipment and other vehicles retrofit diesel engines to make them cleaner. Flint Hills is a founding sponsor of the program, and contributed $1 million previously.

The upgrade to the 57-year-old Pine Bend refinery aims to boost its efficiency so that it operates closer to its design capacity of 320,000 barrels per day.

The project, slated to begin next year, would increase the daily construction workforce from about 500 to 1,000 for five years, and add about 100 permanent jobs, said Scott Lindemann, vice president and manufacturing manager for the refinery.

But Flint Hills’ plans faced potential opposition from environmental groups, including the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA), a nonprofit environmental law organization based in St. Paul that often intervenes in regulatory matters. That’s because Flint Hills, the state’s third-largest greenhouse gas emitter, needs state regulatory approval to modify its air quality permit to release additional emissions, including those linked to climate change.

Lindemann said the company reached out to the MCEA and the Environmental Integrity Project based in Washington to hear their views on the company’s plan to install energy-efficient technology that also offers some emissions benefits.

“That conversation confirmed we were heading in the right direction,” Lindemann said in an interview.

Read the rest of this entry »