The environment thread

[StrangeSox]

The VW scandal does potentially impact Audi and Porsche as they're both owned by VW and share engine platforms on some models (the three have had design relationships going back decades, e.g. the control arms on some 80's Porsches are the same as a Volkswagen Rabbit).

 

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/110078...-than-epa-named

 

Audi, Porsche diesels also caught in this expanding problem.

[iamshack]

After about 16 months on this project, at midnight pacific tonight, NV Energy will go live in the California Independent System Operator's Energy Imbalance Market.

 

Been a lot of work...

[iamshack]

http://www.caiso.com/Documents/NVEnergyEnt...lanceMarket.pdf

[farmteam]

http://www.caiso.com/Documents/NVEnergyEnt...lanceMarket.pdf

Awesome! Gotta imagine that's a feather in your cap.

Edited December 3, 2015 by farmteam

[StrangeSox]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/11/business...andal.html?_r=0

 

WOLFSBURG, Germany — Volkswagen said on Thursday that its emissions cheating scandal began in 2005 with a decision to heavily promote diesel engines in the United States and a realization that those engines could not meet clean air standards.

 

What followed was a textbook example of what happens when ambition combines with weak internal controls and ethical standards, the company acknowledged as it presented a preliminary report of its investigation into the origins of the scandal.

 

Some employees, the company found, chose to cheat on emissions tests rather than to curtail Volkswagen’s American campaign.

 

“There was a tolerance for breaking the rules,” Hans-Dieter Pötsch, the chairman of Volkswagen’s supervisory board, said here on Thursday, at his first lengthy news conference since the emissions cheating came to light in September. “That is the hardest thing to accept,” he added.

 

"some employees" nice of management to pass the buck

[StrangeSox]

Historic climate deal reached in Paris with almost two hundred nations.

[iamshack]

A good article about the changing face of the energy/utility industry.

 

I was invited to a leadership conference for our company in January in Phoenix, and we were asked to read this in advance of the conference, as our president intends to present on it at length.

 

New Yorker

Edited December 30, 2015 by iamshack

[iamshack]

Buffet's Bolshevik: Dissecting NV Energy's Soviet-Style Sabotage of Distributed Generation in Nevada Edited December 30, 2015 by iamshack

[iamshack]

Nevada's Solar Flare

 

And the other side, from the WSJ.

[StrangeSox]

Republicans in Congress appear to be trying to shield VW from any sort of consumer liability.

 

The combination of regulatory oversight and class-action litigation can keep companies in line. But a bill in Congress consisting of a little more than 100 words would not only prevent Kaplan from seeking justice but also cripple virtually all class-action lawsuits against corporations. It’s known as the “Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act,” but lawyers and advocates call it the “VW Bailout Bill.”

 

The bill, which will get a vote on the House floor in the first week of January, follows a series of steps by the judiciary to block the courthouse door on behalf of corporations. “There’s no question the Supreme Court has ben moving in that direction to limit access to courts,” said Joanne Doroshow, executive director of the Center for Justice and Democracy. “But Congress has never done something like this, trying to step in and wipe out class-actions.”

 

The simplicity of the VW Bailout Bill belies the chaos it would create. Proponents like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the bill’s leading lobbyist, say they merely want to get rid of “non-injury” class-action cases, based on potential damages from defective consumer products or corporate actions that have yet to result in harm. Lawyers for class-action litigants argue that defective products deserve compensation even if the consumer hasn’t yet been injured.

 

But the bill goes much further, stating that courts may not certify class-action suits unless the plaintiff “affirmatively demonstrates that each proposed class member suffered the same type and scope of injury as the named class representative or representatives.”

 

“This is devastating because it sets up all class-actions to fail,” says attorney Lori Andrus, who represents several Volkswagen plaintiffs. If every class member must have the same type and scope of injury, it forces extensive proofs for class certification — essentially a full-blown trial up front, where plaintiffs will have to prove that their injuries match with their fellow representatives.

 

It would also further gut class-action lawsuits on the whole.

[Chisoxfn]

Republicans in Congress appear to be trying to shield VW from any sort of consumer liability.

 

 

 

It would also further gut class-action lawsuits on the whole.

Good...the only people who really win those class action suits are attorneys. Everyone else gets screwed. Their has to be a better way to actually get the penalties into the right hands. I don't know what it is, but their has to be a way.

[Balta1701]

Good...the only people who really win those class action suits are attorneys. Everyone else gets screwed. Their has to be a better way to actually get the penalties into the right hands. I don't know what it is, but their has to be a way.

Step 1. Get rid of class action lawsuits.

Step 2. Figure out a better way to deal with cases where large numbers of people are screwed.

 

I'm sure step 2 will happen once step 1 is done, right?

[Jenksismyhero]

Step 1. Get rid of class action lawsuits.

Step 2. Figure out a better way to deal with cases where large numbers of people are screwed.

 

I'm sure step 2 will happen once step 1 is done, right?

 

In most class action suits the individual damages are usually pretty low. It's actually made worse when the defendant eventually settles and has to fork over 1/3rd to attorneys plus costs. So that little sum becomes even less.

 

How about law enforcement/the government just enforce the laws? And hand down bigger fines/penalties? That provides the same deterrent effect, if there is one to begin with.

[StrangeSox]

Step 1 was largely done in AT&T v Concepcion back a few years, where the SC ruled that state laws can't override arbitration clauses that ban class action suits. This effectively means that, for an awful lot of consumer products and increasingly even for employment, class action and regular court cases are closed off. As Breyer said in his dissent:

 

"Where does the majority get its contrary idea — that individual, rather than class, arbitration is a fundamental attribute of arbitration?" "What rational lawyer would have signed on to represent the Concepcions in litigation for the possibility of fees stemming from a $30.22 claim?"

 

 

[StrangeSox]

In most class action suits the individual damages are usually pretty low. It's actually made worse when the defendant eventually settles and has to fork over 1/3rd to attorneys plus costs. So that little sum becomes even less.

 

How about law enforcement/the government just enforce the laws? And hand down bigger fines/penalties? That provides the same deterrent effect, if there is one to begin with.

I'm pretty sure the exact same people pushing to ban class action suits and enforce mandatory arbitration also push for deregulation or at least keeping regulatory fines hilariously and ineffectively low.

[StrangeSox]

Anyway the story here isn't a fundamental argument over the usefulness of class action suits, its over a pretty deliberate attempt to shield VW from liability.

[Jenksismyhero]

I'll read into it, but based on what you quoted it doesn't really sound that terrible.

 

1) banning suits from people that have not yet been harmed is the way litigation works. You can't recover for damages you haven't sustained. I don't see an issue there.

 

2) Making sure that class action participants are involved in the subject lawsuit seems pretty fundamental. If AT&T illegally overcharges some customers on their bills, not every single customer of AT&T is automatically involved. Maybe those charges were limited to certain subscribers. Why should everyone else recover something? I agree it shouldn't have to be a full on trial for each and every class member, but proving that the class member is actually harmed in the same manner as the named plaintiff is pretty basic.

 

Keep in mind the people that are complaining there. Lawyers. People who work in that area of the law for a living.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jenksismybitch

[Jenksismyhero]

I'm pretty sure the exact same people pushing to ban class action suits and enforce mandatory arbitration also push for deregulation or at least keeping regulatory fines hilariously and ineffectively low.

 

Fair, but I don't view private law firms bringing these claims as some great sword of justice either. We have attorney general's for a reason. They should be litigating these cases anyway IMO.

[StrangeSox]

2015 Was Hottest Year in Historical Record, Scientists Say

 

Scientists reported Wednesday that 2015 was the hottest year in recorded history by far, breaking a record set only the year before — a burst of heat that has continued into the new year and is roiling weather patterns all over the world.

[EvilMonkey]

2015 Was Hottest Year in Historical Record, Scientists Say

yeah, after they 'adjusted' down the temps from the previous hottest year on record, 1997.

[NorthSideSox72]

yeah, after they 'adjusted' down the temps from the previous hottest year on record, 1997.

citation?

 

Also, really, who cares if it's 1st or 2nd. Point is more that the climate continues to warm. Regardless of how much of that is human-caused in your view, the reality is in the numbers. It's warmer and keeps getting warmer. That will have effects, pretty serious ones soon.

 

[EvilMonkey]

citation?

 

Also, really, who cares if it's 1st or 2nd. Point is more that the climate continues to warm. Regardless of how much of that is human-caused in your view, the reality is in the numbers. It's warmer and keeps getting warmer. That will have effects, pretty serious ones soon.

What would cause more dollars to flow to the politically correct people:

A) 2015 was one of the warmest years in the last 2 decades, or

 

B) 2015 was 1 degree cooler than warmest year on record, or

 

C) 2015 was THE warmest year evah!

 

Wording matters. Data matters. Integrity apparently does not.

 

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20150504164341/...c/global/199713

 

According to NOAA, the global average temperature for the 20th century was 57 degrees Fahrenheit. And the 2015 average was 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit above that average. In other words, according to this recent NOAA report, 2015 was the hottest year ever at 58.62 degrees Fahrenheit (57+1.62) however the 1997 NOAA report states 1997 had an average global temperature of 62.45 degrees. (They do make it all confusing by not publishing the actual temp, but saying it is "+1.2% above the average" making you have to search for the average.

[StrangeSox]

I'm gonna guess the source for that nonsense is long-discredited Watt's Up With That since that seems to be popping up near the top of google searches. The baseline global estimate was updated by a 1999 study. The numbers Alpha is presenting are not directly from NOAA but from Anthony Watts making a bunch of bad assumptions and, per usual, not understanding what he's actually talking about.

 

from the report alpha sorta-linked to:

“Please note: the estimate for the baseline global temperature used in this study differed, and was warmer than, the baseline estimate (Jones et al., 1999) used currently. This report has been superseded by subsequent analyses. However, as with all climate monitoring reports, it is left online as it was written at the time.”

 

and a more thorough rebuttal of this nonsense:

http://motls.blogspot.com/2016/01/temperat...-naturally.html

Edited January 22, 2016 by StrangeSox

[StrangeSox]

What would cause more dollars to flow to the politically correct people:

 

While we're on the subject of funding, should I link to the multiple "skeptic" scientists who have all been found to be willing to produce a report that says whatever you want it to say as long as you meet their price?

[iamshack]

Who cares?

 

I agree with Matt. It was very warm no matter how you cut it. That is problematic.

 

How about we figure out how to do something to solve the problem rather than waste energy arguing about whether it was the worst or the second worst?