Speaker 1: Oh my goodness, it's it could happen here, a podcast
Speaker 1: about things falling apart, putting them back together, and the
Speaker 1: Sissifician task of occasionally trying to stop them from crumbling
Speaker 1: as fast as they otherwise would. I'm Robert Evans, who
Speaker 1: is not great at introducing this podcast, and I'm joined
Speaker 1: with James, who is better at introducing this podcast. But
Speaker 1: I strong harmed him out of it.
Speaker 2: Not true.
Speaker 1: Well, we'll let the audience decide. So, James, today, you
Speaker 1: and I are here to talk to a journalist that
Speaker 1: we both like quite a lot, Amy Westervelt. Amy is
Speaker 1: the host of a podcast called Drilled, which focuses on
Speaker 1: shady stuff done by the oil and gas industry, and
Speaker 1: particularly we're talking about season eight of Drilled, which is
Speaker 1: focused on what Exon is doing in a South American
Speaker 1: country called Guyana, and it's a really fascinating story. There's
Speaker 1: a lot here, including kind of the way in which
Speaker 1: oil and gas companies move in and in a kind
Speaker 1: of predatory way, create contracts with smaller countries that don't
Speaker 1: maybe have the legal resources to set themselves up as
Speaker 1: well as they otherwise would, that don't have kind of
Speaker 1: the long basis of environmental law rulings that like areas
Speaker 1: that have been you know, used for by the oil
Speaker 1: and gas industry for longer periods of time have and
Speaker 1: kind of the fight by activists in that country to
Speaker 1: rest control back from Exxon, and a bunch of other
Speaker 1: stuff besides, Amy, welcome to the show. I think that's
Speaker 1: that's enough of an intro from me.
Speaker 3: Hi, thank you, thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Amy, I'm curious kind of what got you started
Speaker 1: thinking about and focusing on and really digging into what's
Speaker 1: been happening in Guyana, Because obviously this is you know, uh,
Speaker 1: the oil and gas industry is a topic of concern
Speaker 1: for most progressives, but people tend to focus on, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of the Permian basin, the Gulf of Mexico, obviously,
Speaker 1: the Middle East, these places that are kind of seen
Speaker 1: as traditionally more the bread basket of the oil and
Speaker 1: gas industry.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I started looking at Guyana because I follow a lot
Speaker 3: of Exxon's shareholder briefings and reports like that, and I
Speaker 3: kept seeing them talking about about the project in Guyana,
Speaker 3: and just how like the projections kept increasing so quickly,
Speaker 3: and it got to a point where I was like,
Speaker 3: hold on a second. They are projecting that this is
Speaker 3: going to be producing more than the Permian Basin by
Speaker 3: twenty twenty five. And this is a country that shipped
Speaker 3: its first barrel of oil in twenty nineteen. That's incredible,
Speaker 3: kind of unheard of that something would happen that fast.
Speaker 3: So and I happened, like just so happened to have
Speaker 3: had a friend years and years and years ago in
Speaker 3: San Francisco who who like helped do I don't know,
Speaker 3: like marketing for the tourism board in Guyana, and was
Speaker 3: constantly telling me about how Guyana was this amazing eco
Speaker 3: tourism destination. So I had this so I had this like,
Speaker 3: this idea of Guyana in my head is like ecotourism central.
Speaker 3: And then I kept seeing all of these updates around
Speaker 3: around drilling there, so that's kind of what initially got
Speaker 3: me interested. And then I got a press release about
Speaker 3: a lawsuit being filed there by an attorney who was
Speaker 3: trying to kind of stop the oil drilling.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, and this attorney has a has a
Speaker 1: pretty interesting backstory herself, right she does.
Speaker 3: And that was also very interesting because she actually was
Speaker 3: in house council for BP.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Deepwater Horizon.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, exactly exactly. So she grew up in Guyana,
Speaker 3: her family lap When she was around twelve or thirteen,
Speaker 3: there was quite a bit of political unrest in Guyana
Speaker 3: spurred like so many places by DAA and oh gosh,
Speaker 3: like the history of Banna is really interesting. But anyway,
Speaker 3: so there was a lot of political unrest. Family felt
Speaker 3: it unsafe. They left. They went to Zambia and then Trinidad,
Speaker 3: and then you end up going to school in England,
Speaker 3: went to Oxford, you know, has this like very posh
Speaker 3: ee accent now. And then at one point decided, you know,
Speaker 3: she was working for BP and traveling all over and
Speaker 3: and just kind of got fed up with it and
Speaker 3: wanted to move back to Aana. So she moved back
Speaker 3: started working for a corporate law firm there to get
Speaker 3: very interested in environmental laws because at the time the
Speaker 3: country was just starting to write its first environmental laws.
Speaker 3: This is like mid nineties ish.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And one of the things you make a point
Speaker 1: on in the podcast that is really is interesting is,
Speaker 1: you know, I grew up in Texas and I had
Speaker 1: a lot of friends from the Permian basin, and you
Speaker 1: don't think of it, and you don't think of the
Speaker 1: Gulf as like an area of strong environmental regulations, and
Speaker 1: if you've spent any time in the Gulf of Mexico,
Speaker 1: you certainly don't feel that way. But it actually, I mean,
Speaker 1: it is not which.
Speaker 4: Is not to say that they're strong enough, you know,
Speaker 4: it's not to say that they are sufficient, but it's
Speaker 4: I mean, and it's not just that there's stronger regulations there,
Speaker 4: and the regulations are largely a product of how long
Speaker 4: people have been taking gas out of oil out of
Speaker 4: the ground.
Speaker 1: But it's also that because it's got a century, you know,
Speaker 1: or so of being utilized by the industry, there's kind
Speaker 1: of a there's a level of institutional knowledge built up
Speaker 1: about how to do it relatively, which number one speaks
Speaker 1: how inherently dangerous it is because the deep Water Horizon
Speaker 1: disaster happens right in the heart of this area. But
Speaker 1: it also means that when you've got a company like
Speaker 1: x On starting work in a place like Ghana, they
Speaker 1: don't have any of that, any of that build up
Speaker 1: built up kind of competence or expertise in sort of
Speaker 1: dealing with these problems.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's right. They don't have you don't have kind
Speaker 3: of the heavy benchful of you know, experts just hanging
Speaker 3: out looking for jobs. You don't have the disaster response
Speaker 3: to expertise in case of a spill, for example, and
Speaker 3: you also don't have the regulatory oversight expertise, which has
Speaker 3: been a huge problem in Guyana. They got they got
Speaker 3: a grant from the World Bank at one point. This
Speaker 3: was also super controversial.
Speaker 1: Was really interesting to me. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was like it was right like right before
Speaker 3: the World Bank issued its whole you know, we're not
Speaker 3: gonna recommend fossil fuel developed as much anymore kind of pronouncement.
Speaker 3: They sort of fast tracked this grant to Guyana to
Speaker 3: create and grow like a petroleum regulatory department in its
Speaker 3: EPA because they didn't have, like it didn't exist before,
Speaker 3: so they started to build that out. And but you
Speaker 3: know it's almost like they're building the regulatory apparatus as
Speaker 3: they're starting to drill. So you can imagine like, how
Speaker 3: well that's.
Speaker 2: I think so I think you said in your podcast.
Speaker 2: They dropped this hundreds of pages like environmental risk report,
Speaker 2: and it got to prove the same day that they
Speaker 2: received it, right, that's right.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's like stamped, like the date of receipt and
Speaker 3: the date of approval are stamped on the report and
Speaker 3: it's the same day, so there's not a lot of
Speaker 3: oversight happening.
Speaker 1: Hey, some people are speed readers, Amy, you know, I.
Speaker 2: Spent all that well bank money on speed reading courses.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, really really yeah, I'm going to guess.
Speaker 3: They're very focused over there, Yes, yeah, so you know,
Speaker 3: I mean they I actually talked to. I actually talked
Speaker 3: to this guy who ran the EPA in Gayana, like
Speaker 3: the first couple of years that they were producing oil,
Speaker 3: and he had formerly worked for the Department of Energy
Speaker 3: in the US and was trying to set up like
Speaker 3: real oversight and like his recommendation was that they have
Speaker 3: an EPA staff member actually physically on the production Bethel
Speaker 3: at all times, which like, uh yeah, no one was into.
Speaker 3: So that guy got fired.
Speaker 2: Yeah great, So maybe I'm talking about like the legal
Speaker 2: panisher of Texas and the different system in Guyana would
Speaker 2: be a good way to segue into talking about this
Speaker 2: this like right space approach that they used to I
Speaker 2: guess ultimately try and ensure some kind of responsibility was
Speaker 2: taken by the oil companies. Can Yeah, yeah, do you
Speaker 2: want to explain that for people.
Speaker 3: In terms of like the right to a healthy environment?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it's very interesting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's really interesting. It's super interesting. So Melinda Jinki,
Speaker 3: this lawyer who us worked for BP from Guyana, moved
Speaker 3: home starts working on these laws. She helped to write
Speaker 3: the country's first kind of environmental protection Act, which established
Speaker 3: its EPA, and then in nineteen eighty six and again
Speaker 3: in two thousand and three there were some revisions to
Speaker 3: the constitution. So in early two thousands she worked on
Speaker 3: getting a right to a healthy environment integrated into the constitution,
Speaker 3: which basically just says, you know, you know, every citizen
Speaker 3: has the right to a livable environment for you know,
Speaker 3: themselves and for future generations. So that actually opened up
Speaker 3: the ability for citizens to sue the government over this
Speaker 3: oil dilling project. So there's a couple of people who
Speaker 3: are doing that, and they are arguing that the government
Speaker 3: is violating their right to a healthy environment by not
Speaker 3: just permitting this offshore drilling, but doing it in this
Speaker 3: really kind of reckless way where either a sort of
Speaker 3: rubber stamping permits, they're not really providing any oversight excellon
Speaker 3: like brags constantly about how this project is, Like, you know,
Speaker 3: we've done in five years, what usually takes ten?
Speaker 2: I asked them.
Speaker 3: I was like, oh, is there like a new technology
Speaker 3: or like a new drilling approach or something like. The
Speaker 3: answer is, you know, more or less boils down to
Speaker 3: a very quote unquote collaborative government.
Speaker 4: So you know, oh boy, that's.
Speaker 2: Good, very fast. You need to dig into that.
Speaker 3: Aproach, break things, not totally exactly, And and the Guyamese
Speaker 3: government has this idea I think that, well they've they've
Speaker 3: actually said this out loud a few times that like
Speaker 3: net zero is uh, you know, commitments to net zero
Speaker 3: is sort of like their timeline, you know, where they're like, okay, well,
Speaker 3: you know everyone wants to get to net zero by
Speaker 3: such and such dates, So we need to get oil
Speaker 3: out of the ground as fast as possible and sell
Speaker 3: it so that we can meet that zero, right, so.
Speaker 1: And so.
Speaker 3: And because of how really crappy the contract is for Anna,
Speaker 3: they are kind of incentivized to do that as well,
Speaker 3: because the faster they can get oil out of the
Speaker 3: ground and sold, the faster they might be able to
Speaker 3: kind of get to a place where actually getting sort
Speaker 3: of their promised share of the oil money, so they
Speaker 3: they're incentivized to move fast and kind of look the
Speaker 3: way on stuff. I mean, there's the first two years
Speaker 3: of that project. Exon talked publicly about the fact that
Speaker 3: a pretty key piece of equipment on the boat was
Speaker 3: broken for two years. That's cool. Yeah, and again it's
Speaker 3: like a it's an offshore deep water drilling project. This
Speaker 3: is like the most risky type of oil dren there is.
Speaker 3: There's an enormous amount of pressure at that you know,
Speaker 3: level of depth of the ocean. It's exactly the sort
Speaker 3: of situations that deep water spill happened in, and a
Speaker 3: lot of like similar kind of approaches to you maintenance
Speaker 3: and safety happening. So yeah, not great.
Speaker 1: Now, I wanted to talk a little bit one of
Speaker 1: the things that you you kind of open up the
Speaker 1: series with that I found very very intriguing and it's
Speaker 1: something I've heard from other journalists in the same beat
Speaker 1: as you, is that when you start work on a
Speaker 1: project that focuses on Exon, some peculiar things start to
Speaker 1: happen just like and nothing, nothing, nothing we can say
Speaker 1: for certain, is like tied to Exxon Mobile.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you do notice some like weird things. I wanted
Speaker 1: to chat a little bit about that because it's it
Speaker 1: does scan with other things I've heard from from other folks.
Speaker 3: True, it's true, and I you know, I report on
Speaker 3: all of the oil companies, and none of them particularly
Speaker 3: like journalists, especially journalists, and they, you know, will kind
Speaker 3: of do the usual thing of sending you nasty emails
Speaker 3: or refusing to have their executives talk to you like that.
Speaker 3: But with Exon, it's like every every time I'm working
Speaker 3: on an Excellon story, it's just like you know, if
Speaker 3: I'm traveling, all my travel plans get canceled. There's always
Speaker 3: just there's always just weird stuff that happens, like you know,
Speaker 3: you start to feel like being watched and followed a lot.
Speaker 3: And and yeah, it's super not just me that that experience.
Speaker 3: I know that everyone I know that has reported on
Speaker 3: them has said that's definitely like there's you know, just
Speaker 3: a kind of an intimation thing that they like to do.
Speaker 3: I actually was surprised that that Steve call who wrote
Speaker 3: the book Private Empire about Exon, said to me, and
Speaker 3: I have this in the podcast too, that he has,
Speaker 3: you know, reported on al Qaida and reported on the
Speaker 3: CIA and if he's ever like disappeared, he hold everyone
Speaker 3: he knows that it's probably Exon. So so yeah, yeah
Speaker 3: then and that definitely happened on this project too. Like
Speaker 3: we my hotel room got canceled. Hotel room also got
Speaker 3: broken into. Yeah, and it was one of those where
Speaker 3: it's like I had cash on the nightstand was still there,
Speaker 3: but like my computer was open with like certain files open,
Speaker 3: things like that, and I don't keep like, you know,
Speaker 3: sensitive files on my laptop and even in my hotel room.
Speaker 3: But it was definitely like, Okay, this seems very pointed,
Speaker 3: and you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah it's intimidation. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, totally yeah,
Speaker 2: normal and good and I know no.
Speaker 3: People always ask me, They're like, are you afraid of
Speaker 3: getting sued by Exxon? And I was like, well, I
Speaker 3: guess if I had assets, I would be afraid.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the most concerning thing.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but like I wonder I was really interested in
Speaker 2: I get this legal approach which is very successful in Guyana, right,
Speaker 2: and if we compare that, like if we come back
Speaker 2: to the United States and I know there's a court case,
Speaker 2: I think it was like it was I'm pretty sure
Speaker 2: it's Boulder, Colorado. I might be wrong, but it was
Speaker 2: somewhere like that where they they tried to sue oil
Speaker 2: companies for causing fires.
Speaker 3: Right, Yes, there's a climate liability case there and it's
Speaker 3: still going. Actually it's still still alive. They just got
Speaker 3: like a move in their favor at the Supreme Court.
Speaker 2: Because yeah, it isn't the The case in the US
Speaker 2: is a bit different, right, where we don't have this
Speaker 2: constitutional right to like a healthy environment, and I'm sure don't. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: I didn't tell you.
Speaker 3: Although actually, guess who does have that in the US
Speaker 3: the Montana Yeah, the state of Montana. Yes, And so
Speaker 3: there's like there's a case there actually that's invoking their
Speaker 3: state constitutional right, which is very very interesting.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of people don't know this about kind
Speaker 1: of the northern western part of the country. You know,
Speaker 1: Mountain Montana is it's not really the PNW, but it's
Speaker 1: the Mountain West, which is that they had especially kind
Speaker 1: of in like the seventies and eighties, this weird history
Speaker 1: of like Republican governors, i think into the nineties of
Speaker 1: the early nineties too, like Republican state leaders who were
Speaker 1: also because I guess our national discourse wasn't so inherently
Speaker 1: toxic really progressive in bizarre ways. It's one of like
Speaker 1: probably the best governor Oregon ever had was a Republican
Speaker 1: who's like one of his chief accomplishments was he made
Speaker 1: all of the coastline in Oregon, both like Lake and
Speaker 1: River coastline and the Ocean coastline public property. He like
Speaker 1: set it up so that it's regulated like highways, basically
Speaker 1: so that no one can own private beaches. Now there's
Speaker 1: some little janky ways kind of around aspects of that,
Speaker 1: but like as a general rule, it's a really positive thing,
Speaker 1: and it's like not what you would expect from a Republican.
Speaker 1: I think the same thing is true of that lawn Montana,
Speaker 1: where it just like you used to be able to
Speaker 1: have republic I mean like Nixon created the EPA, right,
Speaker 1: it just didn't used to be the same kind of
Speaker 1: partisan that it is today.
Speaker 2: Even like in the early Trump era, there were a
Speaker 2: decent number of Republican folks who like specifically opposed drilling
Speaker 2: in bearsiars or like d.
Speaker 1: Interesting wherever they went hunting or something.
Speaker 2: Yeah was like yeah, yeah, because we I was like
Speaker 2: the outdoor industry to stop doing trade shows in Utah
Speaker 2: because Utah was gonna The governor of Utah supported de
Speaker 2: monumentizing a load of their like quote unquote hook and bullet.
Speaker 2: People were like, yeah, fuck this, it's bad.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's the same I think it's the
Speaker 1: same category as like John McCain having a good take
Speaker 1: on torture right where it's like, yeah, I mean they
Speaker 1: live right there. Of course they don't want it destroyed.
Speaker 1: But everybody's okay with you know, poisoning the Gulf or
Speaker 1: you know the stuff that the that the coke industries
Speaker 1: was guilty of having, like a fucking pipelines full of
Speaker 1: holes running under towns but then explode.
Speaker 3: Yeah, exactly, exactly, And that is actually like the number
Speaker 3: it's like the number one thing that gets people on
Speaker 3: on board with environmental regulation is like having something happen
Speaker 3: and there in the community where they were like, wait
Speaker 3: a minute, this doesn't seem fair. Same with Pasolinia, Like
Speaker 3: people were really into frecking until it became like wait,
Speaker 3: so if my neighbor has a lease and that lease
Speaker 3: and poisoning my well, I have no records. Yes, that's
Speaker 3: how it works. Welcome to America. Yeah, yeah, yeah, So
Speaker 3: now I mean they're all like, actually, there's there's towns
Speaker 3: and now that are acts being of the right space
Speaker 3: thing that are invoking home rule and baking rights of
Speaker 3: nature into their charters. And these are like pretty conservative
Speaker 3: districts too, And the whole reason they're doing it I
Speaker 3: have more local control over land use decision.
Speaker 1: Yeah, which is probably I'm sure a mixed bag to
Speaker 1: some degree.
Speaker 3: Exactly because you could imagine that going in a bunch
Speaker 3: of different ways.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, yeah, school board level exactly.
Speaker 3: Right. Now it's like to get rid of fracking waste sites,
Speaker 3: but it could easily be yeah, we don't want any
Speaker 3: I don't know, in degraded schools here for example. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I wondered it's different in the US in the
Speaker 2: sense that like, id right, this this case in Guyana
Speaker 2: went to the Supreme Court of Guyana, right, and is
Speaker 2: that right?
Speaker 3: Several so, so Melinda has now filed seven different cases.
Speaker 3: She's she's very busy, and most of them have wound
Speaker 3: up at gay at the High Court of Guyana, which
Speaker 3: is their supreme court. They just had a big verdict
Speaker 3: in another case that she filed which is really interesting
Speaker 3: and potentially huge game changer for oil drilling kind of
Speaker 3: around the globe. They so in the environmental permit that
Speaker 3: Exon had to get in order to start drilling offshore,
Speaker 3: it is laid out as a requirement of that permit
Speaker 3: that they have to have insurance policy from an independent insurer,
Speaker 3: so they can't self ensure, which is what oil companies
Speaker 3: usually do. They all have like their own insurance companies
Speaker 3: to ensure their projects. It's bizarre, but anyway, so it
Speaker 3: really it stipulates an independent insurance company and an unlimited
Speaker 3: parent company guarantee. That's really really huge because basically in Guyana,
Speaker 3: as in most other places that they're operating outside of
Speaker 3: the US, they use like a local subsidiary that has
Speaker 3: very few assets. So they have so Exploration and Production
Speaker 3: Guyana Limited, which is worth maybe two billion dollars on paper,
Speaker 3: and so you know, it's very handy for them to
Speaker 3: you know, something bad happens and the subsidiary might get drained,
Speaker 3: but the parent company is protected. It was actually written
Speaker 3: into their permits they had to have this unlimited guarantee
Speaker 3: that they will cover whatever damage is, which is important
Speaker 3: because in all of the environment impact assessments, you know,
Speaker 3: Exon's own environmental impact assessments. They're saying if there were
Speaker 3: a well blowout, which is like what happened with deep water,
Speaker 3: it would hit up to fourteen different Caribbean islands plus
Speaker 3: various countries and like the northern coast of South America,
Speaker 3: so like a really big problem. And these are mostly
Speaker 3: countries that fry on tourism and for their economies. So
Speaker 3: the argument that Melinda bade was, look, because the government
Speaker 3: has been lacked in regulation and now they haven't required
Speaker 3: this guarantee, you're opening up the citizens of this country
Speaker 3: to risk because if there's a spill like this, these
Speaker 3: countries could come to Guyana asking to be paid for
Speaker 3: damages and we're not able to And now you've like
Speaker 3: taken you know, exon thing for it off the table. Anyway,
Speaker 3: the judge in their favor and said, yeah, you're right, Exon,
Speaker 3: you need to have this in writing within thirty days. Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's incredible. I mean that could really make it would
Speaker 3: change the math considerably for this project, and I would
Speaker 3: say most other projects that they're working on. The ep is.
Speaker 3: It's the EPA and Exon were sort of like co
Speaker 3: defendants in this case, the EPA is appealing also, like
Speaker 3: just by way, when your EPA is a co defendant
Speaker 3: with an oil company, there's something very wrong.
Speaker 1: Yeah, might they might not be doing the p party.
Speaker 3: Exactly, yes, exactly. So they're appealing, and you know, there's
Speaker 3: a lot of government corruption and stuff going on, so
Speaker 3: we'll see, we'll see what happens. But this judge, everyone
Speaker 3: was like, I was talking to a journalist that we've
Speaker 3: been working with there and she was like, yes, everyone's
Speaker 3: very rid for his safety because like this this was
Speaker 3: a big deal. And he really I mean in like
Speaker 3: the most prim and proper legally is possible. He repeatedly
Speaker 3: was like, e pa, why are you just being ex all's.
Speaker 1: Bitch, it's here, what's going on.
Speaker 3: It's like it was like a real like whoa bomb
Speaker 3: of a ruling. So so yeah, that's a big win.
Speaker 3: The constitutional case is still they're still waiting for a
Speaker 3: ruling in that case, but that's also the Supreme Court
Speaker 3: that will be ruling on it because it's a constitutional argument.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, talking of being people's bait, it's probably time
Speaker 2: for us to hate from our advertisers. Ah, yes, great, great, great,
Speaker 2: great yeah, you off, and I disduncted. It was good.
Speaker 1: These these advertisers, none of whom are in any way
Speaker 1: involved in the oil and gas industry. We actually can't
Speaker 1: promise that, but you know, pretend we can. We're back
Speaker 1: and continue to be blameless. All right, let's uh, should
Speaker 1: we move on to talking about We chatted a little
Speaker 1: before this started. And one of the things that kind
Speaker 1: of is is perennially on or perpetually on our our
Speaker 1: beat is different laws and and rules and attempts around
Speaker 1: the world to crack down on the ability of people
Speaker 1: to protest and exercise dissent, which you have some some
Speaker 1: some thoughts on, and also some some information on kind
Speaker 1: of the way in which the oil and gas industry
Speaker 1: is tied to a lot of these legal kind of assaults.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Yeah, they are vary into cracking down on protests.
Speaker 3: Andthing that I think is really interesting right now is
Speaker 3: that you have the fossil fuel industry on the one hand,
Speaker 3: working behind the scenes to you know, the American fuel
Speaker 3: and petrochemical Manufacturers, which is the lobbying group for like
Speaker 3: coke industries and a bunch of oil companies and all
Speaker 3: of that they helped to write sample legislation in the
Speaker 3: way of Standing Rock to pass around all of these
Speaker 3: Republicans that would increase the science associated with protests and
Speaker 3: jail time. And they also did a lot to try
Speaker 3: to broaden it out to include organizations. So you know,
Speaker 3: any anyone, any organization thing to organize or plan protests
Speaker 3: can also be fined. In Kansas, they included a reco
Speaker 3: charge in that, so you know, they're trying to make
Speaker 3: protest organized crime. But at the same time that they're
Speaker 3: doing all of that stuff, the number one argument that
Speaker 3: the fossil fuel industry is making in all of the
Speaker 3: climate cases against it in the US is a corporate
Speaker 3: free speech argument, and that is like it's terrifying. So actually,
Speaker 3: and you mentioned Boulder before, there's been there's like twenty
Speaker 3: fourish of these cases where towns or cities or states
Speaker 3: are saying, hey, it's really expensive for us to adapt
Speaker 3: to all of these climate risks, and it would be
Speaker 3: less expensive if the oil and gas companies had kept
Speaker 3: everyone from doing anything about this for the last forty years.
Speaker 3: Therefore they should pay some portion of the cost. That's
Speaker 3: like the basic argument. And the oil companies for the
Speaker 3: last three or four years have been saying, you know, oh,
Speaker 3: you're trying to get around federal law by bringing these
Speaker 3: in state court, and these cases belong in droll court.
Speaker 3: The Supreme Court finally declined to hear that argument. That
Speaker 3: Department of Justice was like, they can stay in state court,
Speaker 3: it's fine. So that argument is sort of dead in
Speaker 3: the water. But they've already started with like their next
Speaker 3: attempt to get these cases to the Supreme Court, and
Speaker 3: it's this free speech argument that they've been making, which
Speaker 3: basically says, look, anything we've ever said about climate change
Speaker 3: was in the interest of shaping policy. That makes it
Speaker 3: political speech or in like legal words, petitioning speech, and
Speaker 3: therefore protected by the First Amendment. Now they're saying, in
Speaker 3: these cases, our First Amendment argument is foundational to our arguments.
Speaker 3: Therefore these can't be in state courts can't rule on
Speaker 3: like key First Amendment issues. So I'm convinced that one
Speaker 3: of these cases is going to be the next Citizens
Speaker 3: United and this Supreme Court. That's very, very scary. You know,
Speaker 3: they're talking about blurring the like they're basically saying, like,
Speaker 3: lying can be free, can be protected if it's in
Speaker 3: the interest of shaping policy. A particular way.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's fine. We're okay with lying if it's good
Speaker 1: for us, which is you know, is enity whenever I'm
Speaker 1: pulled over by the police, but probably probably oil and
Speaker 1: gas company should be helped you so you can see.
Speaker 3: It's like bad, but like really for everything, very bad
Speaker 3: if that gets said. Yeah, so yeah, they're doing that
Speaker 3: at the same time that they're trying to limit individual
Speaker 3: free speech. And I think that parallel is well a
Speaker 3: not accidental but very very gross and disturbing.
Speaker 2: Yeah, very much. Sure, Like I think it's interesting yet
Speaker 2: that try like that. They very clearly see this Supreme
Speaker 2: Court it's like the the one to go for, right,
Speaker 2: not that it's going anywhere anytime soon. I guess didn't
Speaker 2: Amy County parrots like like Dad wasn't a shell.
Speaker 3: Yeah you word for Shepherd like twenty years.
Speaker 2: He sure did, of course, because yeah, there's a class
Speaker 2: thing happening, and she.
Speaker 3: Never accuses herself on any of these cases ever. Also, Elito,
Speaker 3: I think it's Alito has stock in conicophillis, So that cool,
Speaker 3: that's cool.
Speaker 2: Clarence Thomas rig.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was gifted to him by someone. Yeah statue, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: so yeah, I think it's it's and and I mean
Speaker 3: they they have said out loud in multiple places that
Speaker 3: the whole push to criminalize protests was one hundred percent
Speaker 3: of reaction to Standing Rock. Yeah, they were very freaked
Speaker 3: out by that. I think they always have like a
Speaker 3: an ozed reaction to anything that Indigenous people are doing. Period.
Speaker 3: It's like that whole gross extra layer to it. And
Speaker 3: then actually elsewhere too, like in in Canada this like
Speaker 3: we're working with a reporter who's been looking into this
Speaker 3: in Canada for a while. His name is Jeff Dembicky,
Speaker 3: and he's found that there's the oil and gas companies
Speaker 3: there like wrote down in strategies. I don't know why
Speaker 3: these guys write this stuff down all the time, but
Speaker 3: they wrote down, we're gonna make First Nations people the
Speaker 3: face of climate protests because that'll make it vilified climate
Speaker 3: protest in the press.
Speaker 2: Wow. Yeah, Jesus Christ, sorry that one.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So and the very similar thing there too, where it's
Speaker 3: like increasing fines and jail time and you know, yeah.
Speaker 2: It's interesting. Yeah, it's like in the US anyway, like
Speaker 2: if you look at the bleeding edge of Setler colonialism,
Speaker 2: it's it's nearly always fossil fuel extraction, right, like if
Speaker 2: like Oak Flat, the proposed extraction of lithium on tribal lands,
Speaker 2: like a lot of these the nexus of like protest
Speaker 2: and yeah, like colonialism will be these. I guess not
Speaker 2: lithium is in a fossil fuel, but these extractive projects
Speaker 2: on tribal land.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yes, yes, which is why actually the the rights
Speaker 3: of nature stuff is becoming really interesting in tribal courts. So,
Speaker 3: I don't know you guys followed this, but like with
Speaker 3: the Line three protests, the the tribe there, they they
Speaker 3: actually filed a case against the Minnesota I don't know
Speaker 3: department pulled works or something like that, and they they
Speaker 3: were like, look, we have a in their case. It's
Speaker 3: monomen the rights of monomen So monomen is. Oh god,
Speaker 3: I just went out of my mind entirely. It's uh
Speaker 3: wild rice. Sorry, okay. Monomen is the word is the
Speaker 3: Indigenous word for wild rice, and they have rights for
Speaker 3: this rice written into their tribal laws. And so they're saying, look,
Speaker 3: based on our treaties, you are actually violating this law
Speaker 3: and therefore we can we can take you to court
Speaker 3: in tribal court to stop this pipeline. It didn't work
Speaker 3: to stop Line three, but actually the case is still
Speaker 3: making its way through the courts because the Minnesota DPW.
Speaker 3: You tried to say, look, tible court has action over
Speaker 3: us and the state court. It was like, a, yeah
Speaker 3: they do actually, because treaties exist.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: So it's really interesting because now it's the same tribe
Speaker 3: that is potentially impacted by Line five in Michigan and
Speaker 3: they are looking at using the same argument, and it
Speaker 3: could end up actually working there because there's now been
Speaker 3: enough time that you know, it could it could make
Speaker 3: its way to the courts and set a precedent. But anyway, Yeah,
Speaker 3: it's really really really interesting.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's very that's really weirdly similar to the Kumii
Speaker 2: people here in San Diego who are challenging the construction
Speaker 2: or quote unquote repair, which is not what's happening at
Speaker 2: the wool.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's what they all say about the pipelines too.
Speaker 3: It's always repairing an old pipeline, but you look at
Speaker 3: the plan and it's like that's a whole new ass pipeline. Yeah,
Speaker 3: in a different place than it was before.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Yeah, Yeah, they're repairing a three foot fence with
Speaker 2: a thirty foot steel barrier. But yeah, they it cuts
Speaker 2: directly through burial grounds here, and they're repairing it by
Speaker 2: destroying the burial grounds, which again they they've opposed with
Speaker 2: mixed results, I guess, but it's yeah, I guess if
Speaker 2: folks are listening and they're interested, there are a lot
Speaker 2: of places where they can they can help those struggles,
Speaker 2: like different ways to do that, but that there might
Speaker 2: be more effective here than going to the Supreme Court,
Speaker 2: given the Supreme Court's composition.
Speaker 3: I guess, exactly, yeah, exactly, that's why. Yeah, with the
Speaker 3: the tribal court stuff, I think will be interesting to
Speaker 3: watch in the next couple of years to see if
Speaker 3: they're able to to do anything. But you know, tribal
Speaker 3: solomnties all under attack by the Supreme.
Speaker 2: Yes, yeah, yeah, yeah, They're likelihood of resulting in like
Speaker 2: indigenous nations getting ever more fucked by the it's equally
Speaker 2: high as I could having.
Speaker 3: Success, I guess.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Anyway, Sorry, I got really far afield there. The
Speaker 3: counter protest uff is very very very much being driven
Speaker 3: by oil and gas, and there's it just keeps going too.
Speaker 3: I mean every year, there's like, you know, multiple more
Speaker 3: of these laws being proposed and passed. I think we're
Speaker 3: at twenty eights now have passed them, fourteen or fifteen
Speaker 3: have actually implemented them.
Speaker 2: And.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's not not great.
Speaker 5: No.
Speaker 3: I also think, like, you know, you're seeing the expansion
Speaker 3: of the whole eco terrorist and really like come back
Speaker 3: with a vengeance too. I feel like that was something
Speaker 3: that happened in like early posts nine to eleven days
Speaker 3: and is now happening again where it's it's like, I
Speaker 3: don't know, let's expand the definition of rorism to include
Speaker 3: environmental activists and then we can, you know, go after
Speaker 3: them with those charges too. I haven't in cop City too, right.
Speaker 1: Yes, they are in the process, so still doing that. Yeah, great, well, Amy,
Speaker 1: this is all really important you have I'm so we are.
Speaker 1: This is a this is a real meeting of the
Speaker 1: people who are fun at parties sit down and you
Speaker 1: know that dissent has been criminalized.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I don't know, man, I guess I'll have a Manhattan
Speaker 1: like what do you what do you want?
Speaker 2: The last party Robot and I attended together, we we
Speaker 2: saw a car bomb happened.
Speaker 1: So at least that we did see a car bomb happen.
Speaker 2: Yeah, bring positive vibes.
Speaker 3: You're not talking about.
Speaker 1: Monstrative car bomb, you know, Yeah, no, no, no, it
Speaker 1: was an Irish car It would have gotten more people.
Speaker 1: That's a little bit of a little bit of IRA
Speaker 1: humor for the audience. Okay, we should.
Speaker 2: Probably go, I'm making the next slash motion.
Speaker 1: Yeah all right, well, Amy, we thank you so much
Speaker 1: for coming on today, and thank you for continuing to
Speaker 1: put out a podcast that is keep that can, at
Speaker 1: least if people, you know, listen, keep them very updated
Speaker 1: on some of the most important climate related news going
Speaker 1: on today and some of the real like fuckery being
Speaker 1: carried out by the oil and gas industry. Again, the
Speaker 1: podcast is Drilled. Season eight right now is about Exxon
Speaker 1: in Guyana. Amy, you have anything else you wanted to
Speaker 1: say before we we roll out?
Speaker 3: No, that's it. Thanks for having me. This was fun.
Speaker 1: Yeah, thank you so much. Amy, really appreciate it. And
Speaker 1: uh yeah, this has been Robert and James. We should
Speaker 1: probably do something on the Thames at some point. James,
Speaker 1: it'll rhyme. I know it's not pronounced that way. I know,
Speaker 1: this was just me.
Speaker 2: Let's do it anyway.
Speaker 1: We could call it Robert and Jim's on the times.
Speaker 1: You know, there we go.
Speaker 2: Absolutely no.
Speaker 1: Podcast is over.
Speaker 5: It could Happen here as a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 5: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 5: cool zonemedia dot com or check us out on the
Speaker 5: iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Speaker 5: You can find sources for It could Happen Here, updated
Speaker 5: monthly at cool zonemedia dot com slash sources. Thanks for listening.