

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

"The U.S. has no business rolling back any kind of protection from the world's dirtiest oil at a time when we're supposed to be making progress on climate," Eddie Scher of the Sierra Club told Common Dreams.
Questioned before the House Ways and Means Committee in late July, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman railed against a proposed change to the EU Fuel Quality Directive that requires a 6 percent reduction in gas and diesel emissions by 2020. The ammendment under question would label bitumen--oil extracted from tar sands--as a high-emissions diesel, a rating that would 'discourage' but not prevent EU fuel suppliers from buying tar sands oil.
Environmental groups say that the regulation that Froman is attempting to gut is already grossly insufficient. "The regulation is not really doing anything," Scott Parkin of Rainforest Action Network told Common Dreams. "It's just saying tar sands should be called something different. We are saying that tar sands need to stay in the ground. Period."
Yet, Froman charges this so-called regulation goes too far. When Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) claimed the proposed regulations are "discriminatory, environmentally unjustified and could constitute a barrier to U.S.-EU trade," Froman stated, "I share your concerns."
"I have raised these issues with senior Commission officials on several occasions, including in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP)," he wrote in a letter to the House Ways and Means Committee. "We continue to press the Commission to take the views of stakeholders, including U.S. refiners, under considerations as they finalize these amendments."
Obama's trade official is publicly advocating for the tar sands oil industry despite the president's June speech in which he declared he would cut carbon emissions and only approve the Keystone XL pipeline if it "does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution."
Green groups, who say the oil pipeline would increase carbon emissions by definition, are organizing a mounting campaign against the Keystone XL pipeline and tar sands extraction. So far, 75,000 people have pledged to commit civil disobedience if the president approves the pipeline.


_____________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |

"The U.S. has no business rolling back any kind of protection from the world's dirtiest oil at a time when we're supposed to be making progress on climate," Eddie Scher of the Sierra Club told Common Dreams.
Questioned before the House Ways and Means Committee in late July, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman railed against a proposed change to the EU Fuel Quality Directive that requires a 6 percent reduction in gas and diesel emissions by 2020. The ammendment under question would label bitumen--oil extracted from tar sands--as a high-emissions diesel, a rating that would 'discourage' but not prevent EU fuel suppliers from buying tar sands oil.
Environmental groups say that the regulation that Froman is attempting to gut is already grossly insufficient. "The regulation is not really doing anything," Scott Parkin of Rainforest Action Network told Common Dreams. "It's just saying tar sands should be called something different. We are saying that tar sands need to stay in the ground. Period."
Yet, Froman charges this so-called regulation goes too far. When Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) claimed the proposed regulations are "discriminatory, environmentally unjustified and could constitute a barrier to U.S.-EU trade," Froman stated, "I share your concerns."
"I have raised these issues with senior Commission officials on several occasions, including in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP)," he wrote in a letter to the House Ways and Means Committee. "We continue to press the Commission to take the views of stakeholders, including U.S. refiners, under considerations as they finalize these amendments."
Obama's trade official is publicly advocating for the tar sands oil industry despite the president's June speech in which he declared he would cut carbon emissions and only approve the Keystone XL pipeline if it "does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution."
Green groups, who say the oil pipeline would increase carbon emissions by definition, are organizing a mounting campaign against the Keystone XL pipeline and tar sands extraction. So far, 75,000 people have pledged to commit civil disobedience if the president approves the pipeline.


_____________________

"The U.S. has no business rolling back any kind of protection from the world's dirtiest oil at a time when we're supposed to be making progress on climate," Eddie Scher of the Sierra Club told Common Dreams.
Questioned before the House Ways and Means Committee in late July, U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman railed against a proposed change to the EU Fuel Quality Directive that requires a 6 percent reduction in gas and diesel emissions by 2020. The ammendment under question would label bitumen--oil extracted from tar sands--as a high-emissions diesel, a rating that would 'discourage' but not prevent EU fuel suppliers from buying tar sands oil.
Environmental groups say that the regulation that Froman is attempting to gut is already grossly insufficient. "The regulation is not really doing anything," Scott Parkin of Rainforest Action Network told Common Dreams. "It's just saying tar sands should be called something different. We are saying that tar sands need to stay in the ground. Period."
Yet, Froman charges this so-called regulation goes too far. When Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas) claimed the proposed regulations are "discriminatory, environmentally unjustified and could constitute a barrier to U.S.-EU trade," Froman stated, "I share your concerns."
"I have raised these issues with senior Commission officials on several occasions, including in the context of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP)," he wrote in a letter to the House Ways and Means Committee. "We continue to press the Commission to take the views of stakeholders, including U.S. refiners, under considerations as they finalize these amendments."
Obama's trade official is publicly advocating for the tar sands oil industry despite the president's June speech in which he declared he would cut carbon emissions and only approve the Keystone XL pipeline if it "does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution."
Green groups, who say the oil pipeline would increase carbon emissions by definition, are organizing a mounting campaign against the Keystone XL pipeline and tar sands extraction. So far, 75,000 people have pledged to commit civil disobedience if the president approves the pipeline.


_____________________