Search This Blog

Sunday, March 2, 2025

Businesses sue Hochul on ‘illegal, misguided’ $75B climate law, 'will cause consumer cost spike'

 A coalition of business and trade groups is suing the Hochul administration over a law that will force oil, natural gas and coal companies to pay $75 billion for spewing carbon emissions.

Gov. Kathy Hochul’s administration claimed the law was necessary to combat the companies contributing to climate change for decades — but critics said the extra costs will be passed along to consumers through prices at the pump and heating bills.

“This law is not only illegal and misguided, but it will likely increase the cost of energy, placing an unnecessary burden on New Yorkers and consumers nationwide — especially during a time of already high prices,” Marty Durbin, president of the US Chamber of Commerce’s Global Energy Institute and plaintiff in the case, told The Post.

A coalition of business and trade groups are suing the Hochul administration over a law charging companies for carbon emissions.Darren McGee/ Office of Governor Kathy Hochul

The lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court claims Hochul and the state legislature exceeded their authority by approving the New York Climate Change Superfund Act last year, and asked that it be tossed out as unconstitutional.

00:01
04:43

The plaintiffs also include the New York State Business Council, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Mining Association.

“We’ve always argued that this is bad policy for New York, and we intend to seek reversal through all available avenues,” said Ken Pokalsky, vice president of the NYS Business Council.

The law aims to essentially charge fossil fuel companies for their purported shares of “global, lawful greenhouse gas emissions based on completely unsubstantiated ‘attribution science,'” the plaintiffs claim.

Federal law prohibits New York from imposing liability on fossil fuel energy producers for harms allegedly caused in the Empire State by greenhouse gases emitted outside the state, the lawsuit said.

People holding signs calling on Gov. Hochul to sign the Climate Change Superfund Act during a press conference on the bill on May 26, 2023.Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

The plaintiffs said there’s no way that an estimated 38 energy firms could pay back those costs without raising prices to customers, and some critics wondered whether it could even be collected from foreign-owned companies.

“New York seeks to reach back decades in time and impose significant monetary penalties on those producers (operating almost completely outside the State), potentially subjecting other States and consumers to increased energy costs, while reaping the financial benefits to pay for ‘climate change adaptive infrastructure,'” the suit claimed.

It’s the second lawsuit filed against the law. Twenty two states, led by West Virginia, also filed a challenge last month.

An analysis conducted for the bill’s sponsors state Sen. Liz Krueger (D-Manhattan) and Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz (D-Bronx) last year showed foreign-owned and American companies together would pay about $3 billion a year over 25 years.

The oil giant Saudi Aramco of Saudi Arabia could be slapped with the largest annual assessment of any company — $640 million a year — for emitting 31,269 million tons of greenhouse gases from 2000 to 2020.

Aramco — formally known as the Saudi Arabian Oil Co. — is owned by the Saudi Royal family.

The state-owned Mexican oil firm Petróleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, emitted 9,512 tons of CO2 and could face an $193 million assessment for generating 9,512 million tons of greenhouse gases.

Russia’s Lukoil could be assessed with a $100 million yearly fee for spewing 4,912 millions of CO2.

The 38 companies identified as carbon polluters include American petro giants Exxon and Chevron as well as Shell and BP in the UK, Total Energies IES in France, Petrobras in Brazil, BHP in Australia, Glencore in Switzerland, Equinor in Norway and ENI in Italy.

A box of petitions for the Climate Change Superfund Act in Manhattan on Sept. 24, 2024.LightRocket via Getty Images

Hochul defended the law, which would begin collecting funds in 2028 and be used to upgrade infrastructure impacted by extreme weather or install more energy efficient cooling and heating systems in buildings.

“Governor Hochul proudly signed the Climate Superfund Act because she believes corporate polluters should pay for the damage done to our environment—not everyday New Yorkers,” said spokesman Paul DeMichele.

“We look forward to defending this landmark legislation in court and defeating Big Oil once again.”

A series of green energy laws going into effect that seek to ween New York’s off fossil fuels and transition toward emissions free alternatives is causing a backlash over concerns that the green push will trigger higher energy costs.

A Hochul administration green rule requiring that 35% of 2026 model cars sold in the state to be “emissions free” is an unrealistic bust, auto dealers claim.

The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019 requires the state and its energy producers and consumers to move away from fossil fuels by slashing gas emissions by 40% by 2030 with the goal of achieving 100% zero-carbon-emission electricity by 2040.

Gov. Kathy Hochul and the Democratic-led legislature have also banned gas stoves, furnaces and propane heating in new buildings. In December, Hochul extended the state’s fracking ban by prohibiting a new technique to use carbon dioxide to extract natural gas.

The gripes come amid outrage over Con Edison’s request to jack up electric bills by 11.4% and send gas bills soaring 13.3% for its 3.6 million customers.

Hochul has said she opposed the hikes even though the utility giant partially blamed the need for higher rates on the high cost of building clean energy infrastructure to comply with the state climate law.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/02/us-news/ny-gov-kathy-hochul-sued-over-75b-climate-law/

US Gives Israel Green Light To Stay In Lebanon 'Indefinitely'

 by Jason Ditz via AntiWar.com,

Israel’s decision to continue to occupy territory in southern Lebanon beyond the prior February 18 deadline came without a lot of official comment from the US. According to recent comments of Israeli DM Israel Katz, however, the US gave them a "green light" to remain militarily in Lebanon indefinitely.

Israeli media was reporting around the deadline that the US was backing the continued occupation of five surveillance posts inside southern Lebanon. The US never directly confirmed that, however, and that Israel remains in Lebanon just came and went without official US comment.

Via AP/Al Jazeera

The ceasefire ending the Israeli invasion of Lebanon was meant to provide a 60-day window for Israeli withdrawal, which would’ve ended January 26. The US guaranteed that Israel would be out by then, but then later endorsed extending the deadline to February 18. They similarly talked about February 18 being a firm deadline that would not be extended, but then stopped talking about it at all beyond that.

Israel started building the hilltop surveillance posts before the February 18 deadline, and Israeli FM Gideon Sa’ar said that the "strategic high points" would be necessary to retain temporarily, until the Lebanese Army has sufficient control of the south.

The temporary nature of those posts seems to be at considerable doubt from Katz’s comments. He no longer presented this as anything to do with Lebanese Army control of the area, and just maintains that it is "not time-dependent." It appears Israel will be staying as long as it wants, and the US is comfortable with that idea.

Lebanon is not so keen on the continued occupation, as it’s condemned Israel staying in the area and urged the US and France, the initial guarantors of the ceasefire, to do something about it. France proposed sending its own troops to replace the Israelis, but Israel rejected that.

Adding to the Lebanese disquiet about Israel’s surveillance-focused occupation, the Lebanese Army announced that it had found a number of hidden surveillance devices in southern Lebanon since Israeli troops left the populated areas. Sensors and cameras were reportedly found hidden in trees and among rocks around the area.

Map of Israel Lebanon border. Green circles indicate the five outposts Israel continues to occupy.

In practice, the tree-cameras are probably less of a problem than the actual Israeli ground troops still in Lebanese territory for surveillance purposes. Yet even those cameras reflect a reality where getting Israel militarily out of Lebanon is only the first step toward ending the surveillance operation.

US Treasury will not enforce anti-money laundering law as burdens low risk entities

 The U.S. Treasury Department said on Sunday it would not enforce an anti-money laundering law that obliges millions of business entities to disclose the identities of their real beneficial owners.

The Trump administration has opposed the Biden-era Corporate Transparency Act on the grounds that it is a burden on low-risk entities. The act has faced repeated legal challenges.

In a statement, the Treasury Department said it would not enforce any penalties under the act against U.S. citizens or domestic reporting companies.

"Treasury takes this step in the interest of supporting hard-working American taxpayers and small businesses," it said, adding that it intended to issue a rule to narrow the scope of the act to foreign reporting companies.

The measure's supporters say it was designed to address the growing popularity of the United States as a venue for criminals to launder illicit funds.

https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2025-03-02/us-treasury-department-says-it-will-not-enforce-anti-money-laundering-law


Iran Sacks Economy Minister As US Sanctions Persist, Crisis Worsens

 Via The Cradle

Iran’s Minister of Economy Abdolnaser Hemmati was impeached on Sunday after the Iranian parliament gave a vote of no confidence, coming as Tehran faces an economic crisis and continued sanctions from the west

Hemmati appeared before parliament on Sunday to address mounting complaints from lawmakers over his ministry’s performance amid the Islamic Republic’s worsening economic crisis. 

Iran’s Minister of Economy Abdolnaser Hemmati, via AFP

The motion to dismiss the minister received 182 votes in favor. Eighty-nine voted against the motion, and one abstained. 

Hemmati gave a speech during the open session, defending his ministry’s policies but welcoming the call for his impeachment as part of the democratic process. 

"In 2018, the country’s economic conditions were much more problematic than they are now, but we stood firm and withstood the maximum pressure," he said, adding that it is "the right of the people’s representatives" and that "Impeachment is a manifestation of political progress and will lead to greater empathy, but they are wrong about my lack of responsiveness to problems."

"The claim that the government has increased the exchange rate is not true," he asserted, adding that US President Donald Trump has "declared economic war on us."

President Masoud Pezeshkian attended the session in defense of his minister, stressing that Iran’s economic issues date back years and replacing a single official will not remedy the crisis. 

"Can one person alone decide and implement economic measures, and then we blame him for all the errors and say that if he leaves, the problems will be solved? The only way to overcome problems is through unity and empathy," the president said. 

Iran’s currency has fallen to a record low against the US dollar recently, resulting in a surge in prices for local products and an increased demand for gold. 

Since entering office in January, Trump has renewed his “maximum pressure” policy of sanctions against Iran, which began during his first term. Trump has particularly cracked down hard on Iranian oil shipments. Tehran has blasted Washington for expressing a willingness to hold nuclear negotiations and, at the same time, resuming a full-fledged economic war against the country. 

Pezeshkian and other Iranian officials say they will not negotiate under pressure. On Saturday, Pezeshkian said that "engagement, trade, and cooperation with regional nations, when executed effectively and in conjunction with regional organizations such as the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), the BRICS group, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), will render US sanctions ineffective, and we will confront these challenges with strength, dignity, and honor."

"If we come together, we can create the necessary conditions to solve problems alongside producers, industrialists, managers, and the talented individuals in our country," he added. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/iran-sacks-economy-minister-us-sanctions-persist-crisis-worsens

Out in the 'hood, they're pretty impressed with how Trump dealt with Zelensky

 


President Trump cut his teeth in the tough world of New York real estate, dealing with mobsters, unions, and street toughs. He continuously negotiated advantageous deals with them as he built his successful business there because if he couldn't do that, they would have eaten him alive.

That may explain why we are seeing responses like these from streetwise ghetto-savvy black people, who were pretty impressed with his performance with Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday, throwing him out of the White House when he started challenging and insulting them instead of signing the deal to end Ukraine's war that he had told them he would be coming to sign.

Here is a thread of responses:

Some observations are very insightful, such as how Trump challenged Zelensky on his insulting choice of clothing, a convention in the ghetto:

Pay attention to how much he dragged Zelensky on his outfit. That’s the exact same way people get clowned in the hood for their outfits, lol.

Or how habitual borrowers act from ghetto life:


This why you can't borrow money from people. They trynna big bro him.

They used colorful analogies taken from street-savvy life in the boroughs and in upper Manhattan:

Zelensky was bullshitting, Trump invited him to the dice game, this nigga tried to use his own dice and when Trump said no he tried setting the mfs down instead of rolling, he's lucky Trump didn't pull out the strap.

And of course, brought up some gangsta life analogies:

JD putting Zelensky in his place while Trump sat back felt like a Lion letting his cub finish off the antelope

It's a hilarious reading of Trump's performance by the street-savvy people in the 'hood, recognizing the tough dynamics of power and President Trump's mastery of it as the media elites, wringing their hands, and Europe's elites, plotting and bloviating, cannot. If Zelensky couldn't read the room with Trump in the White House, these outsiders had no problem with it, and they liked what they saw.

While it is anecdotal, that there were quite a few examples of it on social media suggests that it could be a trend.

If so, prepare to see President Trump's poll numbers go up as such sentiment is probably much farther, wider, and deeper than what might be supposed.

Enjoy!

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/03/out_in_the_hood_they_re_pretty_impressed_with_how_trump_dealt_with_zelensky.html

Xolair treats multi-food allergy better than oral immunotherapy, study finds

 A clinical trial has found that the medication omalizumab, marketed as Xolair, treated multi-food allergy more effectively than oral immunotherapy (OIT) in people with allergic reactions to very small amounts of common food allergens

OIT, the most common approach to treating food allergy in the United States, involves eating gradually increasing doses of a food allergen to reduce the allergic response to it.

Of the study participants who received an extended course of , 36% could tolerate 2 grams or more of peanut protein, or about eight peanuts, and two other food allergens by the end of the treatment period, but only 19% of participants who received multi-food OIT could do so.

Researchers attributed this difference primarily to the high rate of  and other intolerable side effects among the participants who received OIT, leading a quarter of them to discontinue treatment. When the participants who discontinued therapy were excluded from the analysis, however, the same proportion of each group could tolerate at least 2 grams of all three food allergens.

The findings were published in an online supplement to The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and presented at the 2025 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology/World Allergy Organization Joint Congress in San Diego on Sunday, March 2, 2025.

"People with highly sensitive multi-food allergy previously had only one treatment option—oral immunotherapy—for reducing their allergic response to moderate amounts of those foods," said Jeanne Marrazzo, M.D., M.P.H., director of NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the study's funder and regulatory sponsor.

"This study shows that omalizumab is a good alternative because most people tolerate it very well. Oral immunotherapy remains an effective option if treatment-related adverse effects are not an issue."

Omalizumab works by binding to the allergy-causing antibody called immunoglobulin E in the blood and preventing it from arming key immune cells responsible for allergic reactions. This renders these cells much less sensitive to stimulation by any allergen.

The current study is the second stage of a landmark clinical trial that found a 16-week course of omalizumab increased the amount of peanut, tree nuts, egg, milk and wheat that multi-food allergic children as young as 1 year could consume without an allergic reaction. This next stage of the trial was designed to directly compare omalizumab with OIT for the first time.

At 10 locations across the United States, the study team enrolled 177 children and adolescents aged 1 to 17 years and three adults aged 18 to 55 years, all with confirmed allergy to less than half a peanut and similarly small amounts of at least two other common foods among milk, egg, cashew, wheat, hazelnut or walnut. After completing the first stage of the trial, 117 individuals entered the second stage of the trial.

Upon beginning Stage 2, all participants received injections of omalizumab for eight weeks. Then the participants were randomly divided in half and placed into one of two groups. Group A received omalizumab injections and multi-allergen OIT for eight weeks, while group B received omalizumab injections and placebo OIT for eight weeks.

Subsequently, group A received placebo injections and multi-allergen OIT for 44 weeks, while group B continued to receive omalizumab injections and placebo OIT for 44 weeks. Neither the participants nor the investigators knew who was in which treatment group.

Group A received omalizumab before and during their early months of OIT because data from prior studies suggested that pretreatment with the medication would significantly augment the safety of OIT, and continuing omalizumab during the early months of OIT would provide additional benefit.

During the study treatment period, 29 of 59 participants in group A discontinued therapy: 15 due to allergic reactions—some severe—or other intolerable symptoms of OIT, and 14 for other reasons, including aversion to the study foods or the burden of participating in the trial.

No participants in group B had allergic reactions or other side effects from omalizumab that led them to discontinue therapy, but seven participants in group B left the study mainly due to the burden of participating in it. In all, 30 of the original 59 members of group A (51%) and 51 of the original 58 members of group B (88%) completed treatment.

After the study treatment period, the clinical trial team tested whether the participants who completed therapy could eat at least 2 grams of  and their two other study foods without an allergic reaction.

Twenty-one of the original 58 participants in group B, or 36%, could tolerate at least 2 grams of all three foods, while only 11 of the original 59 participants in group A (the OIT-treated group), or 19%, could do so. When evaluating only the participants who completed therapy, however, the same proportion of each group could tolerate at least 2 grams of all three foods.

These results showed that omalizumab was more effective than OIT at treating multi- in people who originally had a very low tolerance to common food allergens. Investigators attributed this outcome mainly to the high rate of allergic reactions and other side effects leading to treatment discontinuation among the OIT-treated participants, despite receiving omalizumab before and during the early months of therapy.

The trial is called "Omalizumab as Monotherapy and as Adjunct Therapy to Multi-Allergen OIT in Food Allergic Children and Adults," or OUtMATCH.

Further information about the OUtMATCH trial is available at ClinicalTrials.gov under study identifier NCT03881696.

More information: Robert Wood et al, Treatment of Multi-Food Allergy with Omalizumab Compared to Omalizumab-Facilitated Multi-Allergen OIT, Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (2025). DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2024.12.1022


https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-02-omalizumab-multi-food-allergy-oral.html