Eli Explains the Monnett Saga

At dinner during AGU week, Eli was explaining his view of the Monnett saga. I thought it important enough to be written up, and Eli has not only obliged, but dedicated it to me:

Michael Tobis last month asked Eli to explain why the Department of the Interior was going after Charles Monnett. The Kulluk is the short answer, more specifically BOEM wanting to approve Shell’s drilling plans for the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. Email leaks from Monnett were used to tie Shell, BOEM and BSEE up in court, delaying the issuance of permits four years from 2008 to late 2012 and indeed, this was the only ground that at the conclusion of their farcical investigation that the DOI Inspector General cited to reprimand Monnett.

I am most pleased by Eli’s prompt attention to the matter.

I don’t have any way of verifying Eli’s version of events, but it is a heck of a lot more plausible than the entertainingly absurd cover story about polar bears. Either way, as Eli points out, it does raise interesting questions about the environmental bona fides of the current administration.

2 Responses to Eli Explains the Monnett Saga

  1. Susan Anderson says:

    Just wanted to point out this is a sad but important story. While the inimitable Rabbett style is withoutt peer, PEER has the story here as well, which may or may not include uncovered nuggets from the gold rush:
    http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/2013/01/10/alaska-dropped-ball-on-runaway-shell-vessel/

    Another story being revisited is the Sullivan UVa Dragas saga, which I always suspicioned was an attempt to further attack science on climate change:
    http://www.wvtf.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2688:climategate&catid=48:wvtf-news&Itemid=119

    I’m not the clever bunny who found these, I got them from Tenney Naumer who has a great eye for news and a good mind which allows her to understand a wide variety of material:
    http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/
    http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/

  • Comment policy:
    Constructive comments that move the discussion on are always welcome, no matter what line of argumentation they take. Comments that add nothing interesting or which try to derail the ongoing discussion are ruthlessly purged. In doing this, we are not worrying about fairness, balance, etc. All we care about is constructive engagement. Comments from nonmembers must be explicitly approved, while comments from members may on occasion be demoted. Comments which are rejected or demoted, or where part of the article is edited, will be visible in full here
  • Registered users can login to bypass comment moderation

Leave a Reply