Husky/Cenovus must stop using Hydrogen Flouride

In 2018, the Twin Ports were lucky. The Superior Refinery explosion made national news, but the damage could have been far worse. If the Hydrogen Fluoride (HF) tank ruptured, 180,000 people within 25 miles of the Twin Ports region could have been affected. HF is a fast-acting acid, most commonly used in refining high-octane gasoline. HF causes deep, severe burns, with exposure occurring through both skin contact and inhalation. This chemical can permanently damage our eyes, throat, skin, nose, bones and respiratory system. We are opposed to the use of Hydrogen Fluoride at the Superior Refinery. It is past time to invest in technologies that do not require evacuation plans.

Four years have passed and we’re right back where we started – with a refinery whose owners are choosing to use Hydrogen Fluoride in an urban area despite the life-threatening risks. Our local leaders and the Chemical Safety Board asked the EPA to research “the viability of [using] inherently safer alkylation technologies in petroleum refineries” such as ionikylation. Instead of embracing this newer technology that would truly prioritize public safety, Husky/Cenovus is choosing to double down on toxic Hydrogen Fluoride.

We demand that Husky/Cenovus discontinue their plans to operate the Superior Refinery using Hydrogen Fluoride, and we urge the EPA to pause construction until the Chemical Safety Board completes its investigation into the causes of the explosion.

Honor the Earth stands with these Twin Ports Community members:

Adam Ritscher, Rene Ann Goodrich, Sara Thompson, John McCormick and Kathryn McKenzie, Superior; Dorothy Wolden, Douglas County; Inese Holte, Sophia Langr, Angela Krick and Dorie Reisenweber, Duluth.

Stain remover needed

Recent Trumplican/Qanon/Fux Noise writer? {regurgitator/Fux Noise Echo chamber} spews tried and untrue talking points. April 22 issue. The suggestion of Ex-Lax is 2 years too late.
The ongoing {since the 2020 election} of the hunt for Hunter Biden – for legitimately earning money working for Burisma. Unlike the trump grifters – Jared Kushner, $2B from Saudi prince, Don jr., Eric and Ivanka following the lead of their corrupt/lawless father with; fraudulent loans, taxes, investments, pilfering and using campaign funds illegally.

“Fraudulent election, dead people voting and suspect voting machines” All ‘Big Lie’ proven falsehoods
‘Hunters laptop’ is the new ‘Hilary Clinton/emails/Benghazi’ that has gone on for way too long. Coincidentally, Hilary had the guts, courage, decency and patriotism to sit for 11 hours of kangaroo-court over the Benghazi incident.

Which brings to mind – where are the pussyfied Cult members for the Jan. 6 hearings? Absent, still humping trump’s leg.

Joe Biden was handed; a totally mishandled pandemic, broken alliances, corruption, give aways to the rich and total seditious behavior by the twice impeached previous occupant. Plus trying to clean up the stains left in the White House. Ex-Lax would not work. What was needed was, bleach, Ajax, carpet cleaner and stain remover.

Any money Biden wants to spend will benefit average Americans with jobs and security unlike the Cults massive give away to the already rich. But the obstructionist mob would never vote for anything benefitting common people.

“Biden Mafia” is laughable when we all know about the Mob Boss residing in Mar a Lardo. Here are some suggested authors for those who can read and comprehend: James Comey, Peter Strzok, Mary Trump, Robert Woodward, 2 books by Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker, Spencer Ackerman, Adam Schiff and many others. I am a reader.

As a patriotic American {served in the Marine Corps} and voracious reader I highly recommend everyone read The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by William Shirer. This will give readers a clearer understanding of what trumplicans want for this country – A Fascist Dictator.

William Soderlind
Duluth, Minnesota

College loan debt, tuition and property tax reductions needed

Republican legislators and their friends say that Governor Tim Waltz and Minnesota Legislature should give the surplus back to “overtaxed Minnesotans.” I am not in the Minnesota Legislature any longer, but I follow what is going on in St. Paul. They have not increased taxes. State of Minnesota has a surplus because of good economy and good management. During my tenure in office income tax was decreased by $5 billion; and former Governor Jesse Ventura and legislators gave away a $5 billion surplus during his tenure.      

Since those unwise years, the state has had shortages and could not fund education and local governments. College graduates owe millions of dollars for tuition loans and are not able to buy homes et cetera. Cities, counties and school districts are not getting enough local government aid and are increasing regressive property taxes on our home and businesses. 

Let us contact our legislators and governor and ask them to use part of the surplus for college loan debt, tuition and property tax reduction.

Mike Jaros, an extinguished politician
   
Are Dems trying to take away our guns?
 
The research paper referenced by Jon Eggleston in the April 14 Reader, "The Influence of Mass Shootings on Gun Policy,"  is not a study that should be used to either promote or discredit, the safety of guns. It is a study designed to explore the impact that mass shootings have on public policy, such as gun regulations that are proposed or passed by Congress, So it is a very narrow study which excludes the immense numbers of deaths and injuries resulting from gun usage in general. Why? Because mass shootings, (no matter how they’re defined) actually kill far less people than do guns used by individuals for say, robbery or gang warfare, resulting in far greater numbers of deaths? So, In this way the study discussed by Eggleston draws on information about mass shootings and ignores the effects of guns used in many conventional gun crimes or murders.

The (National Institute of Justice), using the FBI’s definition of mass shootings (shootings that result in at least four deaths) concluded that between 1966 and 2019, the number of mass shootings that have occurred are 167. Yet, theviolenceproject.org found that of these 167 shootings, 29% occurred during the last 5 years. Furthermore, more than half occurred after 2000, and of those, 33% occurred after 2010! In addition, 16 of the 20 deadliest mass shootings in any one year, include nine in 2018, and seven in both 1999 and 2017. Also, between 1966 and 2019 the average number of mass shooting deaths was 51! However, the study referenced by Jon Eggleston does not focus on the alarming increase in mass shootings. It focuses on how mass shootings effect public policy. To do this it examines legislative bills that are introduced in Congress and found that after mass shootings, the number of  bills considered by Congress increases, while in years with very few mass shootings, gun regulations are loosened – which is no big surprise!

 Another similar study, (The Impact of Firearm Surveillance on Gun Policy: Regression Discontinuity Analysis) uses sophisticated research methods to test and quantify policies that affect gun injuries or deaths, and, in part, examines the results of The Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which Democrats passed into law between 1994 and 2004. After using tons of data and statistical analysis this is what they decided – that, if there were a continuing of the Federal Assault weapons Ban through 2019, their models predicted that 30 public mass shootings would’ve been prevented, and that the assault weapons ban, likely averted 11 public mass shooting between 1995 and 2004!

Of course the absurdity of Eggleston’s arguments lies in the fact that they use the much larger number of gun deaths in general, to minimize the effects of all gun regulations – -implying that mass shootings are not so important – because after all, gang warfare, armed robbery and crimes of passion are way more numerous! However, if we want to end gun violence, any disregard for less heinous shootings will also need to be faced – instead of being relegated to an inconvenient truth graveyard. No “left wing radicals” really want to “take away our guns!” Most gun control advocates are primarily asking for better background checks and legal limits regarding large capacity magazines! Sadly, as far as Republican voices of reason go, please watch this Youtube video.

Peter W. Johnson
Superior, Wisconsin