Tennessee Sues BlackRock for Misleading Investors re Aggressive ESG
BlackRock is the largest investment firm in the world, with around $9 trillion of investments under management. Larry Fink, the CEO of BlackRock, has pushed the so-called ESG (environment, social, governance) agenda for years. What the left and people like Fink mean by ESG is don’t invest in or use fossil fuel energy (E), everything is racist (S), and the government is always right when Democrats are in charge (G). Fink said earlier this year he would stop using the ESG term, although he continues to push the ESG agenda of divesting from fossil fuel companies (see Unrepentant BlackRock Won’t Use ESG Term, Still Forces Divestment). A number of states and even Republicans in Congress have pushed back against BlackRock’s ESG agenda, causing it to lose money. Now the company has a new concern: The State of Tennessee is suing BlackRock for violating consumer protection laws.
Read More “Tennessee Sues BlackRock for Misleading Investors re Aggressive ESG”



Williams is a powerhouse pipeline company. Williams operates more than 33,000 miles of pipelines in the U.S. and flows approximately one-third of the natural gas used in our country through those pipelines. Massive! The CEO of Williams, Alan Armstrong, is (or was) in Dubai for the United Nations COP28 climate meeting. He was there to preach the gospel of natural gas as the best way, the near-term way, to lower carbon dioxide emissions across the planet. He has proof to back up his claims. The U.S. is the only major country on earth to lower CO2 emissions since 2005. How? By switching from coal to natural gas for power generation.
In November 2021, Northeast Natural Energy (NNE), a West Virginia driller, announced all of its gas produced in West Virginia had achieved Equitable Origin’s EO100™ Standard for Responsible Energy Development (see
Almost every major (and most minor) drillers in the Marcellus/Utica have, over the past couple of years, signed on to one or more of the responsible gas certification authorities. Just yesterday, we told you that PennEnergy Resources had its full operations certified by MiQ, the second such certification the company has sought and received (see 
The 28th U.N. Conference of the Parties, or COP28, gets underway today in Dubai. Representatives from most of the world’s countries will be there to party, get drunk, and pretend to care about the Big Lie that mankind is somehow destroying the planet by burning fossil fuels. With hypocrites confabbing in Dubai, it’s the perfect time to discuss the DECREASE in fugitive methane emissions across every major shale basin in the United States, including the Marcellus/Utica. Yes, even though shale drilling and production have gone UP over the past five years, fugitive methane emissions have gone DOWN. No other country can make the same claim, yet the COP28 hypocrites (including John Kerry) will renew their shrill calls to shut down U.S. shale drilling and fossil energy.
In August, MDN brought you the good news that the S&P (Standard & Poor’s) credit rating agency, called S&P Global Rating (the largest of the Big Three credit-rating agencies), had dumped its system of numerically ranking corporate borrowers on their ESG risk on a scale of 1 to 5 — just two years after implementing it (see 
We’ve written plenty about so-called certified natural gas, which is “responsibly produced” (as opposed to irresponsibly produced?) gas. The way a driller proves the gas they are selling is certified as responsible is to use a third-party verification vendor — typically either Project Canary or MiQ (see
Yesterday, the Pennsylvania Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee held an informational briefing on Project Canary, a company that measures, analyzes, and reports on methane emissions from natural gas production and distribution infrastructure. Many Marcellus/Utica drillers use Project Canary’s services in their programs to produce “responsibly sourced gas” (RSG). It appears the aim of the session was to bring PA State Senators up-to-speed on Project Canary and the larger issue of cutting back on fugitive methane emissions. Companies that track and reduce methane can charge more for their gas, so the theory goes. As for whether or not that is happening (are they getting more money for their gas?), it is an open question.