LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for PORTSIDE Archives


PORTSIDE Archives

PORTSIDE Archives


PORTSIDE@LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PORTSIDE Home

PORTSIDE Home

PORTSIDE  August 2010, Week 2

PORTSIDE August 2010, Week 2

Subject:

Paying Oil's True Costs - The Gulf at the Gas Station

From:

[log in to unmask]

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 12 Aug 2010 19:23:45 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (459 lines)

The Gulf at the Gas Station 
Can We Calculate the True Cost of Our Dependence on Oil?

By Mark Engler

TomDispatch

August 12, 2010

http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175284/

This might be an opportune time to make a disclosure: I am a
BP shareholder. Admittedly, I've never attended the
company's annual meeting, and if I did, I would have very
little weight to throw around.

I own two shares of BP stock. I received my stake in the
company as a Christmas gift in 1989, when I was 14 years
old. The previous June, I had taken a "summer enrichment"
course in the Des Moines public schools, designed as an
introduction to the world of business. The teacher gave each
of us in the class a modest hypothetical budget to invest in
the stock market.

Earnest young capitalists, we made our picks and then
followed the quotes in the morning paper. I invested heavily
in Amoco and finished the summer feeling that my portfolio
had done quite well. As a result, my younger brother decided
that I should receive a real piece of the enterprise that
was once John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil. He conspired
with my mom to get me an Amoco share for the holidays.

I've watched the oil industry as an interested party ever
since. In 1998, my Amoco stock split, turning my one share
into two. Then, a few months later, the company was acquired
by BP. This "oil mega-merger," as the BBC called it, gave me
a stake in yet another energy titan. It also allowed the
combined corporation to shed 6,000 jobs, prompting its new
chief executive, Sir John Browne of BP, to confidently
assure the press that "he hoped the merger will increase
pre-tax profits of the two partners by 'at least' two
billion dollars by the end of 2000."

The merger proved profitable indeed. Over time, the price of
my stock nearly doubled. I received dividends every three
months, usually of around 60 cents per share. And by the
mid-2000s, BP was making some $20 billion per year in
profits. The numbers looked good.

Of course, these are not the only numbers to consider. In
fact, in the wake of BP's disaster in the Gulf of Mexico,
they don't seem like the right numbers at all. It's time for
a different accounting: What has that catastrophic spill
cost our society? What price do we pay for our dependence on
oil? How do we measure these things?

Costs of Business

When I first began receiving Amoco's annual reports, they
featured photos that celebrated robust industrial
capabilities; I recall multicolored sunsets behind fields of
horsehead oil pumps in Texas. These days, there's still some
of that, but the reports tend to have more shots of solar
panels, white windmills, and smiling school children (our
future). Someone looking at the annual review the company
sent me in 2001, for instance, might have been fooled by the
photos of lush, palm- heavy landscapes in Indonesia,
California, and Trinidad into thinking that it was a mailing
from Conservation International.

Such changes in public relations were born of tragedy. Back
in 1989, not three months before my summer business class,
the Exxon Valdez collided with the Bligh reef in Alaska's
Prince William Sound, breaching its hull. Even according to
conservative estimates, it spilled more than 10 million
gallons of oil and contaminated more than 1,200 miles of
ecologically sensitive coastline. For years afterwards, we
saw Exxon deal with the fallout of the catastrophe.

However many thousands of boats and booms the company
deployed, it only managed to recover about 8% of the oil
released. The rest evaporated, coated beaches, or sank to
the bottom of the sea. The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee
Council estimates that 250,000 seabirds, 2,800 sea otters,
300 harbor seals, 250 bald eagles, up to 22 killer whales,
and billions of salmon and herring eggs were killed by the
spill. Two decades later, some 16,000 gallons of leftover
oil still poison wildlife in the Prince William Sound.

The cost to the planet was steep. The cost to Exxon could
have been severe as well. While the company claims that it
spent $2.1 billion on its clean-up efforts, it might have
had to pay many times that in fines and lawsuit settlements.
The government initially threatened $5 billion in criminal
penalties, and in 1994 a federal jury ordered the company to
pay $5.2 billion in punitive damages to Alaskans who had
filed a class- action lawsuit. For a time, things at Exxon
looked grim.

Although these were the worries of a rival corporation,
Amoco investors did get a taste of what Exxon was
experiencing. In 1990, after a dozen years of litigation, a
federal judge in Chicago ordered my company to pay $132
million in damages to the French government and other
parties. They had all been harmed 12 years earlier when the
Amoco Cadiz ran aground off the coast of Brittany, releasing
68 million gallons of oil. At the time, it was the largest
tanker spill ever. It killed millions of sea urchins and
mollusks, thousands of tons of oysters, and almost 20,000
birds.

In terms of the overall business, however, the judgment was
only a blip on Amoco's radar screen. In the end, Exxon never
made any $10 billion payout for its disaster either. The
first Bush administration allowed the company to plead
guilty to a small number of charges and settled for
penalties and fines of around $1 billion. The judge who
ultimately approved the settlement had earlier worried that
the amount was too low: "I'm afraid these fines send the
wrong message," he said, "and suggest that spills are a cost
of business that can be absorbed."

It was a prescient concern, especially given the resolution
of the class-action suit. In that arena, Exxon's lawyers
proved patient and skilled. They held up the case in court
for years until, in 2008, nearly two decades after the
spill, the Supreme Court ruled that damages paid by the
company would be limited to an exceptionally absorbable
$507.5 million.

Emerging Unscathed

In the months during which the well under BP's Deepwater
Horizon freely spewed crude into the Gulf of Mexico, it
released 4.9 million barrels of oil, or 205.8 million
gallons, according to a government panel tasked with
measuring the spill. Depending on what estimates you use for
the earlier disaster, this amounts to roughly 20 times as
much oil as the Exxon Valdez released. In negotiations with
the Obama administration, BP agreed to put $20 billion into
a fund for cleanup. It has also indicated that it will pay
"all legitimate claims" related to the disaster.

Despite such vows, how much of the final cost BP will
actually end up paying is unclear. Spill-related damages and
lost economic activity could amount to tens of billions of
dollars more than what BP is currently setting aside. An
Oxford Economics study predicts that costs to the tourism
industry alone could exceed $22 billion. Damage to the
natural environment, much of it potentially unseen, is
almost impossible to quantify.

In the case of the Valdez spill, according to the Associated
Press, "the state priced each seagull at $167, eagles at
$22,000, harbor seals at $700, and killer whales at
$300,000." Such an effort could be replicated for the Gulf.
Yet a price tag of $167 per seagull seems tragically
inadequate as a means of accounting for a destroyed
population of birds, and it doesn't begin to account for
species that may seem less significant to us, but could be
crucial to the ecosystem.

Now-deposed BP executive Tony Hayward repeatedly vowed to
Gulf residents that the company would "make this right."
Likewise, in 1989, after the Valdez ran aground, Don
Cornett, Exxon's top official in Alaska, told locals
dependent on the ruined fishing industry, "We will do
whatever it takes to keep you whole. We do business
straight." Of course, that was before Exxon went on to
pursue years of dogged litigation to limit its liability.

Once the public furor dies down, as already seems to be
happening, BP will have financial incentive to do the same.
Though the price of my stock took a hit, plummeting from
around $60 per share in early April -- before anyone had
heard of the Deepwater Horizon -- to a low of $27 per share
in late June, it has already rallied to above $40 as of this
writing. Some analysts are betting that BP, like Exxon, will
contain the cost of its spill, and then continue about its
business in much the same manner it did before. As analyst
Antonia Juhasz argues with regard to the Valdez disaster,
"Exxon emerged virtually unscathed from the incident and is,
today, the most profitable corporation the world has ever
known."

What We Do Not Pay at the Pump

Aspects of this situation are reminiscent of the aftermath
of another recent "spill." They recall the way in which
bailout banks like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase relied
on billions of dollars in public funding to stay afloat
after causing a global economic near-collapse, then turned
around the next year to report massive profits and once
again award exorbitant bonuses to their well-heeled
employees. In each case, there is something deeply
unsatisfying about how the market handles the destructive
behavior of powerful economic actors.

It is not a new idea to suggest that the true costs inherent
in many economic pursuits have been unfairly socialized. Nor
does this notion apply only in moments of crisis. Economists
give the name "externalities" to costs associated with a
business that are not reflected on the balance sheet of that
enterprise or in the prices of its products, but rather are
borne by society at large. For example, if a factory can
dump its waste in a local river and is never fined, it has
successfully externalized the cost of waste disposal, which
the public pays for in the form of polluted water and its
consequences.

Oil has many externalities, and the BP disaster has been
only the most recent trigger -- "the reminder we didn't
need," as Carter Dougherty at BNet put it -- for refreshed
awareness that the gas we buy is far more expensive to our
country than what any of us pay at the pump.

In August 1987, the New York Times published an editorial
with the bold title, "The Real Cost of Gas: $5 a Gallon."
Given that, at the time, you could commonly fill up for 99
cents per gallon, and that even the energy crises of the
1970s did not push gas prices above $1.50 per gallon, $5-a-
gallon gas was pretty much unimaginable. Yet the Times
editorial stated that, "in light of the administration's
willingness to risk lives and dollars in the defense of oil
from the Persian Gulf. the real cost of oil should include
the cost of the military forces protecting supplies." It
argued for an energy policy that accounted for Pentagon
expenditures.

Two Gulf wars later, an array of reports from both liberal
and conservative sources suggest that $5 per gallon is
anything but an outlandish estimate for the true cost of
gas. It could, in fact, be far too low.

Taking military spending into account would only be a start
toward reckoning with what we really pay for oil. But since
the military takes up a massive part of our national budget,
it would be a good start.

Anita Dancs, an economist with the Center for Popular
Economics, notes that "energy security, according to
national security documents, is a vital national interest
and has been incorporated into military objectives and
strategies for more than half a century." After breaking
down the overall military budget and evaluating specific
missions, she concludes that "we will pay $90 billion this
year to secure oil. If spending on the Iraq War is included,
the total rises to $166 billion." That would already add 56
cents to every gallon of gas we buy.

The late Milton Copulos was a veteran of the Heritage
Foundation, an advisor to both President Ronald Reagan's
White House and the CIA, as well as the head of the right-
wing National Defense Council Foundation. He was
particularly concerned with dependence on foreign oil, and
he highlighted how oil imports were both an economic boon to
unsavory governments abroad and a missed opportunity for
domestic investment. In 2006, Copulos argued that, if you
add to oil-related defense spending such factors as the
economic impact of periodic oil supply disruptions and the
opportunity costs of money spent on oil imports that might
have been used elsewhere in the economy, the "hidden" costs
of the U.S. dependence on petroleum would total up to $825
billion per year.

"To put the figure in further perspective," he wrote, "it is
equivalent to adding $8.35 to the price of a gallon of
gasoline refined from Persian Gulf oil." At today's rates,
that would hike the price at the pump to approximately $11
per gallon, or more than $250 to fill the tank of a typical
SUV.

Gushing Subsidies

Military spending is just one type of public subsidy that
benefits the oil industry and keeps the price at gas
stations artificially low. When I made my adolescent wager
on Amoco, I was not aware that the company also profited
from massive tax breaks and other non-military forms of
support. Yet these go a long way toward making the
enterprise a safe bet for investors. Copulos factored some
of them into his $11 per gallon calculation; others would
drive the price still higher.

In early July, The New York Times reported: "With federal
officials now considering a new tax on petroleum production
to pay for [the BP oil spill] cleanup, the industry is
fighting the measure. But an examination of the American tax
code indicates that oil production is among the most heavily
subsidized businesses, with tax breaks available at
virtually every stage of the exploration and extraction
process." Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) added, "The flow of
revenues to oil companies is like the gusher at the bottom
of the Gulf of Mexico: heavy and constant. There is no
reason for these corporations to shortchange the American
taxpayer."

The Times story notes that BP was, for instance, able to
write off 70% of what it was paying in rent for the
Deepwater Horizon rig that caught fire, "a deduction of more
than $225,000 a day since the lease began." Amazingly, BP is
also claiming a $9.9 billion tax credit for its response to
its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Not only does our government allow energy companies to avoid
taxes in myriad ways, the variety of public supports for the
oil industry outside the tax code are almost too numerous to
list. A 1995 report by the Union of Concerned Scientists
mentioned several, including these: the government invests
in substantial energy research that directly benefits the
oil industry; it spends millions to maintain a Strategic
Petroleum Reserve, designed to help stabilize the oil
supply; and it maintains a massive highway system that
facilitates gas- intensive auto travel, only part of which
is paid for by taxes on motorists.

Then, of course, there is the environmental price we pay,
most notably in the form of global warming. As Ezra Klein
wrote recently in Newsweek, some experts argue that carbon
emissions from cars could be offset at the cost of about 65
cents per gallon (money that would presumably be invested in
activities like reforestation). Others believe the cost
would be much steeper -- perhaps steep enough to turn oil
industry profits into losses.

Andrew Simms of the British New Economics Foundation
calculated that, if you were to combine BP's exploration,
extraction, and production activities with those involved in
the sale of its products, you would end up with 1,458
million tons of CO2-equivalent entering the atmosphere per
year. Pricing the cost of carbon emissions at $35 per ton,
he puts the bill for climate-change damages at $51 billion.
Since BP reported a mere $19 billion in profits in 2006, the
year Simms was reviewing, he argues that it would have been
"$31 billion in the red," or effectively bankrupt, if it had
to cover the climate- change bill.

There's more, too. Consider that car exhaust and oil
industry pollution mean an increase in smog and asthma,
burdening our health-care system. Then count in the damage
caused by massive oil spills we seldom hear about in places
like Nigeria, Ecuador, or China, as well as the economic
cost of traffic congestion and excess auto accidents made
possible by subsidized car travel (costs which the willfully
contrarian Freakonomics blog contends may be even more
expensive than global warming). The final tally is
staggering. High-end estimates of the true costs of the gas
we use come to over $15 per gallon. Taxpayers subsidize
significant parts of this sum without even knowing it.

That Which Makes Life Worthwhile

To the extent that energy corporations are made to spend
more to do business in the future -- forced, for example, to
pay for mandatory safety measures, pricier insurance
policies, or taxes from which they were previously exempt --
some of the costs of oil could be "internalized." If enough
costs were accounted for, some companies, no longer
confident that their efforts would be profitable, might
begin to reconsider exploiting harder-to-extract reserves of
fossil fuels. A recent article in the British Guardian
offered this scenario: "If the billions of dollars of annual
subsidies and the many tax breaks the industry gets were
withdrawn, and the cost of protecting oil companies in
developing countries were added, then most of the world's
oil would almost certainly be left in the ground."

Unfortunately, this is almost certainly an overstatement. If
the exploits of oil companies were made more costly, these
companies would simply raise their prices and pass along the
costs to consumers. And we would pay them because we are
unwilling to give up the speed and convenience of driving,
or the luxury of airline travel. We would pay them because
we are unwilling to reduce our consumption of foods shipped
to our grocery stores from far away, or diminish our energy
consumption in many other ways. We would pay them in order
to maintain at least a facsimile of our previous lives.

Or would we?

While it is too much to say that "most of the world's oil"
would be abandoned, some might be. In 2008, when gas prices
soared above $4 per gallon, Americans did behave
differently. As the New York Times reported, we drove 10
billion fewer miles per month than the year before;
surprising numbers of SUV owners traded in their vehicles
for smaller, more efficient cars; and daily oil consumption
was lowered by 900,000 barrels. Investors began to
reconsider how "realistic" the costs of developing
alternative energies might be and to fund them more
seriously. In other words, Americans responded to the
market.

This was a hopeful sign. At the same time, reacting to the
market's cues will not be enough to sort out our
relationship to oil and the oil business. We must also
reckon with the market's limits. Appreciating the full
magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon crisis requires us to
recognize that the market is inherently unable to account
for many of the things we hold most precious. Robert F.
Kennedy pointed to this problem in one of his most powerful
speeches, explaining that the gross national product
measures everything "except that which makes life
worthwhile."

Some things cannot be -- or should not be -- left to
business spreadsheets. Calculating the cost of a destroyed
ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico or along the coast of Alaska
means putting a price tag on things that are not meant to be
priced. If you accept that a harbor seal's life is indeed
worth $700, and a killer whale's $300,000, pretty soon you
must accept that your own life has a price tag on it as
well.

Yet taking the limits of economic calculus seriously has
implications. It means that we cannot trust the market to
solve its own problems -- to self-regulate and self-correct.
It means that we need democratic action to place controls on
corporate behavior. It means that some things must be
considered not merely expensive but sacred, and defended
against forces blind to their true value.

Those who believe that the price of my BP stock will recover
in the next year might be wrong. Even if the stock bottoms
out, however, that won't restore a shattered Gulf, nor will
it change a system that prizes easy consumption and deferred
responsibility. We can only correct for the catastrophe oil
has wrought by living according to a different measure.

[ Mark Engler is a senior analyst with Foreign Policy In
Focus, a TomDispatch regular, and the author of How to Rule
the World: The Coming Battle Over the Global Economy (Nation
Books). He can be reached via the website
http://www.DemocracyUprising.com. Research assistance
provided by Tim LaRocco and Arthur Phillips.]

To listen to a TomCast audio interview with Engler click
here 
<http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2010/08/gulf-at-gas-station.html>

or, to download it to your iPod, here. 
<http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=j0SS4Al/iVI&subid=&offerid=146261.1&type=10&tmpid=5573&RD_PARM1=http%3A%2F%2Fitunes.apple.com%2Fus%2Fpodcast%2Ftomcast-from-tomdispatch-com%2Fid357095817>

==========

_____________________________________________

Portside aims to provide material of interest
to people on the left that will help them to
interpret the world and to change it.

Submit via email: [log in to unmask]
Submit via the Web: portside.org/submit
Frequently asked questions: portside.org/faq
Subscribe: portside.org/subscribe
Unsubscribe: portside.org/unsubscribe
Account assistance: portside.org/contact
Search the archives: portside.org/archive

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

May 2019, Week 3
May 2019, Week 2
May 2019, Week 1
April 2019, Week 5
April 2019, Week 4
April 2019, Week 3
April 2019, Week 2
April 2019, Week 1
March 2019, Week 5
March 2019, Week 4
March 2019, Week 3
March 2019, Week 2
March 2019, Week 1
February 2019, Week 4
February 2019, Week 3
February 2019, Week 2
February 2019, Week 1
January 2019, Week 5
January 2019, Week 4
January 2019, Week 3
January 2019, Week 2
January 2019, Week 1
December 2018, Week 5
December 2018, Week 4
December 2018, Week 3
December 2018, Week 2
December 2018, Week 1
November 2018, Week 5
November 2018, Week 4
November 2018, Week 3
November 2018, Week 2
November 2018, Week 1
October 2018, Week 5
October 2018, Week 4
October 2018, Week 3
October 2018, Week 2
October 2018, Week 1
September 2018, Week 5
September 2018, Week 4
September 2018, Week 3
September 2018, Week 2
September 2018, Week 1
August 2018, Week 5
August 2018, Week 4
August 2018, Week 3
August 2018, Week 2
August 2018, Week 1
July 2018, Week 5
July 2018, Week 4
July 2018, Week 3
July 2018, Week 2
July 2018, Week 1
June 2018, Week 5
June 2018, Week 4
June 2018, Week 3
June 2018, Week 2
June 2018, Week 1
May 2018, Week 5
May 2018, Week 4
May 2018, Week 3
May 2018, Week 2
May 2018, Week 1
April 2018, Week 5
April 2018, Week 4
April 2018, Week 3
April 2018, Week 2
April 2018, Week 1
March 2018, Week 5
March 2018, Week 4
March 2018, Week 3
March 2018, Week 2
March 2018, Week 1
February 2018, Week 4
February 2018, Week 3
February 2018, Week 2
February 2018, Week 1
January 2018, Week 5
January 2018, Week 4
January 2018, Week 3
January 2018, Week 2
January 2018, Week 1
December 2017, Week 5
December 2017, Week 4
December 2017, Week 3
December 2017, Week 2
December 2017, Week 1
November 2017, Week 5
November 2017, Week 4
November 2017, Week 3
November 2017, Week 2
November 2017, Week 1
October 2017, Week 5
October 2017, Week 4
October 2017, Week 3
October 2017, Week 2
October 2017, Week 1
September 2017, Week 5
September 2017, Week 4
September 2017, Week 3
September 2017, Week 2
September 2017, Week 1
August 2017, Week 5
August 2017, Week 4
August 2017, Week 3
August 2017, Week 2
August 2017, Week 1
July 2017, Week 5
July 2017, Week 4
July 2017, Week 3
July 2017, Week 2
July 2017, Week 1
June 2017, Week 5
June 2017, Week 4
June 2017, Week 3
June 2017, Week 2
June 2017, Week 1
May 2017, Week 5
May 2017, Week 4
May 2017, Week 3
May 2017, Week 2
May 2017, Week 1
April 2017, Week 5
April 2017, Week 4
April 2017, Week 3
April 2017, Week 2
April 2017, Week 1
March 2017, Week 5
March 2017, Week 4
March 2017, Week 3
March 2017, Week 2
March 2017, Week 1
February 2017, Week 4
February 2017, Week 3
February 2017, Week 2
February 2017, Week 1
January 2017, Week 5
January 2017, Week 4
January 2017, Week 3
January 2017, Week 2
January 2017, Week 1
December 2016, Week 5
December 2016, Week 4
December 2016, Week 3
December 2016, Week 2
December 2016, Week 1
November 2016, Week 5
November 2016, Week 4
November 2016, Week 3
November 2016, Week 2
November 2016, Week 1
October 2016, Week 5
October 2016, Week 4
October 2016, Week 3
October 2016, Week 2
October 2016, Week 1
September 2016, Week 5
September 2016, Week 4
September 2016, Week 3
September 2016, Week 2
September 2016, Week 1
August 2016, Week 5
August 2016, Week 4
August 2016, Week 3
August 2016, Week 2
August 2016, Week 1
July 2016, Week 5
July 2016, Week 4
July 2016, Week 3
July 2016, Week 2
July 2016, Week 1
June 2016, Week 5
June 2016, Week 4
June 2016, Week 3
June 2016, Week 2
June 2016, Week 1
May 2016, Week 5
May 2016, Week 4
May 2016, Week 3
May 2016, Week 2
May 2016, Week 1
April 2016, Week 5
April 2016, Week 4
April 2016, Week 3
April 2016, Week 2
April 2016, Week 1
March 2016, Week 5
March 2016, Week 4
March 2016, Week 3
March 2016, Week 2
March 2016, Week 1
February 2016, Week 5
February 2016, Week 4
February 2016, Week 3
February 2016, Week 2
February 2016, Week 1
January 2016, Week 5
January 2016, Week 4
January 2016, Week 3
January 2016, Week 2
January 2016, Week 1
December 2015, Week 5
December 2015, Week 4
December 2015, Week 3
December 2015, Week 2
December 2015, Week 1
November 2015, Week 5
November 2015, Week 4
November 2015, Week 3
November 2015, Week 2
November 2015, Week 1
October 2015, Week 5
October 2015, Week 4
October 2015, Week 3
October 2015, Week 2
October 2015, Week 1
September 2015, Week 5
September 2015, Week 4
September 2015, Week 3
September 2015, Week 2
September 2015, Week 1
August 2015, Week 5
August 2015, Week 4
August 2015, Week 3
August 2015, Week 2
August 2015, Week 1
July 2015, Week 5
July 2015, Week 4
July 2015, Week 3
July 2015, Week 2
July 2015, Week 1
June 2015, Week 5
June 2015, Week 4
June 2015, Week 3
June 2015, Week 2
June 2015, Week 1
May 2015, Week 5
May 2015, Week 4
May 2015, Week 3
May 2015, Week 2
May 2015, Week 1
April 2015, Week 5
April 2015, Week 4
April 2015, Week 3
April 2015, Week 2
April 2015, Week 1
March 2015, Week 5
March 2015, Week 4
March 2015, Week 3
March 2015, Week 2
March 2015, Week 1
February 2015, Week 4
February 2015, Week 3
February 2015, Week 2
February 2015, Week 1
January 2015, Week 5
January 2015, Week 4
January 2015, Week 3
January 2015, Week 2
January 2015, Week 1
December 2014, Week 5
December 2014, Week 4
December 2014, Week 3
December 2014, Week 2
December 2014, Week 1
November 2014, Week 5
November 2014, Week 4
November 2014, Week 3
November 2014, Week 2
November 2014, Week 1
October 2014, Week 5
October 2014, Week 4
October 2014, Week 3
October 2014, Week 2
October 2014, Week 1
September 2014, Week 5
September 2014, Week 4
September 2014, Week 3
September 2014, Week 2
September 2014, Week 1
August 2014, Week 5
August 2014, Week 4
August 2014, Week 3
August 2014, Week 2
August 2014, Week 1
July 2014, Week 5
July 2014, Week 4
July 2014, Week 3
July 2014, Week 2
July 2014, Week 1
June 2014, Week 5
June 2014, Week 4
June 2014, Week 3
June 2014, Week 2
June 2014, Week 1
May 2014, Week 5
May 2014, Week 4
May 2014, Week 3
May 2014, Week 2
May 2014, Week 1
April 2014, Week 5
April 2014, Week 4
April 2014, Week 3
April 2014, Week 2
April 2014, Week 1
March 2014, Week 5
March 2014, Week 4
March 2014, Week 3
March 2014, Week 2
March 2014, Week 1
February 2014, Week 4
February 2014, Week 3
February 2014, Week 2
February 2014, Week 1
January 2014, Week 5
January 2014, Week 4
January 2014, Week 3
January 2014, Week 2
January 2014, Week 1
December 2013, Week 5
December 2013, Week 4
December 2013, Week 3
December 2013, Week 2
December 2013, Week 1
November 2013, Week 5
November 2013, Week 4
November 2013, Week 3
November 2013, Week 2
November 2013, Week 1
October 2013, Week 5
October 2013, Week 4
October 2013, Week 3
October 2013, Week 2
October 2013, Week 1
September 2013, Week 5
September 2013, Week 4
September 2013, Week 3
September 2013, Week 2
September 2013, Week 1
August 2013, Week 5
August 2013, Week 4
August 2013, Week 3
August 2013, Week 2
August 2013, Week 1
July 2013, Week 5
July 2013, Week 4
July 2013, Week 3
July 2013, Week 2
July 2013, Week 1
June 2013, Week 5
June 2013, Week 4
June 2013, Week 3
June 2013, Week 2
June 2013, Week 1
May 2013, Week 5
May 2013, Week 4
May 2013, Week 3
May 2013, Week 2
May 2013, Week 1
April 2013, Week 5
April 2013, Week 4
April 2013, Week 3
April 2013, Week 2
April 2013, Week 1
March 2013, Week 5
March 2013, Week 4
March 2013, Week 3
March 2013, Week 2
March 2013, Week 1
February 2013, Week 4
February 2013, Week 3
February 2013, Week 2
February 2013, Week 1
January 2013, Week 5
January 2013, Week 4
January 2013, Week 3
January 2013, Week 2
January 2013, Week 1
December 2012, Week 5
December 2012, Week 4
December 2012, Week 3
December 2012, Week 2
December 2012, Week 1
November 2012, Week 5
November 2012, Week 4
November 2012, Week 3
November 2012, Week 2
November 2012, Week 1
October 2012, Week 5
October 2012, Week 4
October 2012, Week 3
October 2012, Week 2
October 2012, Week 1
September 2012, Week 5
September 2012, Week 4
September 2012, Week 3
September 2012, Week 2
September 2012, Week 1
August 2012, Week 5
August 2012, Week 4
August 2012, Week 3
August 2012, Week 2
August 2012, Week 1
July 2012, Week 5
July 2012, Week 4
July 2012, Week 3
July 2012, Week 2
July 2012, Week 1
June 2012, Week 5
June 2012, Week 4
June 2012, Week 3
June 2012, Week 2
June 2012, Week 1
May 2012, Week 5
May 2012, Week 4
May 2012, Week 3
May 2012, Week 2
May 2012, Week 1
April 2012, Week 5
April 2012, Week 4
April 2012, Week 3
April 2012, Week 2
April 2012, Week 1
March 2012, Week 5
March 2012, Week 4
March 2012, Week 3
March 2012, Week 2
March 2012, Week 1
February 2012, Week 5
February 2012, Week 4
February 2012, Week 3
February 2012, Week 2
February 2012, Week 1
January 2012, Week 5
January 2012, Week 4
January 2012, Week 3
January 2012, Week 2
January 2012, Week 1
December 2011, Week 5
December 2011, Week 4
December 2011, Week 3
December 2011, Week 2
December 2011, Week 1
November 2011, Week 5
November 2011, Week 4
November 2011, Week 3
November 2011, Week 2
November 2011, Week 1
October 2011, Week 5
October 2011, Week 4
October 2011, Week 3
October 2011, Week 2
October 2011, Week 1
September 2011, Week 5
September 2011, Week 4
September 2011, Week 3
September 2011, Week 2
September 2011, Week 1
August 2011, Week 5
August 2011, Week 4
August 2011, Week 3
August 2011, Week 2
August 2011, Week 1
July 2011, Week 5
July 2011, Week 4
July 2011, Week 3
July 2011, Week 2
July 2011, Week 1
June 2011, Week 5
June 2011, Week 4
June 2011, Week 3
June 2011, Week 2
June 2011, Week 1
May 2011, Week 5
May 2011, Week 4
May 2011, Week 3
May 2011, Week 2
May 2011, Week 1
April 2011, Week 5
April 2011, Week 4
April 2011, Week 3
April 2011, Week 2
April 2011, Week 1
March 2011, Week 5
March 2011, Week 4
March 2011, Week 3
March 2011, Week 2
March 2011, Week 1
February 2011, Week 4
February 2011, Week 3
February 2011, Week 2
February 2011, Week 1
January 2011, Week 5
January 2011, Week 4
January 2011, Week 3
January 2011, Week 2
January 2011, Week 1
December 2010, Week 5
December 2010, Week 4
December 2010, Week 3
December 2010, Week 2
December 2010, Week 1
November 2010, Week 5
November 2010, Week 4
November 2010, Week 3
November 2010, Week 2
November 2010, Week 1
October 2010, Week 5
October 2010, Week 4
October 2010, Week 3
October 2010, Week 2
October 2010, Week 1
September 2010, Week 5
September 2010, Week 4
September 2010, Week 3
September 2010, Week 2
September 2010, Week 1
August 2010, Week 5
August 2010, Week 4
August 2010, Week 3
August 2010, Week 2
August 2010, Week 1
July 2010, Week 5
July 2010, Week 4
July 2010, Week 3
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010, Week 1

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.PORTSIDE.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager