climate change

Wed, 2012-12-12 19:48Brendan DeMelle
Brendan DeMelle's picture

Fossil-Fuel Funded Operatives Litter the Mainstream Media, Despite Simple Fix

Have you ever found yourself reading a news article or op-ed in which an “expert” from a distinguished-sounding “think tank” or “institute” seeks to distort or attack climate change science or, alternately, decries public investment in clean energy solutions, and wonder in whose interest this individual and their organization is operating?

Who is funding the proliferation of the anti-renewables, pro-status-quo perspective in all these mainstream media outlets? And why is the media providing them a platform at all, let alone without disclosing the fossil fuel funding behind their misinformation efforts?

Well, today the Checks and Balances Project released a report revealing the extent of this problem in the mainstream media. 

The Checks and Balances report, Fossil Fuel Front Groups on the Front Page, concludes that 58 of the largest mainstream newspapers and publications have quoted or given op-ed space to a fossil-fuel-funded “expert” every other day for the past five years, on average.

“Despite having received millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests, such as ExxonMobil and Koch Industries, these groups’ financial ties to the fossil fuel industry are rarely mentioned,” according to the report.

Checks and Balances writes that it “uncovered the extent of this deception by focusing on the 10 most prominent fossil fuel front groups’ traction [in] 58 of the largest daily newspapers, the Associated Press and Politico. This analysis does not include mentions in broadcast, radio or online publications for these 10 advocacy groups.  As a result, this report only scratches the surface on these fossil fuel-funded groups’ influence on the energy debate.”

The report has received a chilly response from some of the very “experts” often quoted without any disclosure of their fossil fuel funding.  Steven “Junk Man” Milloy was so peeved that he tapped out a quick post attacking the messenger, a typical tactic of the fossil-fuel-funded echo chamber.

Milloy knows the tobacco playbook well. As Connor Gibson points out over at PolluterWatch,  “Steve Milloy has been a central climate denier, who was paid to shill for tobacco company Phillip Morris and oil giant Exxon before work for the Cato Institute and starting the climate denial website “JunkScience.” 

Tue, 2012-12-11 11:09Steve Horn
Steve Horn's picture

ANGA Lobbyist Spins Through Revolving Door To Work For Fred Upton

The revolving door spins with rapidity in Washington following election season, and Tom Hassenboehler serves as an Exhibit A.

Hassenboehler served for the past two years as a lobbyist for America's Natural Gas Alliance, the most powerful lobbying force for the unconventional oil and gas industry. Hassenboehler recently accepted a new position working for the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee's Energy and Power Subcommittee, and will serve as Senior Counsel under the tutelage of U.S. Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI), the head of the Subcommittee.

Upton is the cousin of Katie Upton, the wife of controversial Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon. McClendon, in turn, was one of the founders of ANGA. Given these ties that bind, one can safely hypothesize that Hassenboehler will continue his promotion of fracking as a “public servant.”

Prior to working for ANGA, Hassenboehler served as a Congressional staffer for climate change denier, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).

Sun, 2012-12-09 12:00Guest
Guest's picture

Are We Trading Away Our Rights and Environment?

Written by David Suzuki with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Communications Manager Ian Hanington.

Global trade has advantages. For starters, it allows those of us who live through winter to eat fresh produce year-round. And it provides economic benefits to farmers who grow that food. That could change as oil, the world’s main transport fuel, becomes increasingly scarce, hard to obtain and costly, but we’ll be trading with other nations for the foreseeable future.

Because countries often have differing political and economic systems, agreements are needed to protect those invested in trade. Canada has signed numerous deals, from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to several Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreements (FIPA), and is subject to the rules of global trade bodies, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Treaties, agreements and organizations to help settle disputes may be necessary, but they often favour the interests of business over citizens. With Canada set to sign a 31-year trade deal with China, a repressive and undemocratic country with state-owned corporations, we need to be cautious.

Should we sign agreements if they subject our workers to unfair competition from lower-paid employees from investor nations, hinder our ability to protect the environment or give foreign companies and governments excessive control over local policies and valuable resources? Under some agreements, basics like protecting the air, water and land we all need for survival can become difficult and expensive.

Fri, 2012-12-07 16:02Ben Jervey
Ben Jervey's picture

UN Climate Delegates Agree on Something: Geo-engineering Is No Solution

The UN's annual climate meetings wrap up in Doha today, and though the feckless agreements are a “delight to no one,” there is one silver lining. Geo-engineering, that grand, scary global experiment of last resort, won “scant enthusiasm” from the vast majority of participants.

“Let's face it, geo-engineering has a lot of unknowns,” Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the U.N.'s panel of climate scientists, told Reuters.

Christiana Figueres, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, agreed, emphasizing the need to focus on actual greenhouse gas emissions reductions and mitigation strategies first. “Let's first use what we know,” said Figueres. “There are so many proven technologies we know exist that are tried and true that have not been used to their maximum potential,” she told Reuters. “To begin with, the simplest is energy efficiency.”

Advocates of geo-engineering strategies – which range from tinkering with the planet, the oceans or the atmosphere itself to force cooling in an effort to combat climate change – claimed a breakthrough in the international negations arena in the Cancun climate talks back in 2010. “The taboo is broken,” Paul Crutzen, a Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric scientist who has published on geo-engineering, then told The Associated Press.

That enthusiasm from 2010 seems to be on the wane as opponents of these strategies – including those at the highest levels of leadership in the U.N.'s climate bodies – highlight just how unproven all of these concepts are. Many advocates of real climate change mitigation are also wary of how rich nations could implement these massive, world-changing engineering efforts, the impacts of which are entirely beyond prediction.

Fri, 2012-12-07 14:48Jeff Gailus
Jeff Gailus's picture

Little Black Lie: Canada is “Doing Its Part”

It’s difficult to know where to start when asked to write a regular column on the little black lies that plague the debate over energy and climate policy in Canada, but for the sake of convenience and timeliness, let’s begin with one that’s close at hand: Environment Minister Peter Kent’s characterization of our attempt to turn back the tide on climate change at the 2012 UN Climate Change Conference that just concluded today in Doha, Qatar.

I am proud to be here representing Canada in these important negotiations towards a new, more effective, international climate change agreement,” Kent said as he launched into his Dec. 5 speech at Doha. “As an Arctic nation, we profoundly understand the impacts of climate change…. The Government of Canada is committed to working with our partners to find global solutions to the global climate change problem. In fact, Canada is taking action on all fronts—domestic, continental and international—to address the challenges of climate change.”

The next day, as Kent began feeling the heat about Canada’s inadequate action on climate change, he bragged in a press release from Doha that Canada's GHG emissions were “historically low.” Data, he said, show that Canada’s “GHG emissions decreased between [2005 and 2010] by 6.5% despite an economic growth of 6.3%. These numbers demonstrate that the Canadian economy can grow without increasing GHG emissions levels.”

We are doing our part,” he said, after boasting that Canada was halfway to meeting its United Nations commitments under the Copenhagen Accord — a 17 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from 2005 levels by 2020 (which is a far cry from Canada’s original commitments under the Kyoto Protocol – six per cent below 1990 levels.)

It would be churlish to quibble; still, let’s.

Thu, 2012-12-06 10:25Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

International Forum on Globalization: Kochtopus "Carbon Billionaires" Create "Climate Deadlock"

While international cooperation to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions has never been a greater imperative, climate progress has never been more stymied, more corrupted by those who stand to gain from maintaining a beleaguered carbon-based energy system that threatens the health and well-being of the global community. 

According to a new report released this week by the International Forum on Globalization (IFG), no climate culprit deserves greater blame than the carbon billion duo, brothers Charles and David Koch. The IFG's “Faces Behind a Global Crisis: US Carbon Billionaires and the UN Climate Deadlock” explains the role these oil barons play in paralyzing global efforts to combat climate change on the international level. 
 
“The Kochs cashed in by polluting our planet - economists would call them free-riders - and now they wield their wealth to rig the rules in their own favor…Leading an epic propaganda effort by the broader fossil fuel industry, global climate cooperation may face no bigger barrier blocking progress today than these two individuals of undue influence.”
 
The extent and influence of the Kochs' wealth cannot be underestimated. According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, the Koch brothers combined constitute the world's wealthiest 'individual' with a value of $80.2 billion, beating out Mexico's Carlos Slim at $71.8 billion. 
Tue, 2012-12-04 12:51Carol Linnitt
Carol Linnitt's picture

Canadian Youth Delegation: Tar Sands Creating "Commitment Issues" for Canada at COP18

Canada's leadership is failing to uphold international commitments to reduce the country's emissions under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This failure on the global stage is the direct result of Canada's domestic policies, according to the Canadian Youth Delegation to COP18's recent report “Commitment Issues.”  

Canada's determination to develop Alberta's tar sands constitutes the nation's primary obstacle to progress on climate action. Bitumen extraction in the region “invalidates Canada's commitment to limit global warming to 2 degrees celsius since pre-industrial times and sets a dangerous global precedent for extreme extraction,” the report states.
 
The Canadian government has participated in several significant international agreements and treaties aimed at reducing global levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, given the country's aggressive oil and gas development, these agreements only serve to highlight Canada's disregard for, rather than participation in, international efforts to prevent dangerous global warming.

Marcus Ernst

Marcus D. Ernst

 Credentials

  • MA and PhD in Bavarian history. [1]

 Background

Marcus D. Ernst is a lawyer and historian. He studied law and History from 1989 to 1993 in Passau. He has worked as a self-employed lawyer in the areas of civil and contract law, real estate law, corporate law, business succession and inheritance. [1], [2]

Read more: Marcus Ernst

Pages

Subscribe to climate change