By Andy Rowell
We are used to Big Oil dipping into its deep pockets to try and buy politicians. All you have to do is go on Oil Change International’s Dirty Energy Money site to explore this idea further.
This said, the headline in today’s Financial Times is worrying: “Oil Chiefs use growing influence to sway election.”
The paper argues that the “U.S. oil industry is mounting its biggest-ever campaign to influence the November presidential election, as it seeks to capitalise on the transformation of America’s energy landscape by shale gas and oil.”
Once again the good old attack dogs at the American Petroleum Institute (API) are at the forefront of this campaign.
Any regular reader knows that the API plays fast and loose with the facts when it comes to jobs and oil. But now it is trying to make its dirty money influence the presidential election.
Jack Gerard, the API’s president argues that the shale gas revolution is creating a “game-changing opportunity to reshape the energy landscape” and with it the political landscape.
Its “Vote 4 Energy” campaign is “designed to win support for candidates who back its agenda of increased access and limited regulation for oil and gas companies,” says the Financial Times.
The API has announced rallies in 15 battleground states, including two this week in Missouri and Colorado. It has been flooding the local television, radio and print with pro-oil propaganda.
The Financial Times has some great figures on the negative campaigning by the industry and its allies, such as the API as well as energy-funded groups such as Americans for Prosperity and the American Energy Alliance.
In April alone there were just under 1,000 negative advertisements broadcast across the U.S. Of these, a whopping 80 percent concerned energy and were against President Obama.
Big oil is trying to subvert democracy. “Big oil and big energy companies are doing everything they can to elect Mitt Romney because he will undo public health safeguards that cost them money,” says Daniel Weis, of the Center for American Progress Action Fund. “For an investment of tens of millions of dollars, they can save billions.”
And that is exactly how DirtyEnergyMoney works, and why they have to undermine the political process. Its not about democracy. It's about the oil industry’s bottom line…
By Robin Scher
Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.
- Can Urban Farms Prevent Hunger in 54 Million People in the U.S. ... ›
- New Report Finds Malnutrition World's Top Killer Amid Pandemic ... ›
- Oxfam Warns 12,000 Could Die Per Day From Hunger Due to ... ›
- Three Ways to Support a Healthy Food System During the COVID ... ›
- Trump USDA Resumes Effort to Cut Food Stamp Benefits - EcoWatch ›
- Pandemic Threatens Food Security for Many College Students ... ›
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.
As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.
- 15 Top Conservation Issues of 2021 Include Big Threats, Potential ... ›
- How Blockchain Could Boost Clean Energy - EcoWatch ›
By David Drake and Jeffrey York
The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.
The Big Idea
People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.
- Major Milestone: More than 100,000 MW Worth of Coal-Fired Power ... ›
- Coal Will Not Bring Appalachia Back to Life, But Tech and ... ›
- Renewables Beat Coal in the U.S. for the First Time This April ... ›