The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will no longer penalize or prosecute companies when their actions cause the inadvertent death of birds. Jeff R Clow / Getty Images
By Julia Conley
Just over two weeks before President Donald Trump is set to leave the White House, his U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Tuesday finalized a rollback of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act—a law that's been in place since 1918 and which conservation groups credit with holding corporate polluters accountable for harming bird species.
<p>In what the Western Values Project called a "parting gift to Big Oil by corrupt former oil lobbyist Interior Secretary David Bernhardt," the USFWS <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/05/climate/trump-migratory-bird-protections.html?action=click&module=Latest&pgtype=Homepage" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">announced </a>a new rule under which the federal government will no longer penalize or prosecute companies when their actions cause the inadvertent death of birds. </p><p>In the case of oil spills like the Deepwater Horizon disaster, which killed more than one million birds in 2010; electrocutions by power lines; ducks and other species<a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2009/03/31/syncrude-triples-number-dead-ducks-oil-sands" target="_blank"> stuck in fossil fuel tailings ponds;</a> and illegal actions like the spraying of banned pesticides, companies will no longer be held to account as long as they don't intentionally kill birds.</p>
<div id="f0f81" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e84637ab4594c5bbe67da8bb21bc0c57"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1346517062726930433" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Antithetical to its purpose, US Fish and Wildlife Service finalized a rule rolling back protections for migratory b… https://t.co/sC7gB0SX7R</div> — Aric Caplan (@Aric Caplan)<a href="https://twitter.com/CaplanComms/statuses/1346517062726930433">1609869659.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>When it was passed into law more than 100 years ago, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) made it illegal to hunt, take, capture, or kill birds from endangered species "by any means or in any manner."</p><p>Bernhardt said Tuesday the new rule "reaffirms the original meaning and intent of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act," while the Center for Western Priorities called it a "radical interpretation of the law."</p><p>"The Trump administration wants to make sure extractive industries can continue to kill birds after they leave office," said Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the group. "Secretary Bernhardt's former oil industry clients have explicitly asked for this policy change, and now he is delivering, just days before returning to the private sector. By finalizing this proposal, the Trump administration is signing the death warrants of millions of birds across the country."</p><p>Conservation groups pointed to data showing that three billion birds have been lost in North America since 1970, while six million fewer birds were counted by the Audubon Society in 2019 than previous tallies showed.</p><p>As <em>Common Dreams</em> <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/16/ecological-disaster-massive-scale-hundreds-thousands-dead-migratory-birds-southwest" target="_blank">reported</a> in September, the wildfires that overwhelmed the West Coast last year were thought to be behind the deaths of thousands of migratory birds in the southwest.</p>
<p>"This brutal blow hits America's birds when many populations are already plummeting, so it's really the last thing they need," said Noah Greenwald, endangered species director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Trump officials are giving oil companies and other polluters a license to kill birds. Vast numbers of birds will be electrocuted by power lines, drowned in oil waste pits and killed in other easily preventable ways."<br></p><p>Advocates say the MBTA has worked in recent years to show the oil and gas industry that it will be held accountable if its activities kills birds. The federal government <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/05/climate/trump-migratory-bird-protections.html?action=click&module=Latest&pgtype=Homepage" target="_blank">reached </a>a $100 million settlement with BP after the Deepwater Horizon disaster.</p><p>Rep. Deb Haaland (D-N.M.), who was named as President-elect Biden's nominee for Interior Secretary last month, is expected to repeal the USFWS's rule, but that process could take time. Meanwhile, Rep. Alan Lowenthal (D-Calif.) introduced the Migratory Bird Protection Act last year as the administration was considering the rollback, with the aim of reaffirming the original law's intent of protecting vulnerable birds—not corporations.</p><p>Advocates also expressed hope that the federal courts will strike down what Greenwald called the Trump administration's "reckless attack on one of America's oldest and most important conservation laws," as Judge Valerie Caproni of the Southern District of New York <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/08/12/major-victory-court-tosses-out-trump-interiors-gutting-century-old-protections" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">did in August.</a></p><p>"There is nothing in the text of the MBTA that suggests that in order to fall within its prohibition, activity must be directed specifically at birds," Caproni <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/08/12/major-victory-court-tosses-out-trump-interiors-gutting-century-old-protections" target="_blank">said</a> in her ruling at the time. "Nor does the statute prohibit only intentionally killing migratory birds." </p>
<div id="b6b56" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="95790fd24d47e8369de4bd6a06d03868"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1346503503238205442" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The Trump administration is kicking off the new year and its remaining weeks—and, to add insult to injury,… https://t.co/uydTahSeao</div> — Audubon Society (@Audubon Society)<a href="https://twitter.com/audubonsociety/statuses/1346503503238205442">1609866426.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Jamie Rappoport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife said the group would call on the Biden administration "to restore protections for birds immediately and affirm that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits incidental take."</p><p>"Even though a federal court already ruled that the Trump administration cannot eliminate protections for migratory birds, the administration continues its relentless campaign to undermine environmental protections and harm wildlife," said Clark. </p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2021/01/05/brutal-blow-wildlife-and-gift-big-oil-trump-finalizes-rollback-migratory-bird-treaty" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
A group of climate activists that have been cycling from the North of the country in stages to draw attention to the climate case are arriving to the Court of Justice on the day that the climate lawsuit against Shell starts in The Hague, on December 1st, 2020. Romy Arroyo Fernandez / NurPhoto / Getty Images
By Julia Conley
Representing more than 17,000 claimants who support climate action, the international organization Friends of the Earth on Tuesday opened its case against fossil fuel giant Shell at The Hague by demanding that a judge order the corporation to significantly reduce its carbon emissions in the next decade.
<p>Milieudefensie, the Dutch arm of Friends of the Earth, <a href="https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/01/climate-change-activists-take-energy-giant-shell-to-court-in-the-hague-over-emissions" target="_blank">says</a> Shell has broken the law in The Netherlands by knowingly standing in the way of the country's phase-out of fossil fuels. Shell says it has set a goal of cutting its emissions to net zero by 2050, but the group is demanding a more rapid reduction. </p><p>"We are relying on the Dutch courts to protect communities around the globe," tweeted Nils Mollema, a policy advisor at ActionAid, which is supporting Milieudefensie in the case. </p>
<div id="47348" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5afbc9986f5a700bcaa4f88e3046024b"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1333715559301713922" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Today in The Hague: Shell on trial for its role in climate catastrophe. @Shell must take responsibility and correct… https://t.co/siy20sVKxF</div> — Nils Mollema (@Nils Mollema)<a href="https://twitter.com/MollemaNils/statuses/1333715559301713922">1606817543.0</a></blockquote></div><p>The case comes five years after the Dutch government was ordered to reduce its emissions by at least 25% from 1990 levels by the end of 2020. Under the Paris climate agreement, the European Union has committed to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% by 2030.</p><p>"The claimants therefore conclude that Royal Dutch Shell's corporate policy is on collision course with global climate targets," Roger Cox, a lawyer representing Milieudefensie in the civil case, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/dutch-climate-activists-take-shell-to-court-over-emissions/2020/12/01/ed68d494-33ac-11eb-9699-00d311f13d2d_story.html" target="_blank">told</a> a panel of three judges at The Hague District Court on Tuesday. </p><p>The organization has vehemently rejected Shell's defense in the case, in which the multinational corporation is suggesting that it is no more responsible for solving the climate emergency than other businesses or individuals.</p><p>"What will accelerate the energy transition is effective policy, investment in technology, and changing customer behavior," Shell <a href="https://www.euronews.com/2020/12/01/climate-change-activists-take-energy-giant-shell-to-court-in-the-hague-over-emissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a> Tuesday as the first of four days of hearings began. "None of which will be achieved with this court action."</p><p>Cox noted in his opening remarks that Shell is responsible for about 1.2% of the planet's industrial fossil fuel emissions.</p><p>"The main argument of Shell is that everybody is responsible: the consumer, the state, the international community, everybody is responsible except Shell, except the biggest polluter of the Netherlands, one of the 10 biggest polluters in the world," said Donald Pols, director of Milieudefensie, on Monday. "And we are going to change that."</p><p>The case opened a month after Shell drew outrage from climate action campaigners by <a href="https://twitter.com/Shell/status/1323184318735360001" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">posting a poll </a>on its official Twitter account, asking ordinary citizens what they plan to do to help mitigate the climate crisis. </p><p>"I'm willing to hold you accountable for lying about climate change for 30 years when you secretly knew the entire time that fossil fuels emissions would destroy our planet," U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/02/shell-oil-asked-what-people-are-willing-do-reduce-emissions-im-willing-hold-you" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">replied</a> at the time, denouncing the company's "audacity."</p><p>On Monday, Pols called the opening of the case at The Hague "a historic moment."</p><p>"This is actually 'the People versus Shell,' a company that has got away with greenwashing for too long," he said in statement. "This case will make it clear to everyone that more than 95% of what Shell does is causing dangerous climate change. This has to change as soon as possible."</p><p><span></span><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/12/01/friends-earth-vs-shell-historic-moment-climate-movement-takes-big-oil-hague" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>. </em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected by the writer. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p><em><br></em>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" data-width="710" data-height="959" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" data-width="1244" data-height="1244" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" data-width="800" data-height="800" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" data-width="600" data-height="600" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" data-width="1244" data-height="1244" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
- Full Spectrum CBD Oil: What To Know - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Waters: Plus All You Need to Know - EcoWatch ›
- The Best Water Soluble CBD Available Online - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD for Sleep (Lab-Tested, Person-Tested Oils) - EcoWatch ›
- Strongest CBD Oils to Buy in 2021? - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oils For Pain: Top 3 Brands of 2021 - EcoWatch ›
- 8 Science-Based Benefits of CBD Oil - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Vape Pen: Top Brands of 2020 - EcoWatch ›
- Because Price Matters: Most Affordable CBD Oils of 2021 - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Fossil fuel companies received $110 billion in direct and indirect financial assistance during the coronavirus pandemic, including up to $15.2 billion in direct federal relief. Andrew Hart /
By Bret Wilkins
In a year in which the United States has already suffered 16 climate-driven extreme weather events causing more than $1 billion in economic damages, and as millions of American workers face loss of essential unemployment benefits due to congressional inaction, a report published Monday reveals the Trump administration has given fossil fuel companies as much as $15.2 billion in direct relief — and tens of billions more indirectly — through federal COVID-19 recovery programs since March.
<p>The report by BailoutWatch, Public Citizen, and Friends of the Earth — titled <em><a href="https://www.citizen.org/article/bailed-out-and-propped-up/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=94926f68-3c0f-462d-87c9-ae6d05950810" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Bailed Out and Propped Up</a> —</em>tracks taxpayer funds flowing to fossil fuel companies since pandemic-related bailouts began. It found a total of $110 billion in direct and indirect benefits went to 66 companies, including between $10.4 and $15.2 billion in direct disbursements to coal, oil, and gas companies that are largely responsible for the worsening climate emergency. </p>
<p>Here's a breakdown, according to the report:</p><ul><li>At least $5.5 billion went to 70 money-losing polluters via the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act.</li><li>$582 million in direct, subsidized loans were approved for 37 mid-sized fossil fuel and related companies through the Federal Reserve's Main Street Lending Program.</li><li>$4.3 to $9.1 billion in forgivable loans went to at least 25,931 companies through the Small Business Administration's Paycheck Protection Program.</li><li>At least 229 oil and gas companies received waivers for fees normally paid to drill on public land — giveaways that cost the government a minimum of $4.5 million in lost revenue, and likely far more.</li></ul><p>The report found that five fossil fuel companies — Diamondback Energy, EOG Resources, Marathon Petroleum, Phillips 66, and Valero — received more than 10% of the $110 billion in direct benefits, including tax refunds, and indirect support through the issuance of bonds, even if they were losing money. Reassured by the Fed's actions, private investors purchased more fossil fuel bonds, generating some $100 billion in additional indirect benefits.</p>
<div id="dbef0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2841b587ecc5cf0041553e90425d4397"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1330888073228427264" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">BREAKING: The fossil fuel industry has received up to $15,000,000,000 in direct COVID relief since bailout programs… https://t.co/znbkDW2f0M</div> — Public Citizen (@Public Citizen)<a href="https://twitter.com/Public_Citizen/statuses/1330888073228427264">1606143418.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>"When the pandemic hit last spring, Trump's corporate cronies made sure the fossil fuel industry was able to squeeze whatever favors they could out of the resulting economic rescues," wrote Alan Zibel, research director of Public Citizen's Corporate Presidency Project and a co-author of the report. "The Biden administration and the next Congress will have a golden opportunity to ensure our efforts to rescue the economy no longer benefit the very companies most responsible for the devastation caused by climate change."</p><p>Christopher Kuveke, a BailoutWatch analyst and a co-author of the report, added that "the fossil fuel industry took advantage of the pandemic to put their hands out for help escaping a financial mess of their own making, and their allies in the federal government rode to the rescue."</p><p>"By artificially delaying the industry's inevitable decline at taxpayers' expense, the government has made it that much harder to make the necessary transition to clean energy sources," he added.</p>
<p>The report comes just after members of Congress <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/11/23/21575394/stimulus-covid-relief-bill-congress" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">headed home</a> on vacation without having passed a new coronavirus relief bill, and as millions of Americans <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/18/about-be-catapulted-cliff-study-shows-12-million-set-lose-jobless-benefits-after" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">face the grim prospect</a> of losing essential unemployment benefits as the CARES Act is set to expire at the end of the year.</p><p>Last week, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) <a href="https://the-beam.com/finance/how-to-finance-a-global-green-new-deal-and-stop-climate-change-at-1-5c/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">excoriated</a> Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on the floor of the House of Representatives, accusing him of "abandoning our people."</p><p>"While... thousands of people in Texas lined up for food lines... hospitals no longer have beds to house the sick... [and] 30 million Americans are on the brink of eviction, [McConnell] dismissed the Senate," said Ocasio-Cortez. "Every single day, when we go back to our communities, people are asking us, 'Where is there going to be help? Is there going to be a second stimulus check? Are we going to get the resources that we need?"</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="d1d7e9aa2b3b10ad4d53e11ce35e240a"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/nNBeI-G3eQQ?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
<p>Climate activists and many economists argue that giving money to those most culpable for carbon emissions is the exact opposite of what governments should be doing. One economist says that instead of selling fossil fuel bonds, governments should be promoting "Green Climate Bonds."</p><p>"With a mere fraction of the Covid-19 recovery funds, central banks could support climate protection," <a href="https://the-beam.com/finance/how-to-finance-a-global-green-new-deal-and-stop-climate-change-at-1-5c/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wrote</a> World Future Council chief economist Matthias Kroll last week. He continued:</p><blockquote>The price for coping with the systemically relevant climate crisis... appears almost to be a bargain: with a fraction of the funds used to overcome the Covid-19 crisis (or the banking crisis of 2008), the central banks could trigger investments in climate protection of a magnitude that would make the 1.5°C target [under the Paris agreement] achievable. The central banks would not even need to create additional money for this. It would be sufficient to replace expiring assets from previous purchase programs with new types of "Green Climate Bonds."</blockquote><p>A May 2020 <a href="https://www.worldfuturecouncil.org/press-release-study-pandemic-crisis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">study</a> by the World Future Council estimated the cost of a global "climate bailout" at a relatively modest $175 million per year, resulting in a one-third reduction in worldwide carbon emissions by the end of the decade.</p><p>"We need to start thinking about how to practically finance a Green New Deal and a swift transition to 100% <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a>, and central banks should start playing a proactive role," wrote Kroll. "Let's treat the climate emergency as what it is, and let's bail out the climate, too!"</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/11/23/time-cut-dirty-energys-lifeline-report-details-how-fossil-fuel-industry-feasted" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- 'We Need People's Bailout, Not Polluters' Bailout': Climate Groups ... ›
- Corporate Polluters Have Received Tens of Millions in PPP Loans ... ›
- Trump Bails Out Oil Industry, Not U.S. Families, as Coronavirus ... ›
- Former Federal Reserve Governor Rebukes Fed for Fossil Fuel Bail ... ›
- 'Historic Moment' as Climate Movement Takes on Big Oil at The Hague - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Men rest on a beach on the shore of the Caspian Sea in front of oil rigs following the easing of strict quarantine measures against the spread of the coronavirus disease in Baku on August 5. TOFIK BABAYEV / AFP Getty Images
By Nik Martin
In April, the price of oil turned negative for the first time in history, just after the coronavirus pandemic hit. As lockdowns were ordered across the world, demand for black gold plummeted, prompting producers to literally pay buyers to take the commodity off their hands.
<p>The price collapse was exacerbated by the Saudi-Russian price war which blew up around the same time, after Moscow refused to moderate oil production to keep prices at a reasonable level. Overproduction, particularly by US shale producers, amplified the effects of the worst oil crisis in decades.</p><p>In the first nine months of this year, Shell, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, BP and Total made a total loss of $36.4 billion (€30.6 billion), compared with last year's $50 billion in profit. As investors took flight, the oil majors were forced to slash costs.</p>
Investment Slashed, Jobs Cut
<p>Exxon, once the world's largest publicly traded oil and gas company, said in the summer that capital expenditure would shrink by 20%, and just last week, announced it would cut 15% of its workforce — shedding some 50,000 jobs. Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, BP and others have made similar moves, with most slashing investor dividends for the first time in years.</p><p>"The next few years are going to be very difficult," Helal Miah, investment research analyst at The Share Centre, told DW. "But the oil majors have done it before. During the financial crisis, these companies were very good at slashing costs."</p><p>Dozens of smaller firms, however, will struggle to survive. The <em>New York Times</em> reported that more than 50 North American oil and gas companies had already sought bankruptcy protection this year. Many of them took huge risks and even bigger loans to try to compete with the majors.</p><p>This fall, the second wave of the pandemic has forced renewed lockdowns across Europe and will likely prompt a more robust response from US President-elect Joe Biden, who has vowed to create a pandemic task force as soon as he takes office in January. Those measures could cause a further shakeout.</p><p>"The longer the pandemic goes on, the more we'll see the smaller and mid-cap sized oil companies go under, or be taken over by the larger ones," Miah added.</p><p>ConocoPhillips last month bought the independent exploration firm Concho Resources, days after Chevron completed the takeover of rival Noble Energy.</p>Peak Demand or Bottom of Cycle?
<p>Some analysts believe global oil demand may have already peaked, while others believe that if oil prices haven't already, they are close to bottoming out. Seven months on from the unprecedented negative oil price shock, West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude, one of the benchmarks for calculating oil prices, stood at $38.15 on Monday.</p><p>The price is still 67% lower than its 2014 peak of $114 a barrel, but closer to the $50 that most large oil companies need to break even. Exxon needs prices of around $75, according to analysts. All the same, the oil majors are not expected to reach their pre-COVID profitability levels until at least the end of 2022.</p><p>Already facing pressure to lead the energy transition and help the world ween itself off its fossil fuel addiction, oil giants have vowed to exploit the crisis to speed up investments in renewable energies.</p><p>"Prior to COVID this [energy transition] was a gradual trend," Peter Hitchens, oil analyst at the London-based Progressive Research, told DW. "The question is will COVID accelerate this trend?"</p><p>European firms like France's Total, the UK's BP and the Anglo-Dutch giant Shell have already begun to prioritize renewable energy, and plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2050. BP and Shell have announced major offshore wind projects this year.</p>US Oil Giants Shield by Trump
<p>Their US counterparts, on the other hand, have enjoyed protection from outgoing US President Donald Trump's climate skepticism and continue to focus on their traditional oil and gas businesses. If the Biden administration reenters the Paris Climate Agreement, from which Trump withdrew six months after taking office, it will likely put pressure on American oil majors, although it is unlikely to curtail the drilling for hard-to- reach oil through fracking.</p><p>Biden has also hinted at building ties with OPEC members Iran and Venezuela, which are currently subject to harsh sanctions on their oil trade. The Democrats' plan for a huge infrastructure plan, dubbed the Green New Deal, to meet the climate change challenge will still require oil prices to be high enough to make clean energy alternatives to fossil fuels competitive.</p><p>Despite their moves to step up investment in renewables, the Share Centre's Miah sees oil firms still mostly profiting from fossil fuels in the medium term,</p><p>"If we look a decade ahead, I would say that they will still be majority oil and gas companies rather than renewables-focused," he told DW. He added that most investors still see oil as a sensible way of achieving "good, solid returns."</p>Investors Give Wide Berth
<p>Some major London-based institutional investors have taken a different view, however. Asset managers Fidelity International and Sarasin & Partners have blacklisted the likes of Shell and BP over concerns that the green shift will cripple profits.</p><p>Last month, the <em>Daily Mail</em> reported that several asset managers have written to the oil majors requesting full transparency on the true value of their assets, including oil fields, which they claim could be rendered worthless if a slump in oil demand became more permanent.</p><p>Others, like Hitchens, see the fortunes of the oil industry tied in with the duration of the pandemic and how quickly oil demand recovers, once business and everyday life return to normal.</p><p>"The performance will very much reflect the movement in oil prices" and "very much depends on the economic recovery after COVID," he told DW.</p><p>Other analysts are more bullish and think big oil firms, with their deep pockets, have the strength to ride out their worst crisis. They say they'll likely acquire renewable energy firms and continue to thrive despite likely flat oil demand.</p><p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/how-are-oil-companies-dealing-with-the-shift-to-renewables/a-55542378" target="_blank">Deutsche Welle</a>.<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/r/entryeditor/2648827745#/" target="_self"></a></em></p>
Read More
Show Less
An aerial view shows Marathon Petroleum Corp's Los Angeles Refinery in Carson, California, the state's largest producer of gasoline, as oil prices have cratered with the spread of the coronavirus pandemic on April 22, 2020. David McNew / Getty Images
By Julia Conley
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Monday denounced the "audacity" of oil giant Shell after it waded into the global discussion about the climate crisis by asking members of the public what they would do to reduce carbon emissions.
<p>"I'm willing to hold you accountable for lying about climate change for 30 years when you secretly knew the entire time that fossil fuels emissions would destroy our planet," the New York Democrat and co-sponsor of the Green New Deal legislation replied. </p>
<div id="fb346" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e9b7c448217cd1e4db74efc4f245fd72"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323304992372129792" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">I’m willing to hold you accountable for lying about climate change for 30 years when you secretly knew the entire t… https://t.co/0gwuy5P9h5</div> — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)<a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/statuses/1323304992372129792">1604335470.0</a></blockquote></div><p>In the poll it posted to Twitter, Shell offered choices to the public including "stop flying," "buy an electric vehicle," and shifting to renewable electricity. </p>
<div id="2dc26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5fcb1a371e5c97eb32c9472206736569"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323184318735360001" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">📊 What are you willing to change to help reduce emissions? #EnergyDebate</div> — Shell (@Shell)<a href="https://twitter.com/Shell/statuses/1323184318735360001">1604306699.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Coming from the world's third-largest company, which <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/sep/19/shell-and-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings" target="_blank">knew</a> as early as 1988 that its extraction of oil and gas was linked to the heating of the planet, the question was seen by Ocasio-Cortez and other critics as a gross deflection of Shell's own responsibility.</p><p>"The audacity of Shell asking YOU what YOU'RE willing to do to reduce emissions," Ocasio-Cortez tweeted. "They're showing you RIGHT HERE how the suggestion that individual choices—not systems—are a main driver of climate change is a fossil fuel talking point."</p><p>The "good choices" American voters and lawmakers can make, the congresswoman <a href="https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1323306979314589696" target="_blank">added,</a> are ones that will help "reign in fossil fuel corporations" that are actually fueling the destruction of the planet. </p><p>The journalism initiative Covering Climate Now called Shell's tweet "a textbook example of greenwashing."</p>
<div id="0066b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a4f7bb9c4803396870649b97f6bc77fc"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323336497412689922" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Here’s a textbook example of “greenwashing” + corporations making it seem like climate change is a symptom of every… https://t.co/wL55Zx3yCh</div> — Covering Climate Now (@Covering Climate Now)<a href="https://twitter.com/CoveringClimate/statuses/1323336497412689922">1604342982.0</a></blockquote></div><p>Prof. Katharine Hayhoe, director of the Texas Tech Climate Center, echoed Ocasio-Cortez's disgust at the company as she <a href="https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1323316064911007745" target="_blank">noted</a> that out of 90 companies in the world, Shell is the sixth-highest contributor to fossil fuel emissions in history.</p><p>"Yes, everyone must do their part—starting with the biggest emitters," Hayhoe<a href="https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1323316269370740738" target="_blank"> tweeted</a>, adding that the company has previously publicly suggested that individuals making changes to their daily habits is what will help save the planet.</p>
<div id="bbe8d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c255f6d58a46ccfb50b18b0873df6ab7"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323316064911007745" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Royal Dutch Shell is #6 on the list of 90 companies responsible for 2/3 of greenhouse gas emissions since the dawn… https://t.co/VKnFVwXtBm</div> — Prof. Katharine Hayhoe (@Prof. Katharine Hayhoe)<a href="https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/statuses/1323316064911007745">1604338110.0</a></blockquote></div><p>Shell's tweet drew outrage from international climate action group Greenpeace, international lawmakers, and climate experts.</p>
<div id="f789b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a5bbe12a91b66d037630be4cc93e6b46"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323345812051537921" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Hey Shell: you willing to change your entire business model? https://t.co/CnjSBScTFr</div> — Leah Stokes (@Leah Stokes)<a href="https://twitter.com/leahstokes/statuses/1323345812051537921">1604345202.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="540d1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8c816cf96de217ae3862e4a799f3c1cb"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323337603601567745" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">You polluted our planet, you funded climate change deniers, you fund the lobby to slow down climate protection laws… https://t.co/zgcXDaVjRA</div> — Michael Bloss (@Michael Bloss)<a href="https://twitter.com/micha_bloss/statuses/1323337603601567745">1604343245.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="e6969" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f3be1f9f21462ec3f507d049da3fc941"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1323361897484324865" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">We’re willing to fight for climate justice and for people not to fall for your dirty tricks, @Shell. Individual cho… https://t.co/s7ZyawxM4V</div> — Greenpeace (@Greenpeace)<a href="https://twitter.com/Greenpeace/statuses/1323361897484324865">1604349037.0</a></blockquote></div><p>"What am I willing to do?" Hayhoe <a href="https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1323321067541155841" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wrote</a> in reply to Shell's poll question, which she later said was<a href="https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/1323342197312421896" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> hidden</a> on Twitter by the company. "Hold you accountable for 2% of cumulative global greenhouse gas emissions, equivalent to those of my entire home country of Canada. When you have a concrete plan to address that, I'd be happy to chat about what I'm doing to reduce my personal emissions." </p>
From Your Site Articles
- Shell Pipeline Leaks 20000 Gallons of Oil in California's Central Valley ›
- Shell Oil Spill Dumps Nearly 90,000 Gallons of Crude Into Gulf ... ›
- Shell Oil Loses Arctic Drilling Lawsuit - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Exxon Mobil Refinery is seen from the top of the Louisiana State Capitol in Baton Rouge, Louisiana on March 5, 2017. WClarke / Wikimedia Commons / CC by 4.0
Exxon Mobil will lay off an estimated 14,000 workers, about 15% of its global workforce, including 1,900 workers in the U.S., the company announced Thursday.
<p>Analysts said the layoffs are part of an effort by the beleaguered company to maintain its stock dividend despite sharply reduced demand during the coronavirus pandemic. </p><p>While other oil majors have leaned into reducing emissions and building out renewable energy, Exxon has doubled down on oil. </p>
<p>It plans to <a href="https://newsletter.climatenexus.org/e2t/tc/VXkl_C7Kdv9sW2hPj8t2QWZy2W9ccHTJ4hPvlPN3NdJHk3p_9LV1-WJV7CgMmCW3LS1-t3pMmTrW2dBgj85Xb1R7W2nJ0st59tx0YW3465Bp1TbXg1W37nfX23g4lYBN4P7T8rKXz0fW3PGr6f47tYZ5W1DBtjn6R3xbmW8gw91P9jrw7MW86gmKM6DwN1BW1C-w167TjNdkW1WsKvK75dTdQW8j1G351DdpMhW1bdhGw7FyJnJN6KRmSlnBH4BW1Kfvq762ghcjW7HHmDy3vvvNgW6LDqfL74bg6WW3rLBnB8y8rvyW5GmhVM4v7PG_W4Q4Xz08HJnz7W4nBy-y3XbRx0W9gHpcj8NXKzJW8zXmHf8GBP1yW5sXMCS6zgH1_W1N7t5b6QDm47W6-vPC94QPy9zW5rFKdc753Y1H344X1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">increase its greenhouse gas pollution</a> in the coming years.</p><p>News of the layoffs comes as a former Exxon employee, who consistently received strong performance reviews and was widely respected by his colleagues, says he was pushed out of the company after he raised Exxon's climate denial in a Q&A session with company executives.</p>
<p><strong>For a deeper dive:</strong></p><p><a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/exxonmobil-layoffs/exxon-to-cut-14000-global-jobs-including-1900-in-u-s-as-pandemic-hurts-demand-idUSKBN27E30U?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9uQprMXUg6iyvoNDLff_7apAyEj6b_6aCMkPoE4YUVI7X6DDtZ7s_uanjL-rMxsFWeLsrkDyp-33vvACTMCqrtmUJSr5Ern4GlegWIVNLH_W3G724&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Reuters</a>, <a href="https://login.politicopro.com/?redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fsubscriber.politicopro.com%2Farticle%2F2020%2F10%2Fexxon-mobil-to-cut-1900-us-jobs-as-pandemic-chokes-fuel-demand-2015160%3Futm_campaign%3DHot%2520News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9HSBwxvAIMrWjyFmy_2-j3gQF2u5Fxs1xg8MwGiKmx4OhWGCpFn3UkHH7RclPer5Gq-9W46J48imDmhpiwKLaLdg47faZ9GyhNYfBxxU9gLoXqwV8&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Politico Pro,</a> <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-29/exxon-cutting-1-900-u-s-jobs-in-response-to-virus-driven-slump?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8iqy_Nsx6C0BcQ9tP75IeFhTFP5_INuh0OMuCAtUVQrje6pFkVJCTd_M9VfPBpT4daRhqaSU1GlzZPm9pvcKlBMUHskzL0ErH0Zjm-Hb_2bCu6amM&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Bloomberg</a>, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/exxon-to-lay-off-1-900-u-s-employees-as-pandemic-wreaks-havoc-on-oil-demand-11603986398?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9IISEDbrdgzTXs-yRl4dbvWlN-fnWX3KU6w6xocquxtprMAMPnR7W-WfRwHma9E9tBvykPVjyQPwA5_Q1hU-7g3AE4c5Ix2TcqTZHn5zbmEe-Hy50&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a>, <a href="https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Exxon-To-Cut-1900-Jobs-In-The-US.html?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8MkQCEX3jVp_A4EB7PIQxvaG5UXc_qewcnViGhUULlzhqte5miAogpby0K2A70nf2NZCrtx6iLtZkrL8Au6zTYuVvzoDinl3IUeBokSWRriiB0agc&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Oil Price</a>, <a href="https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Exxon-lay-off-1900-US-employees-mostly-in-Houston-15685353.php?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_T_wesrkbPA54TVqsNMVOVy-DVtOjcxn3Vq3U5i6OP_zh0Rzxlj-H6jX64nUVZbRgZroVfYsPWt0OLkwqhJGcGigIy7qQ7LYqVat1wWak4UhJzk0k&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Houston Chronicle</a>; Employee retribution: <a href="https://www.vice.com/en/article/bvx84q/exxon-silences-staff-alarmed-by-the-climate-crisis-says-former-employee-enrique-rosero?utm_campaign=Hot%20News&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=98644484&_hsenc=p2ANqtz--pCb8jL0WB6VcsJbgX_Ej_YSk_VbYV5aju-qis2s0D7aA6zyHTnWaUxKl-8RzO8eIEQI2x8FqLEiMWPjwAOoIBGtUKZMroZZGq3nGbMXx27Tb1gSM&utm_content=98644484&utm_source=hs_email" target="_blank">Vice</a><br/></p><p><em>For more </em><a href="http://ecowatch.com/climate-change-news/" target="_blank"><em>climate change</em></a><em> and </em><a href="http://ecowatch.com/business/renewables/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><em>clean energy</em></a><em> news, you can follow Climate Nexus on </em><a href="https://twitter.com/ClimateNexus" target="_blank"><em>Twitter</em></a><em> and </em><a href="https://www.facebook.com/ClimateNexus/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"><em>Facebook</em></a><em>, and sign up for daily </em><a href="http://climatenexus.us4.list-manage1.com/subscribe?u=d1f5797e59060083034310930&id=7c84c08aaa" target="_blank"><em>Hot News</em></a><em>. </em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Will Chevron and Exxon Ever Be Held Responsible for Decades of ... ›
- Exxon Goes on Trial for Lying About the Climate Crisis - EcoWatch ›
- Exxon Sues Massachusetts Attorney General to Block Climate Fraud ... ›
- Citigroup and Exxon Make Important Climate Moves ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Report Reveals Auto Giants Knew About Car Emissions and Climate Change — in the 1960s
27 October 2020
Climate
Scientists at General Motors and Ford Motor Co. knew of the connection between car emissions and climate change as early as the 1960s. J/J Images - J Morrill Photo / Getty Images
By Jessica Corbett
"Another cog in the climate denial machine rattles loose."
So said Harvard University climate denial researcher Geoffrey Supran in response to a groundbreaking investigative report published Monday by E&E News revealing that scientists at auto giants General Motors and Ford Motor Co. "knew as early as the 1960s that car emissions caused climate change."
<p>Those discoveries, notes <em>E&E News </em>reporter Maxine Joselow, "preceded decades of political lobbying by the two car giants that undermined global attempts to reduce emissions while stalling U.S. efforts to make vehicles cleaner."</p><p>Supran is co-director of the Climate Social Science Network and a research associate in Harvard's Department of the History of Science. He investigates the history of climate politics—particularly the communications, denial, and delay tactics of fossil fuel interests—alongside professor Naomi Oreskes, who also highlighted the revelations.</p>
<div id="71d13" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8da145d0ce5495a0af282306945503af"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320728404078043136" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">"There was never any doubt for a minute", former GM scientist Ruth Reck says of her pioneering climate science rese… https://t.co/DaYzkpPG7q</div> — Geoffrey Supran (@Geoffrey Supran)<a href="https://twitter.com/GeoffreySupran/statuses/1320728404078043136">1603721164.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="94cd8" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="1812eaef4972b9dc93486f1643265be2"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320737159154991104" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">More details about what corporate America knew about #climatechange in the 1960s and 70s... and also how they funde… https://t.co/lSCrsvA44P</div> — NaomiOreskes (@NaomiOreskes)<a href="https://twitter.com/NaomiOreskes/statuses/1320737159154991104">1603723251.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>"From fossil fuel companies, to car manufacturers and utilities, we know it's not only Exxon that knew about the climate crisis decades ago," <span style="background-color: initial;">Lindsay Meiman of 350.org told <em>Common Dreams </em>on Monday, referencing previous <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" target="_blank">reporting</a> on climate research conducted and concealed for decades by oil giant ExxonMobil.</span></p><p>"Now, with climate disasters at our doorsteps, it's Black, Indigenous, and communities of color who bear the costs of these lies," Meiman added. "The silver lining: we know exactly who is responsible for the climate crisis. It's up to all of us to hold polluters and billionaires accountable for their deception and destruction."</p><p>Joselow's exposé is based on nearly five months of reporting as well as documents on GM from the General Motors Heritage Center and Wayne State University in Detroit, documents on Ford's climate research unearthed by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), and additional materials on both manufacturers provided by the Climate Investigations Centers.</p><p>According to <em>E&E News</em>:</p><blockquote>Researchers at both automakers found strong evidence in the 1960s and '70s that human activity was warming the Earth. A primary culprit was the burning of fossil fuels, which released large quantities of heat-trapping gases such as carbon dioxide that could trigger melting of polar ice sheets and other dire consequences.<br><br>A GM scientist presented her findings to at least three high-level executives at the company, including a former chairman and CEO. It's unclear whether similar warnings reached the top brass at Ford.<br><br>But in the following decades, both manufacturers largely failed to act on the knowledge that their products were heating the planet. Instead of shifting their business models away from fossil fuels, the companies invested heavily in gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs. At the same time, the two carmakers privately donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups that cast doubt on the scientific consensus on global warming.</blockquote>
<p>While spokespeople for each company responded to the revelations by recognizing the reality of human-caused climate change and detailing to <em>E&E News</em> their respective efforts to reduce emissions by increasing production of electric vehicles, climate action advocates were outraged.</p><p>"It's jaw-dropping," Jamie Henn, director of Fossil Free Media and co-founder of 350.org, told <em>Common Dreams</em>. "GM and Ford not only knew their cars were fueling the climate crisis, but anytime a political effort came together to address the emergency, they helped steer it into a ditch. Think of the millions of premature deaths from air pollution that could have been prevented if the world's largest automakers had committed to go all-electric back in the 1970s."</p><p>"This reporting drags the automakers back into the center of the climate fight," added Henn. "It puts immense pressure on them to support any new climate legislation or regulations, especially around electric vehicles and auto emissions. I think it also raises the question of whether GM and Ford should be included in future climate liability lawsuits."</p><p>Henn explained that unlike the major fossil fuel companies, who he called "irredeemable polluters," big auto companies like Ford and GM now have a choice to make. "They can get swept away with the likes of Exxon and Chevron or embrace a clean energy future by going all-electric and supporting mass transit," he said. "Activists will be working hard to make sure it's the latter."</p>
<div id="bb72f" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="161d579460176537e601275315796462"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320759585209262082" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Just like #ExxonKnew, General Motors + Ford have known for decades how they contribute to the climate crisis. Inst… https://t.co/noRVIUGiBt</div> — 350 dot org (@350 dot org)<a href="https://twitter.com/350/statuses/1320759585209262082">1603728598.0</a></blockquote></div>
<div id="3c362" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="928139734c26121a3902b39abb34b69d"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1320739545529393152" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">A critical, and damning, look at how #FordandGMKnew that vehicle emissions were driving climate change and they lob… https://t.co/nXJyEZQd4W</div> — Allison Considine (@Allison Considine)<a href="https://twitter.com/AD_Considine/statuses/1320739545529393152">1603723820.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>In a statement, CIEL president Carroll Muffett said the investigation "demonstrates auto companies were aware of emerging climate science and on notice of potential climate risks decades earlier than was previously recognized." The group also detailed key takeaways from the reporting:</p><ul><li>In a 1956 letter, Ford scientist Gilbert Plass rejected the idea that excess warming from burning fossil fuels poses "little danger to the Earth," observing that burning known reserves of fossil fuels would raise global temperatures by 7⁰C.</li><li>In multiple articles written while at Ford, Plass detailed the science linking fossil fuel combustion to the planetary "greenhouse effect.""</li><li>Ford continued an active program of climate-relevant research into the 1970s and beyond.</li><li>General Motors employed its own climate scientists from the early 1970s, with a research focus on establishing competing theories of global warming.</li><li>In testimony to Congress in 1967, a Ford executive argued against federal investments in electric vehicle research, arguing that industry was actively developing EV technology and would be ready to bring electric cars to market within a decade.</li></ul><p>"Like the oil industry, leading car companies had early notice that the carbon dioxide emitted by their automotive products posed potential risks for the climate at a planetary scale," said Muffett. "Ford and GM had both the opportunity and the responsibility to design products that would reduce emissions, and warn the public of risks that couldn't be eliminated. Instead, they spent decades denying climate science and obstructing climate action."</p><p>In other words, Muffett added, "like the major oil and gas companies, leading car companies took a calculated risk that they—and the world—could delay action to address the drivers of climate change. We are all paying for that gamble."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/26/gm-and-ford-knew-too-reporting-reveals-auto-giants-recognized-looming-climate-crisis" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- 12 Eastern States Aim to Curb Tailpipe Emissions - EcoWatch ›
- How Norway Convinced Drivers to Switch to Electric Cars - EcoWatch ›
- Stop Idling Your Car And Cut Carbon Dioxide Emissions - EcoWatch ›
- GM Pledges to Eliminate Gas-Powered Vehicles by 2035 - EcoWatch ›
- Can a Super Bowl Ad Promote Climate Solutions? - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Democratic U.S. presidential nominee Joe Biden gestures during a campaign stop on September 30, 2020 in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. Alex Wong / Getty Images
By Jake Johnson
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden on Wednesday vowed to bar from his transition team any "leaders" of fossil fuel companies, a pledge environmentalists cautiously applauded while urging the former vice president to go further by committing to banning all Big Oil lobbyists and executives from both his transition team and cabinet.
<p>"Rejecting fossil fuel influence is a smart move for the Biden-Harris campaign," Charlie Jiang, climate campaigner with Greenpeace USA, said in a statement Thursday. "Voters are hungry to elect a climate champion. Joe Biden is running on the most ambitious climate platform in history, but it won't mean much if his transition team is stacked with oil and gas insiders."</p><p>In a document titled "<a href="https://www.eenews.net/assets/2020/10/01/document_daily_01.pdf" target="_blank">Biden-Harris Transition Team Ethics Plan</a>," the campaign states that "in addition to instituting a robust code of ethical conduct, Vice President Biden aims to ensure that those who serve are aligned with his values and policy priorities, and have not, for example, been leaders at fossil fuel or private prison companies."</p><p>But the ethics plan falls well short of adhering to a <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/01/isnt-just-good-policy-its-good-politics-145-groups-demand-biden-ban-fossil-fuel" target="_blank">list of demands</a> issued last month by a coalition of nearly 150 climate organizations, which urged Biden to "ban all fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives from any advisory or official position on your campaign, transition team, cabinet, and administration" if elected president.</p>
<p>While the Biden campaign will require transition team members to sign a pledge promising to disqualify themselves from "involvement in any particular Biden-Harris transition team matter" if they have "engaged in regulated lobbying activities with respect to such matter" within the previous 12 months, the requirement comes with a substantial loophole.</p><p>"Persons who have registered as federal lobbyists within the last 12 months may only serve as transition team members with advance approval of the General Counsel," the document states, suggesting that lobbyists for the fossil fuel industry could ultimately be permitted to serve on the transition team.</p>
<div id="33b52" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="ee2395d30bb8a0ed68c62f8585a46e4f"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1311732363009777664" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">[email protected] is making a smart move by asserting that he won't allow fossil fuel execs on his transition team. He sho… https://t.co/5aH2dePR5E</div> — Ryan Schleeter (@Ryan Schleeter)<a href="https://twitter.com/Ryschlee/statuses/1311732363009777664">1601576340.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>Jiang said that while the Biden campaign's ethics plan "is a strong start," it "is not the end of the road."</p><p>"We urge Biden to commit to banning all fossil fuel executives and lobbyists from his cabinet and administration," Jiang added. "Personnel is policy, and we need experts in the White House who put climate and environmental justice ahead of corporate profits."</p><p>On Twitter, Collin Rees, senior campaigner at Oil Change U.S., <a href="https://twitter.com/collinrees/status/1311737916985614336" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">called</a> Biden's move "a key first step" made possible by constant pressure from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/01/isnt-just-good-policy-its-good-politics-145-groups-demand-biden-ban-fossil-fuel" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">grassroots climate activists</a>.</p><p>"Committing to a fossil-free transition team is exactly what we need to see heading into a new administration with climate impacts mounting rapidly," Rees added in a <a href="http://oilchangeusa.org/response-biden-commits-to-keep-fossil-fuel-reps-out-of-transition-team/" target="_blank">statement</a> Thursday. "Keeping fossil fuel representatives out of the federal government is a position that's extremely popular with Democrats and the entire American public, and builds on the key improvements Biden has made to his climate plan since the primary. The Biden-Harris campaign is clearly listening to its potential allies, and this willingness to listen and adapt will be critical in the months ahead."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/10/01/strong-start-not-end-road-says-greenpeace-biden-vows-bar-fossil-fuel-leaders" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- The Environmental Legacy of Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's Newly ... ›
- Biden Commits to Banning Fossil Fuel Subsidies After DNC Dropped It ›
- Activists Are Alarmed Over Biden Pick Who Took Fossil Fuel Money ›
- Greenpeace Releases Sweeping Policy Plans to Fight Inequality, Racial Injustice, COVID-19 and Climate Crisis - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Charleston, SC Becomes First City in U.S. South to Sue Big Oil for Climate Costs
11 September 2020
Climate
The number of flood days in Charleston, South Carolina has risen from around four to around 89 in the last 50 years. Diane Cook and Len Jenshel / The Image Bank / Getty Images Plus
The city of Charleston, South Carolina made history Wednesday when it became the first in the U.S. South to sue the fossil fuel industry for damages caused by the climate crisis.
<p>The city sued 24 <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oil" target="_self">oil</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pipelines" target="_self">pipeline</a> companies, including major players like <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/exxonmobil" target="_self">ExxonMobil</a>, <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/chevron" target="_self">Chevron</a>, <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bp" target="_self">BP</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/royal-dutch-shell" target="_self">Royal Dutch Shell</a>, <a href="https://www.postandcourier.com/news/charleston-sues-big-oil-for-flooding-in-sc-lowcountry-caused-by-global-warming/article_a97f761c-f297-11ea-b9b6-07c93643bc83.html#:~:text=The%20city%20of%20Charleston%20filed,disastrous%20flooding%20in%20the%20city" target="_blank">The Post and Courier reported</a>. The lawsuit contends that the companies knew that their products were heating the global climate but denied the fact in public. It further seeks to charge them for the costs of protecting Charleston from increased <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/flooding" target="_self">flooding</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/extreme-weather" target="_self">extreme weather</a> events.</p><p>"As this lawsuit shows, these companies have known for more than 50 years that their products were going to cause the worst flooding the world has seen since Noah built the Ark," Charleston Mayor John Tecklenburg said during a press conference announcing the suit, as <a href="https://www.live5news.com/2020/09/09/charleston-mayor-holding-news-conference-wednesday-afternoon/" target="_blank">Live 5 News reported</a>. "And instead of warning us, they covered up the truth and turned our flooding problems into their profits. That was wrong, and this lawsuit is all about holding them accountable for that multi-decade campaign of deception."</p>
<div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="30f8c9a63724b0972d3d8af2ea247346"><div class="fb-video" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=360821064951694" data-allowfullscreen="true"></div></div>
<p>Charleston, a low-lying city built on a peninsula between three rivers, is especially vulnerable to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-level-rise" target="_self">sea level rise</a>, according to <a href="https://apnews.com/fdd1235388b266ded96e4547524a3510" target="_blank">The Associated Press</a>. In the last 50 years, the city has gone from seeing around four flood days a year to almost 89, the suit contends. In addition, the city will feel the impacts of extreme weather events like <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/heat-waves" target="_self">heat waves</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/hurricanes" target="_self">hurricanes</a>. The suit was filed days before the third anniversary of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/hurricane-irma-flooding-records-2484349881.html" target="_self">Hurricane Irma</a>, which inundated Charleston with a nearly 10-foot storm surge, the third highest in the city's history.</p><p>Tecklenburg made his announcement in front of The Battery, where construction crews were working to lengthen an existing sea wall, The Post and Courier reported. The sea wall extension is the city's first project to adapt to rising sea levels. Others include building more than 8,000 feet of new flood drainage tunnels and installing check valves to prevent tidal water from entering the city's storm drain system, according to Live 5 News.</p>
<p>The city expects sea levels to rise two to three feet in the next 50 years and it predicts that adapting to these changes will cost $2 billion, according to The Post and Courier. However, the lawsuit is not asking for a particular amount from the companies, instead hoping a jury will decide what is fair.</p><p>Many of the companies named in the suit did not reply to requests for comments. Those that did said that lawsuits were not the right way to address the climate crisis.</p><p>"Legal proceedings like this waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money and do nothing to advance meaningful actions that reduce the risks of climate change," ExxonMobil spokesperson Casey Norton told The Associated Press.</p><p>Charleston is now the 21st U.S. community to disagree and file a lawsuit against big oil.</p><p>"With today's filing, Big Oil is facing climate lawsuits on both coasts, in the Northeast, the Midwest, the South, the Rocky Mountains, and even Hawaii," Center for Climate Integrity Executive Director Richard Wiles told The Post and Courier by email. "The public is ready to hold this corrupt industry accountable for causing and lying about climate change, and officials across the country are stepping up to take action."</p><p>Charleston's suit comes about a week after a similar lawsuit was <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/big-oil-hoboken-lawsuit-2647462366.html" target="_self">filed by the city of Hoboken, New Jersey</a>.</p><p>It was also followed one day later by another climate liability lawsuit from the state of Delaware Thursday.</p>
<div id="00ba7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3f5e3d8ac183e5a9a93d3b8aa254e743"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1304084807564111872" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">🚨BREAKING: It's gonna be one of those weeks. Delaware is the latest state to announce another climate lawsuit again… https://t.co/0ljwUNZLqS</div> — Jennifer Hijazi (@Jennifer Hijazi)<a href="https://twitter.com/JenHijaz/statuses/1304084807564111872">1599753021.0</a></blockquote></div>
From Your Site Articles
- 'Fossil Fuel Companies Knew': Honolulu Files Lawsuit Over Climate ... ›
- City of Hoboken Files Climate Suit Against Big Oil - EcoWatch ›
- Climate Litigation Against Big Oil Heats Up - EcoWatch ›
- Big Oil Splutters — How Will It Survive the Energy Transition? - EcoWatch ›
- Annapolis Sues 26 Oil and Gas Companies Over Climate Change - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The corner of Jefferson and 7th in Hoboken, N.J., is flooded on Oct. 30, 2012 following Superstorm Sandy. Alec Perkins / Wikimedia Commons / CC by 2.0
By Kenny Stancil
The city of Hoboken on Wednesday filed a lawsuit against multiple Big Oil players—including ExxonMobil, incorporated in New Jersey—joining an increasing number of state and local governments using litigation in efforts to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for defrauding the public about foreseen climate crisis damages and to make companies "pay their fair share" of the costs of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to a warming planet.
<p>The <a href="https://payupclimatepolluters.org/uploads/media/Hoboken-v-Exxon-et-al_Complaint_9-2-20.pdf" target="_blank">lawsuit</a> argues that the defendants—ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips, and the American Petroleum Institute—knew that "their production, marketing, and sale of fossil fuels would cause global climate change," but they engaged in a massive "disinformation campaign" to protect their profits, which would diminish in conjunction with decreased fossil fuel use.</p><p>Big Oil began redesigning its own assets to adapt to rising sea levels at the same time it was "telling the world that climate change was a hoax," the lawsuit states. </p><p>According to the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), Hoboken is the 20th community to take fossil fuel giants to <a href="https://payupclimatepolluters.org/cases/" target="_blank">court</a> to "recover billions of dollars in damages caused by the oil and gas industry's deception about climate change."</p><p>Richard Wiles, executive director of CCI, said in a statement that "with climate costs surging everywhere and local budgets depleted, more and more communities are turning to the courts as their only recourse to make polluters pay for their fair share of the wreckage they knew their products would cause."</p>
<p>Wiles continued:</p><blockquote>Exxon and their co-conspirators can't run from this growing wave of climate lawsuits. Thanks to Hoboken, for the first time, Exxon will have to defend its shameful record of climate damages, disinformation, and denial on its home turf. It takes guts to sue the most ruthless, deceitful, and unapologetic climate polluters on the planet. Hoboken's elected leaders should be applauded. <br></blockquote><p><a href="https://patch.com/new-jersey/hoboken/hoboken-files-lawsuit-against-oil-companies-over-climate-change" target="_blank">According to</a> local reporters, Hoboken Mayor Ravi Bhalla's announcement of the legal action came one month after "the low-lying city suffered two flooding events that theoretically should have occurred once in 50 years." </p><p>In addition, residents remember the devastating <a href="https://www.nj.com/news/2020/09/nj-city-makes-history-is-1st-to-sue-oil-giants-for-climate-change-damages.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">impact</a> that Superstorm Sandy had in 2012, when a 14-foot storm surge overwhelmed outdated sewer systems to cause over $100 million in damage in the city. </p><p>At Wednesday morning's <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Hoboken" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">press conference</a>, Bhalla described his intentions to get Hoboken off the list of coastal communities at risk of becoming inundated within the next five decades. </p>
<p>The mayor <a href="https://www.hobokennj.gov/news/hoboken-sues-exxon-mobil-american-petroleum-institute-big-oil-companies" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>:</p><blockquote>At the same time we've invested hundreds of millions of dollars adapting to the realities of climate change, Big Oil companies have engaged in a decades long campaign of misinformation that has contributed to global warming which has disproportionately impacted our residents. We cannot stand idly by and allow Big Oil to continue profiting at the expense of Hoboken residents. It's time these companies pay their fair share and be held accountable for their actions.<br></blockquote><p>Over the past decade and in response to rising sea levels, Hoboken has invested $140 million in climate change adaptation, including several projects that are part of its Rebuild by Design comprehensive water management strategy, according to a <a href="https://www.hobokennj.gov/news/hoboken-sues-exxon-mobil-american-petroleum-institute-big-oil-companies" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">statement</a> from the city.</p><p>Hoboken's lawsuit aims to "recover funds to pay for the costs that the city is undertaking, and will undertake as a result of the substantial impacts of climate change, which has been exacerbated by Big Oil."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/02/city-hoboken-files-climate-suit-against-exxon-most-ruthless-deceitful-and" target="_blank">Common Dreams.</a></em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Big Oil Is in Big Trouble - EcoWatch ›
- Trump Blasted for 'Morally Bankrupt' Multibillion-Dollar Big Oil ... ›
- Big Oil Taking $1.9 Billion in CARES Act Tax Breaks - EcoWatch ›
- Charleston, SC Becomes First City in U.S. South to Sue Big Oil for Climate Costs - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
145 Progressive Groups Urge Biden to Shun Fossil Fuel Execs and Lobbyists
01 September 2020
Politics
Climate change protesters disrupt Joe Biden during a campaign event on Oct. 9, 2019 in Manchester, New Hampshire. Scott Eisen / Getty Images
By Jake Johnson
A diverse coalition of nearly 150 progressive advocacy groups is demanding that Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden ban fossil fuel executives and lobbyists from his 2020 campaign and commit to barring them from his administration if elected in November, warning that a cabinet stocked with Big Oil representatives would render empty the former vice president's vows to confront the climate crisis with ambition and urgency.
<p>In a <a href="http://oilchangeusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Letter-to-VP-Biden-%E2%80%94-No-Fossil-Fuel-Representatives.pdf" target="_blank">letter</a> Tuesday morning, 145 organizations representing a wide array of progressive interests called on Biden to "ban all fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives from any advisory or official position on your campaign, transition team, cabinet, and administration," arguing there are countless qualified experts and advocates who have not attempted to benefit financially from polluting and extractive industries.</p><p>"People who left government to serve on a fossil fuel industry board, enrich themselves as oil and gas advisors, receive funding from fossil fuel companies to espouse 'reasonable' climate positions, or work with industry front groups should have no role in a Biden administration or campaign," the groups wrote. "Neither should fossil fuel backers on Wall Street, who have attempted to profit off pollution."</p>
<p>The letter's signatories — which include Oil Change U.S., Greenpeace, Justice Democrats, Sunrise Movement, People's Action, and Public Citizen — raised alarm at a Bloomberg <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/climate-hawks-urge-biden-to-shun-obama-era-energy-moderates" target="_blank">report</a> earlier this month indicating that industry-tied individuals like Jason Bordoff, a member of the <a href="https://www.npc.org/members/byNamcon.html" target="_blank">National Petroleum Council</a>, are advising the Biden campaign in an informal capacity.</p><p>"Joe Biden can't address the climate crisis while listening to people taking checks from the fossil fuel industry like Ernest Moniz, Jason Bordoff, Ken Salazar, and Heather Zichal," Collin Rees, senior campaigner at Oil Change U.S., said in a statement. "Biden must act boldly in collaboration with grassroots leaders fighting for environmental and climate justice — which means ruling out positions for dangerous 'all-of-the-above' boosters whose time has passed."</p>
<p>The letter points to <a href="https://filesforprogress.org/datasets/2020/9/dfp_ff_executives_polling.pdf" target="_blank">polling</a> from progressive policy shops Data for Progress and Fossil Free Media showing that 61% of Democratic voters oppose "fossil fuel industry lobbyists or representatives working in the White House and other government agencies." Voters overall oppose fossil fuel industry representatives serving in the federal government by a 22-point margin, the survey found.</p><p>"Banning fossil fuel representatives isn't just good policy — it's good politics," the groups wrote. "Ruling out positions for fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives is a critical way to show your commitment to a future that prioritizes people, not polluters."</p><p>The groups' call comes hours after Biden, speaking in the battleground state of Pennsylvania on Monday, <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/08/31/despite-poll-showing-aggressive-climate-action-winning-issue-biden-boasts-i-am-not" target="_blank">told</a> supporters that contrary to President Donald Trump's claims, he has no plan to ban fracking even as he pushes for <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/14/more-work-do-major-step-forward-progressives-welcome-bidens-2-trillion-green-energy" target="_blank">large investments</a> in clean energy and <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/08/20/901380014/fact-check-bidens-address-to-the-dnc-annotated" target="_blank">promises</a> to treat the climate crisis like the "existential threat" that it is.</p>
<p>Tamara Toles O'Laughlin of 350 Action said Biden's approach to the climate emergency will be judged not by soaring rhetoric and promises but by his actions during the presidential campaign and, if elected, while in office.</p><p>"Thanks to the environment and climate movement's decades of tireless work to make decision-makers act boldly, the Biden-Harris campaign has adopted the strongest climate platform of any presidential ticket in history," said O'Laughlin. "However, real progress will be measured by relationship to communities most impacted and investments in the same."</p><p>"Fossil fuel representatives have no place at the table except to hand over their dirty profits to rebuild what they have broken," O'Laughlin continued. "Any accommodation to fossil fuel executives will undermine the promise of our shared work and throw away our chances of a livable future in the climate decade."</p>
<p>Read the full letter:</p><blockquote><em>Dear Vice President Biden,</em><br><em>Congratulations on your nomination as the presidential candidate for the Democratic Party. As you have said, this is a historic time for our nation. Over 180,000 Americans have lost their lives to theCOVID-19 pandemic that continues to ravage the nation. Millions are rising up to demand racial justice and an end to white supremacy. Donald Trump has put our democracy on the line with his attacks on our right to vote and threats to contest the election. Meanwhile, the climate emergency is ravaging our country, as supercharged wildfires burn across western states, climate-intensified floods and derechos slam the Midwest, and sea level rise threatens our coasts.<br></em><br><em>We want to thank you for your bold plans to combat the climate crisis and create millions of good-paying, union jobs in a clean energy economy. We applaud the ways in which you have put environmental justice at the heart of your plans, making sure that the communities of color who are on the frontlines of this crisis are at the forefront of its solutions. Implementing your plans would be a major step toward putting this country back on track to meet our global commitments under the Paris Agreement while centering the communities most harmed by environmental injustice.<br></em><br><em>Your leadership on climate and environmental justice is why we urge you to ban all fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives from any advisory or official position on your campaign, transition team, cabinet, and administration.<br></em><br><em>For decades, oil, gas, and coal executives have lied to the American people about the threat of climate change and lobbied against government action, all while attempting to present themselves as part of the solution. During this election, the American Petroleum Institute is spending <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-gas-climatechange-insight/in-the-run-up-to-u-s-election-drilling-lobby-promotes-natural-gas-as-clean-idUSKCN25E1DB" target="_blank">upwards of $24,000 per day</a> to mislead voters into thinking that fossil gas is "clean" energy, even though methane emissions associated with gas can make it worse than coal. Meanwhile, fossil fuel corporations have continued to expand their operations, destroy our environment, and pollute communities—especially communities of color—across this nation and around the world.<br></em><br><em>The Trump Administration has fully embraced these fossil fuel interests. Former oil and gas lobbyists now run the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior. At their behest, the Trump administration has instigated <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks.html" target="_blank">100 environmental rollbacks</a>, putting our health and safety at risk. During the coronavirus pandemic, the administration has continued to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/21/white-house-coronavirus-regulations/" target="_blank">slash environmental protections</a> and give <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-15/-stealth-bailout-shovels-millions-of-dollars-to-oil-companies" target="_blank">billions of dollars</a> in bailouts to fossil fuels.<br></em><br><em>These abuses have real costs in the communities that you have pledged to serve. <a href="https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-04-21/nearly-half-of-americans-breathe-polluted-air" target="_blank">Nearly half of Americans</a> now breathe polluted air, the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5800116/#B17-ijerph-15-00016" target="_blank">vast majority</a> of which comes from burning fossil fuels, according to research by the American Lung Association. According to a 2016 NAACP report, <a href="https://www.naacp.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Coal_Blooded_Action_Toolkit_FINAL_FINAL.pdf" target="_blank">71% of African Americans</a> live in counties in violation of air pollution standards. Indigenous people have seen their rights trampled to build dangerous new pipelines like Dakota Access and Keystone XL. Latina women in Texas who live near gas flaring are seeing a <a href="https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Risk-of-premature-births-50-higher-for-mothers-15408663.php" target="_blank">50% increase</a> in premature births.<br></em><br><em>To advance environmental justice, you must stand up to fossil fuel CEOs, stop the expansion of oil, gas, and coal production, and rapidly transition us away from fossil fuels. A Biden administration free of fossil fuel interests would signal your commitment to restoring a government by and for the American people.</em><br><em>Banning fossil fuel representatives isn't just good policy—it's good politics. According to a new <a href="https://filesforprogress.org/datasets/2020/9/dfp_ff_executives_polling.pdf" target="_blank">Data for Progress poll</a>, American voters oppose fossil fuel industry lobbyists or representatives working in the executive branch by a 22-point margin. Sixty-one (61) percent of Democrats oppose fossil fuel industry representatives working in the administration, while only 22 percent are open to the idea. Ruling out positions for fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives is a critical way to show your commitment to a future that prioritizes people, not polluters.<br></em><br><em>This critical need to advance climate and environmental justice is why we are concerned by initial <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-05/climate-hawks-urge-biden-to-shun-obama-era-energy-moderates" target="_blank">reports</a> that people with ties to fossil fuel interests have been advising your campaign and may be angling for roles in your administration. People who left government to serve on a fossil fuel industry board, enrich themselves as oil and gas advisors, receive funding from fossil fuel companies to espouse "reasonable" climate positions, or work with industry front groups should have no role in a Biden administration or campaign. Neither should fossil fuel backers on Wall Street, who have attempted to profit off pollution.</em><br><em>We appreciate your team's recent reiteration of your commitment to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies as part of your comprehensive approach to climate action and environmental justice. A commitment from you to ban all fossil fuel executives, lobbyists, and representatives from your administration would go far to assuage any lingering concerns about your climate commitments that may have been raised when the <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/democratic-national-committee-climate_n_5f3c2907c5b6d8a9173f0268" target="_blank">DNC dropped support</a> for ending fossil fuel subsidies from the 2020 Platform.<br></em><br><em>Many thousands of talented experts, advocates, and community leaders who do not represent coal, oil, and gas companies would gladly serve in your administration and help move our country forward into the clean energy future. They've shown the expertise, principles, and dedication that should be a requirement for any administration role. We urge you to choose them over the fossil fuel CEOs, lobbyists, and representatives who are profiting from climate destruction.<br></em><br><em>We thank you for making combating the climate crisis a top priority for your campaign. We look forward to working alongside you to build back better, create a new, clean energy economy that creates millions of good-paying, union jobs, and address the crises of climate change, Covid-19, mass unemployment, and the environmental injustice and racism that have plagued our nation for too long. Millions of us are ready to get to work: There's no need to slow us down with people tied to fossil fuel interests.</em></blockquote>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/09/01/isnt-just-good-policy-its-good-politics-145-groups-demand-biden-ban-fossil-fuel" target="_blank">Common Dreams</a></em><em>.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- As Biden Embraces More Ambitious Climate Plan, Fossil Fuel Execs ... ›
- The Environmental Legacy of Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's Newly ... ›
- As Kerry Touts U.S. Climate Diplomacy, Biden Is Urged to End Dirty Energy Subsidies - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
A British Petroleum petrol station on March 10, 2017, in Ciudad Satelite, Naucalpan de Juarez municipality, Mexico State. The company will reportedly start to offer electric vehicle recharging stations at its retail gasoline stations. RONALDO SCHEMIDT / AFP via Getty Images
BP, the energy giant that grew from oil and gas production, is taking its business in a new direction, announcing Tuesday that it will slash its oil and gas production by 40 percent and increase its annual investment in low-carbon technology to $5 billion, a ten-fold increase over its current level, according to CNN.
<p>Despite losing $16.8 billion in the second quarter of 2020, the ambitious plan to become a leading purveyor of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/" target="_self">clean energy</a> sent the company's share price soaring 7 percent Tuesday, as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/04/business/energy-environment/bp-renewable-investment.html" target="_blank">The New York Times</a> reported.</p><p>"This coming decade is critical for the world in the fight against climate change, and to drive the necessary change in global energy systems will require action from everyone," BP said in a statement, as CNN reported.</p><p>As part of its plan, the company will stop its oil and gas exploration in new countries and reduce its current production and carbon emissions by one-third, as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/08/04/bp-built-its-business-oil-gas-now-climate-change-is-taking-it-apart/" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> reported.</p>
<p>In a discussion with analysts on Tuesday, BP's Chief Executive Bernard Looney set his company apart from its European counterparts, which have made vague commitments to address the climate crisis. Looney's pledge to invest around $5 billion a year in renewable energy like wind, solar and hydrogen, a clean-burning gas, made it the first oil and gas giant to specify its investment goal, according to The New York Times.</p><p>"This makes the BP the first supermajor to spell out, in detail, what the energy transition will actually entail, in practical terms," said Pavel Molchanov, senior energy analyst for the investment firm Raymond James, to The Washington Post.</p>
<p>"BP today introduces a new strategy that will reshape its business as it pivots from being an international oil company focused on producing resources to an integrated energy company focused on delivering solutions for customers," the company said, as <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-bp-outlook/bp-to-cut-fossil-fuels-output-by-40-by-2030-idUSKCN2500NH" target="_blank">Reuters</a> reported.</p><p>The company expects demand for <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/fossil-fuels" target="_self">fossil fuels</a> to fall by 75 percent by 2050, if the increase in global temperatures is limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius, or by 50 percent if warming is less than 2 degrees, BP head of strategy Giulia Chierchia told investors, as CNN reported.</p><p>BP said its will cut its oil and gas production by at least one million barrels a day by 2030, a 40 percent reduction from 2019 levels, as CNN reported.</p><p>While the company will dramatically expand its portfolio of clean energy technologies, the next five years will see BP continue to invest most of its money in oil and gas production, according to CNN.</p>
<p>"We believe our new strategy provides a comprehensive and coherent approach to turn our net zero ambition into action," Looney said in a statement Tuesday, as The Washington Post reported.</p><p>The investment in low-carbon initiatives is set to jump to more than $3 billion by 2025 and $5 billion by 2030, "en route to 50 gigawatts of renewable generation capacity by 2030 alongside scale-up of other clean tech businesses," Molchanov said, as The Washington Post reported.</p><p>The company sees a profitable future in providing clean energy to cities. According to The Washington Post, BP plans to advise cities on "power packages" with renewables, back-up batteries and financing. It also will also start to offer <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/electric-vehicles">electric vehicle</a> recharging stations at its retail gasoline stations.</p><p>Oswald Clint, an analyst at Bernstein, a market research firm, told The New York Times that BP's plans were "peer-leading" and that its potential to smoothly manage large projects in the renewables area was "underappreciated."</p><p>Environmental activists were lukewarm about the plans. Greenpeace UK described the announcement as a "necessary and encouraging start," but said BP must go further. "BP has woken up [to] the immediate need to cut carbon emissions this decade," senior climate campaigner Mel Evans said in a statement, as CNN reported.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- World's Largest Fund Manager to 'Reshape' Investment Portfolio to ... ›
- Oil Companies Are Thinking About a Low-Carbon Future, but Aren't ... ›
- BP Announces Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Target, but Offers No ... ›
- Investors Worth $5 Trillion Set Major Emissions Reduction Targets - EcoWatch ›
- Shell Claims It Reached Peak Oil Production in 2019 ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less