Source: Drilled
A couple of new studies out last week provide tremendous insight into how the fossil fuel industries works to block climate policy and where it’s particularly focused at the moment. Unfortunately neither got any media coverage at all. If you haven’t noticed, there’s been a massive bloodletting in the media the past couple of months with layoffs at every national outlet and hiring freezes at the few outlets not announcing major layoffs. I can tell you from my own experience that this is resulting in fewer climate stories being assigned, and longer wait times for the stories that are assigned to be published. Half the editors are handling an ever-increasing number of climate stories and there’s just less and less space for them every week.
At any rate, let’s dig into this new research for a minute! First up, an often-used source around these parts ,Dr. Robert Brulle at Brown University, teamed up with Christian Downie at the Australian National University on a new peer-reviewed study in the journal Climactic Change that looks particularly at the role of trade associations in blocking climate policy. As we’ve covered multiple times, it’s quite common for corporations in various industries to commit to climate action publicly while funding and coordinating behind the scenes within trade groups like the American Petroleum Institute, the National Association of Manufacturers, or the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers to block climate policy. This new study finds that U.S.-based trade associations spent $3.4 billion from 2008-2018 on advertising, lobbying, and political contributions to ensure that climate action would be stalled. While there’s been a lot of attention paid to lobbying activities of these associations, the research finds that they are spending even more on advertising and promotion and grant giving by a factor of 3 to 1. Industry spokespeople and pro-fossil fuel pundits often claim that there’s just as much, if not more, spending in the push for climate policy as against it, but so far the data does not back this claim up. In reviewing IRS filings from 2008 to 2018, Downie and Brulle found that spending by sectors generally opposed to climate action compared to those in support was $2 billion to $74.5 million.
In the same week, Influence Map put out a fascinating report on the International Gas Union, which describes itself as a “spokesperson for the gas industry worldwide.” It has more than 150 members including all the household names—Shell, ExxonMobil, Sempra, and Total—representing about 90 percent of the global gas industry. The report analyzes strategy documents that, incredibly, were available on IGU’s website from 2017 to 2021. Taken together they reveal a global playbook that includes the “greening” of gas in regions that are more environmentally conscious and the emphasizing of “energy poverty” in the Global South. The group’s advocacy strategy includes a focus on the World Bank and International Monetary Fund in an effort to tie economic development goals to the buildout of gas infrastructure, as well as partnerships with media outlets, environmental organizations, and think tanks.
Leave a Reply