On October 9, 2015, the House of Representatives approved a bill in a 261-159 vote that would repeal the government’s authority to ban the export of crude oil granted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. Many of the think tanks studied agree on the reality and urgency of climate change, and even the politically conservative Cato Institute acknowledges that “lobal warming is indeed real, and human activity has been a contributor since 1975.” But their push for lifting the ban suggests that they have made the bottom lines of their corporate sponsors a more important factor in determining their advocacy agendas. ![]() In addition to the industry influence over individual think tanks, PAI found that several of the experts who produced pro-export research have had positions at multiple pro-export think tanks, sometimes simultaneously, in effect creating an echo chamber of highly influential institutions funded, directed, and staffed by many of the same corporations and people and delivering the same pro-industry messages. All of the think tanks analyzed had oil and gas executives or lobbyists on their boards.ĮxxonMobil Corporation, which is currently under investigation for funding a campaign of disinformation to sow doubt about climate change, is a major donor to every think tank analyzed in the report. Further, oil and gas executives and lobbyists have actual governing power over these think tanks. PAI found that all of the think tanks examined receive significant funding from major oil and gas companies that have a financial interest in exporting crude oil. The think tanks’ new push for lifting the ban only makes sense in light of their deep and extensive ties to oil companies. The Center for American Progress, the most prominent think tank to oppose lifting the export ban, reported in 2015 that lifting the ban would produce greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 135 coal fired power plants. The Heritage Foundation, for example, enthuses that the US has more than five times the amount of recoverable oil reserves than Saudi Arabia, even as climate scientists warn that recovering all the Earth’s fossil fuel reserves would be apocalyptic. The think tanks have used their influence in the media and policy arena to push for an end to the ban, arguing it to be an economic and geopolitical benefit to the United States while largely ignoring the environmental and climate consequences of such a move. ![]() Over the past two years, nine of the most frequently cited US think tanks have released reports endorsing crude oil exports, sent experts to advocate exports in Congressional testimony, and published op-ed columns supporting a repeal of the ban on exporting crude oil.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |