It wouldn鈥檛 be okay for Amnesty to take donations from military dictators or for Animal Liberation to accept abattoir-owners as sponsors.
Such scenarios are so unlikely they just sound bizarre.
So why should we accept that it鈥檚 okay for Australian environmental groups to take money from fossil fuel corporations?
Surely it鈥檚 the ultimate conflict of interest. How can groups set up to stop climate change accept cash from companies that make millions from polluting the planet?
But big Australian environmental research group does not appear to see the problem.
Its include AGL, one of Australia鈥檚 biggest fossil fuel companies.
AGL has extensive natural gas assets and runs coal seam gas projects at sites near Camden and Gloucester in NSW. It also has a 32.5% stake in Victoria鈥檚 Loy Yang power station. Loy Yang burns brown coal 鈥 the planet鈥檚 dirtiest fuel.
Australia鈥檚 biggest energy infrastructure company, Jemena, is another of the institute鈥檚 partners. Jemena is the builder and owner of the Queensland Gas Pipeline, designed to transport huge amounts of coal seam gas for export.
US-based multinational General Electric (GE) also backs the Climate Institute.
Until the 1990s, GE was heavily involved in the nuclear weapons industry. In the 1950s and 鈥60s, it was found to have conducted 鈥渉uman experiments with nuclear radiation鈥, says .
Today, GE 鈥渆quipment and services for all segments of the oil and gas industry, from drilling and production, LNG, pipelines and storage to industrial power generation, refining and petrochemicals鈥.
It says on its that 鈥渃oal will continue to fuel the world鈥檚 furnaces for years to come鈥. GE boasts it 鈥渋s experienced in the mining industry and is prepared to meet the expected growth鈥 in transporting coal.
GE also has a stake in oil production in Canada鈥檚 tar sands. Because it emits up to three times more emissions than conventional oil, US climate scientist in 2009: 鈥淭he tar sands of Canada constitute one of our planet's greatest threats.鈥
The Climate Institute is not the only environment group to accept sponsorship from companies that trash the environment. Climate group 1 Million Women .
Origin is another fossil fuel giant that is taking part in Australia鈥檚 coal seam gas rush.
It鈥檚 not hard to work out why big polluters are happy to sponsor green groups. It鈥檚 a marketing strategy, an advertising gimmick. When they donate to green groups, big polluters are buying green credentials.
It鈥檚 far harder to grasp why any environmental group would accept such tainted support.
There鈥檚 an argument that it鈥檚 better to engage with polluting corporations rather than campaign against them. The hope is that the environmental ideals will rub off on the CEOs, and encourage them to clean up their act.
But in the US, where business donations to green groups began earlier, it is the corporations that have influenced the green groups 鈥 not the other way around.
British writer Johann Hari documented the capture of some of the biggest US conservation groups by corporate interests in a 2010 in The Nation.
Hari said: 鈥淎fter decades of slowly creeping corporate corruption, some of the biggest environmental groups have remade themselves in the image of their corporate backers: they are putting profit before planet.鈥
He picked out two big US NGOs, Conservation International and The Nature Conservancy, for special censure. 鈥淭hey are not part of the environmental movement,鈥 he said. 鈥淭hey are polluter-funded leeches sucking on the flesh of environmentalism, leaving it weaker and depleted.鈥
Things are not as bad in Australia as they are in the US. But it started the same way there as it has started in Australia 鈥 鈥渨ith a financial donation鈥.
Environmental groups should stop accepting donations and sponsorships with fossil fuel corporations. It鈥檚 dirty money 鈥 coal dirty, oil dirty, methane dirty.
It鈥檚 money made by stealing a safe climate from future generations. Green groups should not help greenwash it.
Comments
Anonymous replied on Permalink
Anonymous replied on Permalink