Let’s face it: the general public doesn’t dig too deep into the background of organizations giving them supposed ‘facts’ about climate change. So, it’s all too easy for them to hear a name like ‘American Energy Alliance’ or ‘Institute for Energy Research’ and assume that these are reputable, non-biased groups that can provide them with information they can trust. But, these groups and many others like them are actually front groups for polluting businesses and for the energy industry.
NRDC explains:
Yesterday the American Energy Alliance announced it is running radio ads in the districts of some of the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee, which is currently looking at a bill that would establish polluter penalties on global warming pollution. The ads repeat Newt Gingrich’s false- and thoroughly debunked – claim that a climate bill will cost every American $1,300 per year.
So who is the American Energy Alliance? Another offshoot of the ExxonMobil and Koch Industries families of polluter-funded advocacy, it turns out. Described by NPR as “a new advocacy organization with strong ties to the oil industry,” AEA was formed in 2008 and is led by long-time polluter-pal Thomas Pyle, who serves as President.
Pyle is also President of the AEA’s counterpart the Institute for Energy Research (IER). What’s that? Well, the tobacco industry had the Tobacco Institute to peddle its smoke screens, deceptions and other propaganda. The energy industry has the Institute for Energy Research, which Sourcewatch describes this way: ” … founded in 1989 from a predecessor non-profit organization, [IER] advocates positions on environmental issues which happen to suit the energy industry: climate change denial, claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless, and the deregulation of utilities.”
As we reported yesterday, the energy industry has been perpetuating the myth that “clean energy is a dirty lie”. Not that this is any surprise. The energy industry will do practically anything to stay afloat during these times of changing public sentiment, including ignoring their own scientists’ data on climate change because it wasn’t convenient to the story they had concocted.
Link [NRDC]
