Think Tank Turns Tables on Greenpeace Hypocrites
The National Center for Public Policy Research is challenging Greenpeace and its affiliates to disclose the sources and amounts of its 2006 donations exceeding $50,000. If it does so, The National Center for Public Policy Research will do the same.
We're making this challenge in light of allegations in Greenpeace's May 17 report, "ExxonMobil's Continued Funding of Global Warming Denial Industry," which suggests that it is improper for 41 groups, including The National Center for Public Policy Research, to accept contributions from ExxonMobil because the positions of at least some of them on climate issues is not precisely in accordance with those of Greenpeace.
Most of the groups singled out for criticism in the Greenpeace report work on a wide variety of public policy issues. For most of the groups, climate policy is just a small fraction of their portfolio. Greenpeace - perhaps based on its own behavior - assumes that donations influence the stands groups such as ours take. They do not. So that the public can judge for themselves, we're challenging Greenpeace to complete transparency through disclosure of major gifts.
Funding from energy companies is not what is fueling the vigorous climate debate. What is fueling the debate is genuine, sincere belief that great uncertainties remain - both on the science and on the appropriate public policy response.
As the stakes, and the costs, of the climate debate are immense, it is entirely proper that many voices and perspectives be considered - not just those of Greenpeace and its allies. If Greenpeace disagrees with others, it might more productively use its resources debating the issue itself, rather than focus on the fact that certain groups also addressing climate issues receive less than 1% of its revenue from ExxonMobil -- as ours did. Greenpeace has profited more from corporate largesse than The National Center for Public Policy Research and similar groups ever will.
Although Greenpeace has a policy against accepting direct corporate donations, the group just received a $27 million bequest from the heir of a major shipping company, a company which emitted 7.13 million tons of CO2 in 2005 (about .12% of ALL U.S. CO2 emissions).
Further, Greenpeace Executive Director John Passacantando's compensation is three times - perhaps more - the total amount of corporate contributions The National Center for Public Policy Research received in 2006. Perhaps that fact puts things a little more into perspective. If Greenpeace expects its call for public disclosure of grants of other groups to be taken seriously, they should lead by example.
If not, they're the real "denial industry."
Source: National Center for Public Policy Research press release
Peter C Glover
1 Comment
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (1)
Greenpeace is either completely incompetent or has been corrupted by the heady feeling of power. This organization should be exposed to the unsuspecting public which funds it as environmental stewards. It was gratifying to read your post. Thank you.
In Greenpeace's rush to get on the global warming band-wagon they are promoting a massive off-shore wind energy project, Cape Wind. And are using $40,000 of membership money (or so it seems... perhaps that money comes from private developers) for political ads. This project, oddly enough, could put whales and dolphins (their symbols of the good fight) in serious jeopardy.
According to The Whale and Dolphin Society new studies show off shore wind farms pose potentially devastating threats to whales and dolphins during and after construction.
The acoustic impact of pile driving, can be heard by marine creatures in shallow water up to 80km (50 miles) away, permanently damaging their hearing at close range and causing dramatic changes to their behavior at distances of 20km (approximately 12.5 miles).
Additionally, the laying of cables and disturbance from service vessels will mean the damage will continue long after construction is over.
What hypocrites. Members should tear up their cards.