Raise awareness of environmental health issues in order to better protect our children and future generations.

EMF Studies

17 October 2012

Fossil Fuel Industry Ads Dominate United States Presidential Election Campaign

Shell has delayed Arctic oil drilling until 2013

With the United States presidential election less than three weeks away, there is need to raise awareness of the aggressive efforts of the fossil fuel and other polluting industries to defeat President Obama and all hopes of initiating environmentally friendly policies. If the Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, becomes President, environmental degradation will greatly increase and the health of the U.S. population will further decline. (Following is the first part of the New York Times article written by Eric Lipton and Clifford Krauss, published 13 September 2012. Read the article in full here.) 

Regarding campaign contributions, a recent newspaper article published in the Tribune de Genève says that the American elections will generate $6 billion in donations for both parties. Two Swiss banks, Credit Suisse and UBS, figure among the 15 largest donators for Romney’s campaign. Swiss industries are also contributing to the Republican Party: Novartis and Syngenta. The latter firm produces the toxic pesticide atrazine which is used widely on crops in the United States but has been banned in Switzerland for many years. 

The Energy Rush
Fossil Fuel Industry Ads Dominate TV Campaign
WASHINGTON — When Barack Obama first ran for president, being green was so popular that oil companies like Chevron were boasting about their commitment to renewable energy, and his Republican opponent, John McCain, supported action on global warming

As Mr. Obama seeks re-election, that world is a distant memory. Some of the mightiest players in the oil, gas and coal industries are financing an aggressive effort to defeat him, or at least press him to adopt policies that are friendlier to fossil fuels. And the president’s former allies in promoting wind and solar power and caps on greenhouse gases? They are disenchanted and sitting on their wallets.
This year’s campaign on behalf of fossil fuels includes a surge in political contributions to Mitt Romney, attack ads questioning Mr. Obama’s clean-energy agenda, and television spots that are not overtly partisan but criticize administration actions like new air pollution rules and the delay of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada. 

“Since Obama became president, gas prices have nearly doubled,” said one advertisement by the American Energy Alliance, a group financed in part by oil executives. “Tell Obama we can’t afford his failing energy policies.”

With nearly two months before Election Day on Nov. 6, estimated spending on television ads promoting coal and more oil and gas drilling or criticizing clean energy has exceeded $153 million this year, according to an analysis by The New York Times of 138 ads on energy issues broadcast this year by the presidential campaigns, political parties, energy companies, trade associations and third-party spenders.

That tally is nearly four times the $41 million spent by clean-energy advocates, the Obama campaign and Democratic groups to defend the president’s energy record or raise concerns about global warming and air pollution. The Times rated presidential campaign and national policy ads by whether they promoted fossil fuels or pushed clean energy and conservation, regardless of their sponsors, using ad and spending data compiled by Kantar Media, a company that tracks television advertising.

The lopsided nature of the energy messages this year contrasts sharply with 2008. Back then, global warming was a top public concern, and green ads greatly outnumbered those for fossil fuels, $152 million to $109 million, according to the analysis by The Times, which looked at 184 energy-related ads. In 2008, Chevron, one of the nation’s leading oil companies, trumpeted its investments in geothermal power, and Mr. McCain spent millions of dollars on ads featuring solar panels and wind farms as part of a solution to global warming.

But climate change legislation died in Congress, Republicans gained a majority in the House, and pocketbook issues like the price of gasoline began dominating public discussion. After imposing a yearlong oil and gas drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico in response to the disastrous BP spill in 2010, President Obama recast himself as favoring an “all of the above” energy strategy, allowing the industry to drill offshore as deep as ever and moving to open up new regions like Alaska’s Arctic waters...

No comments:

Post a Comment