Am Petroleum Inst API

===note color belowsee KNEWsee API 2 4/16

see api tag for newer content 3/141998 secret smoking gun memosci supp caltechsee also AFPM sidekicksee edelman PRhtml co-ordinated

=1119 evil, poster as trade gp buffer #1? big w/ 5 amigos<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">bought a newsweek event jack G?</div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.desmog.com/s3ep3-psychological-warfare-astroturfing-and-another-tobacco-oil-connection/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.desmog.com/s3ep3-psychological-warfare-astroturfing-and-another-tobacco-oil-connection/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="">Featuring: Bob Brulle, environmental sociology researcher at Brown University; Christine Arena, former Edelman PR executive; and clips from Daniel Edelman, founder of Edelman PR.WWI news clip about Nazi propaganda: These German pictures, destined for certain neutral countries, were intended to spread Nazi propagada, but Dr. Goebbels tripped up badly, very badly…Amy Westervelt: Just a few months after their meetings with Ivy Ledbetter Lee, the Third Reich’s propaganda machine kicked into high gear. Within a year they were at war, and using techniques they’d learned from Lee and others to cover up atrocities and to sell the German public – not only on the war effort but also the superiority of the Aryan race. In the final months of World War II, that propaganda took a very Ivy Lee-style turn into completely made up news stories about German wins in battles that had never even happened.. In those months, a young Jewish American reporter was charged with analyzing and combatting those claims. That man’s name was Daniel Edelman. Here he is, remembering those days.Daniel Edelman: Doing the psychological warfare thing was fascinating because we were offsetting the claims made by the Germans. It was all lies…. And we had to disclaim them.Amy Westervelt: Edelman would ultimately spend four years working in psychological warfare. He became an expert on propaganda, and how to combat it. And he put that expertise to work for American industries, from beauty products and Sarah Lee to cigarettes and Big Oil. He added several new tactics to Big Oil’s propaganda machine, including a unique blend of lobbying and media relations, that he called “marketing public relations, and a fun new thing called “astroturfing” that involves creating fake “grassroots” groups. That’s the story we’re going to get into today. I’m Amy Westervelt and this is Drilled, Season 3: The Mad Men of Climate Denial.Daniel Edelman was born in 1920 in Brooklyn. He was a diligent student and something of a boy genius, so by 16 he was already at university. He ultimately went to Columbia Journalism School, and spent the first year or so of his professional life as a journalist, mostly covering sports and human interest stories.When the U.S. joined World War II, Edelman wanted to enlist but his poor eyesight got in the way. Within a year, so many infantrymen had died the military no longer cared about things like eyesight, it needed bodies. Edelman was drafted. But his vision still made him ineligible for combat. And his background in journalism made him a perfect fit for counter-intelligence. He was sent for training, and then on to join the Fifth Mobile Radio Broadcasting Company in London.WWII mobile radio tape: “This is your American expeditionary station, in the field with the fifth army.Amy Westervelt: After learning for a time in London, Edelman was tapped by a former Columbia classmate to join him in France, helping to prepare a nightly analysis of German propaganda. Edelman was soon in charge of the entire operation.Daniel Edelman: He says it’s a good job. You work in a truck and in psychological warfare and I said fine.Amy Westervelt: When the fighting ended, Edelman was transferred to Berlin to help shut down the German propaganda effort and state-owned media. He actually helped start the popular magazine Der Spiegel which he and a few other Americans ran for a few months before turning over to German ownership. For a while, Edelman thought he might stay in Germany and take a job as a reporter there. Eventually his family dissuaded him and he returned home. And then, Like Ivy Lee before him, and plenty of journalists since, Edelman struggled with whether he wanted to report the news or make the news, live the modest life of a journalist or take advantage of the burgeoning post-war economy in America and get into the business side of communications.By this point he had worked in psychological warfare for years and he knew that expertise would be valuable in the public relations business. So he went for it, and took a job for his brother-in-law’s music label. Through that job he met the folks behind the Toni hair company, who eventually hired him to run their PR department, which brough Edelman to Chicago.As the PR guy at Toni, he took the company’s ad campaign – which twin has the Toni? – on the road, with six sets of twins. The campaign featured side-by-side twins, both with perms, and dared customers to guess which had a salon perm and which had the Toni home perm.Toni ad: Which twin had the Toni? You can’t tell? Nobody can. Not yet, anyway. But wait. Only Toni gives you this twin guarantee.Amy Westervelt: Media tours had been part of political campaigns forever, but product companies had never bothered with them. Edelman saw that as a missed opportunity to score hundreds of local press hits and move product in communities across the country. And he was right. In addition to getting coverage in local newspapers, radio and TV, at one point during the tour the twins were arrested, in Oklahoma, for “performing salon services without a license.” Edelman turned it into a national news story that made Toni a household name.It also paved the way for another new approach to P.R., one that included a bit of lobbying on the side. The Oklahoma arrests happened because salon owners were pissed about these home perm kits taking their business. Salon owners in states across the country were mobilizing to push for laws that would ban kits like the TOni kit. So Edelman got busy meeting with state legislators and applying some of those psy-opps moves, mocking the salon owners and their proposals until they were literally laughed out of state building after state building. A couple years later, he started his own firm, calling it Daniel J. Edelman and Associates, with Toni as his first client. But within a few years, he had signed several huge clients, including Mobil Oil, Sarah Lee, Heinz, and several tobacco companies and tobacco trade groups. His hunch was proving correct: What he’d learned about psychological warfare was extremely valuable to American industry.If that sounds like an exaggeration, you don’t have to take my word for it. Edelman’s son Richard bragged about this history in a tribute to his father on the Edelman website.Richard Edelman clip: My dad was a real New York City kid. Born in Brooklyn, went on to high school, Columbia College, and Columbia Journalism School. He went on to work in Europe in the U.S. army for four years in psychological warfare, and when he got out, somehow the cumulation of all these experiences led him to become the father marketing P.R.Amy Westervelt: “Marketing public relations” was the term Edelman came up with to describe his 360-degree approach to PR – it wasn’t just media relations, it was also legislator relations, and true public relations where you were creating a direct relationship between the company and the public. One way to do that was to pretend to be part of the public yourself.Christine Arena: I’m a 20-year communications industry professional. I’ve worked in corporate PR for a long time, on lots of different kinds of accounts. Including fossil fuel accounts, which I hated.”Amy Westervelt: That’s Christine Arena. She was an executive vice president at Edelman’s firm, by that time just called Edelman. Arena headed up the firm’s sustainability division right at the same time that it was representing the American Petroleum Institute. She and a few other executives at the Firm made the news when they quit en masse over the companies dealings with fossil fuel clients. She can’t share any specific inside information about her time there, so she’s speaking here generally about the firm’s reputation and about the techniques deployed by the fossil fuel industry.Christine Arena: That creation of fake, grassroots support which came to be known as astroturfing. Edelman was genius at doing that.Amy Westervelt: Edelman and his firm worked with multiple tobacco and oil clients, all big fans of “astroturfing.”Christine Arena: So fossil fuel industry organizations fund these fake front groups and they give these fake front groups, these names that sound there, like perfectly innocuous names like the California Drivers Alliance or the Washington Consumers for Sound Fuel Policy. And these groups there are hundreds of them are usually secretly run by lobbying organizations like those two I just mentioned are actually run by the <a href="https://www.desmog.com/western-states-petroleum-association" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; box-shadow: none;">Western States Petroleum Association</a>, which is a top lobbyist for the oil industry. And that group, the Western States Material Petroleum Association, is in turn funded by members including BP, Shell, <a href="https://www.desmog.com/exxonmobil-funding-climate-science-denial" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; box-shadow: none;">Exxon Mobil</a>, Chevron and Occidental, among others. So it’s fake activism, it’s corporate money posing as activism. And and it’s designed to undo all of the progress that real activism makes.Amy Westervelt: Working for both tobacco and fossil fuel clients, Edelman also invented litigation PR. Basically making his clients’ cases in the media. A key part of this was what Arena calls the “attack the messenger” strategy.Christine Arena: They are relentless at the attack the messenger strategy. This has been ongoing for like 30 years. So the most effective attack the messenger strategy to me is like the use of labeling. So, for example, if climate scientists refer to facts and data rather than ideology, then they’re labeled liberal elites. If climate scientists or activists are alarmed by the data, then they’re labeled alarmists. If climate scientists apply for grant dollars to fund their research, then they are accused of being in it for the money.Tom DeLay: The report is made by scientists that get paid to further the politics of global warming.Rick Santorum: If there was no climate change, we’d have a lot of scientists looking for work. The reality is a lot scientists are driven by the money.President Donald Trump: All of this with the global warming, and da da da, a lot of it’s a hoax. It’s a hoax. I mean, it’s a money making industry, ok?Amy Westervelt: Arena says that while tobacco used the same strategy, the fossil fuel guys were just better at it. Big Tobacco would attack the whistleblowers personally, Big Oil – they attacked the whole idea of fossil fuels being any sort of problem. Because they’d spent decades crafting the narrative that fossil fuel is an essential part of American life, it was easy to call anyone who thought otherwise un-American, effectively politicizing the issue.Of course we know that Big Oil learned new tactics from Big Tobacco, too, namely in the form of science denial. And Daniel Edelman was right there, too. In the 1970s Edelman proposed an aggressive campaign for the RJ Reynolds tobacco company. It contained more than a few echoes of the PR giant’s time in the trenches of psychological warfare.Salem tobacco ad: Country soft, country fresh, that’s the taste you get wherever you light up a Salem, because Salem genty’ air-softens every puff, for the smoothest, most refreshing taste of any filter cigarette.Amy Westervelt: The proposal begins by suggesting, for example that, “The non-smoker must be made to feel that the smoker cares about him. It is our sense that the non-smoker is divided into two general groups – those who don’t really care if others smoke; and those who are growing more hostile to anyone who does smoke. We need to woo the former group to our side; we need to soften the opposition of the latter. Step 2 is pure science denial. Edelman recommends “We need to pierce the solidly-assumed notion that no additional research is necessary on the subject of cigarette smoking, Imaginative and creative ways must be found to correct this Impression.” Of course one of those creative ways is to create doubt. Edelman proposes: “We need to counter public impressions based on oversimplification by dramatizing pinpointed areas of study that are mysteries to researchers and scientists on both sides of this issue.”That proposal won Edelman a contract, and the firm would go on to work for Big Tobacco for more than a decade. If the science approach they recommended for tobacco sounds an awful lot like the climate science denial that starts showing up a few years later, there’s a reason for it. Edelman also worked for several fossil fuel clients, and the American Petroleum Institute. That’s important because by the 1980s the API, Ivy Lee’s brainchild, was pushing the industry away from researching climate change and toward denying it. Former Exxon scientist Richard Werthamer told us that in Season 1. Richard Werthamer: The key is the <a href="https://www.desmog.com/american-petroleum-institute" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; box-shadow: none;">American Petroluem Institute</a>. Exxon had a huge influence, rightly so, in the API and I think the API changed its tune, and probably other majors went along with that.Amy Westervelt: And you can hear exactly the same sort of strategy that Edelman suggested for RJ Reynolds in this speech from then-ExxonMobil CEO and American Petroleum Institute president Lee Raymond in 1996:Lee Raymond: Proponents of the global warming theory, say that higher levels of greenhouse gases, especially CO2, are causing world temperatures to rise and that burning fossil fuels is the reason. By scientific evidence remains inconclusive as to whether human activities affect the climate.Amy Westervelt: You heard that right? Raymond said the evidence that humans contribute to climate change is “inconclusive.” But this speech was in 1996, long past the point where Exxon’s own scientists had said climate change would cause catastrophic damage for some percentage of the planet in the not so distant future if emissions weren’t curbed.In the late 1990s, Daniel Edelman’s son Richard took over as CEO, but Dan remained involved for the rest of his life. In various interviews, and in Edelman’s biography, Richard said he talked to his dad daily about the business. They didn’t always agree, of course. When he took the reins, Richard almost immediately decided to drop tobacco clients, for example. The writing was on the wall about tobacco by that point, and what it cost the firm in tobacco billings it more than made up for in good PR and new clients.The firm did continue to apply the same strategies for Big Oil for several more years though, including, as Daniel Edelman’s biography puts it, “putting a human face on Big Oil for the American Petroleum Institute.”American Petroleum Institute ad: Leading the world in oil and gas production. I vote to keep it going. With the right policies we can produce, refine and supply, more oil and natural gas.Amy Westervelt: Edelman picked up where Ivy Lee had left off, continuing to tie the extraction of oil, coal, and gas to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, And again, it’s hard not to see the roots of Edelman’s World War II work in the approach the firm crafted for Big Oil. Suddenly anyone who wasn’t pro-oil was anti-American.Daniel Edelman died in 2013, but the firm that bares his name continued to apply the same tactics that he’d been using effectively for decades. In 2014, Greenpeace leaked several documents that showed an aggressive campaign that Edelman had come up with for TransCanada to push the Keystone pipeline. It includes all the same tactics we’ve talked about here: aggressive opposition research, fake grassroots groups, attacking the messenger, and a big nationalistic messaging push. In 2015, the firm announced that it would no longer be working with coal companies or any company that denied climate science. By that point, they’d already lost not only executives but also clients, and the reputational risk was just too great. However, that same year, Edelman spun off its internal advertising group, Blue, which continued to work for the API.American Petroleum Institute ad: More secure American jobs opportunity and economic growth for our children and grandchildren, that’s why this election I’m voting for American energy.Amy Westervelt: For all the rah rah America stuff the oil industry pushes, these campaigns often work to subvert democracy. In his most recent research, environmental sociologist Bob Brulle found that the biggest indicator of fossil fuel PR spend was the likelihood of any sort of climate legislation passing.Bob Brulle: When you look at their public relations spending, the more the more Congress starts to have hearings and write bills dealing with climate change, the more they start spending on public relations the next year. In other words, you start having hearings this year. Next year, you’re going to have a public relations onslaught from the oil companies, telling you how good they are, how they’re so responsible and good corporate citizens, and that whatever problem it is that you’re talking about, they’re right on top of it and handling it. And the hidden messages is: so therefore, there’s no need to regulate us at all.Amy Westervelt: In some cases they move even faster. As the Washington Post just reported, the oil guys just dropped a $1million targeted ad buy the day after a couple of current Democratic candidates said they might ban fracking. And in 2008, when Democrats won control of all branches of the government heading into the global climate negotiations in Copenhagen, they were spending preemptively. The API alone spent a whopping $75 million with Edelman.Bob Brulle: I don’t think there’s any other way to call it other than propaganda, which is a one sided message designed to create a certain impression, that’s exactly what it was. And it’s very focused, targeted, extremely well done and apparently pretty effective.Amy Westervelt: So we went from Ivy Lee working with Standard Oil to World War I propaganda to Lee advising Hitler and Goebbels to Daniel Edelman learning the tools of the trade by studying and countering the Third Reich’s propaganda in World War II, and bringing those tactics right back to Big Oil.Next time we’ll meet another key architect of the propaganda apparatus, Herb Schmertz, the PR legend who took on Mobil Oil after Edelman. And guess what? Schmertz also started out in military intelligence. He wound up adding so many new bells and whistles to the propaganda machine that we’re gonna spend two episodes delving into his story. See you then.For more, visit the <a href="https://www.drillednews.com/podcasts" data-wpel-link="external" target="blank" rel="external noopener noreferrer" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; box-shadow: none;">DrilledNews podcast website here</a>.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">---</div></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/08042020/science-denial-coronavirus-covid-climate-change" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/08042020/science-denial-coronavirus-covid-climate-change</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">American science denialism, deployed for years against climate change and, most recently, the coronavirus, can be traced back to the early 1950s during the fight over smog in Los Angeles.  </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div class="content" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-items" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded" style="box-sizing: inherit;">When a Cal-Tech biochemist fingered nitrogen oxide emissions and uncombusted hydrocarbons from automobiles and refineries as the cause of the thick smog that often blanketed the city, the American Petroleum Institute counter-attacked by highlighting the alleged uncertainty of his science. The tactic was a test run for the fossil fuel industry's assault 40 years later on climate science. Decades of climate denial now appear to have paved the way for denial of Covid-19 by many on the right, according to experts on climate politics. After the fossil fuel industry spent hundreds of millions of dollars attacking climate scientists and accentuating the supposed uncertainty of climate science, it isn't hard to understand how that happened. President Trump, who denies climate change, has brushed off Covid-19's seriousness until recently <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/19032020/denial-climate-change-coronavirus-donald-trump" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">by relying on many of the same arguments he uses to dismiss global warming, such as ignoring government scientists or blaming China. </a>  ...</div></div></div></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">API KNEW</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.democracynow.org/2018/11/21/headlines/report_oil_industry_knew_about_dangers_of_climate_change_in_1954" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.democracynow.org/2018/11/21/headlines/report_oil_industry_knew_about_dangers_of_climate_change_in_1954</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="">Leaders of the U.S. fossil fuel industry knew as early as 1954 that carbon dioxide pollution accumulating in the atmosphere posed a growing threat to life on Earth, but failed to warn the public. That’s according to new research published by Stanford historian Benjamin Franta in the journal Nature Climate Change. Franta found that in the 1950s the American Petroleum Institute commissioned a study by a Caltech scientist which concluded global CO2 levels had risen by 5 percent in a century. It’s the earliest known industry-funded research into climate change, and the findings led in part to a 1965 report by President Lyndon Johnson’s Science Advisory Committee on the threat posed by global warming. Speaking to members of an oil industry conference that year, Frank Ikard, then-president of the American Petroleum Institute, warned, “This report unquestionably will fan emotions, raise fears, and bring demand for action. The substance of the report is that there is still time to save the world’s peoples from the catastrophic consequence of pollution, but time is running out.” The American Petroleum Institute would instead go on to fund decades of climate change denial while fighting efforts to switch to renewable energy sources.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div>=<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/our-childrens-trust-motions-2422789150.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/our-childrens-trust-motions-2422789150.html</a><div class="headline-container" style="margin-top: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h1 class="headline h1" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: relative; line-height: 22px;">Fossil Fuel Associations Scramble to Quit Kids Climate Lawsuit Before Discovery Deadline</h1></div><div id="utm_campaign" style="margin-top: 10px;"><div class="article-body body js-expandable sm-mb-2 md-mb-4 js-update-url selectionShareable" data-url="https://www.ecowatch.com/our-childrens-trust-motions-2422789150.html" data-headline="Fossil Fuel Associations Scramble to Quit Kids Climate Lawsuit Before Discovery Deadline" data-elid="2422789150" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 10px;"><div class="article-description" style="margin-bottom: 20px;">In an unusual procedural move, the <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571d109b04426270152febe0/t/5927a556ff7c50e1bce1a03d/1495770454915/2017.05.25+API+motion+to+withdraw.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">American Petroleum Institute</a> (API) and <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571d109b04426270152febe0/t/5927b418ff7c50e1bce23b91/1495774232708/2017.05.25+AFPM+motion+to+withdraw.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers</a> filed motions Thursday requesting the court's permission to withdraw from the Juliana v. US <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/our-childrens-trust" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate lawsuit</a>, brought by 21 young people. The associations are following the lead of the National Association of Manufacturers, who <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/nam-kids-climate-lawsuit-2418907049.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">filed a similar motion</a> to withdraw on May 22.Now, all three trade association intervenor defendants have filed motions to withdraw from the case, evading last night's discovery deadline. These motions are especially unusual after numerous legal efforts have tried to get a federal court in Oregon to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/youth-climate-lawsuit-trump-2344384211.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">throw out the lawsuit</a>. For any defendant to leave the litigation, U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Coffin must grant permission.</div></div>..."API and its members will not come clean on the facts of <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">climate change</a> because they know it exposes them to liability for the damage they too have caused to the global climate system," Julia Olson, co-lead counsel for plaintiffs and executive director of <a href="https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Our Children's Trust</a>, said.
"After these youths sued the government, the trade associations pleaded their members' interests would be destroyed if they weren't allowed to be in the case, but now they are running for the hills. Now, they've decided they're better off being on the sidelines than subjecting themselves to discovery,."When youth plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in August 2015, only the federal government and government agencies were named as defendants. In November 2015, the associations <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/571d109b04426270152febe0/t/57914288e6f2e1a5ceccfe30/1469137545011/15.11.12.MemoOnIntervention.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">intervened</a> in the case on the side of the U.S. government defendants, calling the lawsuit a "direct threat to [their] businesses."
"What is noticeably absent from these withdrawal motions is the reason why the fossil fuel industry wants to leave the case," Philip L. Gregory, co-lead counsel for plaintiffs and a party with Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy LLP of Burlingame, California, said. "They plead with the court to let them out, yet fail to give Judge Coffin any reason behind their change of heart,"In a <a href="http://ourchildrenstrust.org/s/Doc-53-Intervention-Oral-Argument-Transcript.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">January 2016 proceeding</a> before Judge Coffin, an attorney representing all three trade associations explained how these associations would speak with "one voice" if permitted to join the litigation:
"...having the associations participate as associations in this litigation effectively represents those interests without a multiplicity of disparate viewpoints and voices. Rather, in fact, they have joined to speak with one voice through this intervention motion."The federal court allowed these fossil fuel industry associations to become full party defendants. However, when these intervenor defendants filed <a href="https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/s/Doc-93-Intervenor-Answer.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">their answer</a> to the allegations in young plaintiffs' complaint, the industry claimed it lacked "sufficient knowledge" to take a position on the science of climate change, and most of the claims in the complaint.Intervenor defendants since agreed to set forth their positions on the scientific facts by responding to requests for admissions, which Plaintiffs subsequently served on March 24. When the fossil fuel defendants had not submitted their responses, Judge Coffin ordered that they be electronically-filed with the court. At the May 18 case management conference, Judge Coffin granted intervenor defendants an extension to submit their responses until the end of the day, May 25. Rather than take a position on the science or the effects of climate change, the fossil fuel industry chose to seek to back out of the case.Attorneys for youth plaintiffs have already collected evidence through informal discovery that shows all three associations and their members have had long-standing knowledge of climate danger, and at the same time, used their undue influence over the U.S. government to sabotage efforts to address the urgent problem."Our government is a trustee over the atmosphere, and yet the Trump administration is wrongfully colluding with the intervenors to increase carbon emissions," Alex Loznak, 20, of Roseburg, Oregon and one of the youth plaintiffs in the case, said. "These industry groups can't be allowed to interfere with our democracy or our climate system without consequences."busted, rico:...

Columbia University report commissioned by the American Petroleum

Institute in 1982 cautioned that global warming "can have serious

consequences for man's comfort and survival." It is the latest

indication that the oil industry learned of the possible threat it posed

to the climate far earlier than previously known.

The report, "<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/API%201982%20Climate%20models%20and%20CO2%20warming.pdf" target="blank">Climate Models and CO</a><a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/API%201982%20Climate%20models%20and%20CO2%20warming.pdf" target="blank">2 Warming, A Selective Review and Summary</a>,"

was written by Alan Oppenheim and William L.  Donn of Columbia's

Lamont-Doherty Geological Observatory for API's Climate and Energy task

force, said James J. Nelson, the task force's former director. From 1979

to 1983, <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22122015/exxon-mobil-oil-industry-peers-knew-about-climate-change-dangers-1970s-american-petroleum-institute-api-shell-chevron-texaco" target="_blank">API and the nation's largest oil companies convened the task force</a>

to monitor and share climate research, including their in-house

efforts. Exxon ran the most ambitious of the corporate programs, but

other oil companies had their own projects, smaller than Exxon's and

focused largely on climate modeling.

The

task force commissioned the report to better understand the models

being produced in the nascent field of climate science, Nelson said.

"There

was discussion in the committee about all the noise and information"

around carbon dioxide, Nelson said. "There were all sorts of numbers

being thrown around. We were not trying to find a model to hang our hats

on. It was more, 'If you see this model, this is how it’s built and

these are its strengths and weaknesses.'"

<a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/fight-misinformation/climate-deception-dossiers-fossil-fuel-industry-memos#.VrOGqDYrKT9">Obtained from a university library by the Union of Concerned Scientists</a>

and made available to InsideClimate News, the report described in

detail five models used at the time by climate scientists. They ranged

from simple to complex: the radiation balance model, energy balance,

radiative-convective, thermodynamic and general circulation model.  A

table showed the predictions each model generated of the average

increase in global temperature if atmospheric concentrations of CO2

doubled compared to pre-industrial times, from .6 degrees C per

hemisphere under the thermodynamic model to 2 to 3.5 degrees C globally

under the general circulation model.  The poles were expected to undergo

even greater jumps in temperature.

The report did not focus on the forces behind the increase in CO2

concentrations, but it linked the phenomenon plainly to fossil fuel

use. Atmospheric CO2, it said, "is expected to double some time in the

next century. Just when depends on the particular estimate of the level

of increasing energy use per year and the mix of carbon based fuels."

Like

many studies at the time, the report stressed the models' inherent

uncertainties. "All models are still sufficiently unrealistic that a

definitive evaluation of the problem requires continued effort," the

authors wrote in the summary.

Still, the report concluded that the models pointed to hikes in global average temperatures as CO2

concentrations rose. "They all predict some kind of increase in

temperature within a global mean range of 4 degrees C," the report

stated. "The consensus is that high latitudes will be heated more than

the equator and the land areas more than the oceans."

The

consensus turned out to accurately predict how global warming has

proceeded since then and matches what current models are still

predicting for the future.

The

consequences for humanity were serious, the authors wrote, "since

patterns of aridity and rainfall can change, the height of the sea level

can increase considerably and the world food supply can be affected."

The

authors concluded that "optimum forecasting of climate changes is a

necessity for any realistic long term planning by government and

industry."

When

it commissioned the report, Nelson said, the API task force did not

provide any guidance on which models to use and did not meddle with the

assessment. Committee members received periodic updates about the

report's progress, he said. The final document "was well received by the

committee," Nelson recalled. "We didn't change it at all. Copies were

sent to all the member companies since they paid for it."

Nelson

said the general feeling of the task force members about climate models

echoed the report's findings that models were not yet realistic enough

to evaluate global warming definitively.

Nelson

said he suggested the Columbia study in part because of his own

skepticism of atmospheric modeling. A former Air Force pilot, he had

sometimes found himself in hairy situations because of inaccurate

weather forecasting based on modeling.

in the atmosphere, and we wanted to know where the numbers came from,

what kind of assumptions were in the models as definitely as possible,"

he said, "because I had the experience from a long time before that if

you put garbage in, you get garbage out."

Task

force members also wanted to understand the modeling because they

worried that the predictions could lead to what they believed were

unnecessary regulations. "Where we were also coming from, we felt we

didn't want the EPA throwing a lot of new rules at this until we knew

more precisely what would be the most effective methods of solving the

problem," Nelson said.

The

report accurately described climate physics and the models used in the

early 1980s, said Anthony Del Genio, a NASA atmospheric scientist and

expert on the general circulation model and climate feedbacks, who

recently read the Columbia document.
...
<a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04022016/oil-industry-report-shows-early-knowledge-climate-change-impact-api-american-petroleum-institute" style="">http://insideclimatenews.org/news/04022016/oil-industry-report-shows-early-knowledge-climate-change-impact-api-american-petroleum-institute</a>

<div style=""><a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22122015/exxon-mobil-oil-industry-peers-knew-about-climate-change-dangers-1970s-american-petroleum-institute-api-shell-chevron-texaco">http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22122015/exxon-mobil-oil-industry-peers-knew-about-climate-change-dangers-1970s-american-petroleum-institute-api-shell-chevron-texaco</a>
<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">...</div><div style="">The group was initially called the CO2 and Climate Task Force, but changed its name to the Climate and Energy Task Force in 1980, Nelson said.A background paper on CO2 informed API members in 1979 that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was rising steadily, and it predicted when the first clear effects of climate change might be felt, according to a memo by an Exxon task force representative.  In addition, API task force members appeared open to the idea that the oil industry might have to shoulder some responsibility for reducing CO2emissions by changing refining processes and developing fuels that emitted less carbon dioxide.Bruce S. Bailey of Texaco offered "for consideration" the idea that "an overall goal of the Task Force should be to help develop ground rules for energy release of fuels and the cleanup of fuels as they relate to CO2creation," according to the <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/AQ-9%20Task%20Force%20Meeting%20%281980%29.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background-color: transparent;">minutes of a meeting on Feb. 29, 1980</a>.The <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/AQ-9%20Task%20Force%20Meeting%20%281980%29.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; text-decoration: none; background-color: transparent;">minutes also show</a> that the task force discussed a "potential area" for research and development that called for it to "'Investigate the Market Penetration Requirements of Introducing a New Energy Source into World Wide Use.' This would include the technical implications of energy source changeover, research timing and requirements."Yet by the 1990s, it was clear that API had opted for a markedly different approach to the threat of climate change. It joined Exxon, other fossil fuel companies and major manufacturers in the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), a lobbying group whose objective was to derail international efforts to curb heat-trapping emissions. In 1998, a year after the Kyoto Protocol was adopted by countries to cut fossil fuel emissions, API crafted a campaign to convince the American public and lawmakers that climate science was too tenuous for the United States to ratify the treaty....</div></div>together at last: koch and api?<div style="">Significantly, similar legal issues are being considered in a federal <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/08/13/youth-file-climate-lawsuit/" style="background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s; line-height: 25.2px;">lawsuit brought in August 2015</a> against the federal government by 21 young people from across the U.S. and Dr. James Hansen as guardian for all future generations, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. Just last week in that case, the world’s largest fossil fuel industry representatives <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/13/our-childrens-trust-climate-lawsuit/" style="background: none 0% 0% repeat scroll rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s; line-height: 25.2px;">filed a request to intervene</a> to protect their commercial economic interests in fossil fuel exploitation and to thwart the youth’s request for protection of their fundamental constitutional rights. The proposed intervenors, the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (representing members <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=exxon" style="background-image: none; background-position: 0% 0%; background-size: initial; background-repeat: repeat; background-attachment: scroll; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s; line-height: 25.2px;">ExxonMobil</a>, BP, Shell, <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=koch" style="background-image: none; background-position: 0% 0%; background-size: initial; background-repeat: repeat; background-attachment: scroll; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear 0s; line-height: 25.2px;">Koch</a> Industries and virtually all other major refiners and petrochemical manufacturers), the American Petroleum Institute (representing 625 oil and natural gas companies) and the National Association of Manufacturers, called the youth’s case “a direct threat to [their] businesses.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/20/stem-tide-climate-change">http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/20/stem-tide-climate-change</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div>
8/15<h3 style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: -1px; line-height: 1em;">Leaked internal memos reveal a coordinated, decades-long disinformation campaign.</h3><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div>by <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/node/1381" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 1px 1px 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Elliott Negin</a>When internal documents revealed earlier this year that ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel interests were secretly funding scientifically discredited studies authored by climate contrarian Wei-Hock “Willie” Soon, the news didn’t come as a complete surprise.Back in 2007, a Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) report identified Soon—an aerospace engineer with little formal training in climatology—as one of a dozen scientists affiliated with more than 40 ExxonMobil-funded think tanks that then constituted the backbone of the climate change–denier PR machine. Soon, who erroneously claims the sun is largely responsible for global warming, produced work for at least five of these ExxonMobil-backed groups, including the now infamous Heartland Institute.But the latest cache of documents, obtained by Greenpeace and the Climate Investigations Center through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, lays bare a wealth of detail that was not available eight years ago. For example, they show that Soon received his funding exclusively from fossil fuel interests, including ExxonMobil, utility giant Southern Company, and Charles Koch. He described his scientific work and congressional testimony as “deliverables” to his funders. And some of his contracts specifically dictate that the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, where Soon works, not disclose the names of his funders. These internal documents, on top of what UCS had already uncovered, indisputably establish Soon’s efforts as part of a calculated climate deception campaign.
<h3 style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: -1px; line-height: 1em;">Dossiers of Deception</h3><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">pm dl doc </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">http://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/fight-misinformation/climate-deception-dossiers-fossil-fuel-industry-memos#.Vc98KflViko</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div>Willie Soon, however, is just a small part of a much bigger story, according to a new UCS report, <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/node/5730" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 1px 1px 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"><em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The Climate Deception Dossiers</a>. After spending nearly a year reviewing and analyzing a wide range of internal corporate and trade group documents, a team of UCS researchers has, for the first time, compiled a broader tale of climate deception. <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">The Climate Deception Dossiers draws upon evidence culled from 85 documents that were pried loose by leaks, lawsuits, and FOIA requests.Spanning nearly three decades, these documents reveal that the world’s largest fossil fuel companies—BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, coal giant Peabody Energy, and Shell—were fully aware of the reality of climate change but continued to spend tens of millions of dollars to sow doubt and promote contrarian arguments they knew to be wrong.<p style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"> Taken together, the documents show that these six companies, in conjunction with the American Petroleum Institute (API)—the oil and gas industry’s premier trade association—and a host of front groups, have colluded to intentionally deceive the public; their corporate officials have known for at least two decades that their products are harmful; and their disinformation campaign continues today—despite the fact that most of the companies now publicly acknowledge the reality of anthropogenic, or human-caused, climate change.<div class="caption mceTemp draggable" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><div class="caption-inner" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img src="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2015/07/su15-climate-dossiers-papers.jpg" alt="" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;" height="505" width="752" /><p class="caption-text" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A team convened in 1998 by the American Petroleum Institute—the country’s largest oil trade association whose member companies include BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell Oil—outlined a road map for climate deception including a plan to cultivate purportedly independent scientists as climate misinformers. The campaign would achieve “victory,” according to the memo, when “average citizens” believed that the realities of climate science were uncertain.</div></div>The collected documents reveal a variety of deceitful tactics, including creating front groups, secretly funding purportedly independent scientists such as Soon, and even forging letters from nonprofit groups to try to influence members of Congress. But you don’t have to rely on UCS’s interpretation. All 340 pages of the documents in seven “<a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/node/5730" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: rgb(255, 255, 255) 1px 1px 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">deception dossiers</a>” are available online, so you can read them and reach your own conclusions.<h3 style="background: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 5px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: -1px; line-height: 1em; font-weight: normal;">A Damning Paper Trail</h3>The 340 pages include not only Soon’s contracts, but also a 1998 API disinformation road map memo as well as a 2014 Western States Petroleum Association memo on creating phony grassroots consumer groups to challenge California’s climate policies.One eye-opening, formerly secret document reveals that scientific experts commissioned by the Global Climate Coalition (GCC)—a coalition of 50 U.S. corporations and trade groups including British Petroleum (now BP), Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon, Mobil, and Shell—warned that heat-trapping gases were indeed causing global warming. Regardless, the GCC continued to conduct a multimillion-dollar lobbying and public relations campaign to undermine national and international efforts to address global warming.One of the GCC’s “backgrounders” for legislators and journalists, for example, claimed “the role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood” and emphasized that “scientists differ” on the issue. But the 17-page, internal 1995 GCC primer written by the companies’ own scientists states: “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO<span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; height: 0px; line-height: 1; position: relative; top: 0.3em; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">2 on climate <em style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; border-image-source: initial; border-image-slice: initial; border-image-width: initial; border-image-outset: initial; border-image-repeat: initial; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">is well established and cannot be denied [emphasis added].” The primer’s lead author, Leonard S. Bernstein, a staff scientist at Mobil Oil, would later participate as a lead author of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports in 2001 and 2007.One draft version of the primer even addressed and dismissed the major arguments made by climate change contrarians, such as the “solar variability” argument touted by Soon. “The contrarian theories raise interesting questions about our total understanding of climate processes,” the draft stated, “but they do not offer convincing arguments against the conventional model of greenhouse gas emission-induced climate change.” This section was deleted from the primer’s final version.<p style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;">Three years later, the API set up what it called the Global Climate Science Communications Team to try to derail the Kyoto Protocol, the 1997 international agreement signed by 192 countries—but not the United States—to meet binding carbon emissions reduction targets. A leaked 1998 campaign memo from this team, cowritten by representatives of the API and API members Chevron and Exxon, laid out a road map for climate deception largely based on the tobacco industry’s strategy to stave off government regulation by deceiving the public about smoking hazards.Echoing that strategy—encapsulated in the notorious internal tobacco industry memo claiming “Doubt is our product”—the API memo states: “Victory will be achieved when: average citizens ‘understand’ (recognize) uncertainties in climate science.” The API team planned to emphasize “uncertainties” in climate science at least partly by identifying, recruiting, and funding previously unaffiliated scientists. After all, the memo notes, such scientists would have more credibility with reporters and the public than those already known to be working with the fossil fuel industry.<p style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; margin: 0px; padding: 0px 0px 10px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;">What makes the secret API memo so revealing is how closely its instructions seem to have been carried out in the Soon case. [MILLOY AND SOMEONE SAID IT WAS ALL A JOKE RECENTLY?] One of the API memo’s contributors, Robert Gehri, even negotiated one of Soon’s contracts on behalf of his industry backers. All told, Soon received more than $1.2 million from fossil fuel interests over the last decade and failed to disclose that conflict of interest in most of the scientific papers that money underwrote. More than $400,000 came from a subsidiary of the Southern Company, a large utility holding company with a fleet of coal-fired power plants. ExxonMobil gave Soon $335,000. The Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation kicked in another $230,000. The API, meanwhile, contributed more than $100,000.What did they get for their money? The papers conclude that solar activity is the main cause of global warming and that carbon emissions have had little or no impact. Despite the speciousness of Soon’s findings, members of Congress—notably Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe—routinely cite his work to argue that climate science is a hoax.

Gerard: 3/14 I was appalled to hear of your recent email to Capitol Hill, which blatantly distorted facts from the recent University of Texas methane emissions study. I am writing today to ask that you rescind your comments.

You simply cherry-picked from the study and twisted its actual findings beyond all recognition. You failed to mention that the one area where methane pollution was found to be lower than previously estimated was a direct result of EPA-imposed rules on natural gas production  rules that API heavily lobbied against to weaken!

At the same time, your email blatantly ignored parts of the study that found higher-than-previously-estimated methane emissions. What the study REALLY makes clear is that we face a very serious problem and there is much more work to do. We need to extend EPA's rules to all wells not currently covered, and write new rules to measure and reduce emissions resulting from valves, leaks, pumps, and other similar equipment.

===

<h1 class="headline" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 0.4em; padding: 0px; font-weight: normal; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 1.2em; max-width: 100%;"><a class="post-title" href="http://grist.org/news/oil-industry-sues-epa-over-biofuel-mandate/" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: inherit; max-width: 100%;">Oil industry sues EPA over biofuel mandate</a></h1>

By <a href="http://grist.org/author/john-upton/" title="Posts by John Upton" rel="author" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">John Upton</a>

</header>

Oil companies are fighting efforts to boost the percentage of biofuels in gasoline. And they're not the only ones -- some green groups are opposed to the biofuels boost too.

The American Petroleum Institute filed a lawsuit this week that seeks to overturn the EPA's renewable-fuel mandate, which requires that gas contain a minimum percentage of biofuel. There's particular controversy over requirements for use of cellulosic ethanol, which can be made from crop waste but is not currently being produced in large supply.  <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/regwatch/court-battles/327269-industry-sues-epa-over-renewable-fuel-standard-" target="_blank" style="border: 0px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; text-decoration: none; max-width: 100%;">From The Hill</a>:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the Renewable Fuel Standard in August, long after the agency’s statutory deadline in November of last year. The industry has repeatedly called the standards unworkable. ...

The standards require refiners to use millions of gallons of cellulosic ethanol this year, but the API argues that only 142,000 gallons have been made available to refiners thus far for blending.

</blockquote>

</div>

==

<div class="byline environment" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Media Matters / By <a href="http://www.alternet.org/authors/denise-robbins" style="">Denise Robbins</a> [1]</div>

<h1 property="dc:title" datatype="" class="node-title" style="">Media Tout Pro-Fracking Report, Fail to Mention it Was Funded By the Gas Industry</h1>

</div>

<div class="story-date" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">September 5, 2013  |  </div>

Multiple mainstream media outlets have covered a new report touting the economic benefits from hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") without disclosing the report's industry funding.

The recently released <a href="http://www.ihs.com/images/Americas-New-Energy-Future-Mfg-Renaissance-Main-Report-Sept13.pdf" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">study</a> [2], titled "America's New Energy Future: The Unconventional Oil & Gas Revolution and the US Economy," received widespread media attention on Thursday. The report, conducted by consulting group IHS CERA, was commissioned by multiple fossil fuel organizations that stand to benefit from growth in the oil and gas industry. According to the <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/04/us-energy-economy-impact/2742461/" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">report</a> [3], the increase in unconventional oil and natural gas extraction has added an average of $1,200 in discretionary income to each US household in 2012, and now supports 1.2 million jobs -- projected to increase to 3.3 million by 2020. These figures are much <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/04/us-energy-economy-impact/2742461/" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">larger</a> [3] than the findings of many previous economic studies.

However, multiple major news outlets, including <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-usa-oil-economy-idUSBRE9830NQ20130904" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Reuters</a> [4], <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/101008749" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">CNBC</a> [5], <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/09/04/behold-the-bounty-that-shale-oil-and-natural-gas-have-wrought/" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Forbes.com</a> [6], and the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-oil-natural-gas-household-income-1200-20130904,0,5435572.story" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Los Angeles Times</a> [7], covered the new report with no mention of its financial ties to the industry. The research was monetarily <a href="http://www.ihs.com/images/Americas-New-Energy-Future-Mfg-Renaissance-Exec-Sum-Sept13.pdf" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">supported </a> [8]by America's Natural Gas Alliance, the American Petroleum Institute, the American Chemistry Council, the Natural Gas Supply Association, and others who stand to gain economically from an <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/06/21/myths-and-facts-about-natural-gas/184994#regulation" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">unregulated</a>[9] increase in fracking. Kyle Isakower, vice president of regulatory policy at the American Petroleum Institute -- the largest trade association for the oil and gas industry -- <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/shale-study-promises-huge-gains-33-million-jobs-by-20-701889/#ixzz2e1fv8APu" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">lauded</a> [10] the new report, saying "[f]or an organization like the American Petroleum Institute, being able to cite the findings and reputation of IHS goes a long way toward making its point to government officials." According to <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/shale-study-promises-huge-gains-33-million-jobs-by-20-701889/#ixzz2e1fv8APu" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Steve Forde</a> [10], vice president of policy and communication at the Marcellus Shale Coalition (an industry trade group), economic impact studies such as this are "an important advocacy tool" for industry development.

<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-04/fracking-boom-seen-raising-household-incomes-by-1-200.html" style=" color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Bloomberg</a> [11], which did disclose the report's industry ties, reported that the IHS report didn't take potential environmental impacts from extracting unconventional oil and gas through drilling and fracking, such as <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/06/21/myths-and-facts-about-natural-gas/184994#water" style=" color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">groundwater contamination</a> [12] and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/science/earth/hydrofracking-could-strain-western-water-resources-study-finds.html?_r=0" style=" color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">strains on water resources</a> [13], into account.

</div>

</div>

<div class="tags" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">See more stories tagged with:

<div class="field-item even"><a href="http://www.alternet.org/tags/fracking-0" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" style=" color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">fracking</a> [14]</div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source URL: <a href="http://www.alternet.org/environment/media-tout-pro-fracking-report-fail-mention-it-was-funded-gas-industry" style=" color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">http://www.alternet.org/environment/media-tout-pro-fracking-report-fail-mention-it-was-funded-gas-industry</a></div>

<div style="text-align: left;">Links:</div><div style="text-align: left;">[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/denise-robbins</div><div style="text-align: left;">[2] http://www.ihs.com/images/Americas-New-Energy-Future-Mfg-Renaissance-Main-Report-Sept13.pdf</div><div style="text-align: left;">[3] http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/04/us-energy-economy-impact/2742461/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[4] http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/us-usa-oil-economy-idUSBRE9830NQ20130904</div><div style="text-align: left;">[5] http://www.cnbc.com/id/101008749</div><div style="text-align: left;">[6] http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/09/04/behold-the-bounty-that-shale-oil-and-natural-gas-have-wrought/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[7] http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-oil-natural-gas-household-income-1200-20130904,0,5435572.story</div><div style="text-align: left;">[8] http://www.ihs.com/images/Americas-New-Energy-Future-Mfg-Renaissance-Exec-Sum-Sept13.pdf</div><div style="text-align: left;">[9] http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/06/21/myths-and-facts-about-natural-gas/184994#regulation</div><div style="text-align: left;">[10] http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/shale-study-promises-huge-gains-33-million-jobs-by-20-701889/#ixzz2e1fv8APu</div><div style="text-align: left;">[11] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-04/fracking-boom-seen-raising-household-incomes-by-1-200.html</div><div style="text-align: left;">[12] http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/06/21/myths-and-facts-about-natural-gas/184994#water</div><div style="text-align: left;">[13] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/02/science/earth/hydrofracking-could-strain-western-water-resources-study-finds.html?_r=0</div><div style="text-align: left;">[14] http://www.alternet.org/tags/fracking-0</div><div style="text-align: left;">[15] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B</div>

</div>

==

secret task force: vice bk: task force head Joe Kelliher ask lobby Dana Contratto wish list il duce 17 API fill in the bl exec order becomes 13211 verbatim fed rel dir James Ford, dereg , no jud review p 17 !! [ = Halib Loophole?]  3/1 IF Engelhardt and fred palmer ceo and VP peabody met lundquist, sec of eng S Abraham, b2 eco advisor Larry Lindsey; stock offer IPO coming; 3/16 task rept hype coal 3/21 321 IPO got 420$mil, 60 over predicted<a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/indus.php?id=10910">https://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/indus.php?id=10910</a>[[dANA CHARLES CONTRATTO Dana Charles Contratto passed away of natural causes at his home on Long Beach Island, NJ on July 7, 2014. His three sons, Justin, Jordan and Travis, his grandson, Elias and Daune, his beloved wife of 41 years were all with him. Dana was born on June 21, 1947 in Peoria, Illinois to Jay and Dye Contratto. Dana grew up in Aurora, IL., with his kid sister, Lisa. As a youth he was a member of the Pike Street Pirates. A feared street-gang known for smoking cigarettes in tree houses and careening around the neighborhood cul-de-sacs on their bikes. Dana graduated from Aurora High School and went on to receive a B.S. from the University of Southern Illinois. In 1973 he received his J.D. from Washington University in St. Louis. While in law school he was editor-in-chief of the Urban Law Annual. Following law school, Dana moved to Washington D.C. with his wife, Daune. He clerked for Judge Edward Tamm the chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit. In 1976 Dana entered private practice with Morgan, Lewis andBockius, then later with Jones Day before leaving to become a founding partner with Crowell and Moring, LLP where he headed the firm's Energy Group and International Dispute Resolution. During his 40-year legal career Dana had a diverse and expansive practice. He worked extensively as a lobbyist, lawyer and legal counsel around the globe and was widely respected by all in his field. More importantly, he was a dedicated father who never missed a game and an avid - and successful - fisherman. He is survived by his loving wife, Daune McDevitt, his three children Justin (Polixene) , Jordan and Travis (listed in order of height) his father, W.R. "Dye" Contratto, his sister, Lisa Dickinson, and his grandson, Elias Contratto. Notorious outlaw and straight-talker Dana Contratto has left us in peace. We will never quite be able to fill the void....]]executive Order (E.O.) 13211 - Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use - was issued by President George W. Bush in 2001. It applies to any significant energy action as defined by the E.O. A significant energy action is one that promulgates, or is expected to lead to the promulgation of, a final rule that is:<ul style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top: 0px; line-height: 1.5; padding-left: 3ch;" source="Source" sans="Sans" pro="Pro" web="Web" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" roboto="Roboto" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" text-align="text-align" start="start"><li style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); margin-bottom: 0.25em; max-width: unset;">a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866 and</li><li style="text-align: left; color: rgb(27, 27, 27); box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); margin-bottom: 0px; max-width: unset;">likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution or use of energy or is designated by the Administrator of OMB/OIRA as a significant energy action.</li></ul><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; color: rgb(27, 27, 27);" source="Source" sans="Sans" pro="Pro" web="Web" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" roboto="Roboto" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" text-align="text-align" start="start">For significant energy actions, the federal agency must prepare a Statement of Energy Effects and submit the Statement to the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); color: rgb(0, 94, 162);">Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs </a><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/information-regulatory-affairs/" style="box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); color: rgb(0, 94, 162);">(OIRA)</a> in the <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); color: rgb(0, 94, 162);">Office of Management and Budget (OMB)</a>. The Statement, or a summary, must be included in the proposed and final rulemaking notices published by the agency. A Statement of Energy Effects includes information on any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use, and reasonable alternatives to the action along with the expected effects of such alternatives on energy supply, distribution, or use.<p style="box-sizing: inherit; transition-duration: 200ms; transition-property: background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform, -webkit-box-shadow, -webkit-transform; transition-timing-function: cubic-bezier(0.4, 0, 1, 1); line-height: 1.5; margin-bottom: 1rem; margin-top: 0px; text-align: start;"><span style="color: rgb(27, 27, 27); font-family: " source="Source" sans="Sans" pro="Pro" web="Web" helvetica="Helvetica" neue="Neue" roboto="Roboto" arial="Arial" sans-serif="sans-serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">vs biden<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55829189">: </a><a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55829189">https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55829189</a>----<a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-executive-order-13211-actions-concerning-regulations-significantly-affect">https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-executive-order-13211-actions-concerning-regulations-significantly-affect</a>

===

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Launches Campaign To Lobby For Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline</h2>

Last Friday, after <a target="blank" href="http://finchannel.com/Main_News/Jobs/91725_U.S.Chamber%E2%80%99s_Energy_Institute_Applauds_House_Approval_of_Keystone_XL_Pipeline_Legislation/">applauding the House's vote</a> [1] to rush a decision on TransCanada Corp's Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce launched a new campaign to boost the controversial project. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.fuelingus.org/">The Partnership to Fuel America</a> [2] is run out of the U.S. Chamber's <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3643">Institute for 21st Century Energy</a> [3], and seems positioned to be the U.S. Chamber's main influence channel to drum up support for Keystone XL. Supportive comments aside, it's also the first time the U.S. Chamber has so publicly and overtly aligned with the Canadian company's project.

The launch comes at a pivotal moment for Keystone XL. The Obama administration has the final say in approving the pipeline, and they've said the decision will be made by the end of the year. The new House legislation declared that the Obama administration must make the call by November 1st. A final environmental review of the prospective project is expected from the State Department in August. (To learn more about how tar sands pipelines like Keystone XL are a much greater risk than normal crude pipelines, see my earlier <a href="http://desmogblog.com/many-problems-tar-sands-pipelines">post</a> [4].)

Which is all to say: the next couple months will determine whether or not Keystone XL is approved and built. Given the U.S. Chamber's long history of support for all things fossil fuel -- and long history of fighting against any sort of pollution controls -- it's no real surprise that the Chamber is throwing its considerable weight behind Keystone XL. But until now, the nation's largest lobbying group (which spends more money than the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/01/new-lobbying-reports-show-big.html">next five lobbying groups combined</a> [5], and which receives the majority of its funding from 16 anonymous corporate donors) hadn't done more than release comments in support of the Keystone XL project. (Well, publicly, that is. They've probably done quite a bit behind closed doors.)

So what more do we know about the <a href="http://www.fuelingus.org/" target="_blank">Partnership to Fuel America</a> [2]? According to the U.S. Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy, it will be "comprised of American businesses and industries that understand the need for more energy in the United States and believe that Canada's significant resources can help achieve that goal." Their site makes numerous references to "North American energy," but the only North American sources of energy listed are Canada's tar sands, and every news item listed on the site is specifically about the Keystone XL project.

<div style="text-align: left;">Though you won't find him anywhere on the official site, the "partnership" is being led by a gentleman named <a target="_blank" href="http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Matt Koch</a> [6], who is vice president for Oil Sands and Arctic Issues at the U.S. Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy. And, no, I couldn't find any evidence that this is some long-lost Koch brother of the Koch Industries clan, but lately he's been earning his living off of fossil fuels just the same.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Before working for private industry, Matt Koch served in George W. Bush's White House, as an Associate Director of Cabinet Affairs, and also in the Department of Energy. Before settling into the capital, Koch served as Natural Resource Policy Director at the Texas Office of State-Federal Relations, securing the Lone Star State's oil interests inside the Beltway.</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">Immediately before joining the U.S. Chamber's payroll, Koch was Director of Federal Relations at the American Petroleum Institute, and one of their chief lobbyists. According to the Institute for 21st Century Energy, <a target="_blank" href="http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Koch was</a> [6] "API's chief advocate and issue manager for all downstream and refining-related issues affecting the oil and natural gas industry."</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">What's more, he was "responsible for initiating and managing API's ongoing, multifaceted oil sands strategy and campaign." Now he's running that very same strategy for the U.S. Chamber, and the big tar sands battle of the moment is the Keystone XL.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">It's worth noting that this Partnership to Fuel America launch -- the overt and very public alignment between the U.S. Chamber and TransCanada's Keystone project -- comes at the very moment that both the Chamber and the Keystone XL are being acutely targeted by various activist campaigns. <a target="blank" href="http://350.org/">350.org</a> [7] just launched the clever and timely "<a target="blank" href="http://www.uschamberofsecrets.org/">U.S. Chamber of Secrets</a> [8]" website as part of their <a target="blank" href="http://chamber.350.org/">ongoing campaign</a> [9] to expose the organization as a front group for fossil fuel corporations and other big polluters. (Check out their impressive <a target="blank" href="http://chamber.350.org/poster/">infographic about the Chamber</a> [10], which tells a pretty startling story.)</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Meanwhile, a whole slew of activists are gearing up for the <a target="blank" href="http://www.tarsandsaction.org/">Tar Sands Action</a> [11] in late August, which is specifically targeting the Keystone XL pipeline, which organizers <a target="blank" href="http://www.tarsandsaction.org/invitation/">describe as</a> [12] "a fifteen hundred mile fuse to the biggest carbon bomb on the continent."</div>

But, now, there's no need to speculate about a possible link between the U.S. Chamber and the Keystone XL project. That connection is now public and crystal clear. So it must be asked: why is the U.S. Chamber spending so much energy and resources supporting a project that will be built, operated, and profitted from by a Canadian company, one the U.S. Chamber isn't supposed to represent? Perhaps that answer lies in those other, more renowned Kochs, <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/koch-brothers-exposed-brave-new-films-explains-how-billionaires-could-profit-keystone-xl-pipeline">who stand to make a killing off of Keystone XL</a> [13] if it's completed, and who are <a target="_blank" href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/">known to have shady ties to the U.S. Chamber</a> [14].

</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/tags/oil-sands">oil sands</a> [15]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/643">American Petroleum Institute</a> [16]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2509">alberta tar sands</a> [18]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2521">U.S. Chamber of Commerce</a> [19]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632">tar sands</a> [20]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3676">chamber of commerce</a> [21]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857">Keystone XL</a> [22]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6562">keystone</a> [23]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6577">pipelines</a> [24]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6584">pipeline</a> [25]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7010">partnership to fuel america</a> [27]</div>

<div class="field-item odd" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7011">institute for 21st century energy</a> [28]</div>

<div class="field-item even" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7012">u.s. chamber</a> [29]</div>

</div>

<div class="blogreadmore" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Read more: <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline">U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Launches Campaign To Lobby For Keystone XL Tar Sands Pipeline</a> [30]</div>

</div>

<div class="print-source_url" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source URL: <a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline">http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline</a></div>

<div class="print-links" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div style="text-align: left;">Links:</div><div style="text-align: left;">[1] http://finchannel.com/Main_News/Jobs/91725_U.S._Chamber%E2%80%99s_Energy_Institute_Applauds_House_Approval_of_Keystone_XL_Pipeline_Legislation/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[2] http://www.fuelingus.org/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[3] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3643</div><div style="text-align: left;">[4] http://desmogblog.com/many-problems-tar-sands-pipelines</div><div style="text-align: left;">[5] http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2010/01/new-lobbying-reports-show-big.html</div><div style="text-align: left;">[6] http://energyxxi.org/pages/Matthew_Koch.aspx</div><div style="text-align: left;">[7] http://350.org/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[8] http://www.uschamberofsecrets.org/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[9] http://chamber.350.org/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[10] http://chamber.350.org/poster/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[11] http://www.tarsandsaction.org/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[12] http://www.tarsandsaction.org/invitation/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[13] http://www.desmogblog.com/koch-brothers-exposed-brave-new-films-explains-how-billionaires-could-profit-keystone-xl-pipeline</div><div style="text-align: left;">[14] http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/10/20/124642/beck-koch-chamber-meeting/</div><div style="text-align: left;">[15] http://www.desmogblog.com/tags/oil-sands</div><div style="text-align: left;">[16] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/643</div><div style="text-align: left;">[17] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/1286</div><div style="text-align: left;">[18] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2509</div><div style="text-align: left;">[19] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2521</div><div style="text-align: left;">[20] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/2632</div><div style="text-align: left;">[21] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/3676</div><div style="text-align: left;">[22] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/5857</div><div style="text-align: left;">[23] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6562</div><div style="text-align: left;">[24] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6577</div><div style="text-align: left;">[25] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/6584</div><div style="text-align: left;">[26] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7009</div><div style="text-align: left;">[27] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7010</div><div style="text-align: left;">[28] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7011</div><div style="text-align: left;">[29] http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/7012</div><div style="text-align: left;">[30] http://www.desmogblog.com/u-s-chamber-commerce-launches-campaign-lobby-keystone-xl-tar-sands-pipeline</div></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/print/5609">http://www.desmogblog.com/print/5609</a></div>

PM:<div style="text-align: left;">API has to be seen in the context of corporations hiding behind trade assocations in order to shield themselves from citizen critique or boycotts.  So no surprise that API has close ties with USCoC , funds AFP and ALEC (API has 27-33 state capital offices).  Gerard mining association to ACC to API 2008.  Cheney secret task force; teamed with CoC and NAM on Energy Citizens astroturf (asked 21 co's to turn out employees).  Modelled on health care town halls.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Their big coup/innovation was getting API's Cooney into the White House: in the past people from industry with expertise could legitimately be helpful (indeed FAA etc are really industry/gov't hybrids).  Cooney however was a industry PR guy with considerable climate BS expertise who got a senior position in a regulatory agency.  Mostly he just neutered scientific reports, but when one slipped through a PR disaster, requiring damage control by Rove and Myron Ebell.  Chastened, he he gets fanatic on editing; the admin movs from altering science to muzzling scientists: an intern is assigned to be Hansen's media handler. Government scientists are forbidden to mention climate change, polar bears or</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">CTW thought she thwarted him by cutting a passage he's butchered, but really had no effect; she quit four days later.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Cooney steered the BS Soon and Baliunas GMI study to DC and B2, providing cover for 180?(actually 2003?).  It was immediately discredited (the editor in chief and three others resigned in shame that it slipped through).  Cooney quit 2005(because out by whistleblower Piltz), goes to Exxon.  Fallout: G8 stymied on AGW.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Connaughton gets complete pass in SW; went to constellation in 2009</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">GP: " ExxonMobil has removed its sleeper cell from the White House and extracted him back to the mother ship"</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">1995 Attacked 2nd IPCC SAR "Among the key findings of the IPCC was the acknowledgement of a ‘discernable’ human impact on climate and a prediction that sea levels could rise 15 to 95cm by 2100, in line with temperature increases ranging from1°C to 3.5°C (1.8°F to 6.5°F)36.</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">The SAR’s Summary for Policymakers contained the conclusion that, ‘The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.’ That one sentence set the sceptics on fire. One called it the ‘most disturbing corruption of the peer-review process in 60 years’.37</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Charles DiBona, president of the American Petroleum Institute, called the report ‘inflammatory’"</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">An API "Communications Action Plan" from 1998 stated: "Victory will be achieved when ... citizens 'understand' uncertainties in climate science ... [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the 'conventional wisdom.'" [8]</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">An API memo leaked to the media in 1998 shed some light on the motivation for targeting schools: "Informing teachers/students about uncertainties in climate science will begin to erect barriers against further efforts to impose Kyoto-like measures in the future." [11]</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Greenwash Rebuild American money in 2006 very cynical after 2005 Katrina.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Palin polar bear suit: NAM and the petroleum institute were joined in the lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Mining Association and the American Iron and Steel Institute.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">"The group has loudly protested the EPA’s decision to have greenhouse gas emissions regulated under the Clean Air Act. API members include Chevron, ConocoPhillips,Exxon Mobil, GE, Halliburton and Shell."</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">Funded Soon and Baliunas at GMI, who managed to get into small German peer reviewed journal (three editors resigned in shame/protest).</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">---</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">API teamed with Newsweek to brief congr frosh? Jack Gerard previously at ACC (note food chain/farm team like Tom D)</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">---</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Tom Tanton did research for ATI and API, worked at IER</div>

<div class="posttext" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13385#post13385</div>

<div class="username" style="text-align: left;">Magda Hassan</div>

</div>

<div class="posttext" style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Newsweek Is Neck Deep in Oil & Conflicts</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Submitted by Lisa Graves (http://www.prwatch.org/user/35268) on November 6, 2009 - 12:14am.</div><div style="text-align: left;">http://www.prwatch.org/files/images/BlueDartsOnTarget.jpgTPM Muckraker has exposed (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/11/newsweek_and_oil_lobby_team_up_to_host_climate_cha .php?ref=fpblt) the fact that Newsweek is teaming up with the American Petroleum Institute (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute) (API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API)) to host a "briefing" for Members of Congress on climate and energy policy. The briefing is timed to coincide with, surprise, the Senate getting ready to take up climate and energy policy in advance of next month's COP15 </div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">(http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=COP15) world conference on global warming policy.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API)'s Lobbying Is Up and Against Slowing Global Warming (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Global_Warming)</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">According to TPM, API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute) has already spent $3.9 million directly lobbying in the first part of this year, primarily influence "cap-and-trade (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=cap-and-trade)" legislation regulating the use of "carbon credits (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=carbon_credits)" or pollution emission credits, as well as on the Waxman-Markey (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey) climate change bill. (During the Bush administration, API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API) spent only about $3 to $4 million a year on directly lobbying Congress.) But, according to Guidestar, API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API) (a registered non-profit) has revenues of around $200 million a year, primarily from oil companies, as of the last public report in 2007. And, it spent over $70 million on advertising that year alone.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Surprise: API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API) Is a Big Advertiser for Newsweek</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">http://www.prwatch.org/files/images/cashroots.pngThe Newsweek salon for Members of Congress on climate will feature the API (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=API)'s Jack Gerard (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_Gerard), who makes about $2 million a year in salary and deferred compensation for being Big Oil's go-to guy in DC. Gerard, who previously headed the American Chemistry Council (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Chemistry_Council), gained new notoriety this summer after Greenpeace (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greenpeace) publicized a memo, which is attached down below, that he sent to oil companies mapping out a plan to create astroturf (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=astroturf), or what I call "cash-roots (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=cash-roots)," rallies. I'm sure you remember the slick company-produced signs and t-shirts at these manufactured events where industry employees were bused in to "citizen rallies" against anti-global warming legislation, as with the self-declared "energy citizens (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=energy_citizens)." As TPM's Zachary Roth noted, Newsweek did report on that as an example of "how astroturfing is taking over local activism."</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Newsweek Suddenly Buys into Big Oil Green-Washing (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Green-Washing)</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="text-align: left;">But, as Roth pointed out: "[R]ecently, the magazine has gone easier on the oil industry. In September, Newsweek ran a story by Newsweek International editor Rana Foroohar entitled "Big Oil Goes Green For Real," which infuriated environmentalists by asserting that oil industry investments in alternative energy were no longer just green-washing (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=green-washing), but rather were 'the real deal.'"</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Newsweek's Selling Out Makes It Worth Less and Less</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Despite this, Newsweek said it separates its reporting from its advertising. It is difficult to believe this line is impervious when it publishes puff pieces like the ]]green-washing]] bit, which must have made its big advertiser very happy, and when the magazine lends its name to a briefing by Big Oil for Members of Congress. But, maybe its name is just worth less and less, at least when it comes to its claim of objectivity. Though, I must admit, I've never been a big fan of this periodical, even before these revelations.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">So, one question is, as Mike Smith at Change.org (http://globalwarming.change.org/blog/view/why_is_newsweek_lobbying_for_the_oil_industry) put it: "Why Is Newsweek Lobbying for the Oil Industry?" We all know it's for the money, of course. And, we can expect more of this to come, as corporate media looks for new ways to please the advertisers that pay the bills and to appease Wall Street's relentless quest for profits. Just another reason we need to rein in the big corporations and the not-for-profit industry fronts they pass their profits through.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Lisa Graves (http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/bios.php/Lisa_Graves) is the Executive Director of the Center for Media and Democracy (http://www.prwatch.org/) based in Madison, Wisconsin.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">http://www.prwatch.org/node/8678</div></div>

</div>

The ads are <a href="http://www.api.org/news-and-media/news/newsitems/2012/mar-2012/api-ad-campaign-stresses-energy-tax-hikes-could-increase-pain-at-the-pump.aspx">running</a> in Missouri, Massachusetts, West Virginia, Virginia, North Carolina, Maine and Nevada from March 24-27. Six of those states will see <a href="http://cookpolitical.com/senate">fiercely-contested Senate races</a> this November. The seventh, North Carolina, will likely see a close Senate race in 2014. The 2012 races are:

<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div style="text-align: left;">– MA: Sen. Scott Brown (R) won a 2010 special election and is seeking a full term</div><div style="text-align: left;">– ME: Sen. Olympia Snowe (R) is retiring, leaving an open seat</div><div style="text-align: left;">– MO: Sen. Claire McCaskill (D) is seeking re-election</div><div style="text-align: left;">– NE: Sen. Dean Heller (R) is seeking a full term</div><div style="text-align: left;">– VA: Sen. Jim Webb (D) is retiring, leaving an open seat</div><div style="text-align: left;">– WV: Sen. Joe Manchin (D) won a 2010 special election and is seeking a full term</div></blockquote>

Some of the ads mention both of the state’s senators, but others mention only one senator.

In the four states that have an incumbent running for re-election — <a href="http://www.api.org/News-and-Media/%7E/media/Files/News/Ads/print/2012/P1-boston-globe2.ashx">Massachusetts</a>, <a href="http://www.api.org/News-and-Media/%7E/media/Files/News/Ads/print/2012/P2-stlouis-post.ashx">Missouri</a>, <a href="http://www.api.org/News-and-Media/%7E/media/Files/News/Ads/print/2012/P3-las-vegas-review.ashx">Nevada</a>, and <a href="http://www.api.org/News-and-Media/%7E/media/Files/News/Ads/print/2012/P6-charlston-daily.ashx">West Virginia</a> — the API ads mention that senator alone. And the North Carolina ads mention only Sen. <a href="http://www.api.org/News-and-Media/%7E/media/Files/News/Ads/print/2012/P4-charlotte-observer.ashx">Kay Hagan</a> (D), the incumbent up for re-election in two years. In the two states with an open-seat election — Maine and Virginia — the ads mention both senators.

Sen. Brown’s campaign <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-influence-industry-pact-on-third-party-ads-seems-to-be-working-in-massachusetts/2012/03/28/gIQASBbBhS_story.html">conceded the ads have an effect</a> on the Massachusetts senate campaign, in his favor. The Massachusetts Republican will make a donation to a charity of his opponent’s choosing, in accordance with an agreement between their two campaigns.

===

greenpeace dirty dozen durban

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">API? Members include US branches of</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">ArcelorMittal, BHP Billiton, BP, ExxonMobil,</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">PetroBras, Shell, Siemens Energy Division</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">“emissions from [the production and use of oil</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">and gas] may be helping to warm our planet</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">by enhancing the natural greenhouse effect</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">of the atmosphere.” “While companies must</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">continue to meet the demands of today’s and tomorrow’s consumers for oil and gas, they are</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">also preparing for a future in which alternatives</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">will play a much more significant role.”13</div>

---

sw

hires lots of ex-staffers, Cooney in bush 2 white house

The American Petroleum Institute (API), based in Washington, D.C., is a "major research institute .. committed to using the best available scientific, economic and legal analysis to guide and support" its policy positions. The Institute's work is member-driven and it offers "companies large and small the opportunity to participate in shaping API programs and policy priorities." API represents more than 400 members involved in all aspects of the oil natural gas industry. The API has offices in 27 state capitals. <a href="http://www.api.org" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.api.org" rel="nofollow">[1]</a>

<h2>Contents</h2>

</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Responses_to_Obama_administration_actions">1 Responses to Obama administration actions</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#.22Energy_Citizens.22_rallies">1.1 "Energy Citizens" rallies</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Other_climate_policy-related_actions">1.2 Other climate policy-related actions</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#2008_elections">1.3 2008 elections</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#History">2 History</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Questioning_global_warming">2.1 Questioning global warming</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Concerns_about_API-funded_research">2.2 Concerns about API-funded research</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Petroleum_is_.22cool.22">2.3 Petroleum is "cool"</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Public_relations">3 Public relations</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Super_Bowl_2008">3.1 Super Bowl 2008</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Blogger_outreach">3.2 Blogger outreach</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Public_talks">3.3 Public talks</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#West_Virginia">3.3.1 West Virginia</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Delaware">3.3.2 Delaware</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#California">3.3.3 California</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-3"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Kentucky">3.3.4 Kentucky</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Idaho">3.4 Idaho</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Lobbying">4 Lobbying</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Personnel">5 Personnel</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Contact_information">6 Contact information</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Articles_and_resources">7 Articles and resources</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#Related_SourceWatch_articles">7.1 Related SourceWatch articles</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#References">7.2 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#External_resources">7.3 External resources</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#External_articles">7.4 External articles</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Responses to Obama administration actions</h2>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name=".22Energy_Citizens.22_rallies" id=".22Energy_Citizens.22_rallies">"Energy Citizens" rallies</a></h3>

<a name=".22Energy_Citizens.22_rallies" id=".22Energy_Citizens.22_rallies">In August 2009, an API-led coalition called </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy_Citizens" title="Energy Citizens">"Energy Citizens"</a> announced plans to hold rallies opposing the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill" title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a> in about 20 states, targeting states "whose Democratic Senators aren't strong supporters of a stringent bill, such ... <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sherrod_Brown" title="Sherrod Brown">Sherrod Brown</a> of Ohio and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mark_Begich" title="Mark Begich">Mark Begich</a> of Alaska." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-WSJrallies-0" title="">[1]</a> In addition to API, "Energy Citizens" has backing from the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Association_of_Manufacturers" title="National Association of Manufacturers">National Association of Manufacturers</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Farm_Bureau" title="American Farm Bureau" class="mw-redirect">American Farm Bureau</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Highway_Users_Alliance&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="American Highway Users Alliance (page does not exist)">American Highway Users Alliance</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Black_Chamber_of_Commerce&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="National Black Chamber of Commerce (page does not exist)">National Black Chamber of Commerce</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Small_Business_and_Entrepreneurship_Council&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council (page does not exist)">Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FreedomWorks" title="FreedomWorks">FreedomWorks</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Conservative_Union" title="American Conservative Union">American Conservative Union</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Americans_for_Tax_Reform" title="Americans for Tax Reform">Americans for Tax Reform</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Council_for_Citizens_Against_Government_Waste" title="Council for Citizens Against Government Waste">Council for Citizens Against Government Waste</a>. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-1" title="">[2]</a>

"The group has loudly protested the EPA’s decision to have greenhouse gas emissions regulated under the Clean Air Act. API members include <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chevron" title="Chevron" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ConocoPhillips" title="ConocoPhillips" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ConocoPhillips</a>,<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Exxon_Mobil" title="Exxon Mobil" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Exxon Mobil</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=GE" title="GE" class="mw-redirect" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">GE</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Halliburton" title="Halliburton" class="mw-redirect" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Halliburton</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shell" title="Shell" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Shell</a>." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-2" title="">[3]</a>

Template fliers for the "Energy Citizens" rallies warned, "Climate change legislation being considered in Washington will cause huge economic pain and produce little environmental gain." [LOMBORF MILLOY?] The fliers also claimed that the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Waxman-Markey_Climate_Bill" title="Waxman-Markey Climate Bill">Waxman-Markey Climate Bill</a>, which passed the House of Representatives in June, would "cost 2 million American jobs, raise gasoline and diesel prices up to $4," hurt U.S. businesses and energy security. In contrast, the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="Environmental Protection Agency" class="mw-redirect">Environmental Protection Agency</a> estimates that the bill would cost U.S. households "about a postage stamp a day," while the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy_Information_Administration" title="Energy Information Administration">Energy Information Administration</a> projects that annual "energy bill costs could rise between $26 per household to to $362 by 2020." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-WSJrallies-0" title="">[1]</a>

Part of API's blog is devoted to "<a href="http://blog.energytomorrow.org/energy-citizens/" class="external text" title="http://blog.energytomorrow.org/energy-citizens/" rel="nofollow">Energy Citizens</a>." API also has an "Energy Citizens" <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyCitizens" class="external text" title="http://www.youtube.com/user/EnergyCitizens" rel="nofollow">YouTube channel</a>.

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Other_climate_policy-related_actions" id="Other_climate_policy-related_actions">Other climate policy-related actions</a></h3>

<a name="Other_climate_policy-related_actions" id="Other_climate_policy-related_actions" style="">In April 2009, API sent a letter to members of Congress, in Gerard's name, that slammed the </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Obama_administration" title="Obama administration" class="mw-redirect" style="">Obama administration</a>. It stated: "The US oil and natural gas industry has the expertise and technology to produce the energy we need to fuel economic growth, create jobs, generate significant revenues for local, state and federal governments, and bolster our national security. However, our companies cannot do so if held back by harmful, counter-productive taxes and are restricted from access to domestic oil and natural gas resources that the country urgently needs. ... If imposed, these taxes and fees could have a debilitating effect on our economy, when our nation can least afford it. They would reduce investment in new energy supplies, meaning less energy produced for American consumers. We cannot tax our way out of our energy problems.” <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-3" title="">[4]</a>

The same month, API protested the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="Environmental Protection Agency" class="mw-redirect">Environmental Protection Agency</a>'s finding that greenhouse gas emissions endangered public health and could be regulated under the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Clean_Air_Act" title="Clean Air Act">Clean Air Act</a>. "The Clean Air Act was created to address local and regional air pollution, not the emission of carbon dioxide and other global greenhouse gases," said API's Jack Gerard. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-4" title="">[5]</a>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="2008_elections" id="2008_elections">2008 elections</a></h3>

<a name="2008_elections" id="2008_elections">In response to the November 2008 election of Democrats </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Barack_Obama" title="Barack Obama">Barack Obama</a> as President and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joe_Biden" title="Joe Biden" class="mw-redirect">Joe Biden</a> as Vice-president, API released a statement in the name of their CEO, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_Gerard" title="Jack Gerard" class="mw-redirect">Jack Gerard</a>, saying: "The American people have spoken loud and clear that they want politicians to put aside partisan bickering. ...The oil and natural gas industry stands ready to help put America's vast energy resources to good use, strengthening our nation's economy and energy security, and providing good jobs for Americans across the country." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-5" title="">[6]</a>

Earlier, Gerard had criticized Obama's platform, saying "Obama's plan to impose a windfall-profits tax on oil companies would harm one of the few industries that are thriving" in the economic crisis. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-6" title="">[7]</a>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="History" id="History">History</a></h2>

<a name="History" id="History">"For 76 years, API has been the petroleum industry's U.S. national trade association. API released its first standard in 1923, intended to promote the interchangeability of oil field equipment throughout the industry." </a><a href="http://www.cssinfo.com/info/api.html#hist" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.cssinfo.com/info/api.html#hist" rel="nofollow">[2]</a>

"Today, over 900 API standards serve as the basis for API quality programs covering production material and lubricants, and certification programs for storage tanks, pressure vessels, and piping inspectors. They also publish recommended practices, research reports, and specifications on pipelines, valves, offshore structures, oil-spill response procedures, environmental protection, exploration, facility management and much more." <a href="http://www.cssinfo.com/info/api.html#hist" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.cssinfo.com/info/api.html#hist" rel="nofollow">[3]</a>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Questioning_global_warming" id="Questioning_global_warming">Questioning global warming</a></h3>

<a name="Questioning_global_warming" id="Questioning_global_warming" style="">An API "Communications Action Plan" from 1998 stated: "Victory will be achieved when ... citizens 'understand' uncertainties in climate science ... [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the 'conventional wisdom.'" </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-7" title="" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[8]</a> see newsweek coverage?

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Concerns_about_API-funded_research" id="Concerns_about_API-funded_research">Concerns about API-funded research</a></h3>

<a name="Concerns_about_API-funded_research" id="Concerns_about_API-funded_research">In April 2005, it was reported that API was overseeing a $27 million study on the health effects of benzene, funded by the major oil companies </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=BP" title="BP">BP</a>, Chevron Texaco, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conoco" title="Conoco">Conoco</a>Phillips, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Exxon_Mobil" title="Exxon Mobil">Exxon Mobil</a> and Shell Chemical. The study was launched in 2001, in response to a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Cancer_Institute" title="National Cancer Institute">National Cancer Institute</a> study that found "workers exposed to average levels of benzene had a risk of developing non-Hodgkin's lymphoma more than four times greater than the general population." A follow-up NCI study, published in 2005, found that "benzene had toxic effects on blood cells at 1 part per million - the level workers in the United States are allowed to be exposed to over an eight-hour workday." Benzene is a component of gasoline, so oil companies were concerned that tighter benzene regulations would affect their operations. <a href="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" rel="nofollow">[4]</a>

Although the API research wouldn't be complete until 2007, information from "depositions, proposals to oil companies and other documents collected by a Houston law firm in unrelated lawsuits" suggests that "the results of the study already have been predicted." The Houston Chronicle reported, "The conclusions are expected to contradict earlier research linking low- and mid-levels of benzene to cancers and other blood diseases - findings that could spawn tighter regulations." <a href="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" rel="nofollow">[5]</a>

One research proposal from a Mobil Oil toxicologist said the study would "respond to allegations from a nationwide study of benzene exposed workers." The research proposal submitted to Marathon Oil stated that "the benzene research was expected to provide scientific support for the lack of a leukemia risk to the general population, evidence that current occupational exposure limits do not create a significant risk to workers and proof that non-Hodgkin's lymphoma could not be caused by benzene exposure." <a href="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3159505" rel="nofollow">[6]</a>

A Powerpoint presentation on the proposed research shown to potential oil company funders "included a section describing 'the significant issues of concern to global petroleum industry that the research would affect.' Those issues included possible changes to the way gasoline is made, additional emissions controls and litigation." <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D89OLR1G0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D89OLR1G0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down" rel="nofollow">[7]</a>

In response to the April 2005 media reports on the benzene study, API manager of health sciences <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lorraine_Twerdok&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Lorraine Twerdok (page does not exist)">Lorraine Twerdok</a> stated that the study "is being conducted to gain a better understanding of the relationship between benzene exposure and potential cancer risk to protect industry workers and customers." <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D89OLR1G0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D89OLR1G0.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down" rel="nofollow">[8]</a>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Petroleum_is.22cool.22" id="Petroleum_is.22cool.22">Petroleum is "cool"</a></h3>

<a name="Petroleum_is.22cool.22" id="Petroleum_is.22cool.22">The API is the producer of a 16-minute video titled 'Fuel-less: you can't be cool without fuel', which was distributed through the </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Science_Teachers_Association" title="National Science Teachers Association">National Science Teachers Association</a>. The film starts with the line "you're not going to believe this, but everything everything I have that's really cool comes from oil!" <a href="http://www.classroom-energy.org/oil_natural_gas/fuel_less/index.html" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.classroom-energy.org/oil_natural_gas/fuel_less/index.html" rel="nofollow">[9]</a>.

The API funds a website called 'classroom energy' <a href="http://www.classroom-energy.org/about_us.html" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.classroom-energy.org/about_us.html" rel="nofollow">[10]</a>, which aims to provide teachers and students with materials on 'the vital role of oil and natural gas in modern life.'

An API memo leaked to the media in 1998 shed some light on the motivation for targeting schools: "Informing teachers/students about uncertainties in climate science will begin to erect barriers against further efforts to impose Kyoto-like measures in the future." <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/24/AR2006112400789_pf.html" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/24/AR2006112400789_pf.html" rel="nofollow">[11]</a>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Public_relations" id="Public_relations">Public relations</a></h2>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Super_Bowl_2008" id="Super_Bowl_2008">Super Bowl 2008</a></h3>

<div style="text-align: left;"><a name="Super_Bowl_2008" id="Super_Bowl_2008" style="">At the January 2008 Super Bowl U.S. football championship game, API sponsored "Kickoff to Rebuild," [Katrina?] highlighting its work with </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rebuilding_Together&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Rebuilding Together (page does not exist)" style="">Rebuilding Together</a>, a nonprofit organization that promotes homeownership. API and Rebuilding Together are launching an "Energy Efficient Homes Initiative," which aims "to incorporate energy-efficiency measures in the more than 9,000 homes revitalized each year by Rebuilding Together." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-8" title="">[9]  </a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-8" title="">actually did 200 w/ api $  founding sponsor 2006 </a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://rebuildingtogether.org/news-item/rebuilding-together-presents-the-american-petroleum-institute-with-the-2008-community-builder-award/ founded 1991 looks mostly legit, foto ops http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina 2005">http://rebuildingtogether.org/news-item/rebuilding-together-presents-the-american-petroleum-institute-with-the-2008-community-builder-award/  founded 1991 looks mostly legit, foto ops  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_Katrina 2005</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"> </div>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Blogger_outreach" id="Blogger_outreach">Blogger outreach</a></h3>

<a name="Blogger_outreach" id="Blogger_outreach">API has been battling the </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oil_industry" title="Oil industry">oil industry</a>'s negative public image for years, including by doing increased media outreach. In November 2007, Reuters reported that API, along with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chevron" title="Chevron">Chevron</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Royal_Dutch_Shell" title="Royal Dutch Shell" class="mw-redirect">Royal Dutch Shell</a> "have reached out to a conservative band of bloggers." API "paid for seven bloggers" to take two trips in November, one to Houston and Corpus Christi, Texas, and one offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. API required the bloggers to disclose that the industry group had funded the trips, but otherwise "placed no restrictions" on them. API's "new media advisor," Jane Van Ryan, admitted that the bloggers chosen -- for the Texas trip, Ed Morrissey, Bruce McQuain, Brian Westenhaus and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Association_of_Manufacturers" title="National Association of Manufacturers">National Association of Manufacturers</a>'s Carter Wood -- "have not been particularly critical of the industry." While API's blogger "outreach effort" is new, "reporters who cover the energy industry are often invited by companies to visit offshore drilling rigs or production platforms," notes Reuters. API plans similar junkets for 2008. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-9" title="">[10]</a>

In May 2007, PR Week reported that API was ramping up media outreach, including bloggers for the first time. "We felt we should become more involved" in the blogosphere, explained API's <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jane_Van_Ryan&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jane Van Ryan (page does not exist)">Jane Van Ryan</a>, "because there are a lot of policies and news-related items being discussed." The industry group held three blogger teleconferences, "on subjects including energy and environment and, most recently on May 16, gasoline prices," reported PR Week. "Blogs the API has reached out to include The Oil Drum, Energy Outlook, and the Daily Reckoning." API's "team of seven media relations people" continues traditional media outreach, fielding "a 'huge amount of calls' from the networks, major dailies, trade press, small newspapers in 'virtually every state,' and consumers," after the latest price hike. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-10" title="">[11]</a>

The blogger "Devil's Advocate" wrote about an API-organized bloggers conference call on biofuels, held on February 20, 2008. "I had a very interesting blogger conference call with the American Petroleum Institute yesterday," s/he wrote. "This time, however, I did not agree with much of their agenda. ... If a product cannot stand on its own two feet making a profit, government should not be involved producing it." Call participants were listed as Devil's Advocate of Copious Dissent, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nate_Hagens&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Nate Hagens (page does not exist)">Nate Hagens</a> of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Oil_Drum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="The Oil Drum (page does not exist)">The Oil Drum</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bruce_McQuain" title="Bruce McQuain">Bruce McQuain</a> of The QandO Blog, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Rapier&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Robert Rapier (page does not exist)">Robert Rapier</a> of The Oil Drum and R-Squared, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Geoff_Styles&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Geoff Styles (page does not exist)">Geoff Styles</a> of Energy Outlook, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gail_Tverberg&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Gail Tverberg (page does not exist)">Gail Tverberg</a> of The Oil Drum, and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Brian_Westenhaus&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Brian Westenhaus (page does not exist)">Brian Westenhaus</a> of New Energy and Fuel. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-11" title="">[12]</a>

API held another blogger conference call on July 15, 2008. API participants included new media advisor <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jane_Van_Ryan&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jane Van Ryan (page does not exist)">Jane Van Ryan</a>, CEO <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Red_Cavaney" title="Red Cavaney">Red Cavaney</a>, chief economist <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Felmy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="John Felmy (page does not exist)">John Felmy</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jim_Hoskins&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jim Hoskins (page does not exist)">Jim Hoskins</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Harris_Interactive&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Harris Interactive (page does not exist)">Harris Interactive</a>. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-12" title="">[13]</a> The bloggers on the call included <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Rapier&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Robert Rapier (page does not exist)">Robert Rapier</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Nate_Hagens&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Nate Hagens (page does not exist)">Nate Hagens</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gail_Tverberg&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Gail Tverberg (page does not exist)">Gail Tverberg</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Oil_Drum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="The Oil Drum (page does not exist)">The Oil Drum</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Doug_Lambert&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Doug Lambert (page does not exist)">Doug Lambert</a> from GraniteCrok.com, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Geoff_Styles&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Geoff Styles (page does not exist)">Geoff Styles</a> of Energy Outlook, "as well as several other bloggers from other sites." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-13" title="">[14]</a>

An API blogger call on September 26, 2008. The API participants were Jane Van Ryan, Red Cavaney, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Prentiss_Searles&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Prentiss Searles (page does not exist)">Prentiss Searles</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sara_Banaszak&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Sara Banaszak (page does not exist)">Sara Banaszak</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tim_Sampson&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Tim Sampson (page does not exist)">Tim Sampson</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_Ranger&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Richard Ranger (page does not exist)">Richard Ranger</a>. The bloggers on the call were <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bob_McCarty&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bob McCarty (page does not exist)">Bob McCarty</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bob_McCarty_Writes&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bob McCarty Writes (page does not exist)">Bob McCarty Writes</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Cindy_Kilkenny&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Cindy Kilkenny (page does not exist)">Cindy Kilkenny</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Fairly_Conservative&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Fairly Conservative (page does not exist)">Fairly Conservative</a>, Devil's Advocate from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Copious_Dissent&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Copious Dissent (page does not exist)">Copious Dissent</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Doug_Lambert&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Doug Lambert (page does not exist)">Doug Lambert</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Granite_Grok&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Granite Grok (page does not exist)">Granite Grok</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Gail_Tverberg&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Gail Tverberg (page does not exist)">Gail Tverberg</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_Oil_Drum&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="The Oil Drum (page does not exist)">The Oil Drum</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Geoff_Styles&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Geoff Styles (page does not exist)">Geoff Styles</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy_Outlook&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Energy Outlook (page does not exist)">Energy Outlook</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Greg_Balch&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Greg Balch (page does not exist)">Greg Balch</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Goat%27s_Barnyard&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Goat's Barnyard (page does not exist)">Goat's Barnyard</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jim_Hoeft&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jim Hoeft (page does not exist)">Jim Hoeft</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bearing_Drift&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Bearing Drift (page does not exist)">Bearing Drift</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joules_Burn&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Joules Burn (page does not exist)">Joules Burn</a> from The Oil Drum, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Joy_McCann&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Joy McCann (page does not exist)">Joy McCann</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Little_Miss_Attila&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Little Miss Attila (page does not exist)">Little Miss Attila</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peter_Carlock&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Peter Carlock (page does not exist)">Peter Carlock</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=OPNTalk&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="OPNTalk (page does not exist)">OPNTalk</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Swartz&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Michael Swartz (page does not exist)">Michael Swartz</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Monoblogue&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Monoblogue (page does not exist)">Monoblogue</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mick_Orton&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Mick Orton (page does not exist)">Mick Orton</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=FedUp_Network&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="FedUp Network (page does not exist)">FedUp Network</a>, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pejman_Yousefzadeh&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Pejman Yousefzadeh (page does not exist)">Pejman Yousefzadeh</a> from <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=RedState&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="RedState (page does not exist)">RedState</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=A_Chequer-Board_of_Nights_and_Days&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="A Chequer-Board of Nights and Days (page does not exist)">A Chequer-Board of Nights and Days</a>. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-14" title="">[15]</a> "We discussed refineries, what the lifting of the bans [on offshore oil drilling] mean, known and unknown reserves, employment and a few other things," wrote "Goat" of the Barnyard blog. "API rightly pointed out that not a drop of oil was spilled by the rigs in the Gulf during the worst Mother Nature could throw at them during Katrina. ... Another point was brought up about a liberal talking point that we have only a tiny percentage of the worlds oil and population but we use 25% of the world's production of oil. That may be true but we are also the world's biggest producer of goods and services with that oil not to mention the hundreds of other products that come from oil byproducts like plastic, paint, tires, nylon, and cosmetics." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-15" title="">[16]</a> Bob McCarty also blogged about the call. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-16" title="">[17]</a>

API's October 30, 2008, blogger conference call included a discussion of "the issue of ethanol subsidies and the cost incurred by taxpayers particularly now since gasoline prices have plummeted quite a bit," according to the blogger Vulcan's Hammer. Speakers included API's Jane Van Ryan, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rayola_Dougher&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Rayola Dougher (page does not exist)">Rayola Dougher</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ron_Planting&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Ron Planting (page does not exist)">Ron Planting</a>, along with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lou_Pugliaresi&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Lou Pugliaresi (page does not exist)">Lou Pugliaresi</a> of the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Energy_Policy_Research_Foundation&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Energy Policy Research Foundation (page does not exist)">Energy Policy Research Foundation</a>. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-17" title="">[18]</a>

API held a blogger conference call on May 15, 2009, featuring <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Robert_Ryan&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Robert Ryan (page does not exist)">Robert Ryan</a>, the Vice President of Global Exploration at <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chevron" title="Chevron">Chevron</a>; with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Justin_Higgs&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Justin Higgs (page does not exist)">Justin Higgs</a>, Chevron's News Media Advisor; <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mark_Kibbe&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Mark Kibbe (page does not exist)">Mark Kibbe</a>, API's Federal Relations Director; and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Felmy&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="John Felmy (page does not exist)">John Felmy</a>, API's Chief Economist. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-18" title="">[19]</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-19" title="">[20]</a>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Public_talks" id="Public_talks">Public talks</a></h3>

<h4 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="West_Virginia" id="West_Virginia">West Virginia</a></h4>

<a name="West_Virginia" id="West_Virginia">API's traditional and online media outreach has been coupled with local speaking events across the country, by API staffers and oil company executives. In February 2008, API's </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Denise_McCourt&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Denise McCourt (page does not exist)">Denise McCourt</a> addressed a Rotary Club meeting in Charleston, West Virginia. "The oil and natural gas industry hasn't done a very good job telling people about energy issues," McCourt told the group. So the industry has taken "a little bit of abuse by the people running for office," she added. McCourt told the audience that higher gas prices don't necessarily mean "atrocious profits" for oil companies. She compared what she said were 2007 profit rates of 7.6 cents per dollar of sales for the oil industry with 9.2 cents per dollar of sales for all manufacturing, except automobiles.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-20" title="">[21]</a>

On April 29, 2008, API's <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Denise_McCourt&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Denise McCourt (page does not exist)">Denise McCourt</a> talked to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Rotary_Club&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Rotary Club (page does not exist)">Rotary Club</a> in Wheeling, West Virginia. "Contrary to popular belief and what some politicians might say, America’s oil companies aren’t owned just by a small group of insiders," she told the Rotarians. "Only 1.5 percent of industry shares are owned by company executives. The rest is owned by tens of millions of Americans, many of them middle class." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-21" title="">[22]</a> She also addressed gas prices: "When you talk about what you pay for the price of gasoline at the pump, you have to remember that 72 percent of it right now is actually the price of crude oil. ... About 47 cents [per gallon] on average is actually state and local taxes. ... Those are what help pay for roads and bridges around the country." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-22" title="">[23]</a>

<h4 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Delaware" id="Delaware">Delaware</a></h4>

<a name="Delaware" id="Delaware">On May 7, 2008, </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shell_Oil" title="Shell Oil" class="mw-redirect">Shell Oil</a> CEO <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_Hofmeister" title="John Hofmeister" class="mw-redirect">John Hofmeister</a>, an API adviser, will give a public talk in Newark, Delaware, as part of the University of Delaware's spring 2008 lecture series called "Boiling Point: International Politics of Climate Change." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-23" title="">[24]</a>

<h4 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="California" id="California">California</a></h4>

<a name="California" id="California" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">On May 29, 2008, API co-sponsored an event at </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stanford_University" title="Stanford University" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Stanford University</a> in California, titled, "Energy's Future is in Technology: Innovation in Energy Supply, Energy Efficiency and Alternative/Renewable Energy." Newsweek was the other event sponsor. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-24" title="">[25]</a>

<h4 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Kentucky" id="Kentucky">Kentucky</a></h4>

<a name="Kentucky" id="Kentucky">In June 2008, API's Denise McCourt talked to the Kentucky state legislature's Special Subcommittee on Energy. "85 percent of the places in the ocean where we think we can find resources are under moratorium and we can not go there," said McCort. "When you look at that kind of number people say wait a minute, 85 percent? Let's say you think some areas are more particularly sensitive than others, but 85 percent of the places where we think we have oil and gas we can't go." </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-25" title="">[26]</a>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Idaho" id="Idaho">Idaho</a></h3>

<a name="Idaho" id="Idaho">In August 2008, API Chief Economist John C. Felmy spoke "to the Rotary Club of Boise about oil prices," and also gave an interview to the Idaho Statesman newspaper. "There is little evidence that retailers are making a lot of money," Felmy told the paper. "And it's not the refiners, some of whom are losing money. ... Right now the Department of Energy estimates that 74 percent of the cost of gas is attributable to the cost of oil." </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-26" title="">[27]</a>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Lobbying" id="Lobbying">Lobbying</a></h2>

<a name="Lobbying" id="Lobbying">In February 2009, API hired </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=HBW_Resources&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="HBW Resources (page does not exist)">HBW Resources</a>. The firm's <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Andrew_Browning&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Andrew Browning (page does not exist)">Andrew Browning</a>, "a former special assistant at the Energy Department's office of fossil energy," is lobbying on behalf of API on "the development of domestic oil shale reserves." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-27" title="">[28]</a>

In September 2008, API "hired <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Mehlman_Vogel_Castagnetti" title="Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti">Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti</a> to lobby on energy drilling proposals, tax issues and chemical security legislation," reported The Hill. "The lobbying team includes <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jamie_Brown&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Jamie Brown (page does not exist)">Jamie Brown</a>, a former special assistant for legislative affairs to President Bush; <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Kelly_Bingel&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Kelly Bingel (page does not exist)">Kelly Bingel</a>, former chief of staff to Sen. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Blanche_Lincoln" title="Blanche Lincoln">Blanche Lincoln</a> (D-Ark.); and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_Castagnetti" title="David Castagnetti" class="mw-redirect">David Castagnetti</a>, former chief of staff to Sen. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Max_Baucus" title="Max Baucus">Max Baucus</a> (D-Mont.)." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-28" title="">[29]</a>

"The American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry's main trade group, paid Timmons & Co. $200,000 to lobby the federal government in the first half of 2007," reported AP in August 2007. "The firm lobbied on various pieces of legislation dealing with homeland security appropriations, energy policy, taxes, price gouging and other issues. ... <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Daniel_Shapiro&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Daniel Shapiro (page does not exist)">Daniel Shapiro</a>, former deputy chief of staff for Sen. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bill_Nelson" title="Bill Nelson">Bill Nelson</a>, D-Fla., is among those registered to lobby on behalf of the institute." <a href="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/28/ap4062421.html" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/28/ap4062421.html" rel="nofollow">[12]</a>

API spent $4 million to lobby the federal government in 2007, according to lobbying disclosure forms. "The trade group lobbied on various appropriations bills, and on oil taxes and fees, chemical plant security, price gouging, international investment and more," reported Associated Press. "Besides Congress, the American Petroleum Institute lobbied the departments of <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Defense_Department" title="Defense Department" class="mw-redirect">Defense</a> and <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=State_Department" title="State Department" class="mw-redirect">State</a>, the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="Environmental Protection Agency" class="mw-redirect">Environmental Protection Agency</a> and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Internal_Revenue_Service" title="Internal Revenue Service">Internal Revenue Service</a>." <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-29" title="">[30]</a>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Personnel" id="Personnel">Personnel</a></h2>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a name="Personnel" id="Personnel"> </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_N._Gerard" title="Jack N. Gerard">Jack N. Gerard</a></li>

</ul>

Former personnel:

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Philip_Cooney" title="Philip Cooney" class="mw-redirect">Philip Cooney</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Red_Cavaney" title="Red Cavaney">Red Cavaney</a>; retired as API's president in November 2008</li></ul>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="Contact_information" id="Contact_information">Contact information</a></h2>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">American Petroleum Institute</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">1220 L Street, NW</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Washington, DC 20005-4070</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Phone             2oh2-682-8000      </div><div style="text-align: left;">Websites:</div>

</dd>

<dd style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.energytomorrow.org" class="external free" title="http://www.energytomorrow.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.energytomorrow.org</a></dd>

</dl>

<h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Articles and resources</h2>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Related SourceWatch articles</h3>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Alliance_for_Energy_and_Economic_Growth" title="Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth">Alliance for Energy and Economic Growth</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Conoco" title="Conoco">Conoco</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Exxon_Mobil" title="Exxon Mobil">Exxon Mobil</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jack_N._Gerard" title="Jack N. Gerard">Jack N. Gerard</a></li>

<li style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Ray_R._Irani" title="Ray R. Irani">Ray R. Irani</a></li></ul>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">References</h3>

<li id="cite_note-WSJrallies-0" style="text-align: left;">↑ <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-WSJrallies_0-0" title="">1.0</a> <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-WSJrallies_0-1" title="">1.1</a> Ian Talley, "<a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/08/11/lobby-groups-to-use-town-hall-tactics-to-oppose-climate-bill/" class="external text" title="http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/08/11/lobby-groups-to-use-town-hall-tactics-to-oppose-climate-bill/" rel="nofollow">Lobby Groups to Use Town Hall Tactics to Oppose Climate Bill</a>," Wall Street Journal "Washington Wire" blog, August 11, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-1" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-1" title="">↑</a> Alex Kaplun, "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/12/12greenwire-energy-citizens-take-aim-at-climate-legislatio-54732.html" class="external text" title="http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2009/08/12/12greenwire-energy-citizens-take-aim-at-climate-legislatio-54732.html" rel="nofollow">'Energy Citizens' Take Aim at Climate Legislation</a>," Greenwire, August 12, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-2" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-2" title="">↑</a> <a href="http://www.odwyerpr.com/editorial/0201the-politics-of-climate-change.html" class="external text" title="http://www.odwyerpr.com/editorial/0201the-politics-of-climate-change.html" rel="nofollow">"The Politics of Climate Change"</a>, O'Dwyer's Magazine, Feb. 2010.</li>

<li id="cite_note-3" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-3" title="">↑</a> Noah Brenner, "<a href="http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article175393.ece" class="external text" title="http://www.upstreamonline.com/live/article175393.ece" rel="nofollow">API slaps administration on policy</a>," Upstreamonline.com, April 6, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-4" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-4" title="">↑</a> Nick Snow, "<a href="http://www.ogj.com/display_article/359715/7/ONART/none/GenIn/1/EPA-issues-proposed-endangerment-finding-on-GHGs/" class="external text" title="http://www.ogj.com/display_article/359715/7/ONART/none/GenIn/1/EPA-issues-proposed-endangerment-finding-on-GHGs/" rel="nofollow">EPA issues proposed endangerment finding on GHGs</a>," Oil & Gas Journal, April 20, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-5" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-5" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://www.pennenergy.com/index/articledisplay/api-oil-gas-industry-will-work-with-new-administration/344562/s-articles/s-oil-gas-journal/s-general-interest/s-1.html" class="external text" title="http://www.pennenergy.com/index/articledisplay/api-oil-gas-industry-will-work-with-new-administration/344562/s-articles/s-oil-gas-journal/s-general-interest/s-1.html" rel="nofollow">API: Oil, gas industry will work with new administration</a>", Oil & Gas Journal, November 5, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-6" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-6" title="">↑</a> Daniel Whitten, "<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.YTOC9grPB8&refer=home" class="external text" title="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.YTOC9grPB8&refer=home" rel="nofollow">Obama May Put Renewable-Energy Plan Ahead of Climate Package</a>," Bloomberg, November 5, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-7" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-7" title="">↑</a> U.S. <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=House_Committee_on_Oversight_and_Government_Reform" title="House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform">House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform</a> , "<a href="http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1653" class="external text" title="http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1653" rel="nofollow">Committee Report: White House Engaged in Systematic Effort to Manipulate Climate Change Science</a>," December 12, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-8" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-8" title="">↑</a> Press release, "<a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/article/nfl-rebuilding-kickoff-rebuild_461033_1.html" class="external text" title="http://www.foxbusiness.com/article/nfl-rebuilding-kickoff-rebuild_461033_1.html" rel="nofollow">NFL and Rebuilding Together 'Kickoff to Rebuild'</a>," Rebuilding Together via PR Newswire, February 1, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-9" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-9" title="">↑</a> Anna Driver, "<a href="http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=allBreakingNews&storyID=2007-11-21T183138Z_01_N21175444_RTRIDST_0_CHEVRON-BLOGGERS.XML" class="external text" title="http://investing.reuters.co.uk/news/articleinvesting.aspx?type=allBreakingNews&storyID=2007-11-21T183138Z_01_N21175444_RTRIDST_0_CHEVRON-BLOGGERS.XML" rel="nofollow">Big oil, its lobby court bloggers in media push</a>," Reuters, November 21, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-10" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-10" title="">↑</a> Michael Bush, "<a href="http://www.prweekus.com/API-targets-bloggers-as-prices-at-the-pump-rise/article/57097/" class="external text" title="http://www.prweekus.com/API-targets-bloggers-as-prices-at-the-pump-rise/article/57097/" rel="nofollow">API targets bloggers as prices at the pump rise</a>," PR Week, May 25, 2007.</li>

<li id="cite_note-11" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-11" title="">↑</a> Devil's Advocate, "<a href="http://copiousdissent.blogspot.com/2008/02/my-conference-call-on-biofuels-with.html" class="external text" title="http://copiousdissent.blogspot.com/2008/02/my-conference-call-on-biofuels-with.html" rel="nofollow">My Conference Call on Biofuels with the American Petroleum Institute</a>," Copious Dissent blog, February 21, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-12" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-12" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://energytomorrow.org/News/Blogger_Conference_Call_2008_Energy_IQ.aspx" class="external text" title="http://energytomorrow.org/News/Blogger_Conference_Call_2008_Energy_IQ.aspx" rel="nofollow">Blogger Conference Call: 2008 Energy IQ</a>," American Petroleum Institute, accessed August 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-13" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-13" title="">↑</a> Gail Tverberg, "<a href="http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4421" class="external text" title="http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4421" rel="nofollow">API Energy IQ Game and Blogger Call</a>," The Oil Drum blog, August 17, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-14" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-14" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://energytomorrow.org/ViewResource.ashx?id=5075" class="external text" title="http://energytomorrow.org/ViewResource.ashx?id=5075" rel="nofollow">Transcript of API blogger conference call on energy current events (pdf)</a>," American Petroleum Institute via Federal News Service, September 26, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-15" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-15" title="">↑</a> Goat, "<a href="http://goatsbarnyard.blogspot.com/2008/09/api-blogger-call.html" class="external text" title="http://goatsbarnyard.blogspot.com/2008/09/api-blogger-call.html" rel="nofollow">API Blogger Call On Oil And Energy Production: Updated</a>," Goat's Barnyard, September 28, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-16" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-16" title="">↑</a> Bob McCarty, "<a href="http://bobmccarty.com/2008/09/28/oil-industry-awaits-assurances-on-drilling-ban/#comment-8482" class="external text" title="http://bobmccarty.com/2008/09/28/oil-industry-awaits-assurances-on-drilling-ban/#comment-8482" rel="nofollow">Oil Industry Awaits Assurances on Drilling Ban</a>," Bob McCarty Writes, September 28, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-17" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-17" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://vulcanhammer.blogspot.com/2008/10/conference-call-with-api.html" class="external text" title="http://vulcanhammer.blogspot.com/2008/10/conference-call-with-api.html" rel="nofollow">Conference call with API</a>," blog Vulcan's Hammer, October 31, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-18" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-18" title="">↑</a> David Murphy, "<a href="http://netenergy.theoildrum.com/node/5445" class="external text" title="http://netenergy.theoildrum.com/node/5445" rel="nofollow">Blogger Conference Call with Robert Ryan, VP of Global Exploration, Chevron</a>," "The Oil Drum" blog, May 30, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-19" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-19" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://www.energytomorrow.org/News/Blogger_Conference_Call_Chevron_Exploration_in_the_Gulf_of_Mexico.aspx" class="external text" title="http://www.energytomorrow.org/News/Blogger_Conference_Call_Chevron_Exploration_in_the_Gulf_of_Mexico.aspx" rel="nofollow">Blogger Conference Call: 'Chevron Exploration in the Gulf of Mexico'</a>," EnergyTomorrow.org, May 15, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-20" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-20" title="">↑</a> Sarah K. Winn, "<a href="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200802110574" class="external text" title="http://sundaygazettemail.com/News/200802110574" rel="nofollow">Rotary hears industry take on oil profits</a>," The Charleston Gazette (West Virginia), February 12, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-21" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-21" title="">↑</a> Fred Connors, "<a href="http://www.theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/508901.html?nav=510" class="external text" title="http://www.theintelligencer.net/page/content.detail/id/508901.html?nav=510" rel="nofollow">Speaker Says Middle Class Owns 'Big Oil'</a>," The Intelligencer / Wheeling News-Register (West Virginia), April 30, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-22" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-22" title="">↑</a> D.K. Wright, "<a href="http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=37926" class="external text" title="http://www.statejournal.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=37926" rel="nofollow">Oil Companies Are Defended In Gas Price Situation: The American consumer is paying more than ever for gasoline, and angrily blaming the big oil companies</a>," The State Journal (West Virginia), April 29, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-23" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-23" title="">↑</a> Press release, "<a href="http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/feb/climate022208.html" class="external text" title="http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/feb/climate022208.html" rel="nofollow">Nobel winner to address climate change Feb. 27 at UD</a>," University of Delaware (Newark, Delaware), February 22, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-24" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-24" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/june4/newsweek-060408.html" class="external text" title="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/june4/newsweek-060408.html" rel="nofollow">Energized Discussion</a>," Stanford Report (Stanford University, Stanford, California), June 4, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-25" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-25" title="">↑</a> Greg Stotelmyer, "<a href="http://www.wtvq.com/news/1-latest/315-big-oil-talks-to-kentucky-lawmakers.html" class="external text" title="http://www.wtvq.com/news/1-latest/315-big-oil-talks-to-kentucky-lawmakers.html" rel="nofollow">Big Oil Talks to Kentucky Lawmakers</a>," WTVQ-TV (Lexington, Kentucky), June 20, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-26" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-26" title="">↑</a> Joe Estrella, "<a href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/business/story/471584.html" class="external text" title="http://www.idahostatesman.com/business/story/471584.html" rel="nofollow">Oil industry economist tells Boise Rotary high gasoline costs are due to high cost of crude oil</a>," Idaho Statesman, August 15, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-27" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-27" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://thehill.com/business--lobby/bottom-line-2009-02-02.html" class="external text" title="http://thehill.com/business--lobby/bottom-line-2009-02-02.html" rel="nofollow">Bottom Line</a>," The Hill, February 2, 2009.</li>

<li id="cite_note-28" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-28" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://thehill.com/business--lobby/bottom-line-2008-09-15.html" class="external text" title="http://thehill.com/business--lobby/bottom-line-2008-09-15.html" rel="nofollow">Bottom Line</a>," The Hill, September 15, 2008.</li>

<li id="cite_note-29" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_ref-29" title="">↑</a> "<a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/5613848.html" class="external text" title="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/5613848.html" rel="nofollow">Petroleum Trade Group Spent $4M Lobbying</a>," Associated Press, March 12, 2008.</li></ol>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="External_articles" id="External_articles">External articles</a></h3>

<a name="External_articles" id="External_articles">See </a><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute:Articles" title="American Petroleum Institute:Articles">American Petroleum Institute:Articles</a>

<div class="printfooter" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Retrieved from "<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute</a>"</div>

<div id="mw-normal-catlinks" style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Special:Categories" title="Special:Categories">Categories</a>: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Water" title="Category:Water">Water</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Energy" title="Category:Energy">Energy</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Oil_industry" title="Category:Oil industry">Oil industry</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:United_States" title="Category:United States">United States</a> | <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Category:Industry_lobby_groups" title="Category:Industry lobby groups">Industry lobby groups</a></div>

</div>

----

paid 7 conservative bloggers

<a title="Chevron" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Chevron">Chevron</a>, <a title="ConocoPhillips" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=ConocoPhillips">ConocoPhillips</a>,<a title="Exxon Mobil" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Exxon_Mobil">Exxon Mobil</a>, <a title="GE" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=GE" class="mw-redirect">GE</a>, <a title="Halliburton" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Halliburton">Halliburton</a> and <a title="Shell" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Shell">Shell</a>." <a title="" href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute#cite_note-2">[3]</a>

<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute">http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Petroleum_Institute</a>

---

gop war on sci

Pilz found ex api guy in bush admin? deleted ref to Nat'l Assess p 102, in 2006, Hansen hobbled

----

leaked 1998 memo/gameplan

<a href="http://www.euronet.nl/users/e_wesker/ew@shell/API-prop.html">http://www.euronet.nl/users/e_wesker/ew@shell/API-prop.html</a>

GCSCT members who contributed to the development of the plan are A. John Adams, John Adams Associates; Candace Crandall, Science and Environmental Policy Project; David Rothbard, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow; Jeffrey Salmon, The Marshall Institute; Lee Garrigan, environmental issues Council; Lynn Bouchey and Myron Ebell, Frontiers of Freedom; Peter Cleary, Americans for Tax Reform; Randy Randol, Exxon Corp.; Robert Gehri, The Southern Company; Sharon Kneiss, Chevron Corp; Steve Milloy, The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition; and Joseph Walker, American Petroleum Institute.

----

RS the fake protester:

<dd class="medium-normal" style="text-align: left;">CLIMATE CRISIS</dd>

</dl>

AS HEAD OF THE AMERICAN Petroleum Institute, Gerard serves as the frontman for the nation's oil and gas industry, including energy giants like Exxon, Shell, BP and Halliburton. Although API now claims to back the move to a "carbon-constrained economy," Gerard has been working behind the scenes to scuttle climate legislation. According to an internal memo leaked in August, Gerard directed API's nearly 400 member companies to mobilize their employees to attend "Energy Citizen" rallies in 20 states to protest a cap on carbon pollution. To ensure the success of the fake grass-roots protests, Gerard bragged that he had also enlisted a bevy of polluting allies — including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers. "Please treat this information as sensitive," Gerard cautioned in the memo. "We don't want critics to know our game plan."

This is not the first time that API has been at the center of a secretive campaign to derail carbon controls. In the late 1990s, the institute conspired with Exxon and a cadre of right-wing think tanks to create the "Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan" — an $8 million effort to fund climate research that hypes the "weaknesses in scientific understanding" of global warming. "Victory will be achieved," the plan explained, when "those promoting the Kyoto treaty on the basis of extant science appear to be out of touch with reality."

This article profiles Jack Gerard, the chief executive officer (CEO) of the American Petroleum Institute (API), as part of a series of articles on notable individuals who have expressed their disbelief in global warming, with topics discussed including his opposition to climate change legislation, his organization of posed grassroots protests against carbon controls legislation, and a history of efforts made by the API to avoid carbon controls.

http://search.ebscohost.com.oca.ucsc.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=47875675&site=ehost-live

----

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/30/AR2008083001538.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/30/AR2008083001538.html</a>

<div class="correction"><div style="text-align: left;">Correction to This Article</div><div style="text-align: left;">· An Aug. 31 A-section article incorrectly said that the American Petroleum Institute and four other business groups seek to challenge the listing of the polar bear as a threatened species. The groups are trying to enjoin the federal government from implementing a rule they call the "Alaska Gap," which subjects projects in Alaska to extra scrutiny. The federal government issued the rule in May in conjunction with the announcement of the polar bear's protected status.</div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div></div>

<h1 style="text-align: left; margin-bottom: 10px;">Oil Group Joins Alaska in Suing To Overturn Polar Bear Protection</h1>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<div id="byline" style="text-align: left;">By Kari Lydersen</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">Washington Post Staff Writer</div><div style="text-align: left;">Sunday, August 31, 2008 </div><div style="text-align: left;">
</div></div>

<div id="article_body" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); padding-left: 10px;"><div style="text-align: left;">CHICAGO -- The American Petroleum Institute and four other business groups filed suit Thursday against Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director H. Dale Hall, joining Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's administration in trying to reverse the listing of the polar bear as a threatened species.</div><div id="story-navigation-vertical-ST2010112404657" class="story-navigation-vertical-wrapper show show">

<div class="heading" style="text-align: left;">This Story</div>

<ul>

<li>

<div class="item active active" id="story-navigation-vertical-ST2010112404657-AR2008083001538" style="text-align: left;"><a class="icon-article" onclick="appendSidToAnchor(this);appendPositionToAnchor(this,active_nav_position);" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2010/11/24/ST2010112404657.html">Oil Group Joins Alaska in Suing To Overturn Polar Bear Protection</a></div>

</li>

<li>

<div class="item inactive" id="story-navigation-vertical-ST2010112404657-AR2010112403597" style="text-align: left;"><a class="icon-article" onclick="appendSidToAnchor(this);appendPositionToAnchor(this,active_nav_position);" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/24/AR2010112403597.html">Feds set aside 'critical habitat' for polar bear</a></div>

</li>

<li>

</li>

</ul>

</div>

On Aug. 4, the state of Alaska filed a lawsuit opposing the polar bear's listing, arguing that populations as a whole are stable and that melting sea ice does not pose an imminent threat to their survival. The suit says polar bears have survived warming periods in the past. The federal government has 60 days from the filing date to respond.

One of the plaintiff in Thursday's lawsuit, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), lauded the choice of Palin as the Republican vice presidential nominee for reasons including her advocacy of Alaskan oil and gas exploration, which many fear could be affected by the bear's protected status.

NAM and the petroleum institute were joined in the lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Mining Association and the American Iron and Steel Institute. They object to what they call the "Alaska Gap" in relation to the special rule the federal government issued in May in conjunction with the polar bear's protected status. The rule, meant to prevent the polar bear's status from being used as a tool for imposing greenhouse gas limits, exempts projects in all states except Alaska from undergoing review in relation to emissions.

</div>

---

GP

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">1220 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Phone: 202-682-8176           202-682-8176   </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Founded in 1919, the American Petroleum Institute is the primary trade association for over 300 corporations associated with the petroluem industry.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Based in Washington DC, API has offices in 33 capital cities and works with regional and state oil and gas associations in over a dozen more. Through publications and press releases, the association promotes deregulation of environmental standards impacting the industry. API claims that "burdensome" regulations cost billions, but do not provide any benefits. API argues environmental regulations are based upon faulty science or are the result of scare tactics advanced by the environmental community. API is a member of the National Wetlands Coalition and has provided funding to the Cato Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy and other organizations that oppose regulations aimed to prevent global warming.</div>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">DEEDS</h3>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Funded the 2003 Soon, Baliunas study discounting human induced climate change. From API website: "Harvard-Smithsonian scientists Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas examined the repeated claim that 20th century climate was unusual compared to that of the last 1000 years in the recently published study, "Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1000 Years: A Reappraisal". The study, published in Energy & Environment, analyzed numerous climactic indicators, and specifically notes that many parts of the world showed medieval warming that exceeded the warming observed in the 20th century."</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src2">George C marshall website link to 2003 Soon Baliunas study pd</a></div>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">KEY PEOPLE</h3>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1349">Jack Gerard</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">President and CEO</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src6">think progress</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=860">Willie Soon</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">funded scientist</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src0">"Earth Last," The American Prospect, 5/7/04</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=289">William OKeefe</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">former COO</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src0">"Earth Last," The American Prospect, 5/7/04</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=77">Lee R. Raymond</a> EXXON</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Two time Chairman, currently a Director and a member of the Executive Committee and Policy Committee</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src1">Oil, Gas and Energy Law Intelligence</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=3">Sallie Baliunas</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">funded scientist</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src0">"Earth Last," The American Prospect, 5/7/04</a></div>

<div style="text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1177">Philip Cooney</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">former attorney</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src4">NY Times, June 8, 2005, Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming</a></div>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">PEOPLE</h3>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1151">Rex W. Tillerson</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Member</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src3">Proxy Statement 2004, ExxonMobil Corporation, May 26th, 2004</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=364">Red Cavaney</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Board of Directors</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Source: <a href="http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=11#src5">American Petroleum Institute Website</a></div>

<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">SOURCES</h3>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">"Earth Last," The American Prospect, 5/7/04</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">article by Chris Mooney</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=7603">http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewPrint&articleId=7603</a></div>

<a id="src1" name="src1" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src1" name="src1"></a><a id="src1" name="src1" /><a id="src1" name="src1" /><a id="src1" name="src1" /><a id="src1" name="src1">Oil, Gas and Energy Law Intelligence</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.gasandoil.com/ogel/authors/author_detail.asp?key=262">http://www.gasandoil.com/ogel/authors/author_detail.asp?key=262</a></div>

<a id="src2" name="src2" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src2" name="src2"></a><a id="src2" name="src2" /><a id="src2" name="src2" /><a id="src2" name="src2" /><a id="src2" name="src2">George C marshall website link to 2003 Soon Baliunas study pdf</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/136.pdf">http://www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/136.pdf</a></div>

<a id="src3" name="src3" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src3" name="src3"></a><a id="src3" name="src3" /><a id="src3" name="src3" /><a id="src3" name="src3" /><a id="src3" name="src3">Proxy Statement 2004, ExxonMobil Corporation, May 26th, 2004</a></div>

<a id="src4" name="src4" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src4" name="src4"></a><a id="src4" name="src4" /><a id="src4" name="src4" /><a id="src4" name="src4" /><a id="src4" name="src4">NY Times, June 8, 2005, </a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="src4">
</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a name="src4">Bush Aide Softened Greenhouse Gas Links to Global Warming</a></div>

A White House official who once led the oil industry's fight against limits on greenhouse gases has repeatedly edited government climate reports in ways that play down links between such emissions and global warming, according to internal documents. An Editor in the White House In handwritten notes on drafts of several reports issued in 2002 and 2003, the official, Philip A. Cooney, removed or adjusted descriptions of climate research that government scientists and their supervisors, including some senior Bush administration officials, had already approved. In many cases, the changes appeared in the final reports. The dozens of changes, while sometimes as subtle as the insertion of the phrase "significant and fundamental" before the word "uncertainties," tend to produce an air of doubt about findings that most climate experts say are robust. Mr. Cooney is chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the office that helps devise and promote administration policies on environmental issues.

Before going to the White House in 2001, he was the "climate team leader" and a lobbyist at the American Petroleum Institute, the largest trade group representing the interests of the oil industry. A lawyer with a bachelor's degree in economics, he has no scientific training. The documents were obtained by The New York Times from the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit legal-assistance group for government whistle-blowers. The project is representing Rick S. Piltz, who resigned in March as a senior associate in the office that coordinates government climate research. That office, now called the Climate Change Science Program, issued the documents that Mr. Cooney edited. A White House spokeswoman, Michele St. Martin, said yesterday that Mr. Cooney would not be available to comment. "We don't put Phil Cooney on the record," Ms. St. Martin said. "He's not a cleared spokesman." In one instance in an October 2002 draft of a regularly published summary of government climate research, "Our Changing Planet," Mr. Cooney amplified the sense of uncertainty by adding the word "extremely" to this sentence: "The attribution of the causes of biological and ecological changes to climate change or variability is extremely difficult." In a section on the need for research into how warming might change water availability and flooding, he crossed out a paragraph describing the projected reduction of mountain glaciers and snowpack. His note in the margins explained that this was "straying from research strategy into speculative findings/musings." Other White House officials said the changes made by Mr. Cooney were part of the normal interagency review that takes place on all documents related to global environmental change. Robert Hopkins, a spokesman for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, noted that one of the reports Mr. Cooney worked on, the administration's 10-year plan for climate research, was endorsed by the National Academy of Sciences. And Myron Ebell, who has long campaigned against limits on greenhouse gases as director of climate policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian group, said such editing was necessary for "consistency" in meshing programs with policy.

But critics said that while all administrations routinely vetted government reports, scientific content in such reports should be reviewed by scientists. Climate experts and representatives of environmental groups, when shown examples of the revisions, said they illustrated the significant if largely invisible influence of Mr. Cooney and other White House officials with ties to energy industries that have long fought greenhouse-gas restrictions. In a memorandum sent last week to the top officials dealing with climate change at a dozen agencies, Mr. Piltz said the White House editing and other actions threatened to taint the government's $1.8 billion-a-year effort to clarify the causes and consequences of climate change. "Each administration has a policy position on climate change," Mr. Piltz wrote. "But I have not seen a situation like the one that has developed under this administration during the past four years, in which politicization by the White House has fed back directly into the science program in such a way as to undermine the credibility and integrity of the program." A senior Environmental Protection Agency scientist who works on climate questions said the White House environmental council, where Mr. Cooney works, had offered valuable suggestions on reports from time to time. But the scientist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because all agency employees are forbidden to speak with reporters without clearance, said the kinds of changes made by Mr. Cooney had damaged morale. "I have colleagues in other agencies who express the same view, that it has somewhat of a chilling effect and has created a sense of frustration," he said.

An Editor in the White House

Efforts by the Bush administration to highlight uncertainties in science pointing to human-caused warming have put the United States at odds with other nations and with scientific groups at home. Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain, who met with President Bush at the White House yesterday, has been trying to persuade him to intensify United States efforts to curb greenhouse gases. Mr. Bush has called only for voluntary measures to slow growth in emissions through 2012. Yesterday, saying their goal was to influence that meeting, the scientific academies of 11 countries, including those of the United States and Britain, released a joint letter saying, "The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action." The American Petroleum Institute, where Mr. Cooney worked before going to the White House, has long taken a sharply different view. Starting with the negotiations leading to the Kyoto Protocol climate treaty in 1997, it has promoted the idea that lingering uncertainties in climate science justify delaying restrictions on emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping smokestack and tailpipe gases. On learning of the White House revisions, representatives of some environmental groups said the effort to amplify uncertainties in the science was clearly intended to delay consideration of curbs on the gases, which remain an unavoidable byproduct of burning oil and coal. "They've got three more years, and the only way to control this issue and do nothing about it is to muddy the science," said Eileen Claussen, the president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, a private group that has enlisted businesses in programs cutting emissions.

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"> Mr. Cooney's alterations can cause clear shifts in meaning. For example, a sentence in the October 2002 draft of "Our Changing Planet" originally read, "Many scientific observations indicate that the Earth is undergoing a period of relatively rapid change." In a neat, compact hand, Mr. Cooney modified the sentence to read, "Many scientific observations point to the conclusion that the Earth may be undergoing a period of relatively rapid change." A document showing a similar pattern of changes is the 2003 "Strategic Plan for the United States Climate Change Science Program," a thick report describing the reorganization of government climate research that was requested by Mr. Bush in his first speech on the issue, in June 2001. The document was reviewed by an expert panel assembled in 2003 by the National Academy of Sciences. The scientists largely endorsed the administration's research plan, but they warned that the administration's procedures for vetting reports on climate could result in excessive political interference with science. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Another political appointee who has played an influential role in adjusting language in government reports on climate science is Dr. Harlan L. Watson, the chief climate negotiator for the State Department, who has a doctorate in solid-state physics but has not done climate research. In an Oct. 4, 2002 memo to James R. Mahoney, the head of the United States Climate Change Science Program and an appointee of Mr. Bush, Mr. Watson "strongly" recommended cutting boxes of text referring to the findings of a National Academy of Sciences panel on climate and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that periodically reviews research on human-caused climate change. The boxes, he wrote, "do not include an appropriate recognition of the underlying uncertainties and the tentative nature of a number of the assertions." While those changes were made nearly two years ago, recent statements by Dr. Watson indicate that the admnistration's position has not changed. "We are still not convinced of the need to move forward quite so quickly," he told the BBC in London last month. "There is general agreement that there is a lot known, but also there is a lot to be known." By ANDREW C. REVKIN Published: June 8, 2005</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"> </div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?hp&ex=1118289600&en=54e7b911a5d025aa&ei=5094&partner=homepage">http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/politics/08climate.html?hp&ex=1118289600&en=54e7b911a5d025aa&ei=5094&partner=homepage</a></div>

<a id="src5" name="src5" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src5" name="src5"></a><a id="src5" name="src5" /><a id="src5" name="src5" /><a id="src5" name="src5" /><a id="src5" name="src5">American Petroleum Institute Website</a></div>

<a id="src6" name="src6" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a id="src6" name="src6"></a><a id="src6" name="src6" /><a id="src6" name="src6" /><a id="src6" name="src6" /><a id="src6" name="src6">think progress</a></div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/31/armey-pollution-gospel/" /><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/31/armey-pollution-gospel/">http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/31/armey-pollution-gospel/</a></div>

RS on DC:

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">The most egregious example of cooked intelligence was a study underwritten in part by the API, Cooney's former employer. The study, which purported to show that the twentieth century was not unusually</div><div style="text-align: left;">warm, was authored by two astrophysicists, both of whom were on the payroll of the George C. Marshall Institute, a climate-denial group funded by ExxonMobil and now headed by Bill O'Keefe, Cooney's former</div><div style="text-align: left;">boss. The paper's publication in a minor German journal in January 2003 quickly created a scandal, with the editor in chief and three other editors resigning in shame after acknowledging that the paper</div><div style="text-align: left;">was fundamentally flawed and should never have been published.</div></pre>

greenpeace:

gp

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">1995 - the Second Assessment Report (SAR)</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">When the IPCC released its Second Assessment Report (SAR) in 1995, it met a similarly aggressive response.</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Among the key findings of the IPCC was the acknowledgement of a ‘discernable’ human impact on climate and a prediction that sea levels could rise 15 to 95cm by 2100, in line with temperature increases ranging from1°C to 3.5°C (1.8°F to 6.5°F)36.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;"> </div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">The SAR’s Summary for Policymakers contained the conclusion that, ‘The balance of evidence suggests a</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">discernible human influence on global climate.’ That one sentence set the sceptics on fire. One called it the</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">‘most disturbing corruption of the peer-review process in 60 years’.37</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">Charles DiBona, president of the American Petroleum Institute, called the report ‘inflammatory’ 38, while oil-producing</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">countries such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia tried to delay the report’s release because of this</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">‘strong language’, and argued against the use of the words ‘appreciable’, ‘notable’, ‘measurable’ and</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">'detectable’ in place of ‘discernable’.39</div>

<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">However the attacks weren’t restricted to the science or the report. This time the scientists were fair game.</div>

<div style="text-align: left;">The GCC co-ordinated vicious personal attacks on Dr Ben Santer, one of the key authors of the report.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left;">The aim was to discredit the process by which the IPCC worked</div>

</section>

=

</div>

</div>

</div></div>

Am Petroleum Inst API

Attachments