Menu
Menu
This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
According to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
One of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
This points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
This points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n EU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Many governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Countries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Environmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"};
The fossil fuel industry has spent approximately more than $54.2 million in money on two super PACs during the 2023-2024 election cycle. A lot of money is spent on ads before Election Day to make efforts to win control of Congress. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\n So far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\n As to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Researchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Representing around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\n The EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Although this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\n This situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Why do fossil fuel industries want to change \u200celection results?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Why do fossil fuel industries want to change \u200celection results?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Lobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Decades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Old arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Climate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nAccording to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nOne of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nThis points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nWhy do fossil fuel industries want to change \u200celection results?<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThis points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66 Previous 1 … 44 45 46 … 66 Next \nThe fossil fuel industry has spent approximately more than $54.2 million in money on two super PACs during the 2023-2024 election cycle. A lot of money is spent on ads before Election Day to make efforts to win control of Congress. <\/p>\n\n\n\nWhy do fossil fuel industries want to change \u200celection results?<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThis points out how fossil fuel industries want to change \u200cpolitical decisions according to their favoritism. The concern is increasing as the 2024 elections approach. At the start of this year, one of the candidates, Donal Trump<\/a>, asked oil companies to assist in raising $1 billion for his campaign. In exchange, he made promises with oil companies to give relaxations on the climate rules that were set by the current president of the United States, Joe Biden. This scenario raises questions about \u200chow donations from the fossil fuel industry can affect political decisions and the environment. It also suggests a possible conflict between business interests and efforts to protect the planet.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the groups named as watchdog has requested \u200cthe FBI and Departemnt of Jusice to investigate the Donald Trump action. His effort to \u200cinfluence the oil industries may be considered a possible criminal bribery. Congressional Democrats are also looking into what they describe as Trump\u2019s \u201cquid pro quo solicitations.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to OpenSecrets, in this election cycle, the oil and gas companies have spent a huge amount of money, $152 million. They also reported that more than 88% of this money was going to Republican candidates. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the billionaires and founders of Continental Resources, Harold Hamm, supports Trump's action and raises funds from oil industry donors. <\/p>\n\n\n\nSo far, the oil sector has donated over $21 million to Trump's campaign and his political action committees (PACs). Additionally, lawyers from big oil companies are already drafting executive orders for Trump to sign if he wins against Democratic candidate Kamala Harris next month.<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to recent Federal Election Commission (FEC) records, a small number of affluent people have been the main source of Donald Trump's campaign's noteworthy fundraising surge. These include Kelcy Warren, the chairman of Energy Transfer Partners, and Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla. Concerns over the role of money in politics are raised by this development. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThe CEO of the anti-corruption<\/a> organization RepresentUs, Joshua Graham Lynn, offered his thoughts on the matter, saying that the most recent filings demonstrate how a few billionaires are spending enormous sums of money to influence election outcomes. He mentioned the 2010 Native Americans United ruling from the Supreme Court, which permitted people and businesses to hand over an unlimited amount of money to political elections. American politics have been significantly impacted by this decision, which has exacerbated polarization and conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nLynn faces that the political system is distorted and that a significant contributing factor to the issue is the increasing power of money. He thinks it is crucial to eradicate this financial influence and deal with the corruption that frequently goes along with it in order to bring balance and justice back to elections. Without these adjustments, the political system's honor will keep deteriorating, making significant reforms challenging. <\/p>\n","post_title":"How the fossil fuel industries want to change the 2024 election results","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-the-fossil-fuel-industries-want-to-change-the-2024-election-results","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7224","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7220,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-20 18:47:28","post_content":"\nAs to a recent analysis by InfluenceMap, a think tank that tracks lobbying by the fossil fuel business, groups representing the oil and gas industry have been impeding the worldwide transition towards renewable energy and electric cars since at least 1967 by employing the same strategy. The July 11 research details how, over 50 years, the American Petroleum Institute and two of its European equivalents used the same justifications to undermine, reject, or postpone taking action on climate change, even as our understanding of the role that fossil fuels play in global warming changed. <\/p>\n\n\n\nLobbying tactics unchanged<\/h2>\n\n\n\nResearchers at InfluenceMap examined narrative patterns that appeared in more than 50 instances between 1967 and 2023, a period during which the fossil fuel sector opposed legislation aimed at mitigating climate change. They discovered that industry associations consistently advocated for a \"all-of-the-above,\" technology-neutral strategy to combat climate change while downplaying the usefulness and cost of fossil fuel substitutes. Industry associations also used energy security, a concern that has grown in importance since the commencement of the conflict in Ukraine, to support their arguments against renewable energy sources. For instance, the American Petroleum Institute said in 1975 that the Clean Air Act would impair \"energy self-sufficiency\" by taking capital away from oil and gas production. A similar case was made by the industry group to delay the switch to electric cars the previous year. The American Petroleum Institute claimed in comments to the EPA in 2023 that the country's increased reliance on vital minerals mined outside of the US for use in electric vehicles would \"negatively impact US energy security\" as a result of the agency's new emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles. <\/p>\n\n\n\nDecades of delaying action<\/h2>\n\n\n\nRepresenting around 600 oil and gas corporations, the American Petroleum Institute is one of the biggest and most powerful associations for the fossil fuel sector worldwide. Based on a study of lobbying reports by OpenSecrets, it usually spends between $4 million and $9 million on federal lobbying annually. For federal lobbying, the organization spent $1.8 million in the first three months of 2024. July 22 is the next date for filing. Additionally, the American Petroleum Institute began to spend millions on federal elections in 2016; these expenditures primarily benefited Republicans. As of June 21, it has directed $2.5 million for the 2023\u20132024 Senate Leadership Fund and $1 million toward the Congressional Leadership Fund. The goal of the two organizations is to elect Republicans to the House and Senate, respectively. To defend new oil and gas projects, fossil fuel businesses frequently point to customer demand, according to InfluenceMap program manager Tom Holen. This analysis refutes that claim by exposing the industry's complicity in upholding the existing quo and defending fossil fuels' hegemony in the world economy. <\/p>\n\n\n\nOld arguments resurface<\/h2>\n\n\n\nAccording to Holen, \"this persistent use of false narratives has probably delayed the energy transition for decades and continues to pose a serious threat to the advancement of climate policy.\" The UN Climate Program discovered in 2023 that the world's countries are not on pace to meet the Paris Climate Accords' aim of keeping global warming to 1.5C over pre-industrial levels. Three-quarters of the hundreds of climate experts surveyed by the Guardian this year believe that global temperatures<\/a> will rise by at least 2.5C this century. The lack of progress on climate solutions was attributed by over 60% of respondents to corporate interests. The InfluenceMap analysis also expands on other studies concerning the fossil fuel industry's multi-decade effort to cast doubt on its contribution to climate change. In a joint report published earlier this year, Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee and the House Oversight Committee charged the fossil fuel sector with \"climate denial, disinformation, and doublespeak.\" According to the research, the American Petroleum Institute and other trade associations have been used by oil and gas firms to disseminate false information and advocate for measures that are unlikely to pass and with which they do not wish to be linked. <\/p>\n\n\n\nClimate science ignored<\/h2>\n\n\n\nThe Los Angeles Times and Inside Climate News reported in 2015 that Exxon knew, as early as 1977, that burning fossil fuels would warm the world, yet the company nonetheless went ahead and launched an attempt to delay the regulation of greenhouse gasses that warm the earth. This finding prompted a three-year congressional probe. According to InfluenceMap's study, several American Petroleum Institute members have deviated from the industry organization on certain climate policy. For instance, BP and Shell currently encourage the electrification of light-duty cars.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How API\u2019s climate lobbying continues to hinder progress","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"how-apis-climate-lobbying-continues-to-hinder-progress-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7220","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7216,"post_author":"7","post_date":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_date_gmt":"2024-10-17 13:21:59","post_content":"\nThe EU's reputation on climate issues is in danger due to a one-year delay to its deforestation law<\/a>. For this reason, the European Union is facing criticism. This law aims to stop the sale of products linked to deforestation. It includes cocoa palm oil. According to former environment commissioner, Virginijus Sinkevi\u010dius, this delay is a setback in the fight against climate change. He warned that by delaying the law, the EU put the lives of 80,000 acres of forest at risk every day.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nIt also increased worldwide carbon emissions <\/a>by 15%. With all of this, \u200cEU trust with other nations is hurt that believes that the European Union keeps its climate promises.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAlthough this law is important in to fight against deforestation, the delay raises concerns. According to this law, companies have to \u200cprove that their products have not come from \u200c defrosted land since 2020, utilizing tools such as satellite monitoring. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the conflict between economic interests and climate responsibility in the EU.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEU ministers and the European Parliament<\/a> approved the proposed delay in the law. If they don't have an issue with this proposal, then all small and big companies must follow the law. Large companies must have to follow the law by December 30, 2025, and small businesses by June 30, 2026.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nMany governments and businesses argue that this law significantly affects Europe\u2019s exports and could harm \u200csmall farmers. According to the government, \u200cthe law is being delayed due to its unfair impact. According to European Commission, a 12 months delay will help \u200cevery business sector to adjust better. <\/p>\n\n\n\nCountries like Brazil and Australia want the delay because they believe the EU is using the wrong data to check forests. Indonesia and Ivory Coast also say the law could harm small farmers and their exports. The Commission said that concerns about being ready have been raised in international meetings and that the delay will not change the law's main goals.<\/p>\n\n\n\nIn April 2023, a new environmental law came to light. Many Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) and EU member states support this law strongly. However, since then, there has been growing criticism regarding the costs associated with this legislation. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis compel European Commission to drop regulations on pesticides. This decision by the European Commission raises concerns about its commitment to the protection of the environment.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nEnvironmental groups claim that Ursula von der Leyen is weakening in one of her key achievements, the European Green Deal. She is starting her second term as Commission President. Anke Schulmeister-Oldenhove from the WWF, claims that her decision permits defrostation to continue when urgent action is required. This action raises concerns about her genuine commitment to environmental objectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\nNicole Polsterer from the campaign group Fern opposed \u200cUrsula von der Leyen. She received criticism for giving in to pressure from companies and nations that were not prepared for the new rules. This is worrying because many large businesses have spent time and a handsome amount of money to follow the law. Von der Leyen also received challenges and pressure from her political party that said this law would not prove beneficial for businesses and government agencies. <\/p>\n\n\n\nThis situation shows the ongoing struggle between economic interests and environmental responsibilities in making EU policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\nOne of the German Members<\/a> of the European Parliament, Peter Liese, supports this delay in a law that is set to begin on December 30, 2024. According to it, imposing this law now could create any problems. This is because this new regulation has many uncertain conditions. Furthermore, many nations have raised serious and legal concerns about it.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\nAccording to Liese, no doubt that deforestation harms the global climate, but its solution's an impact on many involved parties. The representatives of Europe\u2019s mechanical engineering industry, the VDMA, strongly opposed this law. According to them, this law is well-intentioned but designed poorly. They warn it could make products harder to find and more expensive.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Exploring the facts: Why has the EU delayed its deforestation law?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","post_password":"","post_name":"exploring-the-facts-why-has-the-eu-delayed-its-deforestation-law","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_modified_gmt":"2025-02-02 08:34:25","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"https:\/\/dctransparency.com\/?p=7216","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":45},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_2o3","class":"epic_block_3"}; Page 45 of 66](\"http:\/\/dctransparency.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Exploring-the-facts-Why-has-the-EU-delayed-its-deforestation-law.webp\"){kind=link}