Posts

Over 5,600 fossil fuel companies have taken at least $3bn in US Covid-19 aid

by Emily Holden, The Guardian


Highlights

  • The Small Business Administration (SBA) released data showing that oil and gas drillers, coal mine operators, refiners, and pipeline companies have taken advantage of federal coronavirus aid
  • Companies include: Navajo Transitional Energy Company, CCU Coal and Construction, Sunflower Electric Power Corporation, and thousands more
  • Four companies that received aid were recently listed in the top 10 drilling rig operators in Texas 
  • The estimated $3 billion in aid taken by these companies is thought to be a lower estimation than what was actually given. It is expected that the actual dollar amount is closer to $7 billion
  • Though these businesses were not exempt from receiving aid funds, all of the aid should’ve gone to smaller business, not giant polluting corporations
  • Jesse Coleman, a researcher for Documented, believes that giving aid to the oil industry is a waste of taxpayer money:

“We should not be wasting taxpayer dollars on an industry that’s in a tailspin of its own making, especially when it seems intent on bringing the whole planet down with it.”

  • California biofuel company Pacific Ethanol also received aid funds even though they have a long history of environmental violations

Fossil fuel divestment and the transition to 100% clean energy is critical to achieving The Climate Center’s goals under the Climate-Safe California Platform.


Read More: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/07/fossil-fuel-industry-coronavirus-aid-us-analysis

How to make carbon pricing palatable to air travelers

University of British Columbia & EDF; read full article at ScienceDaily

  • Travelers are willing to pay a little more for flights if they know the extra money will be used to address carbon emissions, per new study 

How those fees are presented at the time of ticket purchase is the key to consumer acceptance. People respond better when the fee is labeled as a carbon offset rather than a tax. And they respond better if they know the producers and importers of airplane fuel have been billed for it — not just themselves.

“People have the perception that the oil companies are the ones responsible for climate change, or at least more responsible than they are,” says study co-author David Hardisty, an assistant professor of marketing and behavioural science at UBC Sauder School of Business. “Consumers are more supportive of carbon pricing if it’s directed at the fossil fuel producers and importers than if it’s directed at consumers.”….

David J. Hardisty, Alec T. Beall, Ruben Lubowski, Annie Petsonk, Rainer Romero-Canyas. A carbon price by another name may seem sweeter: Consumers prefer upstream offsets to downstream taxesJournal of Environmental Psychology, 2019; 66: 101342 DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101342