Yesterday, Sierra Club Executive Driector Michael Brune came clean about his organization's profitable relationship with the natural gas industry. Specifically, Brune admitted that his organization had taken $26 million from one of the country's largest natural gas companies, Chesapeake Energy, since 2007 to fund the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign.
The investment for the natural gas industry is clear: use the Sierra Club as political cover to induce the federal government to drive up the cost of coal, thereby making natural gas relatively cheaper. It is classic Democratic corporatism in action.
But now that the natural gas industry's hydraulic fracturing practices have become the bete noir of the environmental movement, the Sierra Club wants a divorce. Brune writes:
It's time to stop thinking of natural gas as a "kinder, gentler" energy source. What's more, we do not have an effective regulatory system in this country to address the risks that gas drilling poses on our health and communities. The scope of the problems from under-regulated drilling, as well as a clearer understanding of the total carbon pollution that results from both drilling and burning gas, have made it plain that, as we phase out coal, we need to leapfrog over gas whenever possible in favor of truly clean energy. Instead of rushing to see how quickly we can extract natural gas, we should be focusing on how to be sure we are using less -- and safeguarding our health and environment in the meantime.
But will the Democratic Party follow suit? Here is then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, defending her own personal investment in T. Boone Pickens energy firm (Pickens is also a big proponent of natural gas): "I’m investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuel. … These investments in wind, in solar and biofuels and focus on natural gas, these are the real alternatives."
Does Pelosi still believe natural gas is a "clean cheap alternative to fossil fuel? Or has the "science" changed?
