Advertisement 1

Vivian Krause: Oil sands money trail

Vivian Krause: Billionaire U.S. foundations fund Canada’s green groups

Article content

Last week, on the eve of the environmental review for the $5.5-billion Northern Gateway pipeline project that would carry Alberta oil to Kitimat for export to Asia, Canada’s Minister for Natural Resources, Joe Oliver, expressed concern that foreign-funded environmentalists would jeopardize the review and block the pipeline. Oliver didn’t mention my name, but the research that raised concerns about the foreign funding of environmentalism in Canada is apparently mine.

Advertisement 2
Story continues below
Article content

For five years, on my own nickel, I have been following the money and the science behind environmental campaigns and I’ve been doing what the Canada Revenue Agency hasn’t been doing: I’ve gathered information about the origin and the stated purpose of grants from U.S. foundations to green groups in Canada. My research is based on U.S. tax returns because the U.S. Internal Revenue Service requires greater disclosure from non-profits than does the CRA.

By my analysis and calculations, since 2000, U.S. foundations have granted at least US$300-million to various environmental organizations and campaigns in Canada, especially in B.C. The San Francisco-based Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation alone has granted US$92-million. Gordon Moore is one of the co-founders of Intel Corp. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation have granted a combined total of US$90-million, mostly to B.C. groups. These foundations were created by the founders of Hewlett-Packard Co.The Philadelphia-based Pew Charitable Trusts, created by the founders of Sun Oil, has granted at least US$82-million over the past decade and at least US$40-million has been granted by other U.S. foundations.

Article content
Advertisement 3
Story continues below
Article content

Of the US$300-million that I’ve traced, at least US$150-million was specifically for the Great Bear Rainforest Initiative, the Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area and the Boreal Forest Initiative.

The Great Bear Rainforest is a 21-million-hectare zone that extends from the northern tip of Vancouver Island to the southern tip of Alaska. Environmentalists now claim that oil tanker traffic must not be allowed in the Great Bear Rainforest in order to protect the kermode bear (aka the Great Spirit Bear). Whether this was the intention all along or not, the Great Bear Rainforest has become the Great Trade Barrier against oil exports to Asia.

Speaking on CBC last night, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said, “But just because certain people in the United States would like to see Canada be one giant national park for the northern half of North America, I don’t think that’s part of what our review process [for the Northern Gateway] is all about.”

PNCIMA is a marine-planning initiative in which both the federal and the B.C. governments were at the table along with environmental and First Nations groups, all of whom are heavily funded by US$30-million from the Moore Foundation, co-ordinated through Tides Canada. One of the peculiar things about PNCIMA is that it covers only a relatively small but very strategic part of Canada’s coastline: The north coast of B.C., which just happens to be right smack where oil tankers would need to travel for oil exports to Asia. Last September, the government of Canada withdrew from PNCIMA. The reason, according to media speculation, was excessive outside influence.

Article content
Advertisement 4
Story continues below
Article content

First Nations groups on the north coast of B.C. have been granted at least US$50-million by U.S. foundations, $27-million from Moore, US$19-million from Hewlett and Packard, and several million from other U.S. foundations.

Pew alone put US$57-million into the Boreal Forest Initiative which aims to put half of Canada’s boreal forest (which covers two-thirds of Canada) into protected areas and parks. “New protected areas should exclude industrial development such as logging, mining, hydro, new roads, and oil and gas while accommodating activities such as traditional hunting, fishing and gathering,” says the BFI agreement signed by forestry companies, environmental groups and Suncor Energy Inc. in 2010.

In addition to the Great Bear Rainforest Initiative and the Boreal Forest Initiative, which would thwart the oil industry, U.S. foundations have also granted at least US$30-million specifically for campaigns to tackle the Canadian energy sector.

Back in 2004, Hewlett paid Tides Canada US$50,000 “for the development of a strategic plan to address oil and gas development in British Columbia.” Since then, Hewlett has poured US$26-million into various projects specifically to tackle the Canadian energy sector. That included US$13.7-million paid to the Pew Charitable Trusts for “responsible energy development” under the umbrella of the Boreal Forest Initiative, US$7-million paid to Tides USA “for reducing the environmental impacts of oil and gas development in Northern Canada,” US$1.9-million to Tides Canada, US$2.8-million to the Pembina Foundation (which funds the Pembina Institute), and US$275,000 for Ecojustice.

Advertisement 5
Story continues below
Article content

Twenty six million is a lot of money and it raises a fair question: What is the “strategic plan” that Hewlett funded Tides Canada to develop, back in 2004? Does it involve funding a large number of small environmental groups to campaign in concert against Canadian oil? Does it involve supporting a particular scientist? A particular politician or political party? Large payments to First Nations on the strategic, north coast of B.C., such as the $27.3-million that Tides Canada paid to First Nations in a single grant?

In both the U.S. and Canada, a large number of the groups that campaign against Canadian oil are funded by Tides USA. According to my analysis of U.S. tax returns for 2009 and 2010, Tides USA and its sister organization, Tides Canada, have paid a total of US$10.2-million to 44 organizations that campaign against Canadian oil.

In 2010 alone, Tides USA made grants to 36 groups specifically for something called the “Tar Sands Campaign.” What exactly this “Tar Sands campaign” entails is unclear. Is it the campaign against Keystone XL? Or against the Northern Gateway? Or both? So far, Tides USA and Tides Canada have not been forthcoming about the details of their programs.

Advertisement 6
Story continues below
Article content

The top recipient of money for the Tides “Tar Sands campaign” is Corporate Ethics International, which runs Rethink Alberta, the campaign that aims to pressure the Alberta government by disparaging Alberta tourism. From 2009 to 2010, Tides USA nearly doubled payments to CEI, to $1,450,000 from $750,000.

“It’s blood oil,” says the U.K. Tar Sands Network, a member of Rethink Alberta. African diamonds and Canadian oil are a world apart and yet this campaign is trying to associate the two. And they defile the Canadian flag in the process. Among Corporate Ethics’ claims is that oil sands operations will destroy or degrade an area the size of England. England is 130,000 square kilometres. Oil sands operations are currently underway on 663 square km. By law, oil companies are required to restore the land afterward.

From 2009 to 2010, Tides USA doubled the amounts of grants to several organizations involved in the Tar Sands Campaign. Tides doubled its funding to the San Francisco-based Sierra Club Foundation, to US$420,000 from US$200,000. On top of that, Tides USA also funded the U.S. Sierra Club for voter registration efforts and a Get The Vote Out campaign, presumably in the U.S. Tides USA also paid US$265,000 to the Sierra Club of Canada.

Advertisement 7
Story continues below
Article content

Tides USA also increased the grant for the Tar Sands Campaign that was paid to the New York-based Natural Resources Defence Council. Its funding went to $405,000 in 2010 from $200,000 in 2009. That included $100,000 for an unspecified “2010 Fall Campaign” and $40,000 for a Climate Change campaign.

Tides USA also funds the Indigenous Environmental Network, US$115,000 in 2009 and US$157,000 in 2010. That included US$140,000 for the “Tar Sands Campaign” and US$17,000 for general support. The IEN is based in Minnesota and North Dakota. It has a Canadian office based in Ottawa.

From 2009 to 2010, Tides USA substantially increased the amounts paid to Canadian groups for the Tar Sands Campaign. From one year to the next, Tides USA tripled its grant to Ecojustice, to US$150,00 from US$50,000. Tides USA also tripled funding to the Water Matters Society of Alberta, from to US$60,00 from US$22,500. Tides USA also increased funding to Environmental Defence Canada Inc. to US$250,00 from US$185,000. Greenpeace Canada got US$186,000 from Tides USA in 2009 and US$200,000 in 2010. These grants were specifically for the “Tar Sands Campaign.”

Advertisement 8
Story continues below
Article content

In B.C., seven environmental groups were paid a total of US$505,000 for the Tar Sands campaign in 2010. Five of these groups were new as of 2010: Living Oceans Society, the T. Buck Suzuki Foundation, the Northwest Institute for Biological Research Society, the Tyee Society and West Coast Environmental Law Research Foundation.

LOS was paid US$55,000 plus US$5,000 for a Tar Sands Tanker Route Conflict Map. LOS, based in the tiny island community of Sointula, B.C., is an influential organization that is a federally registered non-profit in the U.S. but, to the best of my knowledge, is not a federally registered in Canada.

The Northwest Institute for Bioregional Research Society was paid US$72,628 for the Tar Sands campaign. In 2009, it reported to the CRA that two-thirds of its revenue was from foreign sources. In 2010, half of its revenue was foreign.

Where did Tides USA and Tides Canada get the US$10-million they have re-granted to dozens of groups that campaign against Canadian oil? That’s not clear. We know both Tides USA and Tides Canada have been funded by the Hewlett Foundation. U.S. tax returns show that in 2009, the Sea Change Foundation also paid US$2-million to Tides USA “to promote awareness of and opposition to tar sands.” In 2010, Sea Change paid Tides USA a further US$3.75-million to “reduce reliance on high carbon energy.” Sea Change is funded by Jim Simons and his son Nathaniel Simons. Jim Simons is the founder of Renaissance Technologies LLC, a hedge fund with US$15-billion under management. Forbes estimates that Jim Simons’ personal wealth is US$10.6-billion. He’s ranked as the 74th-richest person in the world.

Advertisement 9
Story continues below
Article content

The thinking behind the U.S. funding of the campaign against Canadian oil is explained in a 2007 strategy paper titled Design to Win: Philanthropy’s Role in the Fight Against Global Warming. The preparation of this strategy paper was funded by the Hewlett foundation and other U.S. foundations. This landmark paper says the goal of consumer and voter campaigns is to reshape U.S energy policy to bring about a massive change in the flow of investment away from so-called “dirty energy” and toward “clean energy.” Renewable and “clean energy” are synonymous with developing domestic energy, while shifting away from “dirty energy” means reducing dependency on Middle East oil and, it turns out, Canadian oil. Saving the climate has given the U.S. a rallying cry to spur energy self-sufficiency, but let’s be clear: This is for geo-political reasons as well as protecting the environment.

As I see it, the campaign against Canadian oil, put on steroids by U.S. foundations, has created a negative foil, a background of bad press and fear without which it would have been more difficult to push through the billions in U.S. government grants, loans and subsidies that were made in the U.S. in order to develop renewable energy.

Canadians are concerned that an Exxon Valdez-style oil spill could devastate the B.C. coast for centuries. They’re right to be concerned. And they’re every bit as Canadian as I am, but their billionaire funders aren’t. U.S. billionaires and their billion-dollar foundations are fighting the oil companies, most of which are U.S. companies. The boxing ring is Canada.

— Vivian Krause is a Vancouver-based writer and researcher. Her website is www.fair-questions.com

Article content
Comments
You must be logged in to join the discussion or read more comments.
Join the Conversation

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.

This Week in Flyers