March, 30 2010, 12:07pm EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Joe Smyth, Greenpeace US media: 831 566 5647, joe.smyth@greenpeace.org
Kert Davies, Greenpeace US Research Director: 202 413 8515, kert.davies@greenpeace.org
Mareike Britten, Greenpeace International: +31 6 2900 1141
Giant Private US Oil Company at Center of Climate Denial Funding: Greenpeace
A little-known, privately-owned US oil and
manufacturing giant that has made its owners the 19th richest men in the
world has outspent even ExxonMobil in funding the denial of the science
of climate change in recent years, according to a Greenpeace report
released today.
WASHINGTON
A little-known, privately-owned US oil and
manufacturing giant that has made its owners the 19th richest men in the
world has outspent even ExxonMobil in funding the denial of the science
of climate change in recent years, according to a Greenpeace report
released today.
Entitled "Koch Industries: Secretly funding the climate denial
machine" (1), the report details how Kansas-based Koch Industries, a
multinational company with little public profile, is playing a quiet but
dominant role in the US policy debate on climate change. It shows how
Koch has become the financial kingpin in efforts to undermine confidence
in climate science and to oppose clean energy in the US and
internationally. Between 2005 and 2008, Koch foundations contributed
$24.8 million to climate denial organizations - nearly 3 times as much
as ExxonMobil in the same period.
machine" (1), the report details how Kansas-based Koch Industries, a
multinational company with little public profile, is playing a quiet but
dominant role in the US policy debate on climate change. It shows how
Koch has become the financial kingpin in efforts to undermine confidence
in climate science and to oppose clean energy in the US and
internationally. Between 2005 and 2008, Koch foundations contributed
$24.8 million to climate denial organizations - nearly 3 times as much
as ExxonMobil in the same period.
"It is time Koch Industries came clean and dropped its dirty,
behind-the-scenes campaign against action on climate change," said Kert
Davies, Research Director at Greenpeace US
The report also details Koch Industries' growing effort in recent years
to influence US climate and energy policy through spending on lobbying
and campaign contributions from Koch's Political Action Committee to
candidates for federal office. Since the 2006 election cycle, Koch
Industries PAC contributed more to federal candidates than any other
company in the oil & gas industry. Koch Industries ranks third in
lobby expenditures from the oil sector since 2006, just behind
ExxonMobil and Chevron.
Two brothers, Charles and David Koch, own and control Koch Industries as
well as its political spending.
"By spending millions of dollars on lobbying and political
contributions, Charles and David Koch are polluting not only our
environment, but also the US political process. Efforts to pass US clean
energy and climate policy are being hampered by polluter lobbyists and
climate science denial campaigns, and Koch Industries is at the core of
this obstruction." said Davies.
The report details several Koch-funded climate denial efforts:
* The Koch foundations provided substantial funding to at least 20
organizations central to the global "echo chamber" which have repeatedly
rebroadcast, referenced, and appeared as media spokespeople in the
story, dubbed "Climategate," of supposed wrongdoing by climate
scientists gleaned from e-mails hacked from the University of East
Anglia, in November 2009.
* Charles Koch's foundation along with ExxonMobil and the American
Petroleum Institute, funded an astrophysicist to write a 2007 article
about polar bears, masquerading as a peer-reviewed scientific paper
attempting to refute the science around the threat to polar bears from
climate change.
* The Kochs funded a Danish think tank that produced a dubious study
about the Danish wind industry. The Koch-funded 'echo chamber' in the
US used this study to challenge President Obama's support of wind
energy. Earlier this month, the Danish Environment Minister rejected the
study (2).
* The Kochs funded groups that supported and promoted a widely debunked
study in Spain that claimed that the renewable energy industry had lost
the country jobs. Among the groups was "Americans for Prosperity" - a
front group founded and chaired by David Koch. It is currently
campaigning against clean energy and climate policy in the US.
Although few Americans have heard of Koch Industries, it is a major oil
corporation with operations in nearly 60 countries. Koch Industries is
the second largest privately held company in the US, a conglomerate of
more than 20 companies with 70,000 employees and $100 billion in annual
sales. Most of Koch's operations are invisible to the public, with the
exception of a handful of retail brands such as Brawny(r) paper towels
and Dixie(r) cups as well as synthetic textiles like Lycra(r) and Cordura(r).
Part of Koch Industries' influence is channeled through three
foundations, also controlled by the co-owners of the company, David and
Charles Koch. From 2005 to 2008, ExxonMobil spent around US$9 million
while Koch Industries-controlled foundations spent nearly US$25 million
on undermining confidence in climate science by funding the climate
denial movement. Groups which received funding include the Americans for
Prosperity, the Heritage Foundation, Mercatus Center, the Cato
Institute, Washington Legal Foundation and the Foundation for Research
on Economics and the Environment (FREE).
"This funding is propping up an echo chamber of doubt, deliberately
creating the appearance of controversy and uncertainty about the
international consensus on climate change science in order to slow down
policymakers," said Davies.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000LATEST NEWS
Wyden Presses DEA for Answers About Drug-Trafficking Probe Targeting Epstein and 14 Associates
"I’m convinced there’s a mess of financial crimes running throughout the Epstein story, and a lot of other people who were directly involved are still walking free," said the senator.
Feb 27, 2026
US Sen. Ron Wyden has given the Drug Enforcement Administration two weeks to provide key information on a secretive, long-running investigation into potential drug trafficking and money laundering by the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and 14 co-conspirators.
The Oregon Democrat wrote to DEA Administrator Terrance Cole asking for a fully unredacted version of a 69-page memo from 2015 that was prepared by the director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) Fusion Center, a specialized Department of Justice (DOJ) unit that President Donald Trump shut down last year.
A heavily redacted version of the memo was included in the Epstein files that were released last month and referred to an OCDETF probe nicknamed "Chain Reaction."
The investigation had been opened in 2010, according to the document, and was still active at the time the memo was drafted. Epstein's 14 co-conspirators, all of whom had their names blacked out in the file release, were being investigated for "illegitimate wire transfers which are tied to illicit drug and/or prostitution activities occurring in the US Virgin Islands and New York City."
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the release of files related to Epstein's sex trafficking operation, requires that redactions are used to protect the identities of victims, "not members of a criminal sex trafficking organization," Wyden wrote in his letter.
“The fact that Epstein was under investigation by [OCDETF] suggests that there was ample evidence indicating that Epstein was engaged in heavy drug trafficking and prostitution as part of cross-border criminal conspiracy. This is incredibly disturbing and raises serious questions as to how this investigation by the DEA was handled,” Wyden wrote.
“Since Epstein and his 14 co-conspirators were never charged by the DOJ for drug trafficking or financial crimes, I am concerned that the DEA and DOJ during the first Trump administration moved to terminate this investigation in order to protect pedophiles," he continued. "I am also concerned that the excessive redactions of this memorandum for operation ‘Chain Reaction’ go well beyond the intent of the Epstein Files Transparency Act."
In a statement on social media Friday, the senator said the Senate Finance Committee, of which he is the ranking member, needs "to know the results" of the OCDETF's investigation.
"Did it result in any charges being brought against the targets? Why did it end, and when? Did the first Trump administration squash it?" he asked.
This document is proof that it’s essential to keep following the money. I’m convinced there’s a mess of financial crimes running throughout the Epstein story, and a lot of other people who were directly involved are still walking free. That’s unacceptable.
— Senator Ron Wyden (@wyden.senate.gov) February 27, 2026 at 10:15 AM
"This is a big one," Wyden said of the redacted memo.
Wyden has led efforts to get to the bottom of financial secrets regarding Epstein's sex trafficking and other criminal operations. Last summer he drew attention to Suspicious Activity Reports that were filed with the US Department of the Treasury, including information on more than 4,725 wire transfers involving Epstein's bank accounts, totaling $1.5 billion in value.
The redacted memo in the Epstein files, he said, "is proof that it’s essential to keep following the money."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Families Struggle to Afford Groceries, Trump to Hold Lavish Fundraising Dinner for His Super PAC
"Thanks to Republican-backed tariffs and devastating SNAP cuts, working Americans are not only facing higher food prices but millions of people are also losing the assistance they rely on," said one critic.
Feb 27, 2026
President Donald Trump will soon be hosting a ritzy fundraiser even as many Americans say they're still struggling to afford weekly groceries.
As flagged by New York Times reporter Teddy Schleifer, Trump on Friday is scheduled to have a fundraising dinner at his Mar-a-Lago resort where attendees must pay $1 million each for the price of entry.
According to a Times report published last year on the planned fundraiser, the money raised from the dinner "will flow to a super PAC devoted to Mr. Trump, MAGA Inc., which has vacuumed up hundreds of millions of dollars since he was reelected last year."
The Times noted that it's unclear what Trump plans to do with the vast sums he's raising since he is constitutionally ineligible to serve another term, although that hasn't stopped him from saying he wants to run again in 2028.
The fundraiser is occurring as a new report from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is projecting that US consumers will get little relief from food prices in 2026.
According to the USDA Economic Research Service forecast for February 2026, "prices for all food are predicted to increase 3.1%" this year, "with a prediction interval of 0.7 to 5.7%."
The USDA also projects that seven categories of food are project to see their prices increase faster this year than their 20-year historical average rate of growth: "Beef and veal, other meats, fish and seafood, processed fruits and vegetables, sugar and sweets, cereal and bakery products, and nonalcoholic beverages."
Leor Tal, campaign director at Unrig Our Economy, said on Friday that Republican policies including Trump's tariffs and cuts made to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are exacerbating the affordability crisis for US families.
"Families are already struggling to put food on the table and, instead of relief, they’re getting hit with even higher costs because congressional Republicans continue to prioritize billionaires over working Americans," said Tal. "Thanks to Republican-backed tariffs and devastating SNAP cuts, working Americans are not only facing higher food prices but millions of people are also losing the assistance they rely on to put food on the table."
An Associated Press poll released last year found that 53% of Americans believe the cost of groceries is a “major source of stress,” which is higher than the percentage of Americans who say the same thing about the cost of housing, healthcare, and childcare.
Anxiety about grocery prices is particularly strong among Americans earning $30,000 or less per year, as nearly two-thirds of them described paying for groceries as a “major source of stress.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
'One Family Is About to Control CBS, CNN, HBO, and TikTok': Alarm Grows Over Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger
"When Democrats win back power we are going to break up these anti-democratic information conglomerates," said Sen. Chris Murphy. "All of them."
Feb 27, 2026
Concerns are mounting about the state of the US media landscape now that it looks increasingly likely that Paramount Skydance—a company controlled by the son of billionaire Larry Ellison, a donor to President Donald Trump—will succeed in its bid to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.
One day after Netflix announced that it was dropping its previously accepted bid to buy Warner, many critics demanded that antitrust laws be invoked to block the Paramount-Warner merger from going through.
Alvaro Bedoya, former commissioner at the Federal Trade Commission, warned that the Ellison family could soon use their control over vast swaths of US media properties to engage in mass censorship, and he pointed to their decisions to cancel Stephen Colbert's program and to refuse to air an interview with Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico.
"One family is about to control CBS, CNN, HBO, and TikTok," he wrote in a social media post. "They’ll buy [Warner Bros. Discovery] with $24 billion in money from the Saudis, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi. To win over Trump, they canceled Colbert... and blocked Talarico. Much more will follow. Block this rotten deal."
Craig Aaron, co-CEO of Free Press, said the proposed Paramount-Warner merger was "even worse" than the proposed Netflix-Warner merger.
"This deal endangers our democracy by giving a family of pliant billionaires even more control of vast swaths of our news coverage, TV stations, and movie studios," Aaron said. "Allowing more mergers in the already highly concentrated movie business will harm filmmakers and industry workers when Paramount delivers on its promise to make deep cuts to please its Wall Street backers."
Writing in the American Prospect, David Dayen described the Paramount-Warner merger as the "worst-case scenario" that has "echoes of media-political consolidation as we see in dictatorships the world over."
Dayen argued that state governments still had time to block the merger, but warned that they were in a race against time given that Paramount's consultants "are trying to speed run the deal in a matter of weeks."
"The states could challenge the merger even after the feds bless it," Dayen continued, "but by then, Paramount and Warner Bros. would have likely commingled their assets, engaged in layoffs, and made it very difficult to untangle the merger, particularly for judges who are inherently conservative on these matters."
Some Democratic lawmakers are warning that they aren't going to stop fighting the Paramount-Warner merger even if it goes through.
In an interview with Semafor, Sen. Ruben Gallego (R-Ariz.) predicted that the Ellisons would come to regret aggressively buying up US media properties.
"Once we take power, whoever the president is, we’re going to break up your companies," said Gallego. "So all the investment you did to create these mergers are going to be for naught. Your investors are going to be pissed at you, and you’re likely going to end up getting fired as the CEO because you wasted so much money and corrupted yourself in the process."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) echoed Gallego's argument in a social media post.
"Paramount should enjoy its growing news monopoly while they have it," he wrote, "because when Democrats win back power we are going to break up these anti-democratic information conglomerates. All of them."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


