May, 19 2020, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Valentina Stackl, Senior Communications Specialist, Greenpeace USA: +1 (734) 276-6260, valentina.stackl@greenpeace.org
New Greenpeace Report Exposes Big Tech Connection to Big Oil
A new Greenpeace USA report shows how Silicon Valley is helping Big Oil make the climate crisis worse. The report, Oil in the Cloud: How Tech Companies are Helping Big Oil Profit from Climate Destruction [1], exposes how the world's biggest cloud companies are helping oil corporations discover, extract, refine, and distribute oil and gas. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are getting rich through lucrative contracts for cloud computing and other artificial intelligence (AI) technologies for oil and gas companies while at the same time undermining their own climate goals.
San Francisco, California
A new Greenpeace USA report shows how Silicon Valley is helping Big Oil make the climate crisis worse. The report, Oil in the Cloud: How Tech Companies are Helping Big Oil Profit from Climate Destruction [1], exposes how the world's biggest cloud companies are helping oil corporations discover, extract, refine, and distribute oil and gas. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are getting rich through lucrative contracts for cloud computing and other artificial intelligence (AI) technologies for oil and gas companies while at the same time undermining their own climate goals. At present, the carbon emissions from these contracts are out of scope of the tech companies' carbon reporting, thus concealing the impact their technologies have on our changing climate.
As the oil and gas industry confronts the end of the oil age and deteriorating earnings, major oil corporations such as Shell, BP, Chevron, and ExxonMobil have turned to the cloud giants and their high powered computing capabilities to find and extract more oil and gas and reduce production costs. Oil companies are already spending billions on cloud computing and advanced analytics, and despite the current crash in the price of oil, this spending is expected to increase to over $15 billion in the next decade [2].
Greenpeace USA Senior Climate Campaigner Elizabeth Jardim said:
"Amazon, Google, and Microsoft have all made public commitments to cut their carbon emissions, yet, they are at the same time supporting the very industry we have to blame for global warming. These lucrative contracts completely undermine their own climate goals.
"The oil and gas industry accounts for billions of dollars in profits for big tech companies, yet the carbon emissions related to these contracts are not reflected in any of the tech companies' published footprint data. The big three cloud companies must publicly commit to no longer offer solutions to the oil and gas sector to find, extract, refine, or distribute fossil fuels."
Report findings:
Greenpeace examined 14 contracts between Amazon, Google, and Microsoft with major oil and gas companies:
- Microsoft appears to have the most contracts with oil and gas companies, offering AI capabilities in all phases of oil production. We estimate a single contract with ExxonMobil in the Permian Basin to result in additional annual emissions of 3.4 million metric tons CO2e, the equivalent of more than 20% of Microsoft's total annual carbon footprint [3]. Microsoft can never truly achieve its recently announced "Carbon Negative" goal while continuing to aid the oil and gas sector with exploration and production.
- Amazon continues to market its cloud services to help oil and gas firms boost production despite rebranding its website to target the more palatable "Energy Sector" [4]. These contracts showcase Amazon's ongoing duplicity: on the one hand announcing its Climate Pledge to be carbon neutral by 2040, while on the other offering an ongoing lifeline to oil and gas companies. In addition to ending these contracts, Amazon must do more to protect warehouse and distribution workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and stop retaliating against employees for speaking out about these problems.
- Google has undergone personnel and structural changes that show it is deprioritizing contracts, stating recently it will no longer "develop custom AI/ML solutions to facilitate upstream extraction" for the oil and gas industry [5]. While this is a good first step, Google still needs to account for its existing involvement with oil and gas companies and publicly commit to end these contracts.
Today's virtual Microsoft Build event, one of many moved online due to the COVID-19 pandemic, shows how increasingly reliant we all are on major tech firms. With the recent oil price crash and reduced global demand, the near-term outlook for the oil and gas industry is bleak. These AI partnerships represent a critical toolkit that fossil fuel companies will use to bounce back from this downturn. The science is clear that the continued expansion of oil and gas production is placing our climate goals out of reach. We must implement a managed decline for the fossil fuel industry, while rapidly deploying clean energy solutions. Such a plan must be centered around strong, just transition policies to ensure that workers and communities are left better off through the energy transition [6].
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
Rights Defenders Denounce Trump-DeSantis Alligator Alcatraz as 'Direct Assault on Humanity'
"This facility echoes some of our nation's darkest history," said a civil liberties advocate.
Jul 02, 2025
Civil liberties advocates expressed horror on Tuesday after President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis held a joint press event at a massive new detention facility in the Florida Everglades known as "Alligator Alcatraz."
The facility was first announced last month when Republican Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier unveiled a plan to renovate the Dade-Collier Training and Transition Airport and transform it into a mass detention center for immigrants. During a press event touting the new facility, DeSantis boasted that detainees being held at the facility had little hope of ever escaping given that it was surrounded by miles of alligator-infested swamps.
"What'll happen is you'll bring people in there, they ain't going anywhere once they're there unless you want them to go somewhere, because, good luck getting to civilization," he explained. "So the security is amazing—natural and otherwise."
Civil liberties advocates were appalled by the new facility, which is lined with razor-wire fence and is projected at least initially to house 5,000 beds for immigrants awaiting deportation. Bacardi Jackson, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, accused Trump and DeSantis of engaging in wanton cruelty with their touting of the new facility and said it harkened back to dark chapters in American history.
"Building a prison-like facility on sacred indigenous land in the middle of the Everglades is a direct assault on humanity, dignity, indigenous sovereignty, and the constitutional protections we all share," she said. “Our laws—both U.S. and Florida—prohibit cruel and unusual punishment. Yet, this facility echoes some of our nation's darkest history, all while trampling the very land that indigenous communities have long fought to protect."
She added that "the facility's opening also comes as Congress is poised to authorize $45 billion in funding to expand the harmful mass immigration detention machine, right on the heels of multiple deaths in detention facilities" and further said that the project "dehumanizes people, strips them of their rights, and diverts public dollars from the services our communities need."
Guardian correspondent Robert Tait, meanwhile, described the press event surrounding the facility's opening as a "calculatedly provocative celebration of the dystopian" in a place that was designed to be "a location of dread to those lacking documentary proof of their right to be in the U.S."
Former CNN anchor Jim Acosta delivered an even more scathing denunciation of the facility on his Substack page, labeling it a "gulag in the swamp" that was intended to distract Trump supporters from the Republican Party's efforts to take an axe to Medicaid spending in their budget bill.
"Trump knows he can salvage a bad news cycle in conservative media if he can find new and, in this case, medieval ways to torment immigrants," Acosta explained. "Distract the base from Medicaid coverage they're going to lose or the skyrocketing deficits plaguing future generations by conjuring up the fantasy of terrified migrants being eaten by alligators—a prospect that seemed to delight Trump when speaking with reporters Tuesday morning."
Amid growing condemnation of the facility, Trump adviser Stephen Miller encouraged other states to pitch their own ideas for migrant detention facilities during a Tuesday night Fox News appearance. What's more, Miller said that accepted proposals from states would receive funding from the very same GOP budget bill that is projected to slash Medicaid spending by over $1 trillion over a 10-year period.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump CFPB Cancels $95 Million Settlement With Credit Union Accused of Charging Illegal 'Junk Fees'
"How many millions did this CFPB just take from servicemembers?" wrote one consumer financial protection advocate.
Jul 02, 2025
According to an order published Tuesday, the country's top financial protection watchdog nixed a $95 million settlement reached in 2024 with Navy Federal Credit Union, which serves military servicemembers, veterans, Department of Defense employees, and their families. The President Joe Biden-led Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last year accused the bank of illegally charging overdraft fees to customers and ordered the credit union to refund consumers and pay a civil penalty.
Multiple observers, including a former Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) employee, said that the move appears to run counter to the CFPB's stated priority of focusing "its enforcement and supervision resources on pressing threats to consumers, particularly service members and their families, and veterans."
The Tuesday order means that Navy Federal will not have to pay $80 million to impacted customers, or a $15 million civil penalty.
In November 2024, the CFPB under then-President Joe Biden said that from 2017 to 2022, the credit union charged customers "surprise overdraft fees on certain ATM withdrawals and debit card purchases, even when their accounts showed sufficient funds at the time of the transactions," in a statement announcing the $80 million refund and the civil penalty.
Then-CFPB Director Rohit Chopra accused the credit union of "illegally harvested tens of millions of dollars in junk fees, including from active duty servicemembers and veterans."
The order on Tuesday is not the first time the Trump administration has canceled enforcement actions brought under the Biden-led CFPB. The Trump administration has sought to drastically cut personnel at the CFPB, which is currently led by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought.
Adam Rust, director of financial services at the Consumer Federation of America, a non-profit association of pro-consumer organizations, wrote on X on Tuesday that "it doesn't square when the CFPB gives a free pass to Navy Federal for charging illegal overdraft fees AND claims it cares about servicemembers."
"How many millions did this CFPB just take from servicemembers?" he asked.
Allison Preiss, a former senior advisor to the director at the CFPB, reacted to the news by writing on X that "for months, Trump's CFPB has insisted it is focusing its efforts on protecting servicemembers and veterans," and included some screenshots of statements from the CFPB, such as a statement from May 2025 announcing that the bureau will not prioritize enforcement action related to Buy Now, Pay Later loans.
"The bureau takes this step in the interest of focusing resources on supporting hard-working American taxpayers, servicemen, veterans, and small businesses," according to that statement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Spineless Capitulation to Extortion': Paramount Caves to Trump With $16 Million Settlement
Critics characterized the payment as a bribe in exchange for federal approval of Paramount's pending merger with Skydance.
Jul 02, 2025
The parent company of CBS News, Paramount Global, announced Tuesday that it has agreed to pay U.S. President Donald Trump $16 million to settle what legal experts called an entirely meritless lawsuit over the media organization's handling of a pre-election "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris.
Under the reported terms of the settlement, the money will go toward Trump's legal fees and his future presidential library. Paramount said the settlement deal does not include a formal apology, but the company agreed to release written transcripts of future "60 Minutes" interviews with presidential candidates.
Critics responded with outrage to news of the settlement, which one observer characterized as "spineless capitulation to extortion." Some posted screenshots to social media showing they canceled their Paramount+ subscriptions in response.
As Paramount engaged in talks with Trump's legal team over the lawsuit in recent weeks, press freedom advocates and members of Congress implored the organization not to settle, warning that caving to the president would reward and embolden his attacks on media outlets he views as his political enemies.
"If you settle cases, you're going to send a message to your news team to not push the envelope for fear of people being sued," media attorney Edward Klaris toldThe Washington Post, "and you're going to court more cases against your company because they might think that if they sue you they're going to collect."
"A line is being drawn between the owners of American news media who are willing to stand up for press freedom and those who capitulate to the demands of the president."
Paramount's controlling shareholder, Shari Redstone, supported a settlement with Trump in the hope that it would "clear the way" for federal approval of the company's merger with the entertainment company Skydance, according to The Wall Street Journal, which cited sources familiar with the internal discussions. Bloombergreported that Redstone could reap $180 million in "severance and other benefits on top of hundreds of millions from the sale of her stock" if the merger goes through.
In May, the Freedom of the Press Foundation—a Paramount shareholder—cautioned that a settlement with Trump "could amount to a bribe" to the Trump administration in exchange for approval of the merger. The advocacy group said it would sue Paramount if the company caved to the president, arguing that "a settlement of Trump's meritless lawsuit may well be a thinly veiled effort to launder bribes through the court system."
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) similarly warned Paramount that a settlement with Trump could run afoul of federal anti-bribery laws.
"Paramount appears to be attempting to appease the administration in order to secure merger approval," the senators wrote in a May 19 letter to Redstone.
Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders USA, said in a statement Wednesday that the settlement was "a shameful decision by Paramount."
"Shari Redstone and Paramount's board should have stood by CBS journalists and the integrity of press freedom," said Weimers. "Instead, they chose to reward Donald Trump for his petty legal assault against both. A line is being drawn between the owners of American news media who are willing to stand up for press freedom and those who capitulate to the demands of the president."
"Paramount's leaders chose to be on the wrong side of that dividing line, but they'd be mistaken to believe appeasing Trump today will stop his attacks in the future," Weimers added. "News media owners are much better off standing strong than acquiescing."
This story has been updated to include a statement from Reporters Without Borders USA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular