No. 12: Institute for Energy Research (A.K.A. American Energy Alliance)

Meet the 12 loudest members of the chorus claiming that global warming is a joke and that CO2 emissions are actually good for you.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Robert Bradley, the CEO of the Institute for Energy Research, is a former director of policy analysis at Enron, where he once wrote speeches for Ken Lay. While most experts blame Enron’s failure on a lack of government oversight, Bradley cites too much government meddling. In his new book, Capitalism at Work: Business, Government, and Energy, he writes that Enron’s collapse “is yet another case of unintended consequences from government intervention.”

Bradley is now committed to keeping the government from regulating carbon. His 2003 book, Climate Alarmism Reconsidered, argues that carbon dioxide “is not a pollutant but a building block of a living and vibrant biosphere.” He’s even willing to diss his former employer to make his point, suggesting that CO2 foes are as self-centered as Enron was when it pushed for a climate treaty and subsidies for its wind and solar divisions. “The ‘green’ energy crusade that Enron in some ways fathered is much more about corporate welfare than true energy sustainability,” he writes.

Since April, IER’s advocacy arm, the American Energy Alliance, has been airing television ads in the districts of key members of Congress, stressing the potential costs of Waxman-Markey. One ad claimed that an MIT study found that the bill “could cost our families more than $3,100 per year in new taxes.” But the author of the study, professor John Reilly, has said that the number was a misrepresentation of his work and “just wrong.” Confronted with that response, Bradley replied that Reilly had since confirmed to the Weekly Standard “that households will in fact pay this amount.” But Reilly told me that his estimate of Waxman-Markey’s true cost is just $223 per household by 2020 and maintained that the use of the larger number “was incorrect.” Other AEA ads have been called out for similar distortions.

The IER’s American Energy Freedom Center is chaired by former Virginia Sen. George “Macaca” Allen. Thomas Pyle, the president of the American Energy Alliance, was a policy analyst for former Rep. Tom DeLay before becoming director of federal affairs for Koch Industries.

In 2007, the most recent year for which tax filings are available, IER had a budget of nearly $1 million. In May, the Guardian reported that IER has received donations from Exxon, KBR, and trusts set up by Koch. Asked who funds the Institute for Energy Research, Bradley would say only that its money comes from “individuals, foundations, and corporations—including energy companies.”

Click here for the previous member of the dirty dozen.

Click here to return to the main page.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate