Foreign Interests Found Funding Anti-Fracking Campaigns in America

There is strong evidence the Russian government is colluding with radical environmentalists in order to disrupt and stop other oil companies, like Chevron, from competing with its own natural gas provider, Gazprom. Russian oil interests connected to Putin are also funneling money to anti-fracking protesters in the U.S., using offshore money laundering schemes to disguise the funding sources.


By Rachel Alexander l July 22, 2015


Thanking Governor Cuomo for banning fracking in New York. Photo Credit: Andrew Kelly/Reuters

Despite the fact the U.S. is highly dependent upon oil and natural gas, and it is scientifically dubious that their production and use is destroying the earth, environmental activists continue to expand their efforts to relentlessly get the energy sources stamped out of society. Now there is evidence these activists are hypocritically taking money from foreign oil interests to fund their campaigns.

Due to fracking, short for hydraulic fracturing, the U.S. is now the biggest natural gas producer in the world. It is why U.S. gas prices have fallen in recent years. Fracking boosted North Dakota from the bottom fifth of poorest states per capita GDP to the second richest in 10 years. Fracking is probably the only thing keeping California from complete economic collapse, although maybe not for long since the state just passed very restrictive laws restricting the practice. Fracking currently takes place in 31 states. It is estimated that there are over 1.1 million active oil and gas wells in the U.S.

However, a growing number of members of Congress are in favor of banning the practice. Local cities and counties are implementing bans on fracking, or keeping it out through zoning laws. Vermont and New York have banned it, and Maryland has a moratorium in effect until 2017. New York was able to gin up support for a ban by having the state’s environmental agency conduct a seven-year review, which predictably concluded that fracking poses risks to land, water, natural resources and public health. Notably, this contradicted an EPA assessment which came out about the same time.

France and Bulgaria have banned fracking and the practice has been unable to make any inroads in the UK. In Canada, the government actually provided a $239,083 grant to an anti-oilsands group to make the documentary Tipping Point: The Age of the Oilsands, a year after the government approved a grant for a similar project, Dirty Oil.

Fracking is being attacked in the courts as well. In Oklahoma, homeowners are allowed to sue fracking companies over earthquakes that cause damage to their houses, even if it’s not clear whether the earthquakes were caused by the fracking. The Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund persuades localities to pass zoning laws to restrict fracking, which end up in court and cost the fracking industry money and time trying to get them struck down as interfering with state or federal jurisdiction. The organization has never won a case that has gone to court, but won’t stop pressuring localities to pass the meddling laws.

Actor Matt Damon produced and starred in a movie in 2012 portraying oil and natural gas producers as greedy anti-environmentalists, Promised Land. Incredibly, it was financed in part by the royal family that runs the United Arab Emirates. The Middle East has plenty of oil but little natural gas, so it is to their advantage to reduce how much natural gas the U.S. produces. As someone who also rails against “big oil,” Damon is a hypocrite for taking its money.

There is strong evidence that the Russian government is colluding with radical environmentalists in order to disrupt and stop other oil companies, like Chevron, from competing with its own natural gas provider, Gazprom. Protesters mysteriously appeared at sites in Russia to specifically target American oil companies, yet Gazprom is left alone.

Russian oil interests connected to Putin are also funneling money to anti-fracking protesters in the U.S., using offshore money laundering schemes to disguise the funding sources. “The Sierra Club, the Natural Resource Defense Council, Food and Water Watch, the League of Conservation Voters, and the Center for American Progress were among the recipients of Sea Change’s $100 million in grants in 2010 and 2011.” The middleman organization Sea Change contributed nearly $8.5 million to the Sierra Club last year, which the club used to fund its “Beyond Natural Gas” campaign, considered “one of the largest and best-funded environmentalist campaigns combating fracking and the extraction of natural gas in general.”

The usual big left-wing interests are also behind the anti-oil campaigns, like the Tides Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation. Their deceptive tactics include paying Native Americans to protest.

Currently, protesters are trying to stop oil rigs from drilling off the coast of Alaska. Greenpeace “kayaktivists” caused $10,000 in damage to a protected locale trying to stop a Shell oil rig from a visit to Seattle. Shell kindly picked up the bill and the environmentalists were nowhere to be found. Hypocritically, Greenpeace receives large amounts of funding from oil investments.

Ultimately, the tactics of the radical environmentalists are self-defeating, and reek of an ulterior motive. Turning the production of oil and natural gas over to unfriendly authoritarian governments will not eliminate their use as energy sources, instead hinder America’s path to energy independence. Whether it’s deep-seated guilt from their childhood, a desire to make a name for themselves, or simply greed to make money off the environmental movement, taking money from the enemy is corrupt hypocricy at best and traitorous at worst.


Rachel Alexander is the founder of the Intellectual Conservative and an attorney. Ms. Alexander is also a contributor to SFPPR News & Analysis.

Related Articles