chevron

Video Evidence Suggests Chevron Lawsuit Riddled With Corruption, Santacruz Comments on the Case

by Christine Hall on September 1, 2009 · 1 comment

in Environment, Features, International, Natural Resources

A major scandal has arisen in the biggest environmental lawsuit in history – the $27 billion lawsuit against Chevron oil company brought by a lawyer representing citizens of Ecuador.

As reported in Tuesday’s New York Times, Chevron has released video implicating Ecuador government officials close to the president in a massive bribery scheme.  Chevron claims its covertly recorded videos “reveal a $3 million bribery scheme implicating the judge presiding over the environmental lawsuit currently pending against Chevron and individuals who identify themselves as representatives of the Ecuadorian government and its ruling party.”  The president responded, in part, by threatening to shut down a television station that aired the videos.

In a Forbes commentary this summer (“Toxic Revenge“), CEI journalism fellow Silvia Santacruz explained why the lawsuit was unjust in the first place (exempting the state-owned oil company, for example).  She noted that Ecuador lawsuits targeting international companies face a court system rated corrupt by the United Nations, the International Bar Association and the U.S. State Department.

Santacruz also explains why such lawsuits, along with a 50% “windfall profits” tax, have directly harmed the people of Ecuador, scaring away foreign investment.  Lago Agrio, where the lawsuit against Chevron was brought, is poor in literacy levels and in basic needs, like running water.  In fact, Santacruz produced a YouTube video, UnderMining Prosperity, to call attention to the plight of Ecuadorian people.

Putting my money where Chevron’s mouth is

by Marlo Lewis on October 15, 2008 · 2 comments

in Energy, Global Warming

Chevron has plastered a series of posters all over the Washington, D.C. metro system as part of an advertising campaign titled, “will-you-join-us?” Join Chevron how? By becoming an employee and helping Chevron produce the petroleum products consumers need? Nope. By buying Chevron stock and becoming a shareholder? No again. By joining the fight against anti-consumer policies like oil drilling bans and carbon cap-and-trade schemes? Not a chance.

Each poster features an earnest-looking adult who vows to consume less energy—or at least think about it. Here are some of the captions: “I will use less energy,” “I will leave the car at home more,” “I will unplug stuff more,” “I will reuse more stuff,” “I will finally get a programmable thermostat,” “I will carpool to work,” “I will consider a hybrid” (how bold!), and (bolder still), “I will take my golf clubs out of the trunk.” 

To join Chevron means repenting of our fuelish ways. It means buying less of Chevron’s products. But if buying less is good, then buying none is better. Doesn’t Chevron CEO Dave O’Reilly understand this simple logic?

Maybe Mr. O’Reilly thinks Chevron will earn green brownie points by talking as if oil consumption were an addiction to be broken. But de-legitimizing his company’s product is suicidal, because instead of appeasing those who seek to tax and regulate Big Oil out of existence, disparaging energy use will only reinforce the perception that the oil bashers occupy the moral high ground.

Until and unless Chevron changes its tune and starts explaining why abundant, affordable energy is essential to human flourishing, I will “join” Chevron by boycotting its products. And if enough consumers join the boycott, then maybe, just maybe, Chevron will wise up.