If we apply the rule ‘follow-the-money’ to environmentalist groups blocking oil development in America, we might think there is a conspiracy going on.
Who benefits monetarily from hindering development of oil in ANWR, and off the American coasts ? Who benefits monetarily from restricting the supply of oil while maintaining control of that supply ? Certainly not American oil companies. Their profit is the difference between what the crude costs and what their products sell for. Their cost for domestic crude is under $20 barrel, and foreign crude is $98 today. Domestic oil is the more profitable oil for them, so they would naturally prefer more domestic production and less having to buy it on the open market.
I would be very surprised if the Sierra Club, Green Peace, et al, did not receive significant money from shell organizations funded by OPEC countries.
Of course, every time oil maintains a high market price for a while, domestic oil companies sink a bunch of money and effort into more domestic production. Capital investment that is very risky because OPEC countries can add capacity and still sell their crude at a profit even if oil was $10 a barrel. OPEC producers do not even need to take an actual loss to kill off American producers.
Top 3 Sierra Club funding sources:
Pew Charitable Trusts $4,315,000.00
Joyce Foundation $3,007,675.00
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation $2,737,436.00
The Pew Charitable Trusts (seven individual trusts in all) were endowed with various inheritances of the four children of Joseph N. Pew, who founded the Sun Oil Company.
Joyce Foundation: was established in 1948 by Beatrice Joyce Kean, a Chicago heiress whose family wealth stemmed from lumber, building, and sawmill interests.
Charles Stewart Mott Foundation: Charles Stewart Mott sold his father's company (a wire-wheel maker) to General Motors in the early 20th Century, in exchange for over 1 million shares of GM stock. He served on the company's board for over 60 years and left a huge fortune upon his death.