{"id":329127,"date":"2024-05-15T10:04:11","date_gmt":"2024-05-15T08:04:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=329127"},"modified":"2024-05-15T10:04:14","modified_gmt":"2024-05-15T08:04:14","slug":"there-just-might-be-74-million-reasons-environmental-charities-ignore-eagles-and-whales-and-reject-zero-emission-nuclear","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=329127","title":{"rendered":"There just might be 74 million reasons environmental charities ignore eagles and whales, and reject zero emission nuclear"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From JoNova <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Jo Nova<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Renewable billionaires would be crazy if they weren\u2019t funding \u201cEnvironmental Activists\u201d<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Nick Cater points out one mysterious charity, the Sunrise Project<\/a> Australia had a \u201crevenue\u201d of $73.8 million* dollars last year and we don\u2019t know where that came from<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s say you made a fortune from Big-Government subsidies and rigged market rules \u2014 what would stop you pouring some of those parasitic profits right back into fake environmentalists groups to help \u201cyour favourite\u201d politicians win? It has the added bonus that when your wind turbines chop up eagles<\/a> or deafen the dolphins<\/a> no one says a word. The same sell-out environmental groups would .. do nothing at all. Mum\u2019s the word! Which is exactly what Greenpeace and the WWF seem to do \u2014 nothing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s just say hypothetically, that you ran a company completely dependent on politicians to create rigged market rules \u2014 like banning your main competitor? (Nuclear power). What would stop you funneling some of those profits into environmental cover groups to whip up \u201cgrassroots\u201d whinges into a fully mature political campaign with digital databases and social media tracking?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And conveniently for them, as Nick Cater points out, the Australian Electoral Commission doesn\u2019t classify environmental charities as \u201cpolitical\u201d even though the Greens are a party. That means the chumpy tree-huggers who don\u2019t mind chopping down trees for some kinds of industries \u2014 don\u2019t have to declare their donors. How convenient?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And so the positive feedback loop would roll on year after year \u2014 the more the market was rigged, the more the parasites could pay.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And the more it would appear our wilderness groups are industry fronts and our politicians serve someone else:<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"The<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Surely this is the most powerful interest group we\u2019ve ever seen?<\/a><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Nick Cater, The Australian<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

If WWF had accepted money from a mining billionaire, fossil fuel company or tobacco manufacturer, the woke media would have been on to it in a flash.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Australian registered environmental charities receive hundreds of millions in revenue each year. This tax-advantaged honey pot is fuelling the rapid expansion of ecological activism and lawfare, making it nearly impossible to open a new coalmine or drill for gas. As for nuclear, forget it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026we are left with only the vaguest impression of who is bankrolling the anti-nuclear cause by channelling funds through charities such as the ACF\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WWF received funds last year from the European Climate Foundation, one of Europe\u2019s biggest bankrollers of climate activism. Other organisations, such as the Queensland Conservation Council, receive money from the Sunrise Foundation, which originated in the US and is now registered as a charity in Australia. Sunrise Australia\u2019s income last year was an astounding $73.8m. The source of those funds is a mystery.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The activity of a group called Environmental Leadership Australia illustrates how this works. ELA, a registered charity based in Paddington, NSW, reported an income of $4.2m last year and handed out $1.5m in grants and donations. ELA has spawned a host of other charities, including Farmers for Climate Action, Veterinarians for Climate Action and Bushfire Survivors for Climate Action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet the renewable industry investors need Albanese to win. Lifting the ban on nuclear would send their portfolios into meltdown. Wind and solar generators would no longer be protected from competition from a form of technology that is not only carbon-free but actually works.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nick Cater is senior fellow of the Menzies Research Centre and a columnist with The Australian. He is a former editor of The Weekend Australian and a former deputy editor of The Sunday Telegraph. He is author of The Lucky Culture published by Harper Collins.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Imagine you were President Xi wanting to sell more slave made solar panels to Australia, to sabotage their grid<\/a> and force companies to move to China so you could steal their IP<\/a> and get them dependent on your supply lines? What stops that money filtering through a chain of philanthropists and into saboteurs hands? The ABC?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Image by Gordon Johnson<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n