{"id":369374,"date":"2025-03-10T17:11:00","date_gmt":"2025-03-10T16:11:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=369374"},"modified":"2025-03-10T17:11:03","modified_gmt":"2025-03-10T16:11:03","slug":"avarice-in-funderland","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=369374","title":{"rendered":"Avarice in Funderland"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

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

From Climate Scepticism<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By\u00a0Mark Hodgson<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Down the rabbit hole<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A few days ago, my attention was drawn to an\u00a0article<\/a>\u00a0headed \u201cThe UK\u2019s clean power mission: Delivering the prize<\/em>\u201d. Like so many of the pieces purporting to show the benefits (sic) and wisdom (sic) of Net Zero, it comes to a conclusion that I find to be scarcely credible:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK government can both achieve its Clean Power 2030 Mission and bring down electricity bills for households. Detailed modelling shows the government target of 95% clean power by 2030 is attainable, and will protect the UK from gas price volatility. If that is paired with the policy reforms in E3G\u2019s Electricity Bills Charter, billpayers could enjoy savings of over \u00a3200 a year by 2030.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I confess I hadn\u2019t previously heard of Third Generation Environmentalism (which is what E3G stands for). However, a quick look at the \u201cabout\u201d section of its website<\/a> left me in no doubt about its purpose:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our immediate priorities are clear. To build the climate politics and diplomacy needed to shape an ambitious new round of climate targets in 2025, to massively accelerate the energy transition to a clean economy, and to get financing where it matters for climate action through the transformation of the global financial architecture.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having established that the organisation is one that would inevitably produce a hopelessly optimistic report about the current UK government\u2019s even more hopelessly optimistic energy targets I then did what I always do in these cases \u2013 I looked at the section of the website<\/a> which tells me about their funders. They have been in existence for twenty years, and have at least 150 staff (including two co-CEOs, eight Associate Directors, numerous other directors, a Chief of Staff, and thirteen Programme Leads), so they must be well-funded. And while the section of their website listing their funders doesn\u2019t make us privy to the sums received from each of them, it\u2019s a list of funders that we sceptics \u2013 who do what we do for nothing \u2013 could only dream of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sixty-eight funders are listed, and so many of the familiar names are there, that it reads a bit like the inter-married Royal families of nineteenth century Europe. Let\u2019s take a look at them (as they appear on the E3G website, in alphabetical order):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

abrdn Financial Fairness Trust<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a> its objectives are the laudable ones of \u201cTackling financial problems, improving living standards<\/em>\u201d. They make it clear that this includes in respect of climate change, and we learn that in 2024 they granted \u00a3419,730 (over three years) to E3G for the following purpose:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research and policy work to ensure the transition to net zero enhances the financial well-being of low-to-middle income households \u2013 advocating for policies and investment in housing and the power system to help end fuel poverty, increase access to affordable energy, and reduce emissions.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think the words \u201cadvocating for policies\u201d say it all \u2013 the aim of organisations like E3G is to advocate for policies they already believe in, rather than to debate the wisdom of the policies. (Remember their first stated priority \u2013 \u201cTo build the climate politics and diplomacy needed to shape an ambitious new round of climate targets in 2025\u201d).<\/em> This substantial grant from abrdn Financial Fairness Trust isn\u2019t for the purpose of asking whether the transition to net zero is wise, or of asking whether it will make people worse off. Rather, the need for the policy is taken as a given, and instead E3G is tasked with advocating for three mutually inconsistent policy aims: \u201c\u2026 to help end fuel poverty, increase access to affordable energy, and reduce emissions<\/em>\u201d. Naturally E3G is happy to take the money and use it to write reports that say that these mutually inconsistent objectives are both consistent and achievable within the absurd timescales proposed by the current government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

adelphi<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

adelphi (yes, the name does start with a lower-case \u201ca\u201d) took me a little while to track down, but it turns out they are a German organisation whose website<\/a> describes them as \u201cEurope\u2019s leading independent think-and-do tank for climate, environment and development<\/em>\u201d. Moreover:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our 330 bright minds think systemically and work globally in six interconnected fields of action.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are visionaries, designers, strategists and agenda-setters, and work with governments, international organisations, municipalities, NGOs and private companies.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our mission: To enable transformative change and create a sustainable future for generations to come.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

330 of them, eh? You can read about the individuals here<\/a>. They must be well-funded too. Their website discloses 37 pages of international partners, including E3G. Despite a pretty impressive website telling us what they do, what they think and who they work with, I can\u2019t find links to accounts or details of funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Agence Fran\u00e7aise de D\u00e9veloppement (AFD)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps I should be wary about calling them the AFD \u2013 they\u2019re not Alternative f\u00fcr Deutschland, after all. Rather they:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026support\u2026 and accelerate\u2026 the transition to a fairer and more sustainable world. Focusing on climate, biodiversity, peace, education, urban development, health and governance, our teams carry out more than 4,200 projects in France\u2019s overseas departments and territories and another 150 countries.<\/em><\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2023 they spent (they prefer the word \u201cinvested\u201d) almost 12 billion euros towards achieving the UN\u2019s Sustainable Development Goals, and they are fairly candid<\/a> about where the money for this came from:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Approximately 85% of these resources were obtained through loans from banks and pension funds, while the remaining 15% came from public subsidies provided by the French government, the European Union, and other backers.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They are basically a subsidiary of the French government. 85% of the funding they provide to third parties is in the form of loans (some of which are \u201csoft\u201d loans). I could not find reference to funding they may have supplied to E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ashden<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They are a charity, and they describe themselves<\/a> thus: \u201cClimate Solutions in Action<\/em> Accelerating the most exciting climate innovators\u201d.<\/em> As a charity, they rely on and encourage individual donations (\u201cTo prevent climate catastrophe, we need to get to work. Donate today and help us build a low-carbon future<\/em>\u201d), and if you do send them some money they say you will \u201cjoin a community of generous supporters backing innovation that cuts emissions while boosting incomes and wellbeing, reducing inequality, and regenerating nature. Together, we can go faster to reach a zero-carbon <\/em>world\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to their Report & Accounts<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The aims of Ashden are to contribute to the protection of the environment, the advancement of education and relief of poverty for the public benefit in developing countries, UK and elsewhere, by promoting the use of local sustainable and renewable energy sources. Ashden will do this through: \u2022 Raising awareness of the significant social, economic and environmental benefits that renewable energy and energy efficiency can deliver. These include the significant social and economic benefits of increasing energy access to the poor in the developing world; increasing jobs and reducing fuel poverty in the UK and the environmental benefits of reducing carbon emissions. \u2022 Spreading the knowledge and expertise of the Ashden Award winners to encourage learning and replication. \u2022 Encouraging policy makers, NGOs and other funders, to incorporate sustainable energy into their agendas. \u2022 Generating publicity, making financial awards and giving business support to outstanding enterprises and programmes which are environmentally and socially beneficial.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There it is again \u2013 the lobbying: encourage \u201csustainable energy\u201d into the agendas of policy makers, NGOs and other funders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They doubled their income in 2023, and expanded their campaign supporting UK schools to be zero carbon by 2030 \u2013 made possible by another funder, Green Future Investments Ltd<\/a> (GFI). They committed a 3 year \u00a310 million \u201cinvestment\u201d for this. GFI are slightly coy about their<\/strong> funding, but they do say they are part of a \u00a320million fund. They have also \u201cselected Zero Carbon Capital as a partner who share a vision of saving the planet by investing in positive climate action\u201d. <\/em>But now we\u2019re going down a very big rabbit hole. Back to Ashden. They have made grants of between \u00a310,000 and \u00a325,000 and (another rabbit hole) they have been \u201crunning awards in partnership with established funders: LinkedIn, UK Government, Impax Asset Management, Linbury Trust, JAC Trust, Alan and Babette Charitable Fund and Garfield Weston Foundation. Other awards built new partnerships: with Integrate to Zero and Lund Trust<\/em>.\u201d The UK government chipping in taxpayers\u2019 money there. We\u2019ll come across them again later. Later on in the Report & Accounts we obtain more details of Ashden\u2019s funders:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 2023, the Trustees were delighted to have support from The Aurora Trust, B4Box, Barrow Cadbury Trust, Calouste Gulbekian Foundation, City Bridge Trust, Climate Crisis Foundation, Climate Emergency Collaboration Group (a sponsored project of Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors), the Department for Energy Strategy and Net Zero (formerly the Department for Business, Energy and Industry Strategy), Esm\u00e9e Fairbairn Foundation, The Flora Fund, Green Futures Investment Limited, JAC Trust, The John Ellerman Foundation, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, Kasuma Trust, The Linbury Trust, Lund Trust, The Mark Leonard Trust, MCS Charitable Trust, NextEnergy Foundation, OVO Foundation, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, The Sustainable Development Foundation, The Tedworth Charitable Trust, the UN Institute of Training and Research and The Waterloo Foundation.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Aurora Trust and the Linbury Trust appear to have been among the largest donors, though of course the biggest donor of all was GFI (above). They were also \u201csupported by the BBC Radio 4 Appeal for the 2023 Humanitarian Energy award<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Without seeking to deprecate the work of charity employees, it\u2019s worth noting that working for charities doesn\u2019t always involve great personal financial sacrifice. In 2023 five members of staff received more than \u00a360,000 in salary plus taxable benefits, excluding pension contributions). One of those received \u00a380,001-\u00a390,000 and another received \u00a390,0001 to \u00a3100,000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ausw\u00e4rtiges Amt<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the German Foreign Office. According to E3G\u2019s website, they are an E3G partner (and presumably funder) but it is virtually impossible to ascertain how much money they receive from this source.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This probably needs no introduction. According to its website<\/a>, the Gates\u2019 transferred $20 billion of stock to the Foundation, and Warren Buffett has also donated a significant part of his foundation, with the result that since 2000 it has disbursed $53.8 billion. The website says it doesn\u2019t fund \u201c[p]olitical campaigns and legislative lobbying efforts\u201d, which I\u2019m pleased to see. I don\u2019t know how that fits in with them being described as a funder of or partner to E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Breakthrough Energy<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At Breakthrough Energy, we are committed to supporting new technologies that change the way we live, eat, work, travel, and make things so we can avoid the most devastating impacts of climate change. We believe that funding cutting-edge research; investing in new clean technologies as they evolve from idea to commercial adoption; crafting smart, tailored, and scalable energy policies; and forging deep partnerships among policymakers, innovators, and industry leaders will lead to positive solutions that can bring clean energy to all.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its board and investors include some familiar names, such as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg and Richard Branson. There is certainly emphasis on lobbying for what they want. Its:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

U.S. Policy and Advocacy (USPA) team develops, advocates, and lobbies for smart policies that public- and private-sector leaders can implement to get to zero by 2050\u2026<\/em>In addition to our work with lawmakers, the USPA team works closely with diverse climate-action partners, private-sector allies<\/em>\u2026Together we are working to ensure policymakers are prioritizing investments in the next generation of clean-energy technologies that will create good-paying jobs, strengthen American leadership abroad, and help us achieve net-zero emissions in this generation.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I cannot find out explicit details of their funding, though they have plenty of wealthy supporters. Nor can I discover how much they have given to E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bristol City Council<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, Bristol City Council really does feature on the funders and partners page of the E3G website. It\u2019s certainly one of the more climate-obsessed of the UK Councils (and that\u2019s saying something), with a 2025 \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d target. That\u2019s a target that it\u2019s going to miss, according to the BBC<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A city council is set to miss its 2025 carbon neutral target because it is still burning too much gas.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bristol City Council, which declared a \u201cclimate emergency\u201d four years ago, is forecast to emit almost 1,700 tonnes of carbon in 2028.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A cabinet report says it is because many buildings on the council\u2019s estate are still burning large amounts of gas.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Councillors have now signed off on plans to renew the authority\u2019s gas supply contract for another four years\u2026<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026This includes the council spending an extra premium of \u00a3546,000 on \u201cgreen gas\u201d, which is allegedly better for the climate than normal natural gas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Writing on the mayor\u2019s blog, Labour Councillor Kye Dudd, cabinet member for climate, said the council\u2019s direct emissions of greenhouse gases had halved over the past eight years.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But he added that the programme to get to carbon neutral was now in the \u201ctoughest phase.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe\u2019re now into the phase of the programme that we always knew would be the toughest to deliver and have taken the steps necessary, such as the formation of Bristol City Leap, to have the tools available to meet our target of being a carbon neutral council by the end of 2025,\u201d he said.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to another BBC report<\/a> (and this is where this sort of thing gets interesting):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ameresco is an American firm hired by the council in a \u00a3424m deal known as Bristol City Leap in 2022 to orchestrate the council\u2019s transition away from fossil fuels<\/em>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\u2019s a lot of money being spent on all this stuff. I\u2019m far from convinced that it\u2019s being spent wisely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

bulb<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another lower case company, but this time the E3G website should be updated. The outfit in question is Bulb Energy, which was acquired by Octopus Energy in 2022. This followed on from it getting into financial difficluties in September 2021, ironically because it claimed its problems were caused by rising gas prices (the irony being that it claimed to provide electricity and gas from renewable or off-set sources). If it was giving money to E3G, perhaps that wasn\u2019t its wisest move. Perhaps OFGEM should have monitored its activities a bit more closely on our behalf too. When it got into financial difficulties, the UK government set aside \u00a31.7 billion to cover the company\u2019s trading costs and the cost of the administration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Center for Global Development<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is another well-meaning outfit that seeks to influence policy-makers. According to its website<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Impact can take many forms\u2014from shaping the academic consensus to turning proposals into policy\u2026.We have also helped to change global policies and practices\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The only reference I can find on its website<\/a> to E3G is this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Join the Center for Global Development and E3G for a comprehensive discussion on the IMF\u2019s role in the climate issues confronting its emerging market and developing member countries.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some stakeholders have advocated for the IMF to \u201cstay in its lane\u201d \u2013 but what exactly does this mean? How should IMF surveillance, lending, and technical assistance contribute to assisting developing country authorities in progressing on climate-related fronts?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Panelists will delve into the multifaceted role of the IMF concerning climate-related matters. Questions surrounding the IMF\u2019s adherence to its role and responsibilities, especially in navigating the macroeconomic and financial impacts of climate change and the green transition, will be explored.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Founded in 1962, it pre-dates all thought of a \u201cclimate crisis\u201d. It has over 250 employees and annual revenues and expenses in excess of $40 million. It has caught up with the climate change money-go-round since 1962 and says<\/a> \u201cCSIS research focuses on strategies to address global climate change trends and manage its increasingly disruptive impacts.<\/em>\u201d It has co-written with E3G a briefing titled \u201cA Roadmap for World Bank Evolution<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chatham House<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It describes itself<\/a> as \u201ca world-leading policy institute with a mission to help governments and societies build a sustainably secure, prosperous and just world.<\/em>\u201d It is registered as a charity. As regards its funding, it says simply that it benefits from a wide range of philanthropic, research-related and membership support. Founded in 1920, it now claims to have six research priorities. Perhaps inevitably, realising sustainability talks about \u201cDetermining the risks and setting out the pathways to sustainable transitions in energy, land, forests and food, and how we can adapt the global economy to a low carbon world.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The whole climate change aspect appears in some of the other priority areas too \u2013 for instance, the three papers that appear under the heading \u201cReinvigorating Multilateralism\u201d all talk about climate and climate change and the heading \u201cThe UK\u2019s role in the world\u201d begins with a paper discussing an agenda for UK-China climate co-operation. And so it goes on. E3G features on the Chatham House website<\/a> with a co-authored paper titled \u201cClimate risk management for international organisations\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Children\u2019s Investment Fund Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This will be another familiar name to those who take an interest in this sort of thing. It\u2019s difficult to argue against an \u201cindependent philanthropic organisation\u2026seeking to transform the lives of children and adolescents.<\/em>\u201d The problem, however, is that they seem to see their work through the lens of climate change. They earnestly tell us:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are committed to reducing our carbon footprint in line with best practice guidelines and regulation. As part of our grant-making activities, we provide philanthropic support to the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) which provides authoritative guidance to companies and other organisations on how to address their climate impact. We similarly provide philanthropic support to the Integrity Council for Voluntary Carbon Markets (ICVCM) which provides authoritative guidance on the quality of carbon credits. As an organisation, we commit to:

1. Independently measure our emissions

2. Take action to reduce our carbon footprint

3. Purchase carbon credits as a contribution to a global net zero goal (in purchasing these credits, we do not make any \u201ccarbon neutral\u201d claim or similar that might imply a net reduction in our carbon footprint).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They are an enormously rich organisation and they have massive multi-year grant commitments (this year to the tune of \u00a31.709 billion). I find it strange that an organisation aimed at transforming the lives of children and adolescents has chosen to make grants of $808.6 million in respect of climate change, compared to $435.5 million for child health and development; $349.3 million for sexual & reporductive health & rights; $98.3 million for girl capital; just $18.4 million for child protection; and $8.6 million for \u201ccross-cutting\u201d. I don\u2019t know what cross-cutting is, but I know (because they tell me) that it includes $1 million for tackling online disinformation and another $1 million on \u201cstorytelling for social impact\u201d (which is obviously very different to online disinformation).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

climate:imperative<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is an organisation I hadn\u2019t previously heard of. It seems to have around 50 senior (\u201cteam\u201d) employees. One of those is its president, Sonia Aggarwal, whose short biography on the website says:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026Prior to her work at Climate Imperative, Sonia served as Special Assistant to the President for Climate Policy, Innovation, and Deployment in the Biden administration. While there, she helped develop the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as well as the United States\u2019 climate targets, including the commitment to cut economy-wide greenhouse gases by 50-52 percent below 2005 levels in 2030\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of course, there is nothing wrong with that, but it is an illustration of the way in which climate-concerned organisations have access at the very highest levels to promote the policies they seek to impose on the res of us.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a> \u201cClimate Imperative Foundation provides funding, technical support, and expertise to inform the most important climate policy decisions in major-emitting countries around the world.<\/em>\u201d It appears that shaping policy is important to them:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Policy decisions that will be made over the next five years will determine if we win or lose on climate. By partnering with experienced organizations, Climate Imperative aims to ensure these critical decisions drive emissions reductions and secure a safe climate future.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Personally I am uneasy as to the number of organisations busy lobbying and seeking to influence policy behind the scenes. Shouldn\u2019t government policy be the result of a manifesto voted on by electors at regular elections?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s clear that they dispense grants to a large number of organisations, one of whom is presumably E3G. They provide six examples on their website, and one of the beneficiaries is the European Climate Foundation. As we will see below, they in turn help to fund E3G. It really is a massive money-go-round.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate-KIC<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a>, Climate-KIC is \u201cEurope\u2019s leading climate innovation agency and community<\/em>\u201d. Further:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Together with our partners, we generate, implement and integrate climate solutions by mobilising finance, testing business models, and opening pathways for institutional change and behavioural change.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It has forged handy links with the European Institute of Innovation & Technology (EIT), which is a body of the European Union. And when I say handy links, I mean handy links:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Over 15 years, we received EUR 720 million in funding and strategic guidance from EIT. In 2025, our original partnership with the EIT reached the end of its cycle and we move into a new chapter in our history.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate KIC relaunched as a not-for-profit foundation and signed a Memorandum of Cooperation with EIT, solidifying our continued collaboration to boost climate innovation in Europe and beyond.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This evolution of Climate KIC\u2019s structure and relationship with EIT strengthens our unique position and work around the world as we advise and collaborate with intergovernmental organisations, UN agencies, EU institutions, national and regional governments, cities, corporate companies, startups, civil society organisations, research powerhouses and leading universities.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I do not know how much money, if any, they have passed to E3G, but I did find this on their website:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate KIC is teaming up with The Club of Rome, in partnership with ETC\/SystemIQ, We Mean Business and E3G, for a high-level roundtable about developing a climate emergency toolkit for cities.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

ClimateWorks Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Looking at the website<\/a> of this fabulously wealthy Foundation, one really does disappear down the rabbit hole. They have too many funders to mention, but I urge you to look at them here<\/a>. Many familiar names will be identified, and indeed some of them feature below as funders of E3G. So well-funded are they, that they have made more than 2,800 grants to more than 850 grantees, to the tune of more than $2 billion since 2008. In 2024 alone they paid out $244.5 million.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Environment and Climate Change Canada<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a Canadian government body. From its website<\/a> I learn that \u201cCanada co-leads the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) alongside the UK, with the goal of accelerating the transition from coal to clean energy.<\/em>\u201d And this is where we find the link (or, possibly, one of several links) to E3G:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Canada and the PPCA have established partnerships with 15 influential organizations from civil society (Bloomberg Philanthropies, Carbon Tracker, E3G<\/strong>, the Pembina Institute, and the Rocky Mountain Institute) and the financial sector (such as BloombergNEF, Ceres, Climate Investment Funds, and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development). Through these partnerships, the PPCA is working to increase the networks and resources available to support its members. <\/em>[My emphasis].<\/p>\n\n\n\n

European Climate Initiative (EUKI)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This was set up by the German government in 2017. It disburses German taxpayers\u2019 money as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We fund selected projects that promote cross-border climate action in Europe. Funding of between 120,000 and 1 Million euros will be awarded per project, following a Europe-wide call for project ideas that we put out every year.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It appears they are currently supporting 232 \u201cclimate projects\u201d. Take a look at the relevant page of the website<\/a>. Each one seems to receive a substantial 6-figure sum (I haven\u2019t yet spotted one so badly done to as to receive only the minimum 120,000 euros mentioned above). One quick example \u2013 there are so many others \u2013 Implementation of the EU Reforms on Retail Investing for the Green Transition<\/a> received precisely \u20ac613,873.85.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The UK Government<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I appreciate that this appears to be out of alphabetical order. However, I am lumping together three<\/strong> of the UK government\u2019s departments who all, apparently, fund or otherwise partner with E3G. Ladies and gentleman, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer next mentions a black hole in the nation\u2019s finances, feel free to ask why the Department for International Development, the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy and the Foreign & Commonwealth Office are involved with (and presumably funding) E3G (and many others \u2013 see below).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

International Energy Charter<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The International Energy Charter is a declaration of political intention aiming at strengthening energy cooperation between the signatory states and which does not bear any legally binding obligation or financial commitment.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Naturally, the UK is a signatory. Its website is here<\/a>. I cannot immediately ascertain its relevance to E3G, but I include it for the sake of completeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Esm\u00e9e Fairbairn Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This has been in existence for more than 60 years. In that time it has provided grants in excess of \u00a31 billion, including \u00a348.8 million in 2024. They do a lot of good, but they are right up there<\/a> with the climate concerned. Presumably E3G has received funding from them (many climate organisations seem to do so) but I haven\u2019t been able to establish that this is definitely the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Efficient Buildings Europe (EuroACE)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We learn from the European Commission website<\/a> that \u201cEuroACE works together with the EU institutions to help Europe move towards a more efficient and sustainable use of energy in buildings.<\/em>\u201d In itself, of course, that is perfectly laudable, though once more we are left wondering how much of the EU\u2019s money is being diverted to the blob. According to its own website<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The mission of Efficient Buildings Europe is to work together with the EU institutions to help the EU to move towards a more efficient use of energy in buildings, thereby creating an efficient, decarbonised, and flexible building stock that actively contributes to the achievement of Europe\u2019s commitments on climate change, energy security, and economic growth.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Probably the genuflection towards decarbonisation and climate change is genuine, but I suspect it also helps to loosen the EU\u2019s purse strings towards this think tank. Their website asks why you would join them. Among the answers is one that we are seeing with increasing regularity:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Get access to EU policymakers, both at political and expert levels, within the European Commission, Parliament and the Council<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once more, from the point of view of democracy, I am left with an uncomfortable feeling about this sort of thing. Besides that, what\u2019s the link to E3G? A small one, in this case, I think. I found only this reference on their website:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Europe\u2019s struggling bid to rein back energy wastage in the building sector could be boosted by a renovations directive implemented under a new Directorate-General for Resource Efficiency, says the sustainable energy think tank E3G.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m guessing (admittedly without evidence) that some EU money found its way to E3G via Efficient Buildings Europe to help fund the writing of that report.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

European Union<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The issue of European Union for the likes of E3G is a massive topic, probably deserving of an article in its own right. We know that huge amounts of EU money is diverted towards the \u201cgreen\u201d blob. E3G\u2019s website includes a simple EU flag among its list of partners and funders. Without sight of more detail, I assume that simply means that EU funding finds its way to E3G. Next to it is another EU flag with the letters EUD. So far as I can see, this stands for European Union of the Deaf, or it may be Europa-Union Deutschland. In the absence of clarity, I am moving rapidly on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

European Climate Foundation (ECF)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Anyone familiar with the world of the \u201cgreen\u201d blob will be well used to seeing the name European Climate Foundation. Their fingerprints are everywhere. Their website<\/a> (https:\/\/europeanclimate.org\/<\/a>) makes it clear from the outset what they are about \u2013 \u201c\u201dEmpowering people across society to create a net-zero world<\/em>\u201d. Despite all the evidence we are seeing, based on barely scratching the surface (by looking at the funders of E3G), to the effect that the \u201cgreen\u201d blob has access to masses of cash and privileged access to policy-makers at national and EU levels, ECF would have you believe that they are the financial equivalent of David trying to fight the mighty Goliath of fossil fuel companies. Having tried to plead (relative) poverty they then go on to thank some of their funders, and in this case I will list them. Some of the names should by now be very familiar \u2013 Rockefeller Brothers Fund; McCall MacBain; Bloomberg Philanthropies; William & Flora Hewlett Foundation; Children\u2019s Investment Fund Foundation; IKEA Foundation; National Postcode Loterij; Growald Family Fund; KR Foundation; climate:imperative; Stiftung Mercator; Grantham Foundation; Porticus; Hightide Foundation; Laudes Foundation; AKO Foundation; Climateworks Foundation; Ballmer Group; Sequoia Climate Foundation; Robert Bosch Stiftung; Arcadia; Montpelier & Hampshire Foundations; Oak Foundation; and Quadrature Climate Foundation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having received money from all of the above (some of which are massively wealthy and disburse huge sums of money every year), ECF then sets about disbursing funds itself:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since 2008, we have provided strategic and financial support to hundreds of partner organisations working at the national, European and global levels to tackle the climate crisis.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They then say:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are proud to work with over 700 partners in Europe and beyond. Below you will find a selection of our current partner organisations.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There follows a list<\/a> that looks a bit like the list of funders of E3G, but this time E3G is listed as a recipient of funds (which makes sense, and which squares that particular circle). There are lots of other familiar names among the list, including our old friends CarbonBrief, Climate Action Network Europe, ClientEarth, WWF and Climate Analytics. Next time you see a report or study from any of these organisations, gleefully pushed by the BBC or the Guardian as being an \u201cindependent\u201d report or study, remind yourself who funds them, why, and ask yourself just how independent and reliable their work is.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is another arm of the German government. I shall therefore say no more about it, save to notice that, just like the UK government, several departments are keen to fund the likes of E3G to do their bidding (a bidding which isn\u2019t necessarily in the best interests of their electorates).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Frederick Mulder Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just like so many of the foundations set up by philanthropists who wish to use some of their business fortunes (in this case from Frederick Mulder\u2019s business in European printmaking) to do good, there is much here to applaud. Inevitably, however, the first thing it focuses on is \u201cthe threat of climate change\u201d<\/em> (sic). You can find a long list of recipients of the foundation\u2019s climate-related funds here<\/a>. They include a lot of familiar names (the Climate Coalition, Greenpeace, Coal Action Network, European Climate Foundation, etc, etc) but for current purposes, I note that E3G (UK) has received \u00a3116,500 to date, while E3G (Berlin) has received \u00a320,000.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Friedrich Naumann Stiftung<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the Friedrich Naumann Foundation for Freedom. It seeks to offer political education at home and abroad. I can\u2019t find any reference to E3G, but sections of its website are devoted to climate and energy, and there you can find things such as: \u201cThe challenges of climate change are omnipresent and affect all areas of life and the entire world.<\/em>\u201d In the scheme of things, this looks like a small player in the world of climate finance, so I will move on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

GEFA<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is a GEFA bank and a GEFA manufacturing company. It\u2019s probably the latter, since its website says things like \u201cWe aim to achieve CO2 neutrality at our Dortmund site by 2030. Our goal is the continuous improvement of operational environmental protection and the avoidance of environmental pollution<\/em>\u201d and \u201cHeating is one of the main causes of global CO2 emissions. This is why we switched our heating system to efficient and environmentally friendly as well as CO2-neutral green gas at the end of 2020.\u201d However, as I can find no obvious reference to E3G, I will move rapidly on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

GIZ<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is short for the Deutsche Gesellschaft f\u00fcr Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH, which is a German development agency. It appears to have over 25,000 employees worldwide, and to do annual business in excess of four billion euros, with around 1,700 ongoing projects. It\u2019s website is another rabbit warren, but by way of example, I find them involved in the Energising Development programme, which was commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) in a multi-donor partnership with the Netherlands Directorate-General for International Cooperation (DGIS), the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)and funded by lots of our old favourites, such as the IKEA Foundation and (of course) the UK taxpayer in the form of the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office. It\u2019s also funded by USAID (or, at least, it was), so I wonder how that\u2019s working out. They seem inordinately proud of the CO2 emissions they claim to have saved through their work. I can\u2019t find any reference to E3G, so again I move on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good Energies Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a> \u201cGood Energies Foundation is a Swiss-based philanthropic organisation funding initiatives that work to reverse the impact of climate change in two key areas: access to clean energy and protection of tropical forests.<\/em>\u201d They say they have offices in 12 countries, have been in existence for 30 years, and have partners in over 65 countries. They don\u2019t make unsolicited grants, so presumably E3G is a partner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Growald Family Fund<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The above fund is so named on the E3G website, but a visit to the fund\u2019s website<\/a> reveals that it is now called the Growald Climate Fund, and its website commences by telling us that \u201cClimate change is one of the most critical issues facing humanity today<\/em>\u201d We need have no doubts, then, about its focus. Two of its Growald family board members have the middle name Rockefeller, so I guess we can work out where some of the money has come from. It has a couple of dozen senior employees, and a list of past and present grantees can be found here<\/a>. They include the likes of Climate Voice and Carbon Tracker Initiative, but I can\u2019t spot E3G. Having said that, the featured list purports to show only some<\/strong> of those who have received or are received funding, so that doesn\u2019t rule out E3G as having been a beneficiary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Green Finance Institute<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Formed in 2019, it claims to be \u201can independent advisor to governments. We test, demonstrate, and scale the financial solutions needed to accelerate the transition to a net-zero and nature positive economy.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet again, I am sceptical as to such claims to independence. Another section of their website<\/a> shows that they receive funding from the UK government (naturally), the City of London, Quadrature Climate Foundation, Laudes Foundation, Esm\u00e9e Fairbairn Foundation, MCS Charitable Foundation, Amalgamated Bank, the Climate Change Collaboration, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, LTPP Foundation, and the European Union (equally naturally, as the EU is a co-founder of the Green Finance Institute). 48 employees are shown with individual biographies on their website. I can\u2019t find reference to E3G, but presumably they do work with them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Heinrich B\u00f6ll Stiftung<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Heinrich B\u00f6ll Foundationdescribes itself as \u201cpart of the Green political movement that has developed worldwide as a response to the traditional politics of socialism, liberalism, and conservatism. Our main tenets are ecology and sustainability, democracy and human rights, self-determination and justice<\/em>\u2026\u201d and they maintain close ties to the German Green Party. They are part of an international network with more than 100 partner projects in approximately 60 countries. It launched a Green Academy in 1999. A search of its website produces 11 articles co-written by the Foundation and by E3G. I have not been able to ascertain the source(s) of its funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

William & Flora Hewlett Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is an organisation that merits an article in its own right, so omnipresent is it when it comes to funding for organisations pushing the climate crisis narrative. Its website<\/a> opens with the stark words \u201cMoving from commitment to action on climate \u2013 Our updated Global Climate strategy remains committed to ensuring a sustainable and equitable transition to a low-carbon economy.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Examples of its <\/em>largesse include a $3.5 million grant to the Climate Works Foundation \u201cfor support of U.S. Foreign economic policy for global green insustrial policy<\/em>\u201c; <\/em>numerous grants to the European Climate Foundation ($1,930,000 \u201cfor Global Strategic Climate Communications and climate finance disclosure; <\/em>$875,000 for \u201cClimate Voices and accelerating climate action through evidence-based strategic communications<\/em>\u201d; $500,000 for \u201cTara\u2019s Climate Finance Program<\/em>\u201d; and $250,000 for \u201cChina-European climate action<\/em>\u201d; $8,650,000 for \u201cEuropean climate mitigation strategy<\/em>\u201d; $500,000 for \u201cthe International Climate Politics Hub<\/em>\u201d; $1,000,000 for \u201cGlobal Strategic Climate Communications<\/em>\u201d; and a staggering $32,998,000 for \u201cEuropean climate change mitigation<\/em>\u201d );<\/em> $500,000 to Climate Central \u201cfor scaling climate communications by developing a Climate News Engine<\/em>\u201d; $1,000,000 to Climate Policy Initiative for \u201cthe Climate Finance Program<\/em>\u201d and another $1,000,000 for \u201cglobal climate finance and policy infrastructure<\/em>\u201d;<\/em> $350,478 to the African Climate Foundation for \u201cscoping and institutional building for China-Africa climate engagement<\/em>\u201d; $800,000 to Tufts University for \u201cthe Climate Policy Lab to sponsor scholars and interns from China and the Global South to engage in climate policy work<\/em>\u201d; and thousands more. I haven\u2019t yet found any grants to E3G, but I suppose there probably are some, and the problem is simply that the database of grants is so huge. However, you get the picture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ICF<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Founded in 1969 as Inner City Fund to finance minority-owned businesses in Washington D.C it has grown substantially, and has clearly done much valuable philanthropic work. In 2014 it reached $1 billion in revenue, and just seven years later its revenue had increased by more than 50% to $1.55 billion. In that same year it also launched the ICF Climate Center to offer research and insights for a sustainable, low-emissions future, and it claims to have been carbon neutral since 2006. It was founded as a venture capital firm, and is today listed on NASDAQ, so unusally for this list, it isn\u2019t a charity or a philanthropic foundation. I haven\u2019t established the link to E3G either, but I suppose there must be one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

International Institute for Environment and Development<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It describes itself as \u201can independent research organisation that delivers positive change on a global scale<\/em>\u201d and a huge section of its website<\/a> is devoted to climate change. They say:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We work alongside over 350 partners in more than 60 countries to generate evidence and build capacity in order to drive change in policy and practice.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There it is again \u2013 that desire to influence policy, rather than simply to take action in the field.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

E3G is one of those 350 partners, and a quick search of the website reveals 13 references to events hosted by E3G, co-hosted by them and by E3G, organised, facilitated, or supported by E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Konrad Adenauer Stiftung<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Knorad Adenauer Foundation is a broadly political foundation, describing itself as a national and international thinktank, which is financed primarily from public funds (\u201clike other political foundations<\/em>\u201d, it says, so maybe that\u2019s how things work in Germany). Its website doesn\u2019t seem overly concerned about climate change, but insert the search term \u201cclimate\u201d and 317 results are returned. Insert E3G, and three results are produced \u2013 basically discussions of the US Inflation Reduction Act. In the scheme of things, it\u2019s probably safe to say that this Foundation is peripheral to the activities of E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

KR Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unlike the last organisation, this Foundation wears its climate heart on its sleeve: \u201cSupporting a rapid phase-out of fossil fuels<\/em>\u201d. More than that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We find ourselves in a climate crisis caused by human-made greenhouse gas emissions. It is one of the greatest and most urgent threats humanity and our planet have ever faced. We are currently not on track to mitigate this crisis.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It doesn\u2019t accept unsolicited grant applications, but it does disburse grants. In 2024 it made 102 grants to a value of 166 million Danish krone (the number of grants made and their value seems to be increasing every year). As for the basis on which grants are made:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

KR Foundation engages in non-profit activities with positive impacts on our climate and environment, and support projects where neither governments nor market actors seem to have incentives to act.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their annual reports are written in Danish, so I will move on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Laudes Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Launched in 2020, Laudes Foundation supports brave action to inspire and challenge industry and business transition to advance a green, fair and inclusive economy. We tackle climate change, nature and biodiversity loss, and social inequality.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is the connection to E3G? Well, the Laudes Foundation and the Green Finance Institute have forged a funding partnership focused on accelerating the market for financing a net-zero carbon built environment. The funding and strategic support from Laudes will focus on the work of the Green Finance Institute\u2019s flagship Coalition for the Energy Efficiency of Buildings (CEEB). In turn, CEEB was established by the Green Finance Institute, with support from E3G, as its flagship coalition in December 2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LIFE<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is yet another EU organisation, being the EU\u2019s funding instrument for the environment and climate action. It invites applications for funding from public or private legal entities registered in the EU or an overseas country or territory linked to it; third countries associated to the LIFE programme; and legal entities created under Union law or any international organisation. I haven\u2019t been able to establish just how much money is available to be disbursed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

London Sustainable Development Commission<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is a creature of the London Mayor:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The London Sustainable Development Commission was established in 2002 to advise the Mayor of London on making London a \u2018sustainable world city\u2019.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its mission includes advising \u201cthe Mayor to help ensure London reaches the 2030 net zero carbon target in a just and sustainable way<\/em>\u201d. Its objectives include tackling the causes and impacts of climate change \u2013 good luck with that! (page 3 here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m not sure what the connection to E3G is, but it\u2019s all part of a theme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ministerie van Economische Zaken en Klimaat<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is basically the Ministry of Economic Affairs of the government of the Netherlands. I\u2019m not surprised to see it being claimed as a partner or supporter by E3G \u2013 it probably is, though I haven\u2019t been able to establish the link. As with the governments of most developed countries, it\u2019s concerned about climate change and \u201ccarbon\u201d (of course, they mean CO2 and other greenhouse gases). A quick glance at its website<\/a> shows links to articles on things like the second High-Level Roundtable of the International Hydrogen Trade Forum and the Hydrogen Council hosted by Minister Jetten in The Netherlands; The Netherlands, France, the Czech Republic and Ireland call for a European policy package on sustainable carbon in the chemical industry; and five northern European countries ([including the Netherlands] conclude international arrangements on transport and storage of carbon across borders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As with France, Germany, the UK and the Netherlands, so with Denmark, so it seems. A look at the Ministry\u2019s website<\/a> shows it to be much more concerned these days with Ukraine and the problems of Russia and President Trump, but last year the climate was apparently higher on its list of priorities. Less than a year ago it was proudly telling us:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the occasion of Bill Gates visiting Denmark today, the Minister for Development Cooperation and Global Climate Policy, Dan J\u00f8rgensen and Bill Gates signed an agreement setting out the direction for a stronger and expanded partnership between Denmark and the Gates Foundation advance solutions in areas such as global health, climate adaptation and gender equality.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Searching the website for references to E3G, I found one result, which linked to \u201cDenmark\u2019s support to UN Environment Programme Cool Coalition<\/em>\u201d. E3G is listed as a stakeholder in the programme.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

MISTRA<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research. With offices in Africa, Asia, Latin America, USA, Oxford, York and Tallinn, it focuses on many strategic areas. Inevitably one of those areas is climate. A number of projects are ongoing in this area, but the one that caught my eye, simply because it seems to be the most surreal, is one headed \u201cStrategic vision for Ukraine\u2019s green transition: paving the path through collaboration with Sweden<\/em>\u201d. One might have thought that Ukraine had other pressing issues just now, but they are airily brushed aside here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026By integrating green strategies now, Ukraine will continue to attract international support and investments, create jobs, and reduce its dependency on fossil fuels, thereby enhancing national security\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026In line with this vision, significant progress has been made with the adoption of the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) and other essential legislation, establishing a general framework for the country\u2019s climate policy. Currently, Ukraine is developing a comprehensive long-term low-emission development strategy. The GTO plays a critical role in supporting the government with the effective implementation of the National Energy and Climate Plan, the Climate Law, and other strategic documents linked to green transition.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A search of its website for E3G produces 45 references. Here\u2019s just one:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 2023 Production Gap Report: <\/em>\u201cPhasing down or phasing up? Top fossil fuel producers plan even more extraction despite climate promises\u201d <\/em>is produced by Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), Climate Analytics, <\/em>E3G<\/strong><\/em>, International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP). It assesses\u202fgovernments\u2019 planned and projected production of coal, oil, and gas against global levels consistent with the Paris Agreement\u2019s temperature\u202fgoal.<\/em> [My emphasis].<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is much more in similar vein.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oak Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is yet another foundation whose name will be familiar to those who investigate the funding arrangements of climate lobby groups. It was founded in 1983, has its main office in Geneva, national programmes located in Brazil, India, Denmark and Zimbabwe, and a presence in the UK and the USA. It does much good work, but it has a significant focus on climate change (or \u201cenvironment\u201d) as its website<\/a> puts it \u2013 \u201c\u2026Today, the place we call home is under threat. We face a climate emergency\u2026<\/em>\u201d. In 2024 alone, the Foundation made 57 grants totalling $63.8 million (so far as I can see that is under the environment head alone, but it isn\u2019t totally, clear, and I might be wrong). They celebrate stories such as the closure of the UK\u2019s last coal-fired power plant. A search of the website hasn\u2019t revealed any references to E3G, but I would be surprised if they haven\u2019t either received a grant from, or done some work in conjunction with, the Oak Foundation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Open Society Foundations<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As their website<\/a> says:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world\u2019s largest private funder of independent groups working for rights, equity, and justice.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their work breaks down under four heads, one of which (\u201cFuture Worlds\u201d) talks about the \u201cclimate emergency\u201d (sic). We learn that they have disbursed $23 billion to date, of which $1.745 billion was disbursed in 2023. Every year, they make thousands of grants. I cannot find an explicit reference to E3G, but as with the Oak Foundation, I\u2019m confident that E3G has either received a grant from, or worked with, the Open Society Foundations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Powering Past Coal Alliance<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its website tells us that it is \u201ca coalition of national and subnational governments, businesses and organisations working to advance the transition from unabated coal power generation to clean [sic] energy<\/em>\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its members include numerous national governments, including (inevitably) the UK (joined in 2017 \u2013 indeed, together with the Canadian government, set it up at COP23), subnational governments, including (inevitably) the Scottish and Welsh governments (both joined in 2018) and organisations. From a UK point of view, it\u2019s interesting to note that these include NatWest, Lloyds Bank, Legal & General, SSE, Scottish Power (who are, of course, Spanish), National Grid, National Grid ESO, Drax, Marks & Spencer, Unliver, Virgin, abrdn, the Church of England Pensions Board, Central Finance Board of the Methodist Chuch, Church Commissioners of England, AXA Investment Managers, Aviva and BT.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their partners include many of the usual suspects (Bloomberg Philanthropies, Carbon Tacker Initiative, Climate Investments Funds) and E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Proteus Fund<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its website<\/a> (https:\/\/www.proteusfund.org\/about\/<\/a>) tells us:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Proteus Fund partners with foundations, individual donors, activists, and other allies to work strategically towards racial, gender, queer, and disability justice and an inclusive, fully-representative democracy. We curate an ecosystem of mutually reinforcing, aligned donor collaboratives and fiscally sponsored projects that deploy a creative array of strategies and tactics to further this vision.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It partners with funders who share its beliefs, and 37 such organisations are listed on its website. Some are new to us, but many of them we have already seen above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its 2023 accounts show total assets in excess of $75 million. Unlike many of the organisations we have seen above, climate change doesn\u2019t seem to be high on its list of priorities, but it must be in there, otherwise it wouldn\u2019t feature on the E3G website.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Rockefeller Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was founded in 1913 by John D Rockefeller. \u201cMore than a century later, we come to work each day with the same ambitious mindset: we can solve today\u2019s big problems like climate change, not just settle for small improvements.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More than 1,000 grants appear on its website. That\u2019s far too many to drill down, but among the first that appear are things like:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

$1 million awarded to Center for Climate and Energy Solutions in support of the Energy Transition Accelerator initiative to advance a just clean energy transition in developing and emerging economies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

$600,000 awarded to ICVCM Limited in support of the Energy Transition Accelerator initiative to advance a just clean energy transition in developing and emerging economies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

$300,000 awarded to Climate Vulnerable Forum LBG in support of providing technical assistance that incorporates heath impacts into the climate resource mobilization plans of climate vulnerable nations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

$354,316 awarded to Pan American Health Organization in support of raising awareness of climate change\u2019s impact on health inequity in the lead up to, and at, COP30.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And much, much more. You get the picture. I haven\u2019t located a grant to E3G, but there must be a connection somewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

RUSI<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the Royal United Services Institute, and its website<\/a> tells us that it \u201cis the world\u2019s oldest and the UK\u2019s leading defence and security think tank. <\/em>[Founded in 1831 by the Duke of Wellington, apparently] Our mission is to inform, influence and enhance public debate to help build a safer and more stable world.\u201d<\/em> That\u2019s fine, but what\u2019s it got to do with E3G? Inevitably, I suppose, they say this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate change is both an existential threat to humanity and a threat multiplier. With expertise across a range of themes and geographies, we assess the implications of climate change through geopolitical, defence and security lenses.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our research produces leading commentary on how climate change intersects with \u2018traditional\u2019 security issues at the local, regional, institutional and international levels. Ongoing research includes horizon scanning of new trends in organised environmental crime; commentary on the security of nuclear weapons\u2019 storage in a warming world; and the implications of a renewed interest in space travel. We lead several international Track 1 and 2 dialogues on topics including energy security, climate mitigation and governance of global commons.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our unparalleled access and cross-cutting expertise make RUSI the home of commentary on climate change, defence and security.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Click on the relevant page<\/a> of the website, and you will find plenty of climate-related projects. Search for E3G and you will find three references: first, \u201cThe Impact of Climate Change on Security: Is the UK in Need of a Nationwide Review?<\/em>\u201d, which includes a nod to comments by Nick Mabey, Chief Executive of E3G. Next is \u201cRUSI report: Security response to climate change \u2018slow and inadequate\u2019<\/em>\u201d. This piece gives a leading role to Nick Mabey, who we learn was also a senior advisor in the Prime Minister\u2019s Strategy Unit and was previously Head of Sustainable Development in the FCO\u2019s Environment Policy department. He\u2019s clearly well-connected. His thoughts are quoted with approval and at length:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the next decades, climate change will drive as significant a change in the strategic security environment as the end of the Cold War. If uncontrolled, climate change will have security implications of similar magnitude to the World Wars, but which will last for centuries.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Over the next decades, the determinant of whether climate change drives serious conflicts lies in how political systems respond to the tensions it creates. Too often, analysis of climate change impacts assumes that all governments will act to maximise the common good in response to change\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In general, climate change could drive a more collaborative approach in inter-state relations or it could exacerbate tensions between and within countries, leading to a \u2018politics of insecurity\u2019 as countries focus on protecting themselves against the impact. The pattern of co-operation which arises will depend on how effectively climate change is incorporated into mainstream foreign policy, and is perceived as changing the balance of national interests in major countries across a wide range of security and geo-political issues\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Achieving security in a climate-stressed world will require a more pro-active and intensive approach to tackling instability in strategically important regions with high climate vulnerability and weak governance\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first signs of this response are emerging, but the necessary changes will need to happen much faster than in the past if they are to match the remorseless ecological timetable of a changing climate driven by a dynamic global economy.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

RUSI is duly alarmed. The report carries on thus:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This new RUSI report is released just days after Sir Nicholas Stern warned that the economic effects of climate change are likely to be far worse than his initial 2006 estimate, and against the backdrop of recent food riots on three continents, warnings from the WHO on the health and disease implications of climate change, and new information about looming water shortages from glaciers diminishing much more rapidly than predicted.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The final reference is to a report written by Nick Mabey, titled \u201cDelivering Climate Security: International Security Responses to a Climate Changed World<\/em>\u201d. However, its content is accessible only to RUSI members, so I can\u2019t enlighten you as to its contents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

SED Fund<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

SED stands for Sustainability, Equity and Diversity. Its website<\/a> tells us that it \u201cwas set up in 2018 to deliver an ecosystem of actions mapped to nine of the United Nations\u2019 Sustainable Development Goals by raising ambitions through philanthropic support.\u201d <\/em>It seems to be based in the Netherlands. So far as I can see, its website fails to supply details of its funders (though I have found a reference on the MacArthur Foundation website to it receiving a $1 million grant in 2021 for three years in connection with \u201cclimate solutions\u201d). It does tell us that it has supported 107 organisations in 15 countries with regard to 286 projects since 2018. By the way MacArthur Foundation funding for climate projects can be found here<\/a>. It seems to have \u201cinvested\u201d over $590 million via 412 grants to 192 organisations, but I will delve into that no further, otherwise I will never escape from the rabbit hole. Strangely, I can\u2019t find any reference to E3G on SED\u2019s website. Then again, compared to many such organisations, its website is a little sparse, and I wouldn\u2019t be surprised to learn that they have supplied grants to, or worked with, 3EG.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a> this is an international non-profit research institute that tackles environment and sustainable development challenges. As we might expect, its website<\/a> has an extensive section devoted to climate, which lists various initiatives and projects. It is a member of REN21<\/a> but this piece is long enough already, so I\u2019ll leave you to click on the link above and go down that rabbit hole yourself, should you be so inclined. A search of SEI\u2019s website produces 45 separate references to E3G, mostly jointly-produced reports.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was founded in 1966 as a result of a decision made by the Swedish Parliament and it still receives most of its funding from the Swedish government, though it also seeks financial support from other organizations in order to carry out its research. It offers full transparency regarding other funding sources, the most recent listed to date being for 2023. From this we learn that the good old British Government has been shelling out again on our behalf \u2013 4,643,174 Swedish Krone via the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office. USAID supplied less than half that amount \u2013 I imagine it will be supplying nothing at all for the next four years. The EU and governments of various EU (and other) countries also supplied copious funds. IT seems to take a similar view to RUSI, and references on its website to climate and associated risks are too many to mention here. Another search of its website threw up four references to E3G, who seem to work with SIPRI, MISTRA (see above) and others in various projects with E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sunrise Project<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Its website<\/a> opens with a picture of sunrise over a windfarm, with the following words superimposed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The climate crisis threatens the future of life on earth. To help solve it, an energy revolution is moving the world beyond fossil fuels. How, and how fast that revolution happens will determine the future of humanity\u2026<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It seems pretty clear what they\u2019re all about. But for the avoidance of doubt, this is what they say they\u2019re about:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Sunrise Project is a global network of independent organisations that share a common mission and common values. We believe in the power of social movements to change the world. We\u2019re passionate about building networks who can drive the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy to reduce greenhouse pollution and create a healthy and prosperous future for everyone.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They are based in Australia, though their most recent (2023) annual report tells us that they have over 150 staff spanning 19 countries. At the same time they received funding from (some familiar names here, others are new): ACME Foundation; Ballmer Group; Bloomberg Philanthropies; Boundless Earth; ClimateWorks Foundation; Climate Imperative Foundation; Conscience Bay Research; Graeme Wood Foundation; Heising-Simons Foundation; High Tide Foundation; KR Foundation; Laudes Foundation; McKinnon Family Foundation; Oak Foundation; Oranges & Sardines Foundation; Sequoia Climate Foundation; The Global Methane Hub; Wallace Global Fund; and Zegar Family Foundation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Combined revenue for the year was AU$121.9 million, and they provided 366 grants to 263 organisations. The average grant size was a chunky AU$177,000, the smallest was AU$2,000 and the largest was AU$2.1 million. It\u2019s a funny old world when organisations receive huge amounts of money from various foundations then pass on lots of it to others. Why not cut out the middle man?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their website doesn\u2019t have a search facility, so I haven\u2019t been able to search for E3G, but I suppose they\u2019re connected somehow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tara Climate Foundation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based in Asia, its website<\/a> tells us that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Much of Asia is responding to the mitigation challenges of climate change, but not at the scale and speed required. At Tara, we provide grants to a diverse group of partners to accelerate Asia\u2019s energy transformation. We are committed to ensuring a sustainable future for our communities and future generations.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their vision is \u201ca just and thriving society in Asia powered by renewable energy<\/em>\u201d and to this end they have been providing grants since 2014. Their 2023 report tells us that in the year reported on (it being the most recent report available) they made grants totalling $51 million to 259 diverse organisations across 13 geographies, with an average grant size of $145,000. That represented a 71% increase on the year before.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The source of their funding is less clear to me, and search of their website didn\u2019t produce a reference to E3G, though again their must be a link somewhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trust for London<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Founded in 1891, \u201cWe give out around \u00a310m each year to groups fighting for a fairer London.<\/em>\u201d They don\u2019t seem to be particularly obsessed with climate change. The only reference I could find on their website to E3G (though it was obviously enough for the E3G website to list them as a \u201cpartner\u201d) is a 2020 article<\/a> titled \u201cThe spark for a retrofitting revolution<\/em>\u201d. This was written by<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ed Matthew, Associate Director at E3G, and it bigs up E3G (six separate references to them in the article) while referring to a campaign by E3G and Trust for London to put capital investment into building energy efficiency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Umwelt Bundesamt<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the German Federal Environment Agency, and they have around 1,800 employees. Curiously, perhaps, a search of its website produces 22 references to briefing papers which, so far as I can tell, were prepared by E3G.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

They need no explanation. The link to E3G isn\u2019t obvious from their website, though E3G regard them as partners, so presumably they have their contacts there. It must be useful to be plugged in to government and supra-national organisations, as E3G apparently are. It all helps when it comes to influencing policy, I assume.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Heidelberg University<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once more I find little to say. Like all universities, Heidelberg\u2019s website demonstrates something bordering on obsession with climate change \u2013 a quick search reveals hundreds of linked articles. Again, though, I can\u2019t find the link to E3G, but as always, there must be one \u2013 E3G\u2019s website says Heidelberg University is a partner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wellspring Philanthropic Fund<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is an organisation dedicated to social justice, which has been on the go since 2001. Its website<\/a> is surprisingly simple, and enables one to find out very little about it. Climate change doesn\u2019t seem to feature, other than perhaps as an aspect of its dedication to social justice. I can\u2019t find a search facility, and I can\u2019t find details of the grants it makes, so this paragraph is regrettably uninformative, but I include reference to Wellspring for the sake of completeness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Established in 2007, this is the official think tank of the European People\u2019s Party, named after its founder, a former Belgian Prime Minister. A search of its website for the word \u201cclimate\u201d produces 179 results, and they\u2019re worth a read, as they\u2019re a mixed bag (for instance, one is titled \u201cClimate Change Cannot be the Only Driver of Europe\u2019s Energy Policy<\/em>\u201d. It certainly doesn\u2019t seem to be entirely in the climate crisis camp. Nevertheless, a search of its website for E3G produces three results \u2013 all mini-biographies of individuals employed by E3G, and links to publications written by them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

World Resources Institute<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to its website<\/a> (https:\/\/www.wri.org\/<\/a>):<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WRI is a trusted partner for change. Using research-based approaches, we work globally and in focus countries to meet people\u2019s essential needs; to protect and restore nature; and to stabilize the climate and build more resilient communities. We aim to fundamentally transform the way the world produces food, uses energy and designs its cities to create a better future for all. We work across several topics affecting people, nature and the climate<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And its focus on climate is clear and unrelenting:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The planet is already experiencing unprecedented fires, droughts, floods and other extreme weather. People living in poverty \u2014those who had little role in creating the climate crisis \u2014 are least able to respond, but most likely to bear the brunt of its effects. At the same time, the world continues to destroy natural ecosystems and consume fossil fuels at unsustainable rates, further fueling climate change.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Research shows that the world needs to cut its emissions in half by 2030 and reach net-zero by mid-century to prevent the worst effects of climate change. Yet despite this urgency and the massive economic and health benefits of taking climate action, most countries, businesses, states and cities have yet to make the economic and societal shifts required to secure a better future.<\/em> \u202f<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The usual cut and paste message that appears, in one form or another, on so many foundation websites, in other words. They have almost 1,900 staff and offices in at least eight countries, so money doesn\u2019t seem to be a problem. Its 2023 Annual Report confirms as much, with details of more than $365 million revenues, most of which were received in the form of grants, though more than $13 million came in the form of federal grants (there was a fiver year $25 million grant from USAID, which I\u2019m guessing won\u2019t be renewed). Other familiar names are there \u2013 $5.5 million was received from Oak Foundation and $3.5 million was received from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Core donors included the Dutch, Swedish and Danish governments. Needless to say, the UK government was also a major donor, meaning they handed over more than $750,000. Actually, I suspect they gave more than $2.25 million, since three separate UK government departments are separately listed. Other major donors include more old favourites \u2013 The William and Flora Hewett Foundation and the Children\u2019s Investment Fund Foundation. The total list of donors runs into hundreds, if not thousands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A search of the website for E3G produces 15 results \u2013 things like \u201cWRI and E3G Press Call Ahead of Bonn Climate Negotiations<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wuppertal Institute<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s no surprise to see this listed as an E3G partner, given that its website<\/a> (https:\/\/wupperinst.org\/en\/the-institute<\/a>) says:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our vision is a sustainable world for everyone. We define this as a just transformation towards a future in which global warming is reversed to a tolerable level and Earth\u2019s resources are managed in such a way that everyone can enjoy a good life within the planetary boundaries.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Together with our stakeholders, we shape transformation processes. To this end, we develop science-based solutions for ecological, social, political and economic challenges: from practical measures for urban communities and companies to fresh impetus for international climate negotiations\u2026.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A search of its website for E3G failed because its search function requires a minimum of four characters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WWF Turkey<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why only WWF Turkey, and not WWG global? Who knows? IT\u2019s fitting, I suppose, that its website<\/a> opens with a reference to Earth Hour 2025, and a prominent \u201csupport us\u201d button. The climate change section<\/a> of its website is suitably apocalyptic. I conclude this summary of E3G\u2019s partners with WWF Turkey\u2019s call to arms (in capital letters, of course): \u201cCLIMATE CRISIS IS IN OUR LIVES! WE EXPERIENCE ITS EFFECTS MORE INTENSIVELY EVERY YEAR. THE SOLUTION IS IN OUR HANDS AND WE ARE THE LAST GENERATION THAT CAN STOP THIS CRISIS<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are billions, probably tens of billions, and possibly hundreds of billions of pounds\/dollars\/euros in circulation every year funding climate change hysteria and tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands or even millions of jobs globally. The problem is that (although they would of course dispute this) the vast majority of those jobs are in any real sense, non-productive and add little if anything of value. There is massive replication. Study and survey after study and survey saying the same thing. Endless lobbying for the same policies that they all advocate. Massive group-think in play. A bizarre level of mutual funding \u2013 charities, foundations and pressure groups receiving funding from other charities, foundations and pressure groups and passing more funding on to still others.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We\u2019re always being told that \u201cBig Oil\u201d is throwing huge amounts of money at \u201cmis\/disinformation\u201d, but I suspect such sums pale into insignificance compared to the sums available to the Green Blob. From the point of view of the Blob, the best part is that Councils, governments and supra-national bodies such as the EU and the UN give them money so that they can lobby Councils, governments and supra-national bodies to implement policies that they all want anyway (while the wishes of the voters scarcely get a look-in).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You don\u2019t have to be Elon Musk with his DOGE plans to recognise that there is something not right in all this. US journalist Bari Weiss isn\u2019t a Trump fan \u2013 her politics seem to be pretty independent and don\u2019t allow for simplistic labelling. Wikipedia<\/a> says this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to The Washington Post, Weiss \u201cportrays herself as a liberal uncomfortable with the excesses of left-wing culture\u201d and has sought to \u201cposition herself as a reasonable liberal concerned that far-left critiques stifled free speech\u201d. Vanity Fair called Weiss \u201ca provocateur\u201d.The Jewish Telegraph Agency said that her writing \u201cdoesn\u2019t lend itself easily to labels\u201d. Weiss has been described as conservative by Haaretz, The Times of Israel, The Daily Dot, and Business Insider. In an interview with Joe Rogan, she called herself a \u201cleft-leaning centrist\u201d.The Times of Israel reported that her public fight with The New York Times made her a hero among some conservatives.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

She has recently tweeted<\/a> this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Department of Justice is investigating the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, a $27 billion program that was part of Joe Biden\u2019s $740 billion Inflation Reduction Act. Created in the spring of 2023, and managed by the Environmental Protection Agency, the fund was supposed to be a \u201cfirst-of-its-kind\u201d program to address the climate crisis while revitalizing communities that it considered \u201chistorically left behind.\u201d But it appears little of the $27 billion revitalized anything\u2014except the coffers of a range of environmental nonprofits associated with former Obama and Biden administration officials. \u201cThe Biden administration used so-called \u2018climate equity\u2019 to justify handouts of billions of dollars to their far-left friends,\u201d @leezeldin, the Trump administration\u2019s new EPA administrator, told @TheFP. \u201cIt is my utmost priority to get a handle on every dollar that went out the door in this scheme and once again restore oversight and accountability over these funds. This rush job operation is riddled with conflicts of interest and corruption.\u201d A Free Press investigation reveals that of the $27 billion, $20 billion was rushed out the door to eight nonprofit groups after Biden lost the election\u2014but before President Donald Trump took office. As one former EPA official put it on a secretly recorded video, it was akin to \u201ctossing gold bars off the Titanic.\u201d The eight groups were allocated sums ranging from $400 million to $6.9 billion. Several of them were formed in August of 2023, just one month after the grant applications went live in July of 2023, when it became clear that large nine- and 10-figure grants would be up for grabs. The boards and staff of these eight groups include Democratic donors, people with connections to the Obama and Biden administrations, and prominent Democrats like Stacey Abrams. \u201cThese are some of the biggest grants to individual organizations in American history.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, while the beneficiaries of copious funding from governments and others (who then use the money to lobby governments and others) might claim that the arrangement represents a virtuous circle, it is rather a vicious spiral. My fear is that however well-intentioned those who are involved in working to \u201csave the planet\u201d might be, the scope for corruption at worst, and significant waste of public funds at best, is enormous. It also creates a nexus of inter-connected and inter-dependent outfits with a common interest, who can be guaranteed to lobby furiously, using the media skills they have learned and contacts they have acquired, to defend their interests (and finances). The public interest might usefully benefit if this large but dark area had a very bright light shone on it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Sixty-eight funders are listed, and so many of the familiar names are there, that it reads a bit like the inter-married Royal families of nineteenth century Europe.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":369377,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691833736,691833737,691833738,691818056,691821055,691818618,691818154],"class_list":{"0":"post-369374","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-bill-melinda-gates-foundation","9":"tag-breakthrough-energy","10":"tag-bristol-city-council","11":"tag-climate-change","12":"tag-climate-politics","13":"tag-energy-transition","14":"tag-net-zero","16":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/03\/0Screenshot-2025-03-10-170547.png?fit=1277%2C717&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1y5E","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":188662,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=188662","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":0},"title":"Who\u2019s Afraid of Net Zero Watch?","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"22\/02\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"The Guardian appears to have developed an obsession this month with the Net Zero Scrutiny Group. Obsession doesn\u2019t seem to be too strong a word, given the number of articles (nine including a podcast, by my calculation) that have appeared on that newspaper\u2019s website in the last few weeks apparently\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/0pexels-photo-356079-1.jpeg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":373039,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=373039","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":1},"title":"Scientists \u2018Unexpectedly\u2019 Find The Declining Sea Ice Trend Since 1980 Has Radiatively Cooled The Earth","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"01\/04\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The alarmist narrative that says disappearing sea ice serves to enhance and worsen global warming may now be discarded.","rel":"","context":"In \"Antarctica\"","block_context":{"text":"Antarctica","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=antarctica"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0watkins_mosaic_lead_and_ridge_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0watkins_mosaic_lead_and_ridge_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0watkins_mosaic_lead_and_ridge_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0watkins_mosaic_lead_and_ridge_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/0watkins_mosaic_lead_and_ridge_0.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339842,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339842","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":2},"title":"Climate Deniers of the World, Unite!","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"17\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Given how rigid the official orthodoxy is when it comes to the public health \u2018crises\u2019, the \u2018climate emergency\u2019 and the supposed moral defects of Western civilization, it\u2019s no surprise that the slur words of choice today are \u201canti-vaxxer\u201d, \u201cracist\u201d, \u201chomophobe\u201d, \u201cIslamophobe\u201d, \u201cfar right\u201d and, not least, \u201cclimate denier\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screenshot-2024-08-13-at-16.29.38.jpeg?fit=1200%2C688&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screenshot-2024-08-13-at-16.29.38.jpeg?fit=1200%2C688&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screenshot-2024-08-13-at-16.29.38.jpeg?fit=1200%2C688&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screenshot-2024-08-13-at-16.29.38.jpeg?fit=1200%2C688&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screenshot-2024-08-13-at-16.29.38.jpeg?fit=1200%2C688&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":360924,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=360924","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":3},"title":"Complacency at the Climate Change\u00a0Committee","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"07\/01\/2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Listening to the PM programme on BBC radio 4 this evening, I was somewhat taken aback by an interview conducted by Evan Davis. His interviewee was Emma Pinchbeck, the recently appointed Chief Executive of the UK\u2019s Climate Change Committee (CCC).","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate Change Committee (CCC)\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate Change Committee (CCC)","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change-committee-ccc"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0Emma-Pinchbeck-EP.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0Emma-Pinchbeck-EP.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0Emma-Pinchbeck-EP.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0Emma-Pinchbeck-EP.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/0Emma-Pinchbeck-EP.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":279661,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=279661","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":4},"title":"And the Walter Duranty Award Goes To\u00a0\u2026","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"20\/09\/2023","format":false,"excerpt":"An international renewables-lobby outfit called\u00a0Covering Climate Now\u00a0(CCN) this week announced its 2023 prizes for media\u2019s best hyping of the non-existent \u201cclimate crisis\u201d, objectivity be damned. This \u201ccrisis\u201d was most recently elevated to \u201cglobal boiling\u201d by the UN\u2019s top idiot and socialist Antonio Guterres.","rel":"","context":"In \"Antonio Guterres\"","block_context":{"text":"Antonio Guterres","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=antonio-guterres"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-04T145902.200.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-04T145902.200.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-04T145902.200.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/09\/OIG-2023-08-04T145902.200.jpeg?fit=1024%2C1024&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":199756,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=199756","url_meta":{"origin":369374,"position":5},"title":"Rowlatt Labelled as Campaigner by BBC Colleagues","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"14\/05\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"By Paul Homewood Too left wing by BBC standards! Crikey! From The Times: The BBC\u2019s climate editor has been labelled a \u201ccampaigner\u201d by colleagues after he was found in breach of editorial rules for the second time in less than six months. Justin Rowlatt, the BBC\u2019s first climate editor, was\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Screenshot-2022-05-14-104611-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Screenshot-2022-05-14-104611-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Screenshot-2022-05-14-104611-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Screenshot-2022-05-14-104611-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Screenshot-2022-05-14-104611-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/369374","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=369374"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/369374\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":369379,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/369374\/revisions\/369379"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/369377"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=369374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=369374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=369374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}