How did Big Oil respond to this news? With made-up, over-the-top attacks, naturally.
@IERenergy Environmental groups to spend $11M on ad campaign calling for purity on carbon criminalization vote http://ow.ly/23d5FThat's the Twitter handle for the "Institute for Energy Research," a behemoth lobbying group funded by major oil companies like ExxonMobil whose main purpose in life, according to SourceWatch, is to advocate "positions on environmental issues including deregulation of utilities, climate change denial, and claims that conventional energy sources are virtually limitless."
Oh, and its president used to be the communications director for Enron. So they seem to have all of their "bad guy" bases covered.
That's why I suppose we shouldn't be too shocked that IER has decided that "criminalization" is the right word for legislation that would limit carbon pollution. According to that logic, limiting anything is the same as criminalizing it: limiting drivers to 25 miles per hour in school zones "criminalizes" driving, and limiting hunters to five bucks a season "criminalizes" hunting.
There is one thing that IER doesn't seem to worried about limiting, however: oil spills. While a seemingly limitless gusher of oil from BP's sunken rig continues to destroy the Gulf of Mexico, IER wants to make sure you know how strongly it opposes any efforts to limit future spills. Because that would be "anti-energy," which is basically oil-biz-speak for "un-American."