logo
US fossil fuel industry wages campaign to kill policies that ban gas connections in new buildings

US fossil fuel industry wages campaign to kill policies that ban gas connections in new buildings

The Guardian24-02-2025

Oil and gas interests have waged a coordinated campaign to kill pro-electrification policies that ban gas connections in new buildings, putting the climate at risk, according to a new report.
Since 2019, utilities and fossil fuel trade groups, including the American Gas Association (AGA) and National Propane Gas Association (NPGA), have worked together to successfully thwart various local and state efforts.
The industry has launched similar efforts in the UK and Australia, the report from the London-based thinktank InfluenceMap says, drawing on their previous investigations.
These campaigns are imperiling the climate and public health, the researchers warn. Fossil fuel use in buildings accounts for nearly a third of all US planet-heating pollution, and top UN climate scientists say building electrification must be the 'dominant strategy' for decarbonization. Gas usage in the home has also been linked to childhood asthma and an array of other health issues.
'The fossil fuel industry is maliciously trying to promote their corporate interests, to the detriment of the safety of our children,' Gaurab Basu, a professor at Harvard Medical School, who did not work on the report. 'We must fight back.'
Reached for comment, Karen Harbart, CEO of the AGA, said climate advocacy groups are 'willfully spreading misinformation on the safety of gas stoves and promoting ill-informed energy policy that would drive up prices and sacrifice environmental progress.' The industry will 'continue to implement inclusive solutions to deliver life essential energy and reduce emissions for our customers and communities,' she said.
The Guardian approached the National Propane Gas Association for comment.
In July 2019, the city of Berkeley, California, became the first US city to ban gas hookups for heating and cooking in all new buildings. The groundbreaking policy inspired similar legislation in dozens of cities, including New York City and Los Angeles, as well as a 2023 statewide ban in New York.
These measures sparked swift – and often successful – backlash from fossil fuel interests, which lobbied policymakers, took to the courts, and coordinated 'front groups', to overturn and prevent them, the researchers write.
Within months of the Berkeley gas ban's passage, the industry began lobbying for legislation in many states to preempt cities from enacting similar measures. The American Gas Association and its members appear to have played an early role promoting these bills, InfluenceMap says.
At least 26 states have now passed these policies.
In November 2019 – less than two months before the Berkeley gas ban was meant to be enacted – the restauranteur trade group California Restaurant Association also submitted a lawsuit against the policy. The AGA filed a 'friend-of-the-court' brief in support of the litigation.
A court ultimately ruled in the plaintiffs' favor. Berkeley agreed last year to overturn its groundbreaking policy.
The National Propane Gas Association has also sued New York state over its gas ban, and both a utility and a trade group representing fossil fuel companies have filed a legal challenge to a similar measure passed in a Maryland county. And in October 2023, the National Propane Gas Association announced a legal action fund to fend off 'illegal governmental overreach that seeks to eliminate energy choice'.
The industry has also funded pro-gas front groups for its campaigns, the researchers say. New Yorkers for Affordable Energy, which has fought city and state gas bans, for instance, counts utilities as members and receives funding from fossil fuel interests including a leading trade group. Coloradans for Energy Access similarly lists trade groups and utilities as members and in 2021 its board of directors was composed completely of utility representatives.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
InfluenceMap identified these industry campaigns in not only the US but also in the European Union and Australia.
'The scale and persistence of this worldwide anti-electrification campaign is alarming,' said Emilia Piziak, senior analyst at InfluenceMap.
In the EU, the authors write, utilities, energy companies, and trade groups since 2021 have worked to undermine requirements building electrification requirements in the European Energy Performance of Buildings Directive.
Meanwhile, in Australia, oil and gas interests worked to thwart the Victorian Government's planned transition away from fossil gas in buildings. The government last year rolled back a plan to phase out gas cooking; the announcement about the decision 'seemed to directly mirror industry asks,' Piziak said.
The campaigns weren't identical. In the US, industry press releases, public statements, and court filings usually framed gas bans as threats to consumer choice, the researchers found. Pro-gas Australia campaigns mostly centered around the purported need for fossil fuels to maintain energy affordability and reliability, whereas in the EU, the most common talking point was the need for 'technology-neutral' policies.
But the aims have been similar, and some actors may have even been involved in the pro-gas advocacy in multiple countries, the authors say. InfluenceMap compared the membership of the industry associations spearheading campaigns in the three regions and found at least one company, Shell, is a member key groups in the US, the EU and Australia. Several oil and gas companies belong to trade groups in two of the three regions. The true extent of this overlap is hard to determine due to lack of transparency from trade associations, the authors write.
The Guardian has contacted Shell for comment.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Opioid ‘hundred times stronger than heroin' linked to UK clubbing deaths for first time
Opioid ‘hundred times stronger than heroin' linked to UK clubbing deaths for first time

The Independent

time31 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Opioid ‘hundred times stronger than heroin' linked to UK clubbing deaths for first time

Two people in their twenties have died in London after allegedly consuming a super-strong opioid drug, the first that experts have linked in the UK to the new substance. Warned that they can be hundreds of times stronger than heroin, nitazenes are a newer form of synthetic opioid and can be mis-sold as drugs including oxycodone, which is a highly addictive prescription drug used to treat pain. A 20-year-old woman and a 28-year-old man are understood to have taken the drug after visiting a club in south London over the May bank holiday weekend. The blue tablets, which are marked with the number 80, could potentially be mistaken for 'oxys', which can help users fall asleep. In a statement on their social media page, the nightclub Ministry of Sound in Elephant and Castle said: 'We have been informed of a dangerous batch of blue-green pills marked with '80' are being sold across London. 'These pills have been linked to hospitalisations and tragically two confirmed fatalities. 'Reports indicate they contain synthetic opioids, along with traces of ketamine and MDMA. They are being mis-sold as Ecstasy or Oxycodone, and investigations are ongoing.' They encouraged anyone who was feeling unwell while at the venue to seek medical help immediately from their on-site team. The Cause, in east London, and Fabric, in Farringdon, also posted similar messages warning people of the risks of consuming the drug. It has prompted fears ahead of festival season, with increased calls for front-of-house drug testing. Speaking to The Times, Professor Fiona Measham, the founder of drug checking charity The Loop, said: 'Up to now, there have been about two nitazene-related deaths per week in the UK, predominantly linked to contamination of opiate and street benzodiazepine markets,. 'This appears to be a leap from dependent to recreational drug using communities with the deaths of two clubbers but we don't yet know the purchase intent. If we did, we could target the appropriate groups looking to buy, for example, oxycodone or ecstasy pills.' The Home Office said: 'Every death from drugs is a tragedy and our thoughts are with the family and friends of the two individuals who have sadly lost their lives. 'We are determined to take steps to prevent drug-related deaths and we support the testing of drugs seized by the police or deposited in amnesty bins, but we cannot endorse testing for recreational users because there is no safe way to take illegal drugs. 'We are doing everything we can to tackle the evolving threat from synthetic opioids such as nitazenes, including working closely with the police to increase the number of officers carrying the opioid overdose antidote naloxone.' The Metropolitan Police said: 'We are currently investigating the death of two people at a residential address in Havelock Road, Southall. 'Met officers were called on Monday, 26 May at 16:00hrs following reports that a 20-year-old woman and a 28-year-old man had been found unresponsive. 'Paramedics from the London Ambulance Service attended the scene where both people were sadly pronounced dead. The deaths are being treated as unexpected and an investigation remains ongoing. 'Post-mortem examinations have been carried out and we await the results of toxicology findings. 'Next of kin for both the man and the woman have been informed, they are currently being supported by specialist officers.'

Oxfam workers protest over 'outsourcing' of jobs
Oxfam workers protest over 'outsourcing' of jobs

BBC News

time41 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Oxfam workers protest over 'outsourcing' of jobs

Workers at Oxfam have been demonstrating against job members gathered outside the London, Manchester and Oxford offices because of what they called redundancy and outsourcing plans by the Srivastava, speaking outside Oxfam GB's headquarters in Oxford, said he wanted Oxfam "to think again and come up with a proposal that fits with Oxfam values and its commitment to decent jobs and workers' rights".Oxfam said its "restructuring proposals" were to secure its financial future and "not about a policy to replace in-house roles with non-unionised casual labour". But Unite said the charity's publishing and training teams were being outsourced, and that it was planning to "replace secure jobs with casual work". "Staff are being made redundant, but the organisation is proposing their work will then be done by outside agencies or casual staff, without a business case being made for this to workers," it also want Oxfam to roll back a wider programme to put 265 of its staff at risk of redundancy.A consultation process is currently under way. Mr Srivastava, a Unite representative and part of the Oxfam publishing team, told the BBC: "Any corporation that threw out union members and salaried workers to replace them with casual labour or agencies would rightly face criticism from Oxfam - but that's exactly what Oxfam is planning to do to its own staff by outsourcing its work."Emily Gillingham, another member of the publishing team, said she was "frustrated and worried for the future of the organisation and the work"."It's so important to take care of the knowledge and the experience of the people who work here," she explained. 'Difficult decisions' Sukhninder Sandher, who works as a financial controller for the charity, said he did not think the changes would save money."There's better ways to manage our finances and Oxfam as an organisation, which preaches and places great stall on its values, really needs to implement them in-house in our opinion," he said. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: "This situation is totally unacceptable and our members have Unite's full support throughout their campaign."An Oxfam spokesperson said: "We support the right to protest. We believe in union rights. "These restructuring proposals are to secure our financial future, not about a policy to replace in house roles with non-unionised casual labour. "Where our capacity is reduced, if we use short-term specialist expertise, it will be in accordance with our labour rights standards and our values. "Like other charities, we have to make difficult decisions regarding our wage bill, so we can continue to respond to crises around the world." You can follow BBC Oxfordshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.

New approach to GDP could help nature survive Labour's housebuilding plans
New approach to GDP could help nature survive Labour's housebuilding plans

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

New approach to GDP could help nature survive Labour's housebuilding plans

Boris Johnson was prime minister and Kemi Badenoch was a Treasury minister when they gave their support to a groundbreaking study of the economy and its most consistently tortured victim: nature. It was February 2021 and the eminent Cambridge professor Sir Partha Dasgupta had just delivered a 360-page report to the Treasury on the economics of biodiversity, which brought rigour to a subject often governed by emotion. Johnson and Badenoch seemed to support the analysis, which argued that without financial cost/benefit analysis that included biodiversity in its sums, a growing economy would destroy natural habitats. Dasgupta's hard-headed number crunching showed that when nature is in decline, there is a financial as well as an environmental deficit. Fast forward to 2025, and Labour has promised to build 1.5m new homes by the end of the parliament and is already behind schedule. An expanding population and a reliance on private housebuilders, which drip feed homes into the market to maintain high prices, has left the UK with a significant shortage. Last year there was an estimated shortfall of 2.5m homes, despite there being 1.4m plots already with planning permission. And while some local authorities have insisted that developers include parks and tree planting in their schemes, along with a high percentage of affordable homes, they complain that appeals by developers to the secretary of state for relief from these responsibilities are often successful. But as the Labour government moves ahead with a planning and infrastructure bill designed to promote growth, there are understandable fears the landmark report has been sidelined. Nature loss in the UK has been significant over many decades, but Labour's message in the bill is that the developer knows best, and other considerations can take a back seat. It's why the National Trust has warned the bill is a 'licence to kill nature' and the Office for Environmental Protection has advised the government that it is a 'regression' in environmental law. Housing projects that protect natural habitats, include public transport and divert wastewater from running into local watercourses are deemed too expensive. Current planning rules already allow developers, in almost all cases, to 'value engineer' these elements out of the design. Traditional economic thinking is partly to blame. It excludes the world's natural resources except when they are dug up or chopped down and become raw materials for various manufacturing industries. Dasgupta sought to change this, providing a way for economists to put a value on nature and calculate whether the type of growth in the economy enhanced or destroyed a broader definition of national wealth. Since 2021, he has been liaising with the Office for National Statistics to produce an alternative to gross domestic product (GDP). Currently, when governments consider how much economic progress they have made in the previous year they use GDP, which adds up the income from buying and selling goods in the public and private sectors to give a measure of national output. This single figure is Rachel Reeves's guiding light. But the problem with it from an environmental perspective is that GDP includes lots of bad stuff, as well as what we might describe as progress. It calculates oil extraction in the North Sea without considering the implications for emissions and global heating, and classes peat extraction and the paving over of previously wooded land as adding to GDP without any negative cost. Dasgupta's report found that between 1990 and 2014, the UK's 'produced capital' (including manufactured goods and built infrastructure) rose by a fifth but, in the same period, its stock of 'natural capital' declined by 30%. Sign up to Down to Earth The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential after newsletter promotion Analysis by the Green Finance Institute charity suggests that the depletion of nature at the present rate will have the effect of cutting UK GDP by 6% by the 2030s, and, it has argued, if we want to get on and implement the Dasgupta review, replacing GDP must be top of the agenda. Parliament's environmental audit committee added its voice to complaints last month, saying it was concerned that a mission to protect 30% of the land by 2030 would be missed unless a mix of sticks and carrots persuaded private sector landlords to improve biodiversity net gain. There are many MPs and ministers who recognise the need to protect nature and biodiversity as the UK grows both in population and economically. The question hangs over the chancellor as to whether she is on board. Reeves recently waded into the controversy over a bat tunnel straddling the HS2 train link from London to Birmingham to say that never again should the protection of bats hold up important infrastructure projects. Keir Starmer vowed to take on 'the nimbys' by reducing legal challenges to infrastructure building – with a new approach stopping 'newts and bats' from blocking construction. That could spell more trouble for the natural environment, not less.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store