Chevron grant for Kiva

[Guest]

.

[Kay]

We used to receive the Baltimore Examiner -- free and unwanted -- delivered to our house every morning, from 2006 to 2009.  As I recall, even when I asked them to stop, we continued receiving it.  Needless to say, I despised even having to pick up that trash and recycle it -- and placing that burden on our neighbors when we were away.  Thank goodness this particular Examiner ceased publication on February 15, 2009 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Baltimore_Examiner.

[Patricia SF]

When Anschutz started the Examiner in its current format, he envisioned creating a conservative competitor to the The Washington Post. According to Politico.com, "When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz’s instructions were explicit — he 'wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,' said one former employee." The Examiner added more conservative writers and columnists, including Byron York (National Review), Michael Barone (American Enterprise Institute, Fox News) David Freddoso (National Review, author of The Case Against Barack Obama).

Distribution

In the past, some people complained of difficulty unsubscribing from the paper, despite in many cases never having subscribed.

Just wanted to add that Newt Gingrich has been added as a columnist to the San Francisco Examiner; and that for months, us San Francisco residents used to receive this paper on our doorsteps everyday, whether we wanted the paper or not.  This practice finally stopped because massive numbers of us complained.

And the ironic thing about the San Francisco Examiner, though, is that they have actually employed one human being who provides a counter perspective.  No, this person is not a commentor; this person reviews the films.       

[Sengbe Pieh]

Kiva told us they received money. What more do they need to do?


The angst filled thinking of this site makes me wonder about our world and my own thinking. People who need help are receiving it through this grant. Aren't they? I know two wrongs don't make a right. I get that. However, Chevron, like all corporations and business, small or big,  have done many right things along with doing wrong things. Nothing and nobody is perfect in this world.

Chevron is in a legal fight and I'm hopeful that more money will go to people who need it. I don't know enough about the legal fight. Perhaps Chevron is being mean spirited and evil. Perhaps the local government was supposed to do more. From what I can gather this was work done by a different Oil & Gas company which Chevron later bought and is now their fight. Regardless, bad things happened in Ecuador. It could be more than Chevron's fault. Why not let the legal system do its job?

I'd be more than happy to take this money, not buy direct products from Chevron, and live happily ever after. Only thing is...unless you live in a cave and don't need glasses or clothes you use products made from oil & gas every day:

"Transportation needs require 66% of all available petroleum to fuel cars, buses, trucks, and jets.That means 34% of oil is used for items such as:

•Ammonia
 •Packaging for cough syrup and shampoo
 
•Asphalt for paving roads
 •Pain reliever coating to protect the stomach
 
•Automobiles
 •Paint binder and solvent
 
•Balls
 •Resealable bags and containers
 
•Bicycles
 •Detergent containers
 
•Bubblegum
 •Dishwashing liquids
 
•Child safety gates
 •Deodorants
 
•Coolers
 •Electricity
 
•Crayons
 •Eyeglasses
 
•Heart valves
 •Fertilizers
 
•Heat for houses
 •Garden hoses
 
•Heavy-duty plastic (toolbox)
 •Gas ranges
 
•Helmets
 •Pesticides
 
•Ink
 •Plastic plates
 
•Plastic wrap
 •Portable radios, CD and MP3 players
 
•Medicines
 •Lubricants for machinery large and small, such as bicycles or printing presses
 
•Outlet covers
 •Propane grills
 
•Propane for heat
 •Refrigerators
 
•Protective coating on inside of juice boxes
 •Tires
 
•Toys
 •Varnishes
 
•Vinyl siding
 •Rugs

from www.energy4me.org

Gee Willikers folks, I just found a similar copy of this list posted by what appears to be a conservative, tea party aficionado (the Mad Hatter maybe ) in a reply on Yahoo News regarding the current oil leak, disaster (economic & environmental) in the Gulf of Mexico. Looks like the list is making the tea lovers circuit & it also looks likes they've become more ambitious & prolific.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100506/ap_on_bi_ge/us_gulf_oil_spill_blowout_plan#mwpphu-container



Beyond Petroleum

‘Beyond petroleum’ sums up our brand in the most succinct and focused way possible. It’s both what we stand for and a practical description of what we do
We love the environment. And we love you. Seriously. You believe us, don't you? 

next time you want to @#$% about oil READ THIS and see how yo can do without it; Stupid people
A partial list of products made from Petroleum (144 of 6000 items)

(All you need to do is copy & paste. No thought expected or required.)

One 42-gallon barrel of oil creates 19.4 gallons of gasoline. The rest (over half) is used to make things like:

Solvents

Diesel fuel

Motor Oil

Bearing Grease

Ink

Floor Wax

Ballpoint Pens

Football Cleats

Upholstery

Sweaters

Boats

Insecticides

Bicycle Tires

Sports Car Bodies

Nail Polish

Fishing lures

Dresses

Tires

Golf Bags

Perfumes

Cassettes

Dishwasher parts

Tool Boxes

Shoe Polish

Motorcycle Helmet

Caulking

Petroleum Jelly

Transparent Tape

CD Player

Faucet Washers

Antiseptics

Clothesline

Curtains

Food Preservatives

Basketballs

Soap

Vitamin Capsules

Antihistamines

Purses

Shoes

Dashboards

Cortisone

Deodorant

Footballs

Putty

Dyes

Panty Hose

Refrigerant

Percolators

Life Jackets

Rubbing Alcohol

Linings

Skis

TV Cabinets

Shag Rugs

Electrician's Tape

Tool Racks

Car Battery Cases

Epoxy

Paint

Mops

Slacks

Insect Repellent

Oil Filters

Umbrellas

Yarn

Fertilizers

Hair Coloring

Roofing

Toilet Seats

Fishing Rods

Lipstick

Denture Adhesive

Linoleum

Ice Cube Trays

Synthetic Rubber

Speakers

Plastic Wood

Electric Blankets

Glycerin

Tennis Rackets

Rubber Cement

Fishing Boots

Dice

Nylon Rope

Candles

Trash Bags

House Paint

Water Pipes

Hand Lotion

Roller Skates

Surf Boards

Shampoo

Wheels

Paint Rollers

Shower Curtains

Guitar Strings

Luggage

Aspirin

Safety Glasses

Antifreeze

Football Helmets

Awnings

Eyeglasses

Clothes

Toothbrushes

Ice Chests

Footballs

Combs

CD's & DVD's

Paint Brushes

Detergents

Vaporizers

Balloons

Sun Glasses

Tents

Heart Valves

Crayons

Parachutes

Telephones

Enamel

Pillows

Dishes

Cameras

Anesthetics

Artificial Turf

Artificial limbs

Bandages

Dentures

Model Cars

Folding Doors

Hair Curlers

Cold cream

Movie film

Soft Contact lenses

Drinking Cups

Fan Belts

Car Enamel

Shaving Cream

Ammonia

Refrigerators

Golf Balls

Toothpaste

Gasoline

Americans consume petroleum products at a rate of three-and-a-half gallons of oil and more than
250 cubic feet of natural gas per day each! But, as shown here petroleum is not just used fo...

Oil Rocks, dude!!!    

[someone2000]

It seems that Chevron also stifles journalism, right in Kiva's backyard. Kiva, by any means necessary? Really?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/05/06/BURI1DAJJV.DTL

[Peter S]

just keeping in touch with Kiva's half a million bucks partner Chevron, and was struck by the interesting conjunction of perspectives here:  first of all Chevron's own view of its partnership with Kiva and Opportunity Fund, just released on YouTube:



and then this quite recently from AmazonWatch.org (headquartered just a couple of miles away from Kiva), A Message from Ecuador to Chevron CEO John Watson




--Peter

[TheTatiana]

I definitely applaud the efforts to make Chevron act responsibly everywhere it does business.  It also bothers me that kiva seems to be trying to keep the source of this grant money quiet.  I'm still troubled enough about my own reliance on energy, some of it from Chevron and BP, to ask how do we behave morally on this point.

I'm pretty sure I don't want to give up air conditioning, refrigeration of my food, transportation, elevators, electricity, computers, and anything produced in a modern factory.  I don't want to go back to a hunter gatherer or subsistence farming lifestyle.  So that means I'm going to be using quite a bit of energy, or the people who make the products I use are.  My energy footprint is fairly large. Efforts to be more efficient are lowering it slightly, but not by a huge amount.

So, if I'm not going to give up my use of energy, then from whom will I buy it?  Is there an energy company that acts more responsibly about pollution and treatment of indigenous people in developing areas?  Is Shell okay?  If not, who?

And is it okay for me to insist kiva not dirty their hands with money from a company with whom I do regular business?  What about my own hands? Shouldn't I worry about them first?

I'm really hopelessly confused about how to act morally and responsibly in this situation.  What do you guys think?

[marilyn386]

We currently live in a world where we try to compartmentalize everything into an 'evil'r 'vs. good' box.  Rarely do people or corporations (who at the end of the day are made up of people) fit into such a neat box. 

I believe it is OK to applaud a company for their good actions (donations to Kiva  ) and still apply pressure on that company for the actions that cause harm.

As you have already figured out in your comments above, we all have to accept some portion of responsibility for the good things and the bad things that come along with producing oil.  We can do our part by conserving oil where we can.  We can also apply pressure on the oil companies to continually improve their environmental footprint

At the end of the day, there is no one right answer or wrong answer.  You just have to follow your gut and your conscience.

[someone2000]

Just to keep everyone up-to-date of what one of Kiva's major funders are up to:

BBC News, Feb 14, 2011 (Happy Valentines Day!): A court in Ecuador has fined US oil giant Chevron a reported $8bn (£5bn) for polluting a large part of the country's Amazon region.

Yes, Chevron is fighting it. Still, it underscores how sad and disappointing it is for Kiva to facilitate greenwashing.

[Harvey:)]

Quote (and Video) from AmazonWatch on May 9, 2011:

"Feb 2011: Oil giant Chevron ordered to pay $9 billion for pollution cleanup in Ecuador!"

"After nearly 18 years of legal battles, the communities in Ecuador's Amazon rainforest devastated by oil giant Chevron's reckless pump-and-dump oil operations have scored a landmark victory. Chevron has been ordered to pay $9.5 billion for cleanup of widespread contamination, and potable water and healthcare facilities for affected communities.

But Chevron has vowed to fight "until hell freezes over." Help us bring Chevron to justice once and for all: visit www.AmazonWatch.org"
"Video narrated by Peter Coyote."

[Mordoch]

I really ultimately don't see a problem with Kiva accepting money from Chevron when you get down to it. The reality is if Kiva required the companies that donate money to it to always act in a moral manner, that means they couldn't accept donations from virtually any major corporation.

Perhaps even more relevantly, I really don't see the harm in Kiva accepting such a donation in this case.

Now if Kiva's primary mission was to bring attention to companies acting irresponsibly and creating and aggravating poverty worldwide through their actions, and they mysteriously stopped mentioning Chevron negatively after receiving the donation, that would be a different story, but that clearly is not the case here. I don't see how Kiva mission of making microfinancing available worldwide in order to alleviate poverty is actually compromised by accepting the donation. (Its not like Chevron's irresponsible behavior would suddenly change if Kiva stopped accepting donations from them.)

Its also true that Chevron being listed as a sponsor is ultimately perfectly valid information for anyone trying to assess the overall global impact of the company in question.  It always makes sense to consider everything a company does when making such an evaluation, and its not like Kiva claims that every single sponsor it has is a perfectly wonderful company.  In fact,  while there may be a bit of corporate spin by Chevron in "the company" description which Kiva borrowed from Chevron, its not a situation where the description in the sponsor section is actually inaccurate. It obviously does not go into the negative aspects of Chevron, but no-one should reasonably expect that on a page dedicated to mentioning the corporate sponsors of a non-profit.  (You simply do some web searching on your own if you want that info.)

Basically unlike a politician or a company dedicate to public advocacy involving criticism of irresponsible corporate behavior, I think it would be incredibly rare at absolute most for any corporate donation to be genuinely problematic, and the Chevron situation clearly does not qualify.