ThinkProgress Green has learned that TransCanada, the foreign tar sands company behind the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, is facing a potential inquiry into whether it deliberately deceived investors by inflating the job-creation potential of the project. Greenpeace has filed a complaint with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over TransCanada’s “false or misleading statements about the proposed Keystone XL pipeline project.”

In the complaint, Greenpeace shows evidence from TransCanada’s Canadian filings and the State Department that the project would involve fewer than 1000 in-state jobs, and around 6000 total jobs. This evidence is contrasted with TransCanada’s (TRP) repeated public pronouncements that pipeline construction would involve 20,000 American jobs:

Specifically, TRP has asserted that each mile of KXL pipeline constructed in the U.S. would create American jobs at a rate that is 67 times higher than job creation totals given by the company to Canadian officials for the Canadian portion of the pipeline.

These false and misleading job creation numbers are part of TRP’s lobbying and public relations campaign designed to create congressional pressure on the U.S. government to issue a Presidential Permit approving construction of KXL. Without government approval, TRP will not be able to build KXL, which will significantly impact the company’s future earnings and share price. That government approval was thrown into serious doubt last week when President Obama rejected the current KXL pipeline proposal at the State Department’s recommendation.

It may be legal to lie to the American public, but it is an actionable offense to deceive shareholders under U.S. securities disclosure laws.

Download the Greenpeace SEC TransCanada letter here.

by Toby Webb, cross-posted from the Smarter Business blog

US environmental NGOs, along with other, more globally minded ‘green’ and conservation-minded NGOs, have been poorly led in recent years.

They’ve blown a series of chances to help businesses change using a nuanced approach. Their approach been too cut and dried, too ‘with you not against you’ in ideology. It was never as simple as that.

That’s fairly clear to most people I know. I’m condensing quite a few other opinions here.

Now a new generation of green group leaders is emerging.

This new set of leaders may have learned from Greenpeace’s brilliant ‘stick and carrot’ approach that has proven so effective with business.

That’s if this New York Times article is correct:

“Roger Ballentine, a climate adviser to the Clinton White House who now advises businesses on green strategies, suggests that the movement has grown impatient with coaxing incremental change by engaging with policy makers and corporations.

The old way was the Sierra Club putting its seal on “green” Clorox products; the new way is suggested by a Greenpeace Internet campaign that wrung a promise from Facebook last week to use less coal for its data centers.

“The failure to address climate is catastrophic, and young people are justifiably outraged,” Mr. Ballentine said, pointing to the next generation in the movement. “What we have now is an antagonized grass roots calling for a radicalized approach.”

This could mean that in 2012 the big, well-funded US green NGOs may begin to copy Greenpeace’s tactics.
Read more

“After 20 months of mobilizing, agitating and negotiating to green Facebook, the Internet giant has today announced its goal to run on clean, renewable energy. The clear message to energy producers from Facebook is: invest now in renewable energy, and move away from coal power. That’s a status update we can all celebrate!”

Facebook today announced “it is committed to supporting the development of clean and renewable sources of energy, and our goal is to power all of our operations with clean and renewable energy.”  The social media company said “we are working in partnership with Greenpeace and others to create a world that is highly efficient and powered by clean and renewable energy.”

As Greenpeace explained: “The news comes two years after Greenpeace launched its global Unfriend Coal Campaign, enlisting 700,000 online activists to call on Facebook to power its data centers with clean energy instead of coal.”

In general, as I and others have been arguing for a while, it’s a myth the internet is an energy hog: Information technology is good for climate.  But data centers use a fair amount of electricity so making them more efficient and powering them with clean energy is very worthwhile.

As part of the new partnership, the mammoth social media company committed to:

Read more

After 20 months of mobilizing, agitating and negotiating by Greenpeace activists to green Facebook, the Internet behemoth announced today its goal to run on clean, renewable energy:

Facebook is committed to supporting the development of clean and renewable sources of energy, and our goal is to power all of our operations with clean and renewable energy. Building on our leadership in energy efficiency (through the Open Compute Project), we are working in partnership with Greenpeace and others to create a world that is highly efficient and powered by clean and renewable energy.

Facebook’s 2010 data center is primarily powered by coal, spurring the worldwide campaign.

Greenpeace mobilized Facebook users across the world, including Israel, Sweden, Italy, India, and Senegal. In one day, supporters posted over 80,000 comments in at least eleven languages on the Facebook Unfriend Coal page.

Greenpeace is looking to Apple, Microsoft, and Twitter as the next tech companies to commit to renewable energy.