Newsom aims to crush 'Big Oil' but flew jet to a conference in NYC he could have attended via Zoom
Do As I Say, Not As I Do? Newsom announced earlier this month that the State of California is suing Exxon, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP for "lying about the dangers of fossil fuels" and contributing to climate change. In the same week he flew on a petroleum powered jet to New York City to make sure he was seen at a "Climate Week" event.
Democrat California Gov. Gavin Newsom promised during a "Climate Week" event in New York City that he would take on big oil in a lawsuit he filed against five large oil companies. Although he could have made his appearance through a teleconference application like Zoom, or Skype, Newsom made the 2,445 mile trip on an petroleum-burning jet.
"California is taking on Big Oil and holding them accountable for decades of deception and lies about climate change," The Office of the California Governor wrote on X, formerly called Twitter. "At #ClimateWeekNYC, Governor @GavinNewsom spoke with @dgelles about our lawsuit against five of the world’s largest oil companies and their subsidiaries."
Newsom announced earlier this month that the state of California is suing Exxon, Shell, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and BP for "lying about the dangers of fossil fuels" and contributing to climate change.
The lawsuit, filed in California State Court, alleges that these five companies have created a delayed response to global warming and deceived people on the usage of fossil fuels.
"Governor Newsom should be added as a co-defendant to his own lawsuit," the U.S. Oil and Gas Association wrote on X, formerly Twitter, in response to Newsom's remarks at Climate Week.
"This weekend the Gov unnecessarily flew 1000s of miles, burning 1000s of gallons of jet fuel to hold a press conference in NYC to announce he was suing the companies that make it possible for him to fly 1000s of miles and burn 1000s of gallons of jet fuel in support his lifestyle and political activism," the post continued.
Critics of the climate change movement have often pointed out that those who are often the most vocal advocates for getting rid of fossil fuels often fly on private jets and like Al Gore, have massive carbon footprints. It is not clear whether Newsom made his trip via a private jet, or flew on a commercial airliner.
Time Magazine published an article last year discussing that celebrities who travel by private jet and have yachts are the biggest contributors to climate change. Examples include Taylor Swift and Kim Kardashian. Swift reportedly used her private jet, a $40 million Dassault Falcon 900 for close to 170 flights between January and June of last year, according to data collection website Yard.
Their research noted that Taylor's jet had an average flight time in 2022 of merely 80 minutes and an scant average of 139.36 miles per flight. Kardashian flies a Gulfstream G650ER, a $61 million jet with performance that allows the plane to fly at Mach .9, nearly the speed of sound.
Newsom also announced earlier this week that he will sign a climate bill that would require thousands of major U.S. companies to publicly state their greenhouse gas emissions on their websites. In the last campaign cycle, Newsom received more than $675,800 in political donations from "clean" energy companies, California Secretary of State records show.
His proposed legislation would require U.S. companies with more than $1 billion in revenue that do business in California to disclose their "emissions of greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants, and toxic air contaminants for each facility," per the bill.
The California Chamber of Commerce told NBC News this month that the act is "a costly mandate that will negatively impact businesses of all sizes in California and will not directly reduce emissions."
"The fact that a single state like California would do this is both potentially troubling and potentially promising," Harvard Environmental Economics Director Robert Stavins told Just The News. "It could be the case that a company that is valued at $1 billion has $35 of activity in California but is nevertheless affected." Stavins added his view that if more states adopted similar laws it would improve environmental regulation nationwide.