Greenpeace Clean Energy Billboard Rejected by Pattison

authordefault
on

After a Plains Midstream Canada pipeline spilled between 160,000 and 480,000 liters of oil into Jackson Creek near the Red Deer River in Alberta this month, premier Alison Redford called the incident “an exception.”

Yet, as Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner Mike Hudema reports, this spill comes as no surprise given Alberta’s aging pipeline infrastructure and when considering that, in 2010 alone, pipelines across the country experienced 687 ‘failures’ resulting in 3,416 cubic meters of spilled toxic pollutants.

That’s why Greenpeace decided to send Premier Redford a strong message “about the need to invest in green jobs and stop the growing number of toxic oil spills,” Hudema wrote yesterday. 
 
But this plan was stopped in its tracks when Pattison Outdoor Advertising, an advertising arm of the Vancouver–based Jim Pattison Group, rejected Greenpeace’s billboard design destined for a busy Edmonton intersection. Without ceremony and without explanation, the agency refused to host the proposed billboard sign pictured below, simply announcing to Greenpeace, “the artwork has been rejected.”
 

As Hudema writes, the rejection comes as a surprise, especially considering how tame the design is compared to previous Greenpeace ads. The real concern this raises is, of course, the ability to speak for clean energy in an increasingly dirty energy-run province.

“The fact that this ad was denied is more than a little worrying. I mean what does it say about the state of public debate in this country when the tar sands industry can put billboards up across the country talking about how toxic tailings are just like yogurt, but a billboard highlighting the rash of oil spills and the need for green energy is rejected,” writes Hudema.

According to the Globe and Mail, Joe Donaldson, vice-president of marketing for Pattison Outdoor, Pattison’s official response to the rejection is “no comment.”

It is a mystery what Pattison Outdoor sought to accomplish when it decided Greenpeace’s plea for renewable energy was unfit for their stage. The company decided to forego the week’s $2800.00 CAD plus tax rental in the axed deal.

Greenpeace might come out ahead in this ordeal, however, with stories of the billboard rejection making headlines across the country.

“We are encouraging people to circulate the ad,” Hudema told the Globe and Mail. “If Pattison doesn’t want to run it we can at least get the awareness out.”

Related Posts

on

A new Environmental Defence analysis reveals that despite government promises to cut, the amount of taxpayers’ money given to the industry remains high.

A new Environmental Defence analysis reveals that despite government promises to cut, the amount of taxpayers’ money given to the industry remains high.
on

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, a major oil refining group, is once again behind a push to keep cars running on oil.

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, a major oil refining group, is once again behind a push to keep cars running on oil.
Analysis
on

"Climate the Movie" portrays today’s climate denier agenda by rehashing the same old fossil fuel talking points and trolling the left.

"Climate the Movie" portrays today’s climate denier agenda by rehashing the same old fossil fuel talking points and trolling the left.
on

Energy Transfer and Sunoco claimed the substance was not toxic, but residents don’t trust the results.

Energy Transfer and Sunoco claimed the substance was not toxic, but residents don’t trust the results.