natural gas
US Department of Energy

Well, well. So the Sierra Club's campaign to end coal was substantially supported by a natural gas company CEO involved in the controversial practice called fracking. The club's Beyond Coal campaign is very active in Kentucky.

Bryan Walsh of TIME has the report, here, in what's as an exclusive. The report says the organization has since stopped taking the money:
TIME has learned that between 2007 and 2010 the Sierra Club accepted over $25 million in donations from the gas industry, mostly from Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy - one of the biggest gas drilling companies in the U.S. and a firm heavily involved in fracking - to help fund the Club's Beyond Coal campaign. Though the group ended its relationship with Chesapeake in 2010 - and the Club says it turned its back on an additional $30 million in promised donations - the news raises concerns about influence industry may have had on the Sierra Club's independence and its support of natural gas in the past. It's also sure to anger ordinary members who've been uneasy about the Club's relationship with corporations. "The chapter groups and volunteers depend on the Club to have their back as they fight pollution from any industry, and we need to be unrestrained in our advocacy," Michael Brune, the Sierra Club's executive director since 2010, told me. "The first rule of advocacy of is that you shouldn't take money from industries and companies you're trying to change."
Natural gas has been seen by many as a bridge from dirty coal to renewable sources and perhaps less of a threat to the climate. While its clear that natural gas power plants emit fewer pollutants, and less carbon dioxide, a more thorough analysis has led to questions as to whether burning more gas instead of coal will help the climate.

Maybe this news about Sierra Club funding choices helps explain the departure of Carl Pope atop the Sierra Club