The ExxonMobil controversial climate change concerns ExxonMobil's activities relating to climate change, especially their view of climate change skepticism. Since the 1970s, ExxonMobil has been involved in research, prosecution, advertising, and grant grants, some of which were undertaken with the aim of delaying broad acceptance and action on global warming.
From the late 1970s and into the 1980s, Exxon funded internal collaborations and universities, broadly in line with the growing public scientific approach. From the 1980s to the mid-2000s, the company was a leader in climate change resistance, opposing regulations to reduce global warming. The ExxonMobil-funded organization is critical of the Kyoto Protocol and seeks to undermine public opinion on scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Exxon helps establish and lead the Global Climate Coalition from businesses that challenge greenhouse gas emissions regulations. Recently it has expressed support for the carbon tax and Paris agreement.
Video ExxonMobil climate change controversy
Riset awal
From the late 1970s and into the 1980s, Exxon, one of ExxonMobil's predecessors, has a public reputation as a pioneer in climate change research. Exxon is funding internal collaborations and universities, broadly in line with the development of public scientific approaches, and developing a reputation for expertise in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO 2 ). Between the 1970s and 2015, Exxon and ExxonMobil researchers and academic collaborators published dozens of research papers. ExxonMobil provides a list of over 50 article citations from that period.
In July 1977, an Exxon senior scientist James Black reported to company executives that there was a general scientific agreement at the time that burning fossil fuels was the most likely way in which humans affected global climate change. In 1979-1982, Exxon undertook climate change research and climate modeling programs, including a research project to supplement their largest Esso Atlantic supertanker with laboratories and sensors to measure carbon dioxide uptake by the oceans.. In 1980, Exxon analyzed in one of their documents that if it were not synthetic fuels such as coal liquefaction, oil shale, and oil sands the fuel demand had to be met by petroleum, it delayed atmospheric CO 2 doubling time about five years to 2065. Exxon is also studying ways to avoid CO 2 emissions if the Natuna D-Alpha gas field in Indonesia will be developed.
In 1981, Exxon shifted its research focus to climate modeling. In 1982, the Exxon environmental affairs office circulated an internal report to Exxon's management saying that the consequences of climate change could be catastrophic, and that significant reductions in the consumption of fossil fuels would be needed to mitigate climate change in the future. He also said that "there are concerns among some scientific groups that once the effect can be measured, they may not be reversed."
In 1992, a senior ice researcher, leading a research team at Canadian Exxon subsidiary Imperial Oil, assessed how global warming could affect Exxon Arctic operations, and reported that Beaufort Sea exploration and development costs may be lower, while sea levels are higher and more rough. the sea can threaten the coastal and offshore infrastructure of the company. Imperial incorporated this forecast into planning its facilities in the Mackenzie River Delta in the Northwest Territory. In 1996, Mobil Oil, another ExxonMobil predecessor, calculated the impacts of climate change on the Sable gas field project. An ExxonMobil spokesperson said that standard practice in major project planning is to consider various factors, and that ExxonMobil's consideration of environmental risks does not conflict with their public policy advocacy.
In 2016, the International Environmental Law Center, a public interest, nonprofit environmental law firm, states that from 1957 onwards Humble Oil, one of ExxonMobil's forerunners today, is aware of increasing CO 2 in the atmosphere and prospects that it is likely to cause global warming. ExxonMobil responded to this claim that "to show that we have a definitive knowledge of human-caused climate change before world scientists are not credible theses."
Maps ExxonMobil climate change controversy
Funding climate change denial
In 1989, shortly after presentation by Exxon science and strategy development manager Duane LeVine to the board of directors reaffirming that introducing public policy to combat climate change "could lead to an irreversible and expensive Draconian step," the company shifted its position in climate change to question it openly. This shift is caused by concerns about the potential impact of climate policy measures on the oil industry. A study published in Climate Change in 2015 found that ExxonMobil "may have played a very important role as a corporate donor" in the production and dissemination of contrarian information.
Of the major oil companies, ExxonMobil has become the most active in the climate change debate. In 2005, when large competing oil companies diversified into alternative energy and renewable fuels, ExxonMobil reaffirmed its mission as an oil and gas company. According to a 2007 analysis by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the company uses many of the same strategies, tactics, organizations, and personnel with the tobacco industry used in denial of links between lung cancer and smoking. ExxonMobil rejects similarities with the tobacco industry.
During the 1990s and 2000s, Exxon helped advance international climate change denials. ExxonMobil is a significant influence in preventing the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol by the United States. The ExxonMobil-funded organization is critical of the Kyoto Protocol and seeks to undermine public opinion on scientific consensus that global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Exxon is a founding member of the board of directors of the Global Climate Coalition, which consists of companies opposed to greenhouse gas emissions regulations. According to the Mother Jones magazine between 2000 and 2003 ExxonMobil channeled at least $ 8,678,450 to forty organizations using disinformation campaigns including "skeptical propaganda disguised as journalism" to influence public opinion and political leaders about warming up global.. ExxonMobil has funded, among other groups, the Competitive Companies Institution, the George C. Marshall Institute, the Heartland Institute, the American Legislative Exchange Council and the International Policy Network. Since the Kyoto Protocol, Exxon has awarded more than $ 20 million to organizations that support climate change denials.
Between 1998 and 2004, ExxonMobil gave $ 16 million to advocacy organizations debating the effects of global warming. Of the 2005 ExxonMobil recipients, 54 were found to have a statement on climate change on their website, which is consistent with the scientific consensus on climate change, while 39 "misunderstand the science of climate change with direct rejection of evidence," according to a 2006 letter from the Royal Society to ExxonMobil. The Royal Society said ExxonMobil gave $ 2.9 million to US organizations that "mislead the public about climate change through their website." According to environmental sociologist at Drexel University, Robert Brulle, ExxonMobil accounts for about 4% of the total funding Brulle identifies as a "climate change movement". Drexel's research finds that much of the funding that direct sources from companies such as ExxonMobil and Koch Industries are then diverted through third party foundations such as Donor Trust and Donor Capital to avoid traceability. In 2006, the Brussels-based organization of the Europe Observatory said, "ExxonMobil invests a significant amount in allowing think-tanks, apparently respectable sources, sowing doubts about the need for the [EU] government to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions glass for climate skeptics is very hypocritical because ExxonMobil spends a large amount of advertising to present itself as environmentally responsible company. "
In 2006, the Royal Society expressed "concerns about funding an ExxonMobil lobby group that seeks to misrepresent climate-related scientific evidence." Between 2007 and 2015, ExxonMobil provided $ 1.87 million for the rejection of climate change Congress and $ 454,000 to the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). ExxonMobil denies climate refusal funding. ExxonMobil is a member of ALEC's "Enterprise Council", the company's leadership board.
In January 2007, ExxonMobil's vice president for public affairs Kenneth Cohen said that, in 2006, ExxonMobil has suspended funding from the Competitive Enterprise Institute and "'five or six' similar groups". While ExxonMobil did not identify other similar groups, a May 2007 report by Greenpeace mentions five groups "at the heart of the climate change rejection industry" ExxonMobil has suspended funding, as well as 41 similar groups still receiving ExxonMobil funds.
In May 2008, ExxonMobil pledged in its annual corporate citizenship report that they will cut funding for "some public policy research groups whose position on climate change can distract attention" from the need to address climate change. In 2008, ExxonMobil funded such an organization and was named one of the most prominent promoters of climate change denial. According to Brulle in the 2012 ExxonMobil's outflow interview, it has stopped funding climate change reversal movements in 2009. According to Greenpeace environmental advocacy group, ExxonMobil awarded $ 1 million to the climate denial group by 2014. ExxonMobil awarded $ 10,000 for Science & amp; The Environmental Policy Project, founded by Climate Rejection advisor, physicist and environmental scientist Fred Singer and previously funded the work of the Wei-Hock solar physicist "Willie" Soon, who said that most global warming is caused by solar variations.
In the fall of 2015, InsideClimate News published a series of reports on an eight-month investigation based on Exxon Mobil's internal file decade and an interview with former Exxon employee, stating "Exxon conducts cutting-edge climate research." decades ago and then, without revealing all that it has learned, working on the front lines of climate resistance, cast doubt on the scientific consensus that has been confirmed by its own scientists. "Exxon responded to the article by saying that the allegations were based on cherry-picked statements from ExxonMobil employees and taking into account the ongoing climate research conducted by the company over the course of the time.The company also denied claims made by InsideClimate News > that it has limited carbon dioxide research in favor of climate rejection Exxon's statement says the fall in oil prices harmed oil companies in the 1980s and led to a reduction in research The statement also claims that it is uncertain whether increases in greenhouse gas emissions lead to significant warming, or if immediate action on climate change is required.
From 1989 to April 2010, ExxonMobil and its predecessor Car buy regular Thursday adverts on The New York Times The Washington Post , and The Wall Street Journal > which says that the science of climate change is unstable. In 2000, responding to the 2000 First Climate Change National Assessment in the US, an ExxonMobil advertisement said "The language and logic of the report appear to be designed to emphasize selective results to convince people that climate change will have a negative impact on their lives. , not an objective summary of the underlying science. "2000 Another advertorial published in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal entitled Unsettled Science says it is" impossible for scientists to relate recent increases in small surface temperature to human activity. " Content analysis of Exxon Mobil's internal reports and predecessors, research papers reviewed by colleagues, and Exxon's advertorial were placed in the open section of The New York Times between 1972 and 2001, by Harvard University researchers. Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes found that "83% of peer papers and 80% of internal documents [of Exxon] recognize that climate change is real and caused by humans, but only 12% of advertisers do, with 81% expressing doubts". The study concludes that ExxonMobil contributes to advancing climate science but promotes doubts about it in advertorials. The report was criticized by ExxonMobil and the American Independent Petroleum Association for sampling incomplete data collected by Greenpeace, authors' involvement in the #ExxonKnew campaign, and partial financing by the Rockefeller Family Fund. Also the fact that Exxon and Mobil are separate companies for most of the period in question are mentioned as climate research primarily conducted by Exxon while the main advertorial comes from Mobil.
Lobbying against emissions regulations
Lee Raymond, Exxon and ExxonMobil chief executive officers from 1993 to 2006, is one of the most vocal executives in the United States against regulations to reduce global warming,
In February 2001, the early days of the administration of US President George W. Bush, ExxonMobil chief lobbyist in Washington wrote to the White House urging that "Clinton/Gore take over with aggressive agendas" must stay out of any "decisional activity" on delegates USA to the work committee of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and recommended their replacement by scientists critical of the prevailing scientific consensus on climate change. IPCC chairman, climatologist Robert Watson, was replaced by Rajendra K. Pachauri, who is considered more industrial-friendly. A spokeswoman for ExxonMobil said the company has no position on the IPCC chairman.
On June 14, 2005, ExxonMobil announced that it will hire Philip Cooney, four days after Cooney resigned as chief of staff of the Environmental Quality Board at the White House Bush, two days after the release of the Government Nonprofit Project Accountability document showing that Cooney has edited government scientific reports thereby diminishing the certainty of science behind the greenhouse effect. Thomas Friedman writes in The New York Times, "Of all people, Bush's team will let us edit his climate report, we have a man who first worked in the oil lobby against climate change, without a scientific background. , then go back to work for Exxon Is that intellectually more corrupt than that? "
Several studies have suggested that ExxonMobil's strategy has succeeded in delaying the world's response to climate change, others are unsure whether the behavior of different companies will bring different results.
Recognition of climate change
In 2007, ExxonMobil for the first time disclosed to shareholders financial risks to the profitability of climate change. Nonetheless, it only comes in the form of boilerplate language in the Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-K they declare threats to operations and revenues generated by "laws and regulations relating to environmental or energy security issues, including those dealing with alternative energy sources. and global climate change risks "rather than recognizing the risks posed by climate change itself or by the company's contribution to it. In January 2007, ExxonMobil's vice president for public affairs Kenneth Cohen said "we know enough now - or, the public knows enough now - that the risks are serious and action must be taken." On February 13, ExxonMobil CEO Rex W. Tillerson acknowledged that the planet is heating up while carbon dioxide levels are rising, "but in the same speech it provides an unfavorable defense of the oil industry and predicts that hydrocarbons will dominate world transportation as energy demand grows with an estimated 40 percent by 2030. [Tillerson] stated that there are no significant alternatives to oil in the next few decades, and that ExxonMobil will continue to make petroleum and natural gas the main product. "
In April 2014, ExxonMobil released a report that recognizes climate change risks for the first time publicly. ExxonMobil estimates that the increase in global population, improved living standards and increased access to energy will result in lower greenhouse gas emissions.
ExxonMobil underestimated the movement of fossil fuel divestment, wrote on the ExxonMobil blog in October 2014 that the fossil fuel divestment "is not in line with reality" and that "not using fossil fuels is tantamount to using no energy at all."
Exxon routinely uses the internal shadow price of CO 2 in its business planning. In December 2015, after a similar earlier announcement, Exxon notes that if carbon regulations are a requirement, the best approach is the carbon tax.
State and federal investigations
In May 2015, Sheldon Whitehouse suggested at The Washington Post that federal prosecution of the tobacco industry could set a precedent for the oil industry. In October, Whitehouse, Richard Blumenthal, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey issued a letter to Exxon who questioned their donations to the Donors Trust, a group that funded climate change denials. On October 14, 2015, Ted Lieu and Mark DeSaulnier wrote to the US Attorney General (US AG) requesting an investigation into whether ExxonMobil violated federal law by "failing to disclose actual information" about climate change. Asked about a letter by the The Guardian , an Exxon spokesman said "This is complete nonsense We have a relentless history for 30 years continuously researching climate change..."
On October 30, 2015, more than 40 leading US social and environmental justice organizations wrote to US AG to request a federal investigation into ExxonMobil that deceived the public about climate change. Former Vice President Al Gore and the three Democratic presidential candidates for US President called for a Justice Department investigation. Marjorie Cohn, professor of law at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, California, called for the lifting of the terms of the merger of ExxonMobil.
The New York Attorney General is investigating whether ExxonMobil's statements to investors are consistent with decades of extensive scientific research firms. The Martin Act in New York state law gives the state Attorney General a vast power to investigate financial fraud. On November 4, 2015, New York Attorney General issued a summons to ExxonMobil. New York Attorney's Investigations include possible breaches of consumer protection, fraud, and securities laws. ExxonMobil refused to withhold climate change research. Following published reports, based on Exxon's internal documents, indicates that during the 1980s and 1990s Exxon used climate research in its business planning but simultaneously publicly stated that the science was not calm, the California Attorney General was investigating whether ExxonMobil was lying to the public or shareholders about the risks to its business from climate change, the possibility of securities fraud, and violations of environmental laws. ExxonMobil has denied making a mistake.
On March 29, 2016, Massachusetts attorneys and the US Virgin Islands announced an investigation. Seventeen general attorneys worked together in the investigation. Exxon said the investigation was "politically motivated." In June, the attorney general of the US Virgin Islands revoked a subpoena. As of June 2016, ExxonMobil sued Massachusetts attorney general Maura Healey.
Relationship with Rockefeller family
Beginning in 2004, the descendants of John D. Rockefeller Sr., led primarily by his grandchildren, through letters, meetings and shareholder resolutions, sought to obtain ExxonMobil to recognize climate change, to abandon climate rejection, and to shift toward the net. energy. In 2013, responding to a shareholder resolution calling for emission reductions, CEO Rex Tillerson asked, "What's the point of saving the planet if humans suffer?"
In March 2016, Rockefeller Family Fund announced plans to "remove ownership" of ExxonMobil. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund and the Rockefeller Family Fund support a report stating that ExxonMobil knows more about the threat of global warming than it discloses. David Kaiser, grandson of David Rockefeller Sr. and president of Rockefeller Family Fund, said that "... the company seems to be morally bankrupt." Valerie Rockefeller Wayne, the daughter of former Sen. Jay Rockefeller, said, "What we expect from Exxon is that they will recognize what they have done - this decade of rejection..." In November 2016 ExxonMobil accused the Rockefellers of masterminding a conspiracy against the company.
Kaiser wrote in December 2016, "Our criticism brings with it a certain historical irony.John D. Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, and ExxonMobil is the largest direct descendant of Standard Oil.In a sense we are turning against a company where much of the Rockefeller family's wealth has been made. "
Other climate change activities
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments