Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Investigation Finds Exxon Ignored Its Own Early Climate Change Warnings

Posted by samzenpus on from the writing-on-the-wall dept.

New submitter jrmcferren writes: PBS Reports the Exxon ignored their own internal climate change warnings. Newly discovered documents show that the corporation's own research scientists warned top executives that atmospheric CO2 was increasing and that the burning of fossil fuels was to blame as early as 1977. The report goes on to say: "In 1978, the Exxon researchers warned that a doubling of CO2 levels in the atmosphere would increase average global temperatures by 2 to 3 degrees Celsius and would have a major impact on the company’s core business. 'Present thinking holds that man has a time window of five to ten years before the need for hard decisions regarding changes in energy strategies might become critical,' one scientist wrote in an internal document."

5 of 255 comments (clear)

  1. Re:And so what, people still drove cars by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    To be fair, there was great uncertainty about those findings at the time. We have struggled to build good models to the day.

    OTOH, they certainly were not going to back down and hand things over to nuclear. Their propaganda machine was already in full gear, and these finding would undermine their efforts;

    Nuclear power’s main energy competitor is of course Big Oil, which had no problem with nuclear weapons, but was not happy to lose its grip on the world’s major source of energy. Nuclear energy was not under their control, requiring by definition major government involvement and regulation of the industry. Its widespread use would leave Big Oil with falling profits, and would mean the end of Big Oil’s economic hegemony.

    This led to a bizarre situation where oil companies both founded and funded ecology-related organisations, including the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, Nature Conservancy, Greenpeace, Sierra Club and others to protest the peaceful use of nuclear power. These groups have all received backing from the oil industry, notably Atlantic Richfield Oil and BP

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/b...

    Of course, many still choose to believe and support big oil's agenda to the day.

  2. Versus doing what? by Kohath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What were they supposed to do to not be accused of "ignoring" warnings? Can you describe the decision-making process you wish they'd followed?

    It's the same for the rest of us as it is for Exxon -- just less existential. We've been "warned". Yet we go on with our lives. The warnings get louder and more shrill and catastrophic and angry. And we still go on with our lives. Eventually this should stop being a big surprise.

  3. Re:Alarmists - wrong on global warming since 1978! by BillCable · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So you're seriously going with "some scientist in 1978 warned Exxon that sometime in the upcoming CENTURY there will be an increase in CO2 that'll have a major impact on core business"? OK then...

  4. Re:Bad Exxon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    "bad Exxon and others (like Union Carbide, because of Bhopal) have caused so many problems that one wonders how such things didn't get a more adequate treatment by society."
    Because of reporters and politicians.
    This article AND summary are perfect examples. They say Exxon this, Exxon that, but there are no names. Who was the one behind the decision to start those climate denial programs, who read those reports and chose to ignore them?
    What are their names? There are actual individuals that caused this, actual murderers that walk free because they're allowed to hide behind a corporate logo.

    From the article ...
    Exxon responded swiftly.
    Exxon curtailed its carbon dioxide research.
    Exxon's ambitious program
    Exxon worked instead at the forefront of climate denial.
    Exxon assembled a team of climate modelers
    Etc ...

    Exxon ... is a concept, an idea, a piece of paper in some government office at best. It does not make decisions, it does not do anything. It doesn't even exist.

    This is the worst kind of journalism possible. Dozens of FUD articles would do less damage than this piece of crap.

  5. Re:And so what, people still drove cars by thegarbz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    just think how much more sales they would have today if they had heeded their own research and put some profits into solar panels.

    You mean like BP who started the solar business in the 80s and closed it in 2011?
    Or like Royal Dutch Shell who started in 2002 and got out of it only about 6 years later?

    Yes but where did it get them? Those poor deluded people at at Exxon only made more profit than the world's top 20 solar providers combined. They really made the wrong choice didn't they? /sarcasm