Conservatives are already calling Exxon "woke".
As long as conservatives continue to live, they will do everything in their power to oppress and kill everyone.
next extreme weather event is called "Exxon"
If my air conditioner could talk, all it would say is “it’s too hot in here”
Of course that Exxon. They are afraid now that CO2 is rising and the consequences get more and more obvious, people will demand action, and their profits would suffer. If coal had contributed less, Exxon would be able to hold out for longer.
Yup, almost sounds like they're just trying to deflect blame and avoid getting in the crosshairs.
"Don't let coal emissions warm the globe, that's OUR job!"
We are living in the clownest timeline...
But ALSO it's NOT our Fault!
-Exxon!
Hey Exxon,
That headline makes my brain hurt.
Welcome to Trump America
Smoke and mirrors. This is representative of Exxon's general strategy. There is a partial admission of the dangers of climate warming, followed by an absolute refusal to change trajectory. This has not changed, and as long as capital depends on it, it never will.
The headline is not necessarily misleading. It paints an incomplete picture, though. These paragraphs in the article are more relevant (to me) than Exxon's immaterial admissions concerning climate change:
ExxonMobil’s Energy Outlook typically shows strong demand for oil and natural gas for decades into the future even as the world attempts to reduce emissions.
“We are seeing clear signs that coal is sticking longer from an energy security and other perspectives, specifically in parts of Asia-Pacific, China, and others,” Joshi said.
In Exxon's Global Executive Summary, mentioned in the article, coal use is predicted to decrease by 30% by 2050 to be replaced by renewables and natural gas. This is, at best, replacing fossil fuels with fossil fuels.
The mention of including fewer emission-reduction technologies and fewer CCS projections was also interesting:
Other changes in ExxonMobil’s outlook include fewer emission-reduction technologies. Projections for carbon capture and storage, and use of low-carbon hydrogen, dropped by about one-third from last year.
It makes me believe there is no more budget for putting on an overshoot-and-return charade to justify our reliance on fossil fuels. None of this is surprising or remarkable, though. This is not the downfall of Exxon, as the headline might have you believe, this is still business as usual.
Exxon has a long history of highlighting the dangers of climate change. This is not out of the ordinary.
Did you mean covering up and targeting people who were trying to warn about it? Or was that a joke I didn't catch?
https://archive.org/details/ExxonClimateDocs
They did something. And were vocal. Doesn't mean they were good.
*after getting caught doing it for DECADES and lying about it
They were standard oil till 72. The landmark Exxon papers were published in 78. That's not decades of time.
I agree that this is not out of the ordinary for Exxon.
Available documents show a discrepancy between what ExxonMobil’s scientists and executives discussed about climate change privately and in academic circles and what it presented to the general public.
This excerpt from one of the studies you posted shows that they were certainly not publicly vocal about it, though.
That’s not decades of time.
They did manufacture doubt about the scientific consensus, they did fund entities advancing climate denialism, they did lobby against regulatory measures. That is decades of time. Publishing climate change papers in the 70s does not absolve them of the crime of covering up the same information obtained through those papers.
Yes. And they are still doing that with this paper.
Jesus Christ... nope, I'm out. If someone else wants to pick it up from here feel free but I've had my fill of aggravation today.
I don't get how highlighting this is not an unusual news and not a change in their behavior is frustrating to you.
They are continuing their brand of distracting the public/looking good. This is not a statement written out of the good of their hearts. And they have done so for halve a century.
Your responses seem to suggest that they have been open about this all along which comes off as pretty fucking disingenuous and ignores a lot of the other shit they did.
Have they created reports here and there which may or may not have been shown to the public at the time? Sure. So fucking what? That doesn't really excuse anything at all. It doesn't absolve them of what they have done, at all.
Yes. They have been using high profile studies for decades to distract the public. Those reports were important in the public discourse. Even more so then this current, widely ignored, paper.
k
I think they might be frustrated with the no change in behavior part?
Maybe they feel I advocate for instead of against them. This post looks like hope posting. I guess I should use more redundant and simple statements.
There were parts where you did kinda seem to be giving them credit if you look at some if the posts without the context of your other comments (which they may not have seen?).
I have them credit for this not being a change in their behavior. True. I considered this paper to be in bad faith from the get go for it highlights the responsibility of their competition. Carbon footprints etc. are distractions. So is shooting your buddy in the leg to flee from an ever hungry polar bear. You cannot run. They will come. The bear must not regard you for this dutyful help in his ever hungry task. If it takes them longer in total they must feel disdain instead.
Guess I am tired and wordy ^^
There’s not going to be enough popcorn for these last few episodes of this final season.
🤡🌎
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.