What a years-long probe of Big Oil reveals about its climate strategy

1 comment

1. Some of the world’s largest oil companies have privately expressed skepticism of the [Paris agreement](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/12/12/proposed-historic-climate-pact-nears-final-vote/?itid=lk_inline_manual_2), federal climate regulations and their own goals of reaching “net zero” emissions by mid-century, even as they publicly voiced support for these efforts, according to documents that congressional Democrats released Tuesday.

   The documents also detail industry efforts to fund university research into the environmental benefits of natural gas. They were obtained by Democrats on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee and the Senate Budget Committee as part of a years-long investigation.

   Democrats say the findings demonstrate that the oil industry has misled the public about its role in causing and addressing climate change, an allegation the industry rejects. The new documents come as oil companies already face a [wave of lawsuits](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/09/14/states-cities-scramble-sue-oil-companies-over-climate-change/?itid=lk_inline_manual_5) that seek to hold them responsible for extreme weather events fueled by global warming.

   One [2018 exchange](https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/e5b72a68-3238-4aed-9da4-f379fedd9f9f.pdf?itid=lk_inline_manual_8) shows an ExxonMobil executive downplaying the impact of the Paris agreement on the company’s plans for continued fossil fuel production.

   The oil giant in 2015 voiced support for the landmark agreement, which calls for limiting global warming to “well below” 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) and ideally to 1.5C (2.7F). But Pete Trelenberg, Exxon’s manager of environmental policy and planning, wrote that these targets should not influence internal decision-making on exploration and production of oil and gas.

   “I don’t think hypothetical 1.5 deg C scenarios (vs hypothetical 2 deg C scenarios) should really change our thinking vis a vis upstream strategy,” Trelenberg wrote. “We don’t yet see the world even approaching a 2 deg C pathway … let alone a 1.5 deg C pathway.”

   Many top scientists agree that [humanity is not on track](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2022/global-warming-1-5-celsius-scenarios/?itid=lk_inline_manual_13) to meet the 1.5C goal, a move that could help [save coral reefs](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2024/florida-coral-restoration/?itid=lk_inline_manual_13) and stave off catastrophic sea level rise. To achieve this crucial climate target, they say, the world must swiftly phase out fossil fuels, which are [responsible for more than three-quarters](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/03/20/climate-change-ipcc-report-15/?itid=lk_inline_manual_13) of global greenhouse gas emissions.

   Another 2018 exchange shows a Shell official disputing a report by the Energy Transitions Commission, a think tank, on the feasibility of net-zero emissions by mid-century — a target the company would later adopt.

   Read more here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/04/30/oil-companies-climate-documents-democrats/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/04/30/oil-companies-climate-documents-democrats/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com)