ExxonMobil Warns of ‘Catastrophic’ 7°F to 12°F Global Warming Without Government Action

[villager]

Source: ThinkProgress

It’s a Through-The-Looking-Glass world. The Washington Post reports Sunday that ExxonMobil has a far saner view of global warming than the national Republican party.

Fred Hiatt, the paper’s centrist editorial page editor, drops this bombshell: With no government action, Exxon experts told us during a visit to The Post last week, average temperatures are likely to rise by a catastrophic (my word, not theirs) 5 degrees Celsius, with rises of 6, 7 or even more quite possible.

This is indeed basic climate science.

Of course, thanks to excellent reporting by InsideClimate News, we now know ExxonMobil had been told by its own scientists in the 1970s and 1980s that climate change was human-caused and would reach catastrophic levels without reductions in carbon emissions. Yes, this is same ExxonMobil that then became the largest funder of disinformation on climate science and attacks on climate scientists until they were surpassed by the Koch Brothers in recent years — but that is a different (tragic) story.

Hiatt’s point is to show “how dangerously extreme the Republican Party has become on climate change,” and that that “Republicans’ ideologically based denial is dangerous and cowardly.” After all, the oil giant ain’t Greenpeace. Yet unlike the national GOP leadership and its presidential candidates, “the company believes climate change is real, that governments should take action to combat it and that the most sensible action would be a revenue-neutral tax on carbon,” that taxes fossil fuels like coal and oil and returns the money to taxpayers.

What is the reason for “the know-nothingism of today’s Republicans”? Hiatt offers a partial explanation: “Some of them see scientists as part of a left-wing cabal; many of them doubt government’s ability to do anything, let alone something as big as redirecting the economy’s energy use.”

But he misses a key element — namely the deafening echo chamber of the right wing’s media and think tanks. As David Brooks — who is often, but not always, part of that echo chamber — explained last week, on the climate change issue:
[T]he G.O.P. has come to resemble a Soviet dictatorship — a vast majority of Republican politicians can’t publicly say what they know about the truth of climate change because they’re afraid the thought police will knock on their door and drag them off to an AM radio interrogation.

Yes, the GOP’s science denial is so extreme that a major conservative columnist has called out the right wing’s “thought police.” Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman used Brooks’ line — and the Paris climate talks — as a launching point for a must-read piece, “Republicans’ Climate Change Denial Denial” Friday.

As Krugman explains,”the talks could mark a turning point” toward “the kind of international action needed to avert catastrophe.” But he adds: “Then again, they might not; we may be doomed. And if we are, you know who will be responsible: the Republican Party.”

<snip>

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/07/3728921/exxonmobil-warns-catastrophic-global-warming/

[randys1]

1. Even if all the idiots were out of power and our govt could agree on the issue, what could

be done now?

We could do all kinds of things, actually and if nothing else, would be profitable for green industry.

I do believe the harm has been done long term, though.

[villager]

2. No question that it's too late to avoid consequences for our species-wide hubris...

I guess the remaining questions this century are: Will they ultimately be "extinction-level" consequences, or will some mitigation be possible?

The latter can only come when the corporate/military state -- and their lapdogs among our "leaders" -- are definitively swept out of power...

[randys1]

3. China alone has to account for so much and look at how long it would take to fix that

[villager]

4. Even if there were no GOP, there'd still be China. And vice-versa.

Still, since we are China's "main market," one wonders what suasion a non-GOP infested US might have had?

One also wonders when advanced pollution will cause enough mass die-offs in China that the leadership will no longer be able to escape consequences....

[truebrit71]

7. Don't forget India...

....as more and more people drag themselves out of extreme poverty it will (perversely) only add to the woes of the planet...

[demosincebirth]

39. India is still trying to deslodge themselves from thousands of years with Caste system

[yeoman6987]

51. That is amazing

So what you are saying is ensuring no poor is bad for the environment?

[truebrit71]

65. What I am saying is that as the poor pull themselves out of poverty...

... which is a good thing, they will require more goods and services to consume, which will exacerbate environmental problems, especially in India, which is a bad thing.

[yeoman6987]

66. I'd rather see people out of poverty. So to me this is great news.

[truebrit71]

68. Me too. But if it costs us the planet, who really gains?

That's the devil's bargain we now face because we continue to exploit fossil fuels instead of renewables..

It totally sucks.

[yeoman6987]

69. It does. They'll have to find another way to save the planet

But I refuse to support it at the expense of the poor getting a leg up.

[villager]

79. The question might be: What would you be willing to give up personally, so that others could be

....less poor?

We can't have 12 billion people driving around in SUVs and eating double-decker burgers, and imagining that world can even last...

[nightscanner59]

89. 1. GOTV. 2. boycott these number 1 bastards funding the disinformation campaign:

And there's an app for that!:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2012/06/18/microsoft-programmer-turned-democrat-politician-plans-anti-koch-brothers-smartphone-app/
I'm one who scraped himself up from dirt poor, to lower working class. I'm still essentially homeless. I live company paid hotel to the next, and between jobs I live in a tent and a car on BLM free camps near hot springs. There's nothing I can do to until charging stations are more available in remote areas I'm often assigned for work to decrease my fossil fuel consumption beyond driving my 10 year old, well maintained economy car, and only by necessity.
But I certainly can avoid giving the KOCKS anything I can avoid!

[bvar22]

90. I'd love to see people out of poverty too.

We can start right here in my county in the rural Arkansas Mountains.
Desperate Poverty up in these hills.

[bvar22]

58. As long as we are not forgetting, we can add

Vietnam, Korea, and Indonesia.

[randys1]

9. Ricky Gervais and his buddy, show, buddy went to China and other places, and Ricky made his life

hell, I dont recall names at this time which is sad cuz I am huge fan, anyway on one show his friend was sent to China and I will never forget the pollution in the air, it was absolutely insane.

[LanternWaste]

47. An Idiot Abroad, maybe?

An Idiot Abroad, maybe?

My introduction to Gervais, and the show was a hoot to watch.

[randys1]

53. Thanx...yep

[pampango]

61. China's CO2 emissions are double the US but their population is 4 times bigger.

On a per capita basis the average American is a much bigger CO2 emitter.
...................Total emissions....per capita
China..............10,540,000........7.6
United States.....5,334,000......16.5
European Union..3,415,000........6.7

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

[randys1]

62. Did not know that, if you look at their skies you would assume they were much worse.

If your stats are accurate, we have a lot of splaining to do

[Bernin]

50. We could

fix this if we desired. We are an innovative society when we want to be.
But, you know apparently it's more important to make weapons and spread misery than have nice things and the promise of a future for our kids.

Kind of moot anyway since one naturally occurring EMP from the sun, as happened in the 1700's, would knock most, if not all, of the more than 400 nuclear power plants world wide off line and into melt down.


Planet will be useless forever after that. So global warming is kind of small potatoes when you really think about it.

[Volaris]

72. We would have to engineer a way to pull atmospheric carbon out of the air..

Essentially, we would have to reverse teraform the carbon-rich air we've spent 200 years creating.

I think it could be done, but the energy and materials required to do it would necessarily be a National-level project.

[bvar22]

91. International level project.

We can "pull" all the carbon out of the air here, but I China is still making twice as much we've only slowed the speed at which we do the big Thelma & Loise.

[bvar22]

92. BTW: All green plants "pull" carbon out of the air.

The real problem is that we are digging up and burning carbon that was buried millions of years ago, and we can't put that genie back in the bottle.

[nightscanner59]

88. 1. GOTV. 2. boycott these number 1 bastards funding the disinformation campaign:

And there's an app for that!:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2012/06/18/microsoft-programmer-turned-democrat-politician-plans-anti-koch-brothers-smartphone-app/
Yet I agree, the damage done is likely irreversible, but I still don't want to hand a penny to the Kocks. .

[hobbit709]

5. Yet at the same time they covered this fact up for 40 years.

[truebrit71]

8. Right?

Fuckers...

[sinkingfeeling]

6. Ironic that now Exxon's concerned.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

11. They got caught, no point in hiding from it any more. Time to try and repair their reputation. nt

[jberryhill]

13. They have a lot of maritime infrastructure

They have port facilities, ocean platforms and a whole lot of other infrastructure. Politically, they will do whatever they can to benefit their business, but they are still an organization that is run on scientific research.

It's not as if they believe the petroleum they are extracting is 5,000 years old.

[erronis]

17. Excuse me if I question their motives. Many companies/industries have played some very long card

games. While my cynicism is fueled by observation of past actions and I may be over-cynical, I will always call into doubt the PR statements made by any corporate (and most political) entities.

Perhaps they have really gotten on the boat and hope that the planet can be human habitable for the next 1,000+ years. They haven't demonstrated their interest for more than the last 1-2 years. They have demonstrated that they are willing to be part of the conglomeration of profit-makers who rape the resources and kill the environment.

Just like Cocaine-Cola promoting the "Sweet Sodas Are Part of Good Nutrition" or the tobacco industry promoting filters and menthol, I would want to see Esso/Exxon/Mobile prove their commitments by supporting the scientists that are honest, and promoting the results throughout the industry and the world.

[Blue_Tires]

49. +1000

[jalan48]

10. I've read one future possibility is moving 'hot spots' on the globe.

Some areas will experience extreme temps so high as to make life impossible in those locations. It reminds me when I was a kid and used a magnifying glass on an ant hill (I know, it was terrible behavior).

[villager]

14. Moving? You mean, *less* than thousands of years in a given spot? I haven't come across that

..scenario yet.

Though it implies we'll be returning -- shortly -- to a nomadic kind of existence...

[jalan48]

18. Yes, I believe that is what I read.

[Quixote1818]

15. We are going to have to start building CO2 capturing machines

and put them fucking everywhere. If you want to invest in something it would be a company that is trying to come up with some sort of way to do this. Here is an article on this: http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060004175

[Indydem]

19. Not really.

The solution is not sequestration.

It is division into Carbon and o2.

Science is close to the catalyst. Now we just need a method to power it.

We need fusion.

Invest in that.

[exboyfil]

24. Fusion is just 20 years away

That was said 60 years ago.

http://www.newstatesman.com/sci-tech/2014/11/forever-20-years-away-will-we-ever-have-working-nuclear-fusion-reactor

[NeoGreen]

27. <cough>...some might say that Fusion...

...is already here:



Depending on how you define fusion, that is...

[exboyfil]

40. Yep you are right

I would prefer the spend dollars on orbital solar collectors over fusion. I can see a much easier technological path towards that than what is involved with man made fusion reactor vessels.

Ultimately a Dyson sphere.

[NeoGreen]

42. Ahhh...reminds me of a presentation about energy I made in 9th grade...

...that touted the benefits of orbital solar collectors as inspired in an article I read in Omni magazine, all the way back in 1980.

As for a Dysonian sphere, I'd settle for a ring.

No need to get greedy and take it all...

[Quixote1818]

12. K and R

[hedgehog]

16. Nice of them to come to the party, even if they're awfully late!

[Ford_Prefect]

20. I find it fascinating that they choose NOW to come forward.

Last edited Tue Dec 8, 2015, 12:52 AM - Edit history (1)

It makes me wonder what worse outcome for Exxon are they trying to avoid? Victim lawsuits attaching corporate profits and executive golden parachutes? Nationalization of "natural" resources and their exploiters? Or something even worse they don't want to admit knowing about?

I was taught about this stuff in 1969 in High School science class along with peak oil theory, resource depletion, water and air pollution effects. There never was a free ride when fossil fuels were extracted and burned, and the population grew and grew and grew. The maths were compelling, obvious, and inescapable.

Where the hell was everyone else?????????????

************************************

Oh yeah, they were in church praying to THEIR god that whatever the next big bad thing was it should happen to some other poor heathen in another part of the planet. They still are today, it seems.

As was already so well said about gun violence: "God Isn't Fixing This!"

[villager]

21. There was something good on television.... nt

[Fast Walker 52]

37. I'm sure this is part of the lawsuits they are facing

[secondwind]

22. K&R!!

[annabanana]

23. Where were they a few decades ago? Al Gore could've used

some back up.

[RoccoR5955]

25. They knew about this in the 1970s and are just letting on to this.

This should be criminal!
So many of us have been shouting about it since then, and only NOW they start to blow their horn!
Why are these corporations still in business, other than their bribery of government officials.
I want an investigation into this, AFTER we have a Manhattan Project style effort into combating climate change. (even though I think it has gone too far already)

[LiberalArkie]

33. Short term profits, let the next CEO take care of it.

[Fast Walker 52]

38. horribly, inexcusably criminal-- GREED UBER ALLES

fuck those bastards.

[grntuscarora]

70. Goddamn ExxonMobil

for their profit driven silence all these years. Just fuck 'em, and fuck the entire fossil fuel industry.
If they're looking for my admiration for their enlightened stance now, they ain't gettin' it.
One day late and an inhabitable planet short.

[Ford_Prefect]

26. I think they want to make sure that the cost is socialized, that WE pay for it, not them.

What a tragedy if corporate profits should be interfered with by such an inconvenience.

[immoderate]

28. Those goddam motherfuckers!!

--imm

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

29. What's their prediction of warming WITH government action?

Is there a big difference? Can government action reverse this trend?

[WillyT]

30. K & R !!!

[Dont call me Shirley]

31. "G.O.P. has come to resemble a Soviet dictatorship" thanks to you Exxon and the rest of your fossil

fuel dictators.

[packman]

32. Nothing can be done about it -

it's too late, too many adding to the problem, beyond our scope now to control it ---- gee, sounds a lot like the things they say about gun control in this country.

[demosincebirth]

34. try telling that to the "Crazies" and they'll turn and tell you that the 95% of the scientist do not

know what the fuck they are talking about...that they hear on fox and talk radio, with their experts, just the opposite.


You can't crack a thick skulls.

[Fast Walker 52]

35. *FACEPALM* ... thanks, ASSHOLES

[2naSalit]

36. So now the most guilty perp is feigning concern

that's really rich.

Thanks for waiting until you've been exposed and it's already too late.

[drm604]

41. I think that they're now afraid of civil or criminal action.

So they're now trying to play the good guy.

What they need to do is put their money where their mouth is and spend their money (which they have oodles of) on researching ways to fix the mess they helped make.

[AnnetteJacobs]

64. Well, you know what they (and British Petroleum, etc.) are spending billions on...

They're spending billions on propaganda feel-good commercials telling us how concerned they are about the environment.

[chapdrum]

43. What the f*ck is going on here?

Didn't we just learn that ExxonMobil has been accused of sitting on its OWN research from the late 70's, showing that indeed unrestrained burning of fossil fuel would bring to us to where we now are?

That is politely referenced in passing in the story.

My guess is that EM asked fellow uber capitalist Jeff Bezos to let it use the imprimatur of the WaPo, to so very thoughtfully
let us know - finally - what we need to do.

Thank you dear overlords for creating and willfully perpetuating the problem.

[northoftheborder]

44. This is a turning point, hopefully. I can hardly believe this was admitted by Exxon..

[glinda]

45. They are scared.

[northoftheborder]

46. Absolutely they should be indicted for numerous crimes. Will the Attorney General of the....

United States be up to the task? So shortly before Obama leaves office. I wish the succeeding Democratic president would keep her on - she's the best AG we've had in a LONG time.

[onehandle]

48. Too late. We will experience massive extinctions by 2100. Including most people. nt

[Jack Rabbit]

52. How nice of them to let us know now

Was it about 40 years ago they determined that it was a problem and they would take decisive action to hide the facts and obfuscate any discussion?

Reading the report by ClimateProgress and the editorial in the Washington Post by Fred Hiuatt, one might suppose that the Republican Party created ExxonMobil's climate denial propaganda rather than ExxonMobil, through outright bribery generous campaign contributions, pushed a major political party into adopting its climate denial propaganda. Of course, more bribes generous contributions from the Koch brothers helped as well.

Note to ClimateProgress: It's bad enough to call a right wing moron like Fred Hiatt a conservative, but a centrist? This guy was in the tank for the imperialist war against Iraq prosecuted by the Frat Boy and the Big Dick. Imperialism, the act of invading another country in order to take control of its natural resources, is no more centrist than slavery, the act of buying a human being in order to collect wages on his labor.

[bvar22]

59. President Carter told us way back in 70s,

and even managed to pass legislation that could have had an effect,
but we all know what happened.

55MPH was just too damn slow, and who cares what our grandchildren have to breathe,
or what kind of World they have to live in....Party NOW!!!!


One of Bill Clinton Sins of Omission that I have never forgiven was that the did NOT put Carter's Solar Panels (Water heaters) back on the roof of the White House on DAY 1.

(In case you don't remember, one of the first things Reagan did was to remove carter's Energy Conservation devices from the Whit House).

[villager]

82. And we know what the Bush-Reagan cartel did to *him* to get him out of office...

What's a little treason, when you're goal is to get solar panels -- and all they represent -- off the White House roof?

[GliderGuider]

54. Too little, waaay too late.

According to Dr. Kevin Anderson of the Tyndall Centre, what is required is a 10% annual reduction in FF use, by the whole world, for the next 15 years - getting down to 10% of today's usage by 2030. That might keep us under +2C.

There is no realistic chance that we can put enough renewable energy in place to displace that much fossil fuel in that short period of time without destroying the global economy. So our choices come down to - destroy the economy in the coming two decades, or have climate change destroy it - and much other terrestrial and oceanic life - a bit later.

The true numbers are incredibly, unbelievably brutal - to the point that most people would probably choose to let their grandkids die rather than make the necessary changes today.

Can any government propose a plan like that if they depend on an electorate for their power?

[hughee99]

55. While I agree with much of what is written here, when did Paul Krugman become a "major conservative

columnist"? Most of the conservatives I've met think he's a "progressive" (no, that's not they word they used). Not intending to sidetrack the discussion, just curious.

[BillZBubb]

56. That was referring to the David Brooks piece that preceded Krugman's

[hughee99]

57. Ah, okay. That makes more sense. Thanks. n/t

[bvar22]

60. Since 2006, my Wife & I have worked every day to reduce our Carbon Footprint,

We moved to The Woods, and began producing more Toxin Free, non-GMO food than we consume. We keep chickens and Honey Bees, and heat our home with a renewable (but labor intensive) method. Our total heating bill last year was under $20 (gas for the chain saws and hauling.)
So far...so good.

Something as small as this can be an act of revolution:


Unfortunately, we both believe the World is past the climate tipping point, and things are going to get worse.....waaaaay worse.
We do what we can,
and then "sit on the bank and watch the River Flow." (Thanks, Bob)

[villager]

81. Great stuff, bvar22, and I've long been an admirer of yours on this site

I actually hang my clothes to dry here in L.A. (to talk about that one small piece of the puzzle). Most people still think it's strange/odd. I'm always wondering what the fuck they're doing using a dryer -- except at night, during rainstorms, etc. -- in a sun-drenched place like this.

[bvar22]

93. Thanks for the kind words.

This was much easier to do 10 years ago when I was in my 50s,
but lately, due to some progressive health problems, I am having trouble keeping up.
The hills have gotten higher, the wood harder to split, the rocks heavier, and the ground harder to dig.

(We don't hang our clothes in the rain either.)

[TexasBushwhacker]

63. Now that they've pumped all the cheap oil

and polluted the planet, it's suddenly the government's responsibility to clean up the mess. Now, why do we still have coal fired power plants being built?

[Octafish]

67. Great OP and thread!

It wasn't the Bomb, it was Republican greed that doomed civilization. That is, unless the Democrats DO something about it.

Thank you, Villager. Most important news.

[villager]

80. Thanks, Octafish. I was actually surprised when I got here this morning and it wasn't posted yet...

But it's clearly struck a DU nerve, which is gratifying -- not as the OP poster, but simply as a member of the community here...

[Initech]

71. ExxonMobil: worst company in the world.

Though they may be tied with Monsanto at this point.

[Glamrock]

73. LIBERAL PLOT!!!

Goddamned liberals trying to shut down the oil compa....oh wait.

[Kablooie]

74. Strange that we are hearing them say this just weeks after we learned they knew decades ago.

Or maybe not so strange after all.

[burrowowl]

75. Well they knew this a few decades ago!

Will this convince their Repuke supporters to vote for rules to prevent climate change? No, probably we should rely on praying it away.
I am just sick about this.

[valerief]

76. Now we're supposed to love ExxonMobil's natural gas, I guess.

http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/energy/natural-gas

[hatrack]

77. Fuck ExxonMobil sideways with a rusty pipe wrench

They knew more than 30 year ago that this was going to be a problem.

When their own research revealed just how big of a problem it was going to be, they shit-canned their research programs, dumped the money into lobbying and funding denial think-tanks and made as much money as they possibly could over the intervening decades.

And now they demand - demand - government action to save their lying asses, and (more critically) their money and infrastructure.

Fuck. Them.

[pothos]

78. They could turn themselves around

completely divest from all oil and carbon burning industries and change into a clean energy company, if they cared that much. buutttt... thats not gonna happen.

[liberal_at_heart]

83. I think we all knew that they would only come to grips with it once it started affecting their

bottom line. The question is, is it too late?

[blackspade]

84. What's their angle?

This admission has to have some profit in it for them.

[roamer65]

85. Reversing CO2 emissions is going to require something no one wants to talk about.

Population reduction.

There are too many people on this planet. We are exceeding its "carrying capacity".

[marble falls]

86. Is this Exxon's way of saying, "stop me before I kill again."

[raouldukelives]

87. Some are afraid, some are paid and far too many, are both.

We exist in the most reality, the most honesty, the most progress Wall St shareholders cannot block.

First they tell us we are wrong, that our eyes are lying to us. Then they will tell us it is too late for any efforts but government funded corporate experiments.

As always, avarice will find a way, even in the end.

Some think we can grow out way out of this and some think Jesus will fix it. Both are about as likely.

It will only end when, like slavery, the people decide it is time for it. Individually. They will come to understand the horror they perpetuate and care, or not.

Heck, maybe it could even still be in time for some even though we know it is already far, far too late for far, far too many.

[maxsolomon]

94. someone there should let Inhofe know that he can stop tapdancing

or maybe just stop funding his bullshit.