This is (apparently) really happening folks. For the first time in history, CEOs of Big Oil will testify to US Congress about their multi-decade disinformation campaign to mislead the public about the climate crisis. H/t @maxinejoselow for the scoop. 1/n washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/…
2/n: For quick context, I & @NaomiOreskes wrote last year about why "it is our opinion that holding the fossil fuel industry accountable would be one of the most impactful ways for Congress – & governments around the world – to combat the climate crisis." theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
3/n: Last week I reiterated that point to @bbcworldservice's #TheClimateQuestion as part of a discussion about the latest evidence of Big Oil's malfeasance:
4/n: To learn more about Big Oil's history of climate deception, here's a thread with links to scholarship, reports, journalism, legal briefs, podcasts, cartoons, and more Twitter threads!
5/n: Kudos to the countless people (too many for 140 characters) who have brought Big Oil's moment of reckoning to fruition, incl:
🗞️So many journalists who found receipts proving #ExxonKnew, #ShellKnew, etc. & immeasurably raised the bar on fossil fuel accountability reporting.
6/n: 👩🎓Historians, social scientists, & other scholars who have expanded & solidified the evidentiary basis & built out a peer-reviewed literature documenting Big Oil's history of denial & delay.
7/n: ✊ Advocates and activists who have both found additional historical documents and translated them into calls for action.
🏛️Lawyers and lawmakers who have recognised the injustices of Big Oil as the new Big Tobacco & found innovative ways to hold them to account.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For my entire lifetime, oil & gas companies have engaged in PR campaigns to "manufacture doubt & downplay the threats of climate change." For twice that long, they've known their fossil fuel products were producing CO2 with potentially "catastrophic" climate consequences. 1/n
2/n: That is the crux of an amicus brief that I and other experts today filed to the US Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of Minnesota Attorney General @AGEllison's lawsuit against ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute.
3/n: Short on time? Our Table of Contents offers top-line takeaways.
Contrary to Big Oil's climate change propaganda of individualized responsibility, the International Energy Agency's blockbuster 'Net Zero by 2050' report envisions less than 5% of emissions reductions coming from "behaviour changes". 1/n
2/n: We should each do all we can, of course. Climate action should be BOTH/AND not EITHER/OR.
That means driving less, flying less, eating less meat.
BUT, it also means working collectively to confront the fossil fuel forces undermining systemic change.
3/n: Refs ⬆️
For more on Big Oil's PR blame games, see my & @NaomiOreskes's new study:
Big Oil has known its products could cause climate collapse since at least 1959, when physicist Edward Teller warned the American Petroleum Institute of global warming due to fossil fuel burning "sufficient to melt the icecap & submerge New York". Happy #ShowYourStripes Day! 1/n
3/n: To learn more about Big Oil's history of climate deception, here's a thread with links to scholarship, reports, journalism, legal briefs, podcasts, cartoons, and more Twitter threads!:
When we learned in 2019 that @MIT might rename its climate science lecture hall the *Shell* Auditorium in exchange for $3m, we raised the alarm. It made the front page of the @BostonGlobe. Today, in a win of sorts, MIT announced a "course-correct". 1/n
2/n: The auditorium will instead be named the "Dixie Lee Bryant(1891) Lecture Hall", after the first woman to receive a BSc in Geology at MIT. This, as MIT rightly acknowledges, is a wonderful & "overdue recognition of women in science at MIT". eapsweb.mit.edu/sites/default/…
3/n: I am sad to say, however that this remains a greenwashing win for Shell, & yet another case of what @BenFranta & I term Big Oil's "colonization of academia". theguardian.com/environment/cl…
Of Wednesday's 3 big blows to Big Oil, Shell losing in court strikes me as most immediately impactful because it ORDERS a fossil fuel firm to align with Paris Agreement, effective at once, & establishes legal precedents up the wazoo. Do others agree? 1/n
2/n: The Exxon and Chevron shareholder wins are, of course, also seismic in terms of political momentum-building towards further (shareholder) activism, but that's partly because shareholder engagement has literally yielded nothing for the past 25 years.
3/n: @GernotWagner seems to concur, noting that "Only one of these events [Shell's court loss] is bound up with measurable, concrete steps towards decarbonization." Regarding the shareholder wins at Chevron and Exxon, "what comes next is more open ended."bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
For those claiming yesterday's (genuinely brilliant) Exxon/Chevron shareholder climate victories are an argument against fossil fuel divestment, remember that shareholder engagement with Big Oil achieved precisely nothing for 25 years. 1/n insideclimatenews.org/news/16112015/…
3/n: (@_aploy and I wrote about those dynamics in @sciam ⬆️.)
Only after all that - i.e. now - have shareholders made progress. This isn't an argument against shareholder activism per se; indeed, divestment campaigns generally propose an explicit "grace period" for engagement.