The Awakening in the 1950s

In 1959, Edward Teller, at a symposium organized by the American Petroleum Institute, highlighted the causal relationship between fossil fuel consumption and climate change, forecasting dire consequences.

By the 1970s and 1980s, Exxon scientists grew increasingly alarmed at the potential for catastrophic climate change stemming from fossil fuel combustion.

In a 1977 internal memo, senior Exxon scientist James Black informed the company’s leadership that there was broad scientific consensus regarding humanity's influence on climate through CO2 emissions from fossil fuels.

In 1978, he cautioned that independent experts predicted a doubling of atmospheric CO2 could elevate global temperatures by 2 to 3 degrees, and potentially 10 degrees at the poles. He noted the urgency of making critical energy strategy changes within five to ten years.

Exxon subsequently embarked on an extensive program of CO2 monitoring and climate research that persisted into the late 1980s.

During an American Petroleum Institute meeting in 1980, representatives from Exxon, Texaco, and Shell projected a 1 degree Celsius rise in global temperatures by 2005, 2.5 degrees by 2038, and a staggering 5 degrees by 2067, which would lead to "major economic consequences."

However, a pivotal moment occurred in June 1988 when NASA scientist James Hansen testified before Congress, declaring that "Global Warming Has Begun." This event spurred headlines and intensified discussions on addressing the warming trend.

In response, Exxon management recognized the existential threat posed by CO2-induced global warming to their industry, leading to a transition from a proactive approach in climate research to one of denial.

The second video titled "Science, Fiction, and Narrative: Framing the Upcoming Special Report on Climate Change" explores how narratives are shaped around climate science and the implications for policy-making.

The Rise of Disinformation

From the late 1980s onwards, Exxon orchestrated a sophisticated disinformation campaign aimed at casting doubt on the reality of global warming. This included lobbying efforts to hinder both domestic and international initiatives addressing greenhouse gas emissions.

Despite once leading climate science efforts, Exxon publicly attacked the credibility of climate research. The company financed fringe studies, cherry-picked data, and perpetuated discredited theories to argue that a scientific consensus was unattainable, even though a consensus had emerged by the 1980s.

When outright denial became untenable, the industry redefined climate change as a technological challenge, particularly promoting Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), despite its known ineffectiveness.

BP was particularly notorious for introducing the concept of the 'personal carbon footprint' to shift the onus of responsibility from corporations to consumers, even though methane emissions from oil and gas production significantly contribute to total lifecycle emissions.

Financial markets, too, recognized that meaningful action on climate change posed unacceptable systemic risks. Banks and asset managers had significant investments in fossil fuel extraction and energy generation, which threatened to become "stranded assets" as governments pursued carbon pricing and related initiatives.

Unfortunately, this framing of climate change as an economic dilemma, manageable through financial mechanisms, often deferred real action and diverted attention from the core issues.