Wednesday, November 25, 2015
ExxonMobil Corp. (Irving, Texas) asserts that media and environmental activists’ allegations about the company’s climate research are inaccurate and deliberately misleading. The allegations were contained in reports distributed by InsideClimate News, an anti-oil and gas activist organization, and the Los Angeles Times, prompting political attacks by U.S. Sen. and presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Reps. Ted Lieu and Mark DeSaulnier, both California Democrats.
Subsequently, New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman sent a subpoena to ExxonMobil after a review of company statements and shareholder disclosures. Schneiderman’s office is said to be investigating whether ExxonMobil deceived investors about the causes and impacts of climate change. The office made a similar move against Peabody Energy (St. Louis, Mo.) in 2013. Peabody Nov. 9 agreed to make fuller public disclosures about the risks climate change poses to its business in a settlement of charges.
“For nearly 40 years we have supported development of climate science in partnership with governments and academic institutions, and did and continue to do that work in an open and transparent way,” said Ken Cohen, ExxonMobil vice president of public and government affairs. “Activists deliberately cherry-picked statements attributed to various company employees to wrongly suggest definitive conclusions were reached decades ago by company researchers. These activists took those statements out of context and ignored other readily available statements demonstrating that our researchers recognized the developing nature of climate science at the time which, in fact, mirrored global understanding.”
He added that both InsideClimate and the Los Angeles Times ignored evidence provided by the company of continuous and publicly available climate research that refutes their claims. “The facts are that we identified the potential risks of climate change and have taken the issue very seriously,” Cohen said. “We embarked on decades of research in collaboration with many parties, including the Department of Energy, leading academic institutions such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, and others to advance climate science.”
ExxonMobil notes that, since 2009, it has supported a revenue-neutral carbon tax as the preferred policy approach for emission reduction because it ensures a uniform and predictable cost of carbon, allows market prices to drive solutions, maximizes transparency to stakeholders, reduces administrative complexity, promotes global participation, and is easily adjusted to future developments in climate science and policy impacts. “We recognize that our past participation in broad coalitions that opposed ineffective climate policies subjects us to criticism by climate activist groups,” said Cohen. “We will continue to advocate for policies that reduce emissions while enabling economic growth.”
Subsequently, New York attorney general Eric Schneiderman sent a subpoena to ExxonMobil after a review of company statements and shareholder disclosures. Schneiderman’s office is said to be investigating whether ExxonMobil deceived investors about the causes and impacts of climate change. The office made a similar move against Peabody Energy (St. Louis, Mo.) in 2013. Peabody Nov. 9 agreed to make fuller public disclosures about the risks climate change poses to its business in a settlement of charges.
“For nearly 40 years we have supported development of climate science in partnership with governments and academic institutions, and did and continue to do that work in an open and transparent way,” said Ken Cohen, ExxonMobil vice president of public and government affairs. “Activists deliberately cherry-picked statements attributed to various company employees to wrongly suggest definitive conclusions were reached decades ago by company researchers. These activists took those statements out of context and ignored other readily available statements demonstrating that our researchers recognized the developing nature of climate science at the time which, in fact, mirrored global understanding.”
He added that both InsideClimate and the Los Angeles Times ignored evidence provided by the company of continuous and publicly available climate research that refutes their claims. “The facts are that we identified the potential risks of climate change and have taken the issue very seriously,” Cohen said. “We embarked on decades of research in collaboration with many parties, including the Department of Energy, leading academic institutions such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, and others to advance climate science.”
ExxonMobil notes that, since 2009, it has supported a revenue-neutral carbon tax as the preferred policy approach for emission reduction because it ensures a uniform and predictable cost of carbon, allows market prices to drive solutions, maximizes transparency to stakeholders, reduces administrative complexity, promotes global participation, and is easily adjusted to future developments in climate science and policy impacts. “We recognize that our past participation in broad coalitions that opposed ineffective climate policies subjects us to criticism by climate activist groups,” said Cohen. “We will continue to advocate for policies that reduce emissions while enabling economic growth.”
