Oil industry knew in 1995 that they were causing climate change.

Oil companies concluded in 1995 that “the scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,” but decided it was best to ignore conclusions and continue to claim that there was no correlation. Many of those oil companies continue to pretend otherwise, though some (Exxon Mobil) have recently admitted that humans are causing global climate change and stopped funding the groups that claim otherwise on behalf of the oil industry.

At this point being surprised by this is a bit like being surprised that the tobacco industry long ago knew that cigarettes are deadly.

Published by Waldo Jaquith

Waldo Jaquith (JAKE-with) is an open government technologist who lives near Char­lottes­­ville, VA, USA. more »

8 replies on “Oil industry knew in 1995 that they were causing climate change.”

  1. Yawn. The fear-mongering disaster enthusiasts are of the same ilk that were saying back in the 70s that we’d be out of oil by now and that large parts of the earth would be starving. Although I admit the global warming, er, I mean “climate change” ruse is more clever, it’s still just a different chapter in a tired playbook and will amount to little more than a footnote on a page quickly turned.

  2. …it’s still just a different chapter in a tired playbook and will amount to little more than a footnote on a page quickly turned….

    are we talking about the republican party or climate change?

  3. Big business is naturally coming around to the liberal point-of-view and getting in bed with the government. There’s a word for that.

  4. And those scientists working for the industry’s lobbying group turned out to be just as wrong as all the other Global Warming alarmists. What’s the earth been doing for the past decade? Oh yeah… it’s been cooling. We must’ve stopped producing CO2, is that it?

  5. Thank goodness Will and I.Publius are objective enough to be able to look past the consensus of scientists, businesses and government and draw their own conclusion without the harmful influence of scientific fact.

  6. Lawyers bring no constructive input to this discussion. There isn’t one in 50 fluent in the sciences. Superfund taught us that if an attorney is in the room during clean-up negotiations that there would be a direct and measurable decrease in the results. In effect they have become paid, skilled, professional deniers.

    What is different now on climate change is that the science is getting better. Lots more analysis depicts the severity of climate oscillation. Warming has initiated a larger cycle of CO2 and CH4 release that predicts to radically increase the rate of global warming:

    Unexpectedly large amounts of carbon dioxide are being released into the atmosphere as the result of “feedback loops” that are speeding up natural processes. Prominent among these, evidence indicates, is a cycle in which higher temperatures are beginning to melt the arctic permafrost, which could release hundreds of billions of tons of carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere, said several scientists on a panel at the meeting.

    The permafrost holds 1 trillion tons of carbon, and as much as 10 percent of that could be released this century, Field said. Along with carbon dioxide melting permafrost releases methane, which is 25 times more potent a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

    It is not unlike losing control of an automobile in a skid – once the momentum and mass start exceeding the control mechanisms the skid becomes much larger and less controllable. A professional driver would tell you to never quit driving he car. An attorney would tell you to get your hands off the wheel to limit your liability for the crash.

Comments are closed.