Impakter
  • Environment
    • Biodiversity
    • Climate Change
    • Circular Economy
    • Energy
  • FINANCE
    • ESG News
    • Sustainable Finance
    • Business
  • TECH
    • Start-up
    • AI & Machine Learning
    • Green Tech
  • Industry News
    • Entertainment
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Health
    • Politics & Foreign Affairs
    • Philanthropy
    • Science
    • Sport
  • Editorial Series
    • SDGs Series
    • Shape Your Future
    • Sustainable Cities
      • Copenhagen
      • San Francisco
      • Seattle
      • Sydney
  • About us
    • Company
    • Team
    • Global Leaders
    • Partners
    • Write for Impakter
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy
No Result
View All Result
Impakter logo
No Result
View All Result
Big Oil Testifies in Court for Decades-Long Climate Denialism 

Big Oil Testifies in Court for Decades-Long Climate Denialism 

Since the 1950s, the fossil fuel industry deliberately misled the public about climate change, today lawmakers are bringing them to account

Esme AbbottbyEsme Abbott
October 29, 2021
in Climate Change, Corporations, Politics & Foreign Affairs, Society
0

Big Oil executives from the US fossil fuel industry appeared in a congressional hearing on Oct. 28 to testify whether their companies deceived the public about the link between fossil fuels and climate change. The landmark hearing represents the first time executives have been sworn under oath to address their “long-running, industry-wide campaign to spread disinformation about the role of fossil fuels in causing global warming.” 

The CEOs of Exxon, BP America, and Chevron, the president of Shell’s U.S. subsidiary and the presidents of two top lobbying groups: the American Petroleum Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce were hauled before Congress to answer big questions. 

Pressure for such a hearing has been mounting for years as reports have revealed how long fossil fuel companies have known about the threat of climate change and their deep involvement in lobbying against climate action. The catalyst for this hearing though was a Greenpeace sting operation earlier this year which captured an Exxon lobbyist admitting the company had fought climate science through “shadow groups ” and targeted influential senators to weaken climate proposals from U.S. President, Joe Biden.


In 2017, it was revealed that 71% of global emissions since 1988 came from just 100 companies. Half of the rise in global temperatures and almost one third of sea level rise since the Industrial revolution has been attributed to the largest 83 fossil fuel companies (and 7 cement companies). There is no denying the connection between fossil fuels and climate change. 

Having learnt from the lessons of Big Tobacco, Big Oil executives facing Congress did not outright lie and deny this connection. Instead, they denied that they had misled or muddied public perception about climate science. They took the opportunity to highlight the importance of fossil fuels for economic growth and their investments in sustainable technology such as carbon capture and biofuels. These are the same tactics the industry has used to delay climate action though after outright climate change denialism became preposterous. 

The fossil fuel industry has known about climate change for half a century

The fossil fuel industry has been studying CO2 pollution for over 60 years according to a report published by the Center for Climate Change Communication. The industry knew their products could potentially change the climate as early as the 1950s, leading to rising temperatures and melting ice caps. By the 70s and 80s, scientists at Exxon were convinced that burning fossil fuels could lead to “catastrophic” global warming. 

In 1978, a senior scientist at Exxon warned that “present thinking holds that man has a time window of five to 10 years before the need for hard decisions regarding changes in energy strategies might become critical.” Despite this warning, the industry did not transition to cleaner energy sources, instead “Big Oil doubled down on fossil fuels.”

Fossil fuel companies had the most up to date and accurate climate science. In-house scientists at Exxon were so good that in 1982, they correctly predicted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would hit 415 parts per million by the year 2019. 

The evidence was clear on global warming and it was clear on the impact fossil fuels had on air pollution and the ensuing health issues. 

In a 1968 internal technical report Shell acknowledged that air pollution “may, in extreme situations, be deleterious to health” and that the oil industry must “reluctantly” accept that cars “are by far the greatest sources of air pollution”. They were aware of the significance of small particles released by fossil fuels, which they deemed the “real villains in health effects”, as they brought toxins, like carcinogens, “deep into the lungs.” In some states in America, air pollution was responsible for almost 1 in 5 deaths. 

Despite clear knowledge of the harms of fossil fuels, these industries embarked on a campaign to sow doubt and confusion. 

A campaign to mislead the public

Instead of using their extensive scientific research to warn the world of the need to take urgent action, the industry launched a sophisticated disinformation campaign to throw the reality of global warming into uncertainty. 

13/n: Here's how an ExxonMobil advertorial on climate change in @nytimes falls apart when its denialist techniques are deconstructed. pic.twitter.com/MeNhyYhnnd

— Geoffrey Supran (@GeoffreySupran) October 21, 2019

80% of research published by Exxon between 1977 and 2014 acknowledged that climate change was real and caused by humans. Meanwhile 80% of their statements to the public expressed doubt about climate change. Dr. Oreskes and Dr. Supran who were involved with the Center for Climate Communication report argue “the question is not whether Exxon Mobil ‘suppressed climate change research,’ but rather how they communicated about it.” They stated “Exxon Mobil contributed quietly to the science and loudly to raising doubts about it” with adverts such as the following.

In the photo: Pro-fossil fuel industry ads run in the 1990s. Photo credit: BBC

For decades fossil fuel industries funded campaigns to cast doubt over climate science. As public perception and mainstream science changed to acknowledge the realities of climate change, Big Oil also changed. The industry shifted from explicit climate denial to disinformation and today relies on subtler propaganda and greenwashing. 

In an interview with the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Dr. Supran explains that they do this through tactics stolen from the playbooks of Big Tobacco. The process is as follows: 

“First is to continue to publicly downplay the reality, but especially the seriousness, of climate change. The second is to present fossil fuel dominance as reasonable and inevitable. And the third—and we think maybe the most interesting—is to shift responsibility for climate change away from the company and onto consumers.”

The concept of a carbon footprint was produced by BP. A website to calculate your “personal carbon footprint”, along with a massive PR propaganda campaign, succeeded in shifting blame away from producers onto consumers. 

I’m willing to hold you accountable for lying about climate change for 30 years when you secretly knew the entire time that fossil fuels emissions would destroy our planet 😇 https://t.co/ekj1Va1Cp0

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) November 2, 2020

This focus on personal responsibility has massively impacted public perception as well as political agendas. For example, Yale University refused to divest from fossil fuels as they claim “it is the consumption of fossil fuels and not the production of fossil fuel that’s the cause of climate change.”

This notion of consumer responsibility was used in a climate lawsuit against Exxon in 2018 and has been co-opted from tobacco industry discourse. These companies have hidden pivotal scientific research, continued harmful production, sown public doubt about climate science, lobbied against climate actions and later washed their hands clean of all responsibility, shifting it to the victims of their practices.   

The deception of greenwashing

For decades Big Oil deceived the public about the destructive consequences of fossil fuel production and consumption. As scientific consensus around this has grown, the industry now focuses on deceiving the public about their operations. 

Research shows that, in the three years following the Paris Agreement, the five largest oil and gas companies (ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, BP and Total) invested more than $1 billion in “misleading climate-related branding and lobbying.” These companies have spent almost $200 million a year “lobbying to delay, control or block policies to tackle climate change.”

In the run up to the hearing, these Big Oil companies bought ads in America’s most popular political newsletters. As lawmakers, lobbyists and policy professionals debated America’s largest climate change legislation and the role of the fossil fuel industry they were barraged with propaganda.

chevron ad
In the photo: An ad for chevron from a POLITICO Morning Energy Newsletter

According to climate justice sites, Heated and Earther, from October 1. to October 22., 100% of POLITICO’s Morning Energy newsletters were sponsored by fossil fuel interests. Although ads no longer explicitly challenge climate science, they inflate companies’ transition to clean energy and the importance of the fossil fuel industry for the economy and labour market. 

“While BP’s advertising focuses on clean energy, in reality, more than 96% of the company’s annual capital expenditure is on oil and gas. According to its own figures, BP is spending less than £4 in every £100 on low-carbon investments each year. The rest is fuelling the climate crisis.”

–said Sophie Marjanac, a lawyer for ClientEarth

The use of propaganda and aid campaigns to inflate public perception of capital expenditure on clean energy is a form of deception. It’s deception that allows them to continue producing and profiting from fossil fuels, delaying climate action.

The idea that Big Oil is prioritizing investments in renewables is perhaps their biggest lie — and one we’re going to hear over and over at this hearing.

Here’s what their capital expenditures looked like in 2019.#SlipperySix pic.twitter.com/j6AMuIVhOH

— Jamie Henn (@jamieclimate) October 28, 2021

Big Oil has exploited ads like these to stave off public condemnation. Millions of dollars have been used to lobby politicians and the general public when it comes to environmental policies that could impact fossil fuel usage. 

Infographic: Oil Firms Spend Millions On Climate Lobbying | Statista
In the photo: Graph showing how much Oil firms spend on climate lobbying. Photo credit: Statista

At the end of 2019, environmental NGO ClientEarth filed a complaint with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) accusing BP ads about low-carbon energy efforts of misleading the public about BP’s contribution to climate change. The ad campaign allegedly breaches international guidelines governing corporate conduct. As a result, the organisation called for “all advertising by fossil fuel companies to be banned, unless it comes with a tobacco-style health warning about dangers to the planet and people.”

In the photo: An example of an advert with a tobacco-style warning. Photo credit: ClientEarth

 


Related Articles: Greenpeace Activists Block Shell’s Port Protesting ‘Greenwashing’ Adverts | TotalEnergies Has Known About Climate Crisis Caused by Fossil Fuels Since 1971

Will Big Oil face the same fate as Big Tobacco?

Comparisons to Big Tobacco were rife throughout the hearing and the past couple of years of public condemnation of Big Oil. In 2006, a federal judge found tobacco companies guilty of a decades-long conspiracy to mislead the public about the risks of smoking. The finding was a landmark move and many are hopeful that Big Oil will face a similar reckoning. 

Although the tobacco industry still produces cigarettes and runs ads, the market was crippled by the lawsuit and ads are now heavily restricted. Some fear that the devastation of the fossil fuel industry is the only way for the world to transition away from dirty fuels and the global warming that they would lock us into. 

To keep within a 1.5°C carbon budget by 2050, almost 60% of oil and methane gas, as well as 90% of coal must remain unextracted. It’s unclear whether this goal could be or will be achieved without wide-scale divestment from fossil fuels. 

Here’s the clip from today’s Big Oil hearing where @RepKatiePorter eviscerates the executives of Exxon, Chevron, Shell and BP for their greenwashing and lobbying against climate action. #SlipperySix pic.twitter.com/j7zoVk5d94

— Jamie Henn (@jamieclimate) October 28, 2021

Regardless of the climate crisis, there is also a moral obligation to hold Big Oil accountable. One study revealed that the fossil fuel industry costs society an average of $568 billion per year in environmental and public health damages, inefficient pricing and transportation.

During the U.S. Presidential elections, Joe Biden was asked whether he would “hold fossil fuel corporations and executives who’ve lied to the public accountable.” He responded that he would crack down on them “just like we did the tobacco industry that lied to the public, just like we did the opioid industry.”

Where does the hearing leave us? 

Despite attempts to hold the fossil fuel industry to account, the way lawmakers did with tobacco companies, Big Oil just isn’t Big Tobacco. Fossil fuels are a deeply partisan issue and the hearing on Thursday involved harsh condemnation from Democrats whilst Republicans apologised to the oil executives, thanked them for their services and questioned the premise of the hearing. 

The hearing may not have brought about the reckoning many were hoping for, but it’s important to remember that the case against Big Tobacco lasted seven years. The fact that fossil fuel corporations have been brought to court like this is a landmark in and of itself. 

Furthermore, the case has brought the complicity and mendacity of Big Oil to public attention. The hearing revealed more in what executives did not admit to than what they did.  

At one point, Representative Carolyn Maloney of New York, chairwoman of the committee, asked all four executives to “commit to no longer spending any money, either directly or indirectly, to oppose efforts to reduce emissions and address climate change.” 

Representative Ro Khanna, Democrat of California, asked them to tell the American Petroleum Institute and other trade groups, which are paid to represent fossil fuel interests in Washington, to stop funding advertisements against electric vehicles and other climate policies.

However, executives wouldn’t commit to either of the requests.

Democrats are not giving up though. Lawmakers stressed that this hearing was just the beginning. At the end of the six-hour hearing, Maloney announced that she will issue subpoenas to the oil companies—as well as the American Petroleum Institute and Chamber of Commerce—for internal documents.

The documents will force Big Oil to provide information on social media advertisements, payments to shadow groups and public relations companies that promote climate denial and misinformation. These documents were demanded before the hearing but the industries refused to comply.

To conclude the meeting, Maloney declared: “We are at ‘code red’ for climate, and I am committed to doing everything I can to help rescue this planet and save it for our children.” She continued “We need to get to the bottom of the oil industry’s disinformation campaign, and with these subpoenas, we will.”

“Code red” for all of us, but will the fossil fuel industry take note?


Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed here by Impakter.com columnists are their own, not those of Impakter.com. — In the Featured Photo: Big Oil executives have been called to Capitol Hill for their hearing Featured Photo credit: Joshua Sukoff

Tags: Big OilClimate ChangeClimate CrisisCongressCOP26Fossil FuelsGlobal warmingPolitics
Previous Post

Facebook Announces Corporate Name Change to Meta

Next Post

U.S Politics: The Virginia Litmus Test

Related Posts

Bill Gates memo
Climate Change

Climate, Gates and COP30

Bill Gates’ recent article on the “three tough truths” of the ongoing environmental changes makes an essential point: we must...

byJosé Graziano da Silva - Former Director-General at FAO, Founder and Director of the Instituto Fome Zero, and Professor Emeritus at the University of Campinas
November 12, 2025
ESG news regarding SBTi proposes flexible Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2 with new Scope-1/2/3 pathways and strict credit guardrails, COP30 in Belém during the UN climate summit, Simon Stiell addresses COP30 in Belém, warning governments to act on climate or face famine, conflict and inflation, Carbon Direct acquires Pachama to add AI and satellite MRV for forest-carbon projects
Business

SBTi Draft Plan Gives Companies More Ways to Reach Net Zero

Today’s ESG Updates SBTi Proposes Net-Zero Standard V2: Multi-path targets across Scopes 1–3, tighter credit rules; consultation open until December...

byAda Omar
November 11, 2025
The Amazon rainforest is often called “the lungs of the world.” It produces oxygen and stores billions of tons of carbon every year. The Amazon rainforest covers more than 60% of the landmass of Peru. Photo Credit: USDA Forest Service / Diego Perez.
Biodiversity

Inside COP30

The 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) is taking place in Belém, Brazil, from November 10 to 21, 2025....

byInternational Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
November 10, 2025
ESG news regarding U.S. absence from the COP30 climate summit, Europe’s role in the U.S. absence, new euro zone loan pricing, and countries suffering from global warming speak at COP30
Business

COP30 Without the U.S.

Today’s ESG Updates Global Climate Talks Proceed Without U.S. Leadership: Lack of U.S. representatives at the UN’s COP30 talks in...

bySarah Perras
November 10, 2025
From Caves to COP30: Comparing the Neanderthals and Modern Humans
COP30

From Caves to COP30: Comparing the Neanderthals and Modern Humans

There is much positive to be said about life in this twenty-first century; we live longer and have multiple technologies...

byRichard Seifman - Former World Bank Senior Health Advisor and U.S. Senior Foreign Service Officer
November 9, 2025
climate change and food
Biodiversity

COP30: Climate Extremes Are Already Impacting Food Yields Today

The 30th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30), taking place in Belém, Brazil, brings together world leaders, scientists, non-governmental organizations, and...

byThe Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
November 7, 2025
ESG news regarding UN says world on 2.8°C track; UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2025, Apple–Engie 15-year PPA adds 173 MW in Italy; 400+ GWh annually, US AGs tell Microsoft, Google, Meta to reject EU CSRD/CSDDD, Farmdex finds one-third of British farmers made no profit as subsidies fall
Business

UN: World Still on 2.8°C Track as 2035 Plans ‘Barely Move the Needle’

Today’s ESG Updates Climate Pledges Fall Short: UNEP warns the world is still heading toward ~2.8°C this century unless cuts...

byAda Omar
November 5, 2025
Hawaii’s Green Tax for Tourists: A New Strategy to Mitigate Climate Impacts?
Biodiversity

Hawaii’s Green Tax for Tourists: A New Strategy to Mitigate Climate Impacts?

Home to hundreds of beautiful islands and endangered wildlife species, Hawaii is lovingly known as the Aloha State. It is...

byYuxi Lim
October 31, 2025
Next Post
U.S Politics: The Virginia Litmus Test

U.S Politics: The Virginia Litmus Test

Recent News

Sustainable Poltrona Frau in a living room in the Tuscan country side villa

Can Design Furniture Be Sustainable? These Brands Are Rethinking Materials, Production, and Responsibility

November 17, 2025
Solar panels in China

China’s Carbon Emissions Flat or Falling for 18 Months: What’s Driving the Shift?

November 17, 2025
EU Parliament cuts corporate sustainability reporting; BlackRock relaxes ETF ESG exclusions; Aegon sets 2025 US growth targets; Google proposes adjusting EU AdTech policy.

EU Parliament Slashes Corporate Sustainability Reporting, Shaking ESG Landscape

November 17, 2025
  • ESG News
  • Sustainable Finance
  • Business

© 2025 Impakter.com owned by Klimado GmbH

No Result
View All Result
  • Environment
    • Biodiversity
    • Climate Change
    • Circular Economy
    • Energy
  • FINANCE
    • ESG News
    • Sustainable Finance
    • Business
  • TECH
    • Start-up
    • AI & Machine Learning
    • Green Tech
  • Industry News
    • Entertainment
    • Food and Agriculture
    • Health
    • Politics & Foreign Affairs
    • Philanthropy
    • Science
    • Sport
  • Editorial Series
    • SDGs Series
    • Shape Your Future
    • Sustainable Cities
      • Copenhagen
      • San Francisco
      • Seattle
      • Sydney
  • About us
    • Company
    • Team
    • Global Leaders
    • Partners
    • Write for Impakter
    • Contact Us
    • Privacy Policy

© 2025 Impakter.com owned by Klimado GmbH