Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Royal Dutch Shell Knew Too: Decades-Long Climate Lies

posted by on Sunday March 12 2017, @01:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the playing-both-sides-of-the-fence dept.

-- OriginalOwner_ writes:

Common Dreams reports:

Oil giant Shell also knew of the dangers of climate change decades ago, while it continued to lobby against climate legislation and push for fossil fuel development, a joint investigation by The Guardian[1] and the Dutch newspaper The Correspondent revealed [February 28].

Shell created a confidential report in 1986 which found that the changes brought about by global warming could be "the greatest in recorded history", and warned of an impact "on the human environment, future living standards, and food supplies, [that] could have major social, economic, and political consequences".

The company also made a 28-minute educational film in 1991 titled Climate of Concern that warned oil extraction and use could lead to extreme weather, famines, and mass displacement, and noted that the dangers of climate change were "endorsed by a uniquely broad consensus of scientists". The film was developed for public viewing, particularly for schools.

[...] Despite its own warnings, Shell invested billions of dollars into tar sands operations and exploration in the Arctic. It has also devoted millions to lobbying against climate legislation.

The revelations about Shell come after a separate investigation into ExxonMobil revealed that [that] company had also been waging a climate science suppression campaign and burying its own reports on the global warming impacts of fossil fuel use for decades. Exxon, whose former CEO is now U.S. secretary of state, is currently under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and state attorneys general for allegedly lying to investors about the risks of climate change.

In 2016, a group of lawmakers asked the Department of Justice to look into Shell's knowledge of global warming as well.

[1] Bogus link in TFA corrected.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Royal Dutch Shell Knew Too: Decades-Long Climate Lies | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 89 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12 2017, @05:27PM (5 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12 2017, @05:27PM (#478109)

    Effects != major consequences.

    Then what does == major consequences?
    Miami has 1.5 billion dollars budgeted [periscope.tv] to hold back tidal flooding and only the most optimistic projections think that will even make a dent.

  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 12 2017, @06:41PM (2 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday March 12 2017, @06:41PM (#478139) Journal

    Then what does == major consequences?

    Something comparable to say the destruction of habitat in Europe where most of Europe has been greatly disturbed from anything that would be considered natural.

    Miami has 1.5 billion dollars budgeted to hold back tidal flooding and only the most optimistic projections think that will even make a dent.

    Miami would have to budget for tidal flooding anyway. They get beach erosion and hurricanes even in the complete absence of global warming and sea level rise. This is a classic example of confirmation bias where an ongoing activity which would happen anyway is instead blamed on global warming.

    There is also a high degree of mobility to humanity. They can just move out over the centuries into areas that are less threatened by sea level rise. Meanwhile we don't have similar simple solutions to overpopulation. One can't magically disappear a few billion people without consequence.

    To summarize, my view is that a major consequence with respect to global problems should be something that significantly manifests on a continental or global scale and is caused by the phenomena in question, not merely blamed.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12 2017, @07:11PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 12 2017, @07:11PM (#478159)

      is caused by the phenomena in question, not merely blamed.

      Since global warming does not exist, any such cases are merely examples of blame, never of cause.
      Thus there is no such thing as global warming because there are no consequences!
      Logic!!

    • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Sunday March 12 2017, @07:15PM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday March 12 2017, @07:15PM (#478164) Journal

      To summarize, my view is that a major consequence with respect to global problems should be something that significantly manifests on a continental or global scale and is caused by the phenomena in question, not merely blamed.

      Nice view you have there! How much do they pay you to hold it? And the obvious rebuttal is that it matters very little what khallow thinks, he was summoned in the frist post exactly because of this. And, waiting for manifest global catastrophic consequences to admit that Anthropogenic Global Warming is actual means that it will be too late to do anything about it.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by art guerrilla on Sunday March 12 2017, @06:48PM (1 child)

    by art guerrilla (3082) on Sunday March 12 2017, @06:48PM (#478143)

    'major consequences' as defined by whether it impinges on bubble of the callow khallow, of course ! ! !
    it is anecdotal, BUT in my little corner of the planet which i walk several times a day over the last 3 decades, the flora/fauna are changing...
    no where NEAR the variety of birds who used to show up at my birdbath/birdfeeders... not as many hummingbirds at the feeder... golden orb weaver and crab spiders who used to positively clog up the airspace with their webs, are hardly found in the last 2-3 years... not nearly as many snakes, saw a coral snake for the first time in 3-4 years, and used to see them 2-3 times a year... do have some gopher turtles coming back, since my one dog who, um, 'loved' gopher turtles died a couple years back... couple different landscape plantings which *always* die back in winter (such as it is in la florida), and re-grow in the spring, have not died back the last 2 years... and literally did not have to turn the heat on in the house this 'winter' at all... weather/temp records being continually broken is the new normal, not something that happens on a rare 100-1000 year event...
    no, we done did shit in our nest once too often, and unlike the omniscient shallow khal, we do not know what the fuck we are doing, and we have not run this 'experiment' over a thousand terrestrial planets to study the outcome...