There are those, however, that would suggest global warming isn't really our fault. It's those danged oil companies. A recent report by the Climate Accountability Institute has been seized upon to do precisely that. The report points out that the products of the top 20 fossil fuel companies resulted in 35 per cent of the carbon dioxide and methane released by human activities since 1965. Another stat has attracted rather less attention but tells the important story, specifically that 90 per cent of those emissions were from the use of their products. That means us.
Do the oil companies have a responsibility? Of course they do. They produce the product that ultimately causes global warming. Have they vigorously promoted their industry? Of course they have. Doesn't everybody promote their livelihood? And have they behaved badly? Oh yes, at times very badly. But we are the ones who burn the damn stuff. We send the CO2 skyward.
And it isn't as if the relationship between burning fossil fuels and global warming has been a big secret. The theory has been known since early in the 19th century. Edward Teller, he of the hydrogen bomb, was speaking out about the dangers in the 1950s. In 1965, the U.S. government issued a report outlining the climate effects of burning fossil fuels. Furthermore, the American Petroleum Institute, the U.S. oil industry's largest trade association, concurred with the report and warned about "marked changes in climate." So both government and industry have discussed the relationship publicly for over 50 years.
And the public's response? Just keep on filling the tank. A decade after Al Gore's Oscar-winning documentary An Inconvenient Truth, the Americans elected Donald Trump, a buffoon who once said global warming was a "Chinese hoax." In Brazil, South America's largest country, its benighted citizens elected a party of deniers whose foreign minister claimed global warming is a "Marxist conspiracy." But no need to go abroad. Here in Alberta we threw out a government that wasn't doing as much as it should but at least recognized the problem and replaced it with a government that is doubling down on fossil fuels and threatening people who criticize its policies. And federally, we are in the midst of an election where a party of near-deniers may form the next government.
This post is not a defense of the oil industry. I have no interest in that and, in any case, it doesn't need my help. This is about scapegoating. Scapegoating is powerful and tempting to demagogues and ordinary people alike; it's comforting to hear that someone else is responsible for your problems, not you. But whether it's Hitler scapegoating Jews, Trump scapegoating immigrants, or Kenney scapegoating Trudeau, it's wrong. It's dishonest and dangerous.
We have all enjoyed the golden age of cheap energy that the lifeblood of modern industry brought us. Now the bills are coming due and they are much higher than we realized. Too many people don't want to pay them. Or get off the high. Election after election and survey after survey show that while most people now recognize the threat is serious they are reluctant to pay the price of dealing with it. Blaming the oil companies is a cop-out. It's our swamp, our mess. The enemy is us.
5 comments:
As Monbiot notes:
"Even as their own scientists warned that the continued extraction of fossil fuels could cause “catastrophic” consequences, the oil companies pumped billions of dollars into thwarting government action. They funded thinktanks and paid retired scientists and fake grassroots organisations to pour doubt and scorn on climate science. They sponsored politicians, particularly in the US Congress, to block international attempts to curtail greenhouse gas emissions. They invested heavily in greenwashing their public image.
"These efforts continue today, with advertisements by Shell and Exxon that create the misleading impression that they’re switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy. In reality, Shell’s annual report reveals that it invested $25bn in oil and gas last year. But it provides no figure for its much-trumpeted investments in low-carbon technologies. Nor was the company able to do so when I challenged it."
That's hardly scapegoating, Bill. These corporate giants have operated a giant misinformation campaign for decades. They have been instrumental in regulatory capture and in putting our elected representatives into their service, not the public interest.
Even today, knowing full well how near we stand to climate change catastrophe they're planning on expanding production to levels that will insure our youngest won't have a chance.
It's not scapegoating to point out their malevolence. I can't take us off our carbon fuel addiction. The best I can do is to use my car just as little as absolutely necessary and then as efficiently as possible. We don't really have public transit where I am so I don't have much choice.
Yes, consumers of fossil fuels bear some responsibility for their actions but it is positively eclipsed by the chicanery of the fossil energy giants.
BTW, how are those massively profitable energy giants coming with cleaning up those tailing ponds or the many thousands of orphan wells spread around your province? Or, perhaps, that's our fault too.
I recall clearly when Christy Clark traveled to Calgary to address the Canadian Petroleum Club and returned home that afternoon with a million dollar campaign cheque. With that cash in her jeans she somehow had a change of mind on that infernal pipeline. But I guess we're to blame for that. Mustn't scapegoat, right?
As for your first question, Mound, you live in B.C., so no you aren't responsible. But Albertans certainly are. We elected the Conservatives for 45 years (and have now re-elected them) and have never demanded cleanups then or now. Sort of like Pogo and his swamp mates.
As for your second question, you British Columbians elected Clark premier for six years so, yes, I guess you do have some responsibility for her.
fool me once shame on you
fool me twice shame on me
fool me thrice to infinity without any personal action i can reasonably take
by guys with yearly budgets more than I've made this life time...not my shame
not to say i didn't buy in
heat in winter, lights, transportation as per the dictated to the masses
Albertan here that has never voted Conservative in 50 years
so this hasn't been my crime spree
and the only way to not play since day one
was suicide
so that said
what is it in human nature that allows this?
or is it just rigged by money and evil?
there is a pathology in this
that gravitates to politics and other positions of power
with a passion and determination and ruthlessness not found in decent humans.
bit of a rant but we have been frustrated a long time
The oil giants, Bill, waged a pernicious scheme over many decades to confuse the public over the perils of fossil fuels and greenhouse gases. They financed hack science, now thoroughly discredited. They poured money into rightwing think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the Fraser Institute. They bought media outlets such as the "partnership" they formed with PostMedia.
The most disgusting thing they did was to copy the RJ Reynolds playbook. Reynolds used it to mislead smokers by casting doubt on the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. Big Oil used the same approach, including RJ Reynolds' PR hacks, to sow doubt in the public mind about man-made climate change and they're still at it. They leverage their clout ($27 trillion in proven fossil reserves already subscribed on world stock exchanges) to deter government action against them.
They're still at it. They're not giving up. But we're 'scapegoating' them, really? No, not hardly. How do you scapegoat pure evil?
For years Big Tobacco was off limits in anti-smoking campaigns. The smoker is responsible, we were told. And yet the tide of public opinion didn't really change until we started to have a conversation about the huge profits Big Tobacco was making, the advertising to youth, the lies about the science of cancer.
The smokers were part of the problem, but to ignore the role of the Tobacco companies - and the profits they were making - prevented real progress. It allowed them to continue behaving badly.
Talking about the moral and legal responsibility of fossil fuel companies does not need to be scapegoating. Until now the assumption has been that Chevron, Shell and ExxonMobil could continue to make massive profits selling products that they know is already causing massive harm around the world. The resulting costs are passed on to communities and their taxpayers, while the companies and their investors pocket the profits. No wonder that to this day they continue to "behave badly" - there's big bucks to be made in doing so.
The Climate Accountability Institute shines a light on the huge role that fossil fuel companies have played in causing climate change. And we should be grateful to them.
Of course we are all responsible for climate change - but that includes fossil fuel companies. The need for everyone to do their share is precisely why fossil fuel companies need to start being held responsible. That's not scapegoating. It's good economics and the start of giving them an incentive to stop delaying climate action and to start transitioning to sustainable energy systems.
For more thoughts on why to hold fossil fuel companies accountable, here's a blog post - https://www.wcel.org/blog/why-hold-fossil-fuel-companies-accountable-climate-costs
Post a Comment