"Earlier this year, the Rockefeller Brothers foundation divested its holding in Exxon Mobil, the company created* by John D. Rockefeller. Now, more descendants of the world's richest oil baron are launching a public broadside against the company that made their fortune. In an editorial for the New York Review of Books, fifth-generation Rockefeller David Kaiser (of the Rockefeller Family Fund) talks about Exxon's complicity in our looming ecological catastrophe.
Kaiser's narrative paints a picture similar to that of big tobacco after it had discovered the link between smoking and cancer. He quotes internal Exxon research from as early as 1977 attributing fossil fuel consumption to climate change. By 1980, one company scientist said that by 2030, if left unchecked, CO2 emissions would cause a global catastrophe. By 1988, Exxon had decided to go on the offensive in anticipation of regulation, muddying the waters with paid scientists to dispute the scientific consensus.
The piece, the first of two to be published, also explains how the Rockefeller family has made an enemy of those in government. Texas Republican Lamar Smith has accused the family of launching a "coordinated effort to deprive companies" of their right to conduct "scientific research free from intimidation." The New York Times quotes Exxon spokesperson Alan Jeffers who believes that the company is the victim of a "conspiracy" led by the Rockefellers. Given how favorably the incoming leadership looks upon oil companies, it's likely that Smith, Jeffers and others will be able to silence the dissenters.
Update: This story has been amended to clarify the differences between Rockefeller Brothers and Rockefeller Family, two separate organizations.
*Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, of which various components were merged to form Exxon."
See also:
The Rockefeller Family Fund vs. Exxon
Quotes:
"...In 1977, for example, an Exxon scientist named James Black gave a presentation to the company's Management Committee. He explained, accurately, what the "greenhouse effect" is and how measurements of atmospheric CO2 that had been taken since 1957 showed it was steadily increasing. And, although emphasizing that climate science still had to deal with untested assumptions and uncertainties, he said that "current opinion overwhelmingly favors attributing atmospheric CO2 increase to fossil fuel combustion."15 "Present thinking," Black added a year later, "holds that man has a time window of five to ten years before the need for hard decisions regarding changes in energy strategies might become critical."16
By 1980, a report written by Exxon's Canadian subsidiary and distributed to Exxon managers around the world stated matter-of-factly, "It is assumed that the major contributors of CO2 are the burning of fossil fuels...and oxidation of carbon stored in trees and soil humus.... There is no doubt that increases in fossil fuel usage and decreases in forest cover are aggravating the potential problem of increased CO2 in the atmosphere."17 The next year Roger Cohen, director of Exxon's Theoretical and Mathematical Sciences Laboratory, wrote in an internal memo that by 2030, projected cumulative carbon emissions could, after a delay, "produce effects which will indeed be catastrophic (at least for a substantial fraction of the earth's population)."18
In 1982, Cohen added that "over the past several years a clear scientific consensus has emerged": atmospheric CO2 would double from its preindustrial quantity sometime in the second half of the twenty-first century, producing an average increase in global temperature of three degrees Celsius, plus or minus 1.5 degrees. "There is unanimous agreement in the scientific community," he went on, "that a temperature increase of this magnitude would bring about significant changes in the earth's climate, including rainfall distribution and alterations in the biosphere."19
It was clear, too, what a problem these conclusions posed for the oil industry. As a 1979 Exxon memo reported,
If you want to read the history of Big Oil & the Fracking industry, look for
Frackopoly
"A history of the fracking industry, Frackopoly exposes how more than 100 years of political influence peddling facilitated the control of our energy system by a handful of corporations and financial institutions. It provides the public policy backstory and the history of deregulation that has turned our communities into sacrifice zones.
The book also examines the powerful interests that have supported fracking, including leading environmental groups, and looks at the growing movement to ban fracking and keep fossil fuels in the ground."
my best regards
Andy
The piece, the first of two to be published, also explains how the Rockefeller family has made an enemy of those in government. Texas Republican Lamar Smith has accused the family of launching a "coordinated effort to deprive companies" of their right to conduct "scientific research free from intimidation." The New York Times quotes Exxon spokesperson Alan Jeffers who believes that the company is the victim of a "conspiracy" led by the Rockefellers. Given how favorably the incoming leadership looks upon oil companies, it's likely that Smith, Jeffers and others will be able to silence the dissenters.
Update: This story has been amended to clarify the differences between Rockefeller Brothers and Rockefeller Family, two separate organizations.
*Rockefeller founded Standard Oil, of which various components were merged to form Exxon."
See also:
The Rockefeller Family Fund vs. Exxon
Quotes:
"...In 1977, for example, an Exxon scientist named James Black gave a presentation to the company's Management Committee. He explained, accurately, what the "greenhouse effect" is and how measurements of atmospheric CO2 that had been taken since 1957 showed it was steadily increasing. And, although emphasizing that climate science still had to deal with untested assumptions and uncertainties, he said that "current opinion overwhelmingly favors attributing atmospheric CO2 increase to fossil fuel combustion."15 "Present thinking," Black added a year later, "holds that man has a time window of five to ten years before the need for hard decisions regarding changes in energy strategies might become critical."16
By 1980, a report written by Exxon's Canadian subsidiary and distributed to Exxon managers around the world stated matter-of-factly, "It is assumed that the major contributors of CO2 are the burning of fossil fuels...and oxidation of carbon stored in trees and soil humus.... There is no doubt that increases in fossil fuel usage and decreases in forest cover are aggravating the potential problem of increased CO2 in the atmosphere."17 The next year Roger Cohen, director of Exxon's Theoretical and Mathematical Sciences Laboratory, wrote in an internal memo that by 2030, projected cumulative carbon emissions could, after a delay, "produce effects which will indeed be catastrophic (at least for a substantial fraction of the earth's population)."18
In 1982, Cohen added that "over the past several years a clear scientific consensus has emerged": atmospheric CO2 would double from its preindustrial quantity sometime in the second half of the twenty-first century, producing an average increase in global temperature of three degrees Celsius, plus or minus 1.5 degrees. "There is unanimous agreement in the scientific community," he went on, "that a temperature increase of this magnitude would bring about significant changes in the earth's climate, including rainfall distribution and alterations in the biosphere."19
It was clear, too, what a problem these conclusions posed for the oil industry. As a 1979 Exxon memo reported,
Models predict that the present trend of fossil fuel use will lead to dramatic climatic changes within the next 75 years.... Should it be deemed necessary to maintain atmospheric CO2 levels to prevent significant climatic changes, dramatic changes in patterns of energy use would be required.20In other words, the world would have to curtail its use of fossil fuels substantially. Senior Exxon scientist Henry Shaw warned management that according to the predictions of the National Academy of Sciences, global warming, not any lack of supply, would force humankind to stop burning fossil fuels.21"
If you want to read the history of Big Oil & the Fracking industry, look for
Frackopoly
"A history of the fracking industry, Frackopoly exposes how more than 100 years of political influence peddling facilitated the control of our energy system by a handful of corporations and financial institutions. It provides the public policy backstory and the history of deregulation that has turned our communities into sacrifice zones.
The book also examines the powerful interests that have supported fracking, including leading environmental groups, and looks at the growing movement to ban fracking and keep fossil fuels in the ground."
my best regards
Andy
-- Andy Gheorghiu - Policy Advisor - Food & Water Europe Ascher 14 34497 Korbach Germany Tel.: +49 5631 50 69 507 Mobil: +49 160 20 30 974 Skype: andy.gheorghiu2 website: www.foodandwatereurope.org
