Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings

schism666

cold and ugly
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Posts
12,007
:eek: like we didn't already know :rolleyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...d-exxons-secret-1980s-climate-change-warnings

Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products. One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).

https://i.imgur.com/W70rwKw.jpg

Later that decade, in 1988, an internal report by Shell projected similar effects but also found that CO2 could double even earlier, by 2030. Privately, these companies did not dispute the links between their products, global warming, and ecological calamity. On the contrary, their research confirmed the connections.

Benjamin Franta, a former research fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, is a doctoral candidate at Stanford University, where his research focuses on the history of climate science and politics.
 
It is also a documented fact that the cigarette companies knew about the health risks long before the general public, and from the start regarded it not as a health problem but as a public-relations problem. See here. Also the 1953 Plaza Hotel meetings.

Is anyone surprised?
 
Back
Top