Monday, June 1, 2015

Exxon CEO Toes Party Line

The CEO of ExxonMobil, Rex Tillerson, might as well have used the 'I'm not a scientist, but...' line at the shareholders meeting last week. When challenged about climate change, he stated,
“What if everything we do, it turns out our models are lousy, and we don’t get the effects we predict?” Tillerson said. “Mankind has this enormous capacity to deal with adversity, and those solutions will present themselves as those challenges become clear.”
This is really unfortunate, especially considering the hope attached with some developments with Exxon. It turns out, it was just a ruse. Exxon is still a denier organization and there are indications it still provides funds to denier organizations, using entities such as Donor Trust to funnel funds with orders to undermine climate science. 

That wasn't enough, though. He also mocked renewable energy and said the company intentionally does not invest in renewables, stating, “We choose not to lose money on purpose.”

But, it gets even worse. His comments also included this jewel:
“Mankind has this enormous capacity to deal with adversity. Those solutions will present themselves as the realities become clear,” he said. “I know that is a very unsatisfying answer for a lot of people, but it’s an answer that a scientist and an engineer would give you.”
Tell us, Mr. Tillerson, just how do you expect the rest of the world to 'adjust?' Things such as massive change in ocean life, not to mention the ocean acidification. Or, how about the mass extinction that is in progress? Or, how about all of the world's poor that will suffer reduced living standards because of climate change? If you're dead, you can't adjust. Of course, I guess that would actually qualify as 'adjusting' under Mr. Tillerson's definition. I mean, why should he care? He makes tens of millions of dollars a year. He can afford to pay for his personal costs due to climate change. Let everyone else worry about themselves.
One last thing, Mr. Tillerson, the only scientists that would give that answer are ones that have been bought and paid for by the fossil fuel industry. But, since ExxonMobil made over $32 billion last year, I guess you can afford a few. 


  1. The reality has been presenting itself for many decades now and the solutions to it, have still gone unheeded by people like Tillerman who, apparently thinks that "someday," has not yet come.

    In one of my comments on another thread, I provided a link that cited Tillerman's apparent approval of carbon caps. Apparently in the world of good cop/ bad cop, he now represents a good cop whose goal is to deny the truth as something being perpetually unsure yet not that bad. That way we will waste more and more time in needless debates until it is entirely too late. So, unless Tillerman or someone else develops a 60 billion dollar whatchamagigy that can suck up immense quantities of atmospheric Co2 and then turn it into margaritas and fairy dust---we are all screwed! But how long do you think it will take to invent such a miracle solution? But Wait Mr. Tillerman! their might be a simpler way to solve the problem? However it will never appear unless you take your head out from under the sand!

  2. I have some dude arguing that Venus proves that CO2 doesn't cause warming because at a pressure of around 50 km (which is around 1 bar), the temperature is not much different from Earth:

    What do you think of this?

  3. “Mankind has this enormous capacity to deal with adversity, and those solutions will present themselves as those challenges become clear.”

    Oh, really?

    Exxon's a bit behind the pack then, isn't it? If "mankind" has such an enormous capacity to deal with adversity, a well-resourced, successful company like Exxon with thousands of scientists, engineers and economists on staff should be able to take a mere financial hiccup - like changing its business model - in a single stride.

    So far they've demonstrated absolutely no capacity to deal with a comparatively minor "challenge" like moving away from specifically, exclusively, digging up, transporting and processing fossils. They could state an intention to move partially (then steadily more) to general energy generators and/or distributors and/or storage operators. They could outline proposals to use their existing mining expertise to identify and mine or quarry CO2 absorbing rocks rather than CO2 releasing fossils. They could stay with fossils but move into researching more carbon fibre and other long-life, value-added, fossil products rather than simply burning the stuff for momentary heating or travel use.

    Until they show some capacity to change their own business, they should stay right out of telling the rest of us to buckle up and "deal with adversity".