Humble petrol

belated? 5/21<div>
</div><div><div></div><div><a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/about/news/fossil-fuel-new-evidence-sb-1161">https://www.ucsusa.org/about/news/fossil-fuel-new-evidence-sb-1161</a></div><div>
</div><div><div id="block-ucstheme-page-title" class="block block-core block-page-title-block hero-default" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: var(--border-color); border-image: initial; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px auto; padding: 3rem 1rem 0px; box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; width: 640px; max-width: 32rem; text-align: center; z-index: 1;"><h1 class="page-title" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: 1.16667; margin: 0px 0px 1.6rem; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.002em;"><span class="field field--name-title field--type-string field--label-hidden" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;">New Evidence of Fossil Fuel Industry Climate Science Deception Underscores Need for SB 1161 (Allen), “California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act”</h1><p class="page-subtitle" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: 700; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: -1rem 0px 1.6rem; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.001em;">Statement by Adrienne Alvord, California and Western States Director, Union of Concerned Scientists<p class="dates" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-align: left; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.5em 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.001em;"><span class="date-published" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;">Published Apr 13, 2016</div><article role="article" class="node node--type-press-release node--view-mode-full" style="border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="nodecontent" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="column-general" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="main-region" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px auto; padding: 0px 1rem; box-sizing: inherit; position: relative; width: 640px; max-width: 32rem;"><div class="block block-layout-builder block-field-blocknodepress-releasebody" style="border-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: var(--border-color); border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="clearfix text-formatted field field--name-body field--type-text-with-summary field--label-hidden fielditem" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; clear: both;">OAKLAND, Calif. (April 13, 2016)— A <a href="https://www.smokeandfumes.org/#/" style="font-weight: inherit; border-width: 0px 0px 2px; border-top-style: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 174, 235); border-left-color: initial; border-image: initial; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none;">trove of documents</a> released today by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) reveals that the oil industry was well aware of the potential climate risks of fossil fuels decades earlier than was widely believed. The uncovered industry communications, scientific papers and oral histories demonstrate that the petroleum industry was conducting climate research as early as 1957 and knew about the potential for catastrophic climate risks by 1968 at the latest.The documents include a 1957 study, “Radiocarbon Evidence on the Dilution of Atmospheric and Oceanic Carbon by Carbon from Fossil Fuels,” published by scientists working for Humble Oil, a precursor of ExxonMobil. The study looked at how carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion accumulates in the atmosphere and oceans and indicates that scientists affiliated with the fossil fuel industry were not just aware of what happens to the climate when we burn fossil fuels, but were at the leading edge of our understanding of it.<p style="font-weight: inherit; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.6rem; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.001em;"> Below is a statement by Adrienne Alvord, California and Western States Director, Union of Concerned Scientists:<p style="font-weight: inherit; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.6rem; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.001em;">“It is shocking and disheartening to see that the fossil fuel industry apparently had knowledge of climate risks from the burning of fossil fuels even earlier than previously believed. Their subsequent public deception campaign in the interest of profit has led to confusion and uncertainty about the consequences of burning oil, gas and coal. <p style="font-weight: inherit; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 1.6rem; padding: 0px; box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: -0.001em;">Meanwhile, concentrations of greenhouse gases have doubled over the past three decades, exacerbating the costly, damaging effects of climate change that California already is experiencing. The California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act would help ensure that California can hold fossil fuel companies fully accountable for their decades of deception and the damages they have caused to public health, property and the environment in California. We need to ensure that fossil fuel companies won’t be let off the hook for their decades-long campaign of intentional deception about the harmful effects of their products.”</div></div></div></div></div></article></div><div><a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/jason-barbose/climate-science-truth-and-accountability-act-sb-1161">https://blog.ucsusa.org/jason-barbose/climate-science-truth-and-accountability-act-sb-1161</a>
<h1 style="margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px 63px 5px 0px; font-weight: lighter; line-height: 1.2em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Five Reasons to Pass the Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act (SB 1161)</h1><div class="username" style="margin: 0px 10px 10px 0px; padding: 0px; text-transform: uppercase; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/author/jason-barbose" title="Posts by Jason Barbose" rel="author" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">JASON BARBOSE</a>, WESTERN STATES POLICY MANAGER | MARCH 29, 2016, </div><div class="php-widget-top" data-user="jason-barbose" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div id="custom_html-4" class="widget_text widget widget_custom_html" style="margin: 0px 0px 15px; padding: 0px;"><div class="textwidget custom-html-widget" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><div class="the_author_nickname" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;" /><div class="article-content" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; width: 657.219px; clear: both;">Sometimes the truth hurts. And when it does, it can be tempting to try to cover up the facts. But ultimately it’s better to face them honestly because eventually the facts catch up to you. While I learned that lesson a long time ago, the fossil fuel industry seemingly has not.After all, they have spent millions over decades to convince the public that consumption of their product would not lead to dire consequences for the planet. To date, they have yet to fully reckon with that, but I’m hopeful that the truth is catching up to the fossil fuel industry and 2016 will be a turning point.This year there is an opportunity for the California Legislature to help redress this long-standing deception by passing the <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/03/SB-1161-%28Allen%29-Climate-Science-Truth-Accountabiliy-Act.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016</a> (SB 1161). This legislation, authored by Senator Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica) and sponsored by the Union of Concerned Scientists, help law enforcement hold fossil fuel companies accountable for their actions. Specifically, it would extend the statute of limitations of California’s Unfair Competition Law to 30 years for deceptive behavior relating to the scientific evidence of climate change.<div id="attachment_42372" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; text-align: center; max-width: 860px;">
</div>Why should the California legislature pass this bill? Here are my top five reasons:<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2em;">1) Some fossil fuel companies have long known about the risks of climate change.</h3>Recent reports by <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Inside Climate News</a> and the <a href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-arctic/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Los Angeles Times</a> show that by the 1980s the fossil fuel industry was well aware of the emerging scientific consensus that emissions from the burning of fossil fuels were increasing global temperature.In fact, many companies engaged in their own climate change research and shared some of this research with others in the industry. Exxon’s own climate scientists, for example, conducted cutting-edge climate change research in the late 1970s and early 1980s.There is also evidence that companies began factoring projected climate change into their own business decisions and operations, such as designing new infrastructure to withstand rising sea levels and increased storm severity. In short, fossil fuel companies have long known about the risks and likely consequences of processing and burning their products.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; line-height: 1.2em;">2) The fossil fuel industry has spent decades deceiving the public about the science of climate change.</h3>The realization that use of your company’s product (i.e., oil, gas and coal) as intended (i.e., burning it) is affecting life on earth in profound and potentially catastrophic ways for centuries to come (i.e., climate change) is about as hard a truth a corporation can be forced to face.But that is exactly what confronted fossil fuel companies as the science of global warming was gaining wide recognition in the scientific community and making front-page headlines in the late 1980s and the broader public began to seriously consider whether, and how, to respond to climate change.Here is where things get ugly: rather than owning up to the scientific reality of global warming, fossil fuel companies decided to develop and participate in a concerted campaign to sow confusion in the public about the scientific evidence linking fossil fuel emissions to rising global temperatures.How do we know? UCS scoured collections of internal company and trade association documents that have been leaked to the public, come to light through lawsuits, or been disclosed through Freedom of Information Act requests and complied a report on our findings called <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/fight-misinformation/climate-deception-dossiers-fossil-fuel-industry-memos" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">The Climate Deception Dossiers</a>.In the report we describe, for example, a <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/Climate-Deception-Dossier-2_API-Climate-Science-Communications-Plan.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">memo</a> leaked to the New York Times that shows how the American Petroleum Institute—the country’s largest oil trade association whose member companies include BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, and Shell—convened a team in 1998 to create a public communications plan with the goal of convincing average citizens that the realities of climate science were uncertain. Other examples are in plain sight, such as a <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/UncertainAds1058px_final.png" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">series of newspaper ads</a> that Exxon ran in the late 1990s and early 2000s that overemphasized the scientific uncertainties of climate change.<div id="attachment_42356" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px; padding: 5px; text-align: center; max-width: 810px;">
</div><h3 style="margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.2em;">3) There are real costs to fossil fuel industry deception.</h3>Since 1988—around the time that fossil fuel companies began to systematically undermine the public’s understanding of the scientific evidence of global warming—<a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2015/06/gw-graphic-graph-half-carbon-emissions-released-since-1988.jpg" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">743 gigatons of carbon dioxide have been emitted</a> to the atmosphere. This represents more than half of all industrial carbon pollution emitted over the last 250 years.Imagine an alternate world where fossil fuel companies had faced the facts of climate change head on and invested heavily in transforming themselves to provide low carbon sources of energy, leaving most of the fossil fuels consumed over the last two decades in the ground. We would live in a world with a far safer climate and Californians would face fewer <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/regional_information/ca-and-western-states.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">threats from wildfires, drought, heat waves, and coastal flooding</a>.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.2em;">4) Deceiving the public is morally wrong.</h3>Most of us expect businesses to look out for their bottom lines ahead of the public good. But there are limits to acceptable corporate behavior, and there is a difference between being amoral and immoral.By constructing a decades-long campaign to misinform the public about the scientific realities of climate change, the fossil fuel industry crossed a moral Rubicon. By lying to the public, the industry has distorted the truth, denying the public a complete picture of the risks associated with using their products.Many others have recognized the fundamental impropriety of this behavior as well. Most recently, <a href="http://www.rffund.org/divestment" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">the Rockefeller Family Fund announced</a> its intent to divest from fossil fuels, citing ExxonMobil’s “morally reprehensible conduct” to confuse the public about climate change. This action is all the more notable given that John D Rockefeller Sr. was a co-founder of Standard Oil, a precursor to ExxonMobil. And <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press-release/SEC-Exxon-Chevron-0682" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">a ruling last week by federal regulators</a> cleared the way for ExxonMobil shareholders to grapple for the first time with the <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/guest-commentary/why-two-degrees-is-so-important-fossil-fuel-companies-can-no-longer-ignore-the-need-to-act" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">moral and justice implications of climate change</a> as it relates to the company’s business.There should be consequences any time a company lies to the public, but particularly for deceiving the public systematically for decades about an issue as serious and consequential as global warming. This legislation is an important way to hold them accountable.<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 0.5em; padding: 0px; font-weight: 400; line-height: 1.2em;">5) A movement is building. California can stay at the forefront.</h3>If you have been following this issue in the news, then you know that a movement is building to more fully uncover the truth about the fossil fuel industry’s decades-long effort to deny and deceive the public about climate change—and to hold these companies accountable for their actions.Following the release of Inside Climate News’ <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">eight-month investigation</a> of Exxon and new reporting from the <a href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-arctic/" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Los Angeles Times</a>, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/06/science/exxon-mobil-under-investigation-in-new-york-over-climate-statements.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">announced in November</a> that his office was beginning an investigation of ExxonMobil to determine whether the company lied to the public and shareholders. This was quickly followed in January with <a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-exxon-global-warming-20160120-story.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">reports</a> that California Attorney General Kamala Harris was beginning to investigate ExxonMobil as well.While attention to ExxonMobil’s history of misdeeds is welcome, it is important to remember that they were not alone in fomenting disinformation about climate change—and that the campaign of deception continues today. In light of the evidence that has emerged so far, California congressman Ted Lieu has requested the U.S. Attorney General to launch investigations of both <a href="http://lieu.house.gov/sites/lieu.house.gov/files/TED_LIEU_SHELL.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Shell</a> and <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2461620-2015-10-15doj-exxonmobil.html" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">ExxonMobil</a>.Whether these companies have actually broken the law is something for the courts to decide—SB 1161 is not making that judgment. What SB 1161 is doing is giving law enforcement the opportunity to ensure that justice is served for the full weight of any violations that may have been committed.Wherever these investigations lead, it is important that the California legislature—and by extension, the people of California—signal their intent to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for its many decades of spreading disinformation.Learn more:<ul style="margin: 0px 0px 10px 20px; padding: 0px 0px 0px 40px;"><li style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 0px 0px 5px 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 30px;"><a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/03/backgrounder-fossil-fuel-industry-climate-science-deception.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Background Information on Fossil Fuel Industry Climate Science Deception (PDF)</a></li><li style="margin: 0px 0px 5px 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 30px;"><a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/03/backgrounder-fact-sheet-california-climate-impacts.pdf" target="blank" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Background Information on Climate Change and Costly Damages in California (PDF)</a></li></ul> Update (April 1, 4:15pm): A previous version of this post incorrectly stated that the bill would “give explicit authority to public prosecutors” to bring actions against those who have deceived with regards to climate change. The post has been updated to reflect the fact that the bill only extends the time period for bringing such actions based on existing law. The post also used the word “crimes,” but this is not a criminal statute. Instead, it is related to violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, which is a civil statute.Posted in: <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/category/global-warming" rel="category tag" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Global Warming</a> Tags: <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/tag/california" rel="tag" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">California</a>, <a href="https://blog.ucsusa.org/tag/climate-science-truth-and-accountability-act" rel="tag" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; outline: 0px;">Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act</a></div></div>=joe romm apr 2014<a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/50-years-ago-big-oil-bragged-about-being-able-to-melt-glaciers-while-they-knew-about-climate-change-728efe887daa/">https://archive.thinkprogress.org/50-years-ago-big-oil-bragged-about-being-able-to-melt-glaciers-while-they-knew-about-climate-change-728efe887daa/</a>
<div class="postcontent" style="box-sizing: inherit; line-height: 2.2rem; margin-bottom: 2em;">Newly-released oil industry documents push back the start date of the world’s most successful disinformation campaign to the 1960s, if not earlier.The must-read documents, <a href="https://www.smokeandfumes.org/#/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">published by </a>The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), strengthen the hand of the <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/11/05/3719767/investigate-exxon-new-york-attorney-general/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">numerous</a> <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/03/29/3764399/climate-change-attorneys-general/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">attorneys general</a> investigating whether ExxonMobil engaged in a cover-up to mislead the public and investors about the dangers of human-caused climate change.The New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/14/science/pressure-on-exxon-over-climate-change-intensifies-with-new-documents.html?r=1" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">quotes</a> CIEL director Carroll Muffett on the stunning implications of these documents:<blockquote name="f1c5" id="f1c5" class="graf graf--blockquote graf--startsWithDoubleQuote graf-after--p" style="box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 1.5625rem; padding: 0px; position: relative; border-left: 3px solid rgb(87, 87, 206);">“From 1957 onward, there is no doubt that Humble Oil, which is now Exxon, was clearly on notice” about rising CO2 in the atmosphere and the prospect that it was likely to cause global warming, he said.</blockquote>The first thing that quote made me think of is a story I wrote <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/climate/2009/11/19/204985/oil-ad-lifemelt-glaciers/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">years ago</a> about a ridiculously ironic ad that Humble oil published in a 1962 edition of Life Magazine found on <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=k00EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA86-IA3&dq=glacier%20humble&pg=PA86-IA2#v=onepage&q=glacier%20humble&f=false" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Google Books</a> (for larger version, <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/uploads/2009/11/19195428/humble-oil.jpg" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">click here</a>). The headline: “EACH DAY HUMBLE SUPPLIES ENOUGH ENERGY TO MELT 7 MILLION TONS OF GLACIER!”:<figure class="postfigure postfigure--format-title-width" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 2rem; padding: 0px; max-width: 100%;"><div class="postthumbnail" style="box-sizing: inherit; overflow: hidden; position: relative;"><picture id="picture-343073" class="wp-image-343073 size-full " data-id="343073"" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(min-width: 1920px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(min-width: 1024px) and (max-width: 1920px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(min-width: 768px) and (max-width: 1024px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(min-width: 512px) and (max-width: 1024px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(min-width: 512px) and (max-width: 768px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=512&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C318px&ssl=1" media="(max-width: 512px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="(max-width: 768px)" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><source srcset="https://i2.wp.com/thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C396px&ssl=1" media="all" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><img srcset="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/uploads/2016/04/0236WZUD6RuLTFR2D.jpg?w=638&h=396&crop=1" alt="" style="box-sizing: inherit; display: block; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px auto; height: auto;" /></source></source></source></source></source></source></source></source></picture></div></figure>“This giant glacier has remained unmelted for centuries,” the ad begins without a trace of irony. “Yet, the petroleum energy Humble supplies — if converted into heat — could melt it at the rate of 80 tons each second! To meet the nation’s growing needs for energy, Humble has supplied science to nature’s resources to become America’s Leading Energy Company….”At the time, I noted the scientific reality that “<a href="http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28249708#.Vw-9yTYrJko" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">More than 2 trillion tons</a> of land ice in Greenland, Antarctica, and Alaska have melted since 2003, according to new NASA satellite data that show the latest signs of what scientists say is global warming.” But what we now know is that by 1962, the phrase “Humble has supplied science to nature’s resources” also included supplying some of the early science on global warming and its impacts.CIEL documents that back in 1946, the leading oil companies created a “Smoke and Fumes Committee” to back scientific research into air pollution issues and use their findings to shape the public debate about the environment. CIEL explains, “The express goal of their collaboration was to use science and public skepticism to prevent environmental regulations they deemed hasty, costly, and unnecessary.” The Committee, which perhaps should have been named “Smoke and Mirrors,” was later folded into the American Petroleum Institute (API).The scientific understanding that certain gases trap heat and warm the planet dates back at least to Irish physicist John Tyndall in 1820, as NASA has <a href="http://climate.nasa.gov/blog/143" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">explained</a>. By the turn of the 19th century, Svante August Arrhenius was quantifying how CO2 contributed to the greenhouse effect and <a href="http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/blog/2010/12/unchained-goddess-frank-capra-knew" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">later made</a> the connection between global warming and fossil fuels combustion.In 1955, as CIEL notes, Hans Suess, a Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO) scientist, “demonstrated that naturally occurring carbon-14 in the atmosphere was being ‘diluted’ by depleted carbon-12 derived from fossil fuels.” In 1957, <a href="https://www.smokeandfumes.org/#/documents/document8" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">a paper</a> by SIO’s Roger Revelle and Hans Suess determined that “far more CO2 would remain in the atmosphere than previously assumed, potentially accelerating the impact of global climate change.”Two months later, scientists with the Humble Oil and Refining Company Production Research Division published — under the company name — <a href="https://www.smokeandfumes.org/#/documents/document7" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">a study</a> called “Radiocarbon Evidence on the Dilution of Atmospheric and Oceanic Carbon by Carbon from Fossil Fuels.” In other words, by 1957 the precursor company to Exxon knew that burning fossil fuels was boosting CO2 levels in the air.As an aside, you may recall that the very next year, 1958, the American public saw the first televised warning about the dangers of CO2, global warming, and sea level rise. In a TV episode, “<a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/02/12/3749275/frank-capra-1958-global-warming/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Unchained Goddess</a>,” written and produced by three-time Oscar winner Frank Capra, viewers learn that unrestricted CO2 emissions could “melt the polar ice caps” leading to a world where “Tourists in glass bottom boats would be viewing the drowned towers of Miami.”By February 1968, Stanford Research Institute (SRI) scientists had completed their Final Report to the API on “<a href="https://www.smokeandfumes.org/#/documents/document16" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Sources, abundance, and fate of gaseous atmospheric pollutants</a>.” The SRI report notes that the best explanation for rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere is the “fossil fuel emanation theory”!The researchers explicitly warn the API that because of rising CO2 levels, “Significant temperature changes are almost certain to occur by the year 2000,” and “there seems to be no doubt that the potential damage to our environment could be severe.” The report points out:<blockquote name="f650" id="f650" class="graf graf--blockquote graf--startsWithDoubleQuote graf-after--p" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; clear: both; margin: 0px 1.5625rem; padding: 0px; position: relative; border-left: 3px solid rgb(87, 87, 206);">“If the Earth’s temperature increases significantly, a number of events might be expected to occur, including the melting of the Antarctic ice, a rise in sea levels…”</blockquote>The researchers go on to make “Estimates of the possible rate at which the Antarctic ice cap might melt,” ranging from 4000 years down to a beyond-alarming 400 years! Indeed, they make a simple calculation that if the ice cap melted in 1000 years, “the resulting 400 foot rise in sea level would occur at a rate of 4 feet per 10 years. This is 100 times greater than presently observed changes.”You’ll be happy to know that their math was off by a factor of 2. The melting of all of the land-locked ice on the planet, of which the vast majority is on Antarctica, would “only” raise sea level some 230 feet. Ironically, or tragically, SRI’s crude 1968 estimate of the possible rate of sea level rise if we kept burning fossil fuels isn’t that much different from the worst-case scenario laid out by James Hansen and 18 leading climate experts in a <a href="http://archive.thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/03/22/3762111/climate-scientists-global-emergency/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">peer-reviewed paper</a> last month.We may never know whether the PR geniuses who came up with the 1962 melting glacier ad — and the corporate executives who approved it — had any idea of just how tragically ironic it was. But thanks to CIEL — and <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/13042016/climate-change-global-warming-oil-industry-radar-1960s-exxon-api-co2-fossil-fuels" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">Inside Climate News</a> and the <a href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-arctic/" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">L.A. Times</a> — we know that <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/exxonknew" rel="noopener" target="blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">#ExxonKnew</a> a half century ago about the very serious dangers their product would some day inflict on humanity.And yet Exxon chose to lie to its investors and spread disinformation to the general public about those dangers. The courts will decide whether Exxon broke the law. But considering that the Pope laid out in great detail in his <a href="http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html" rel="noopener" target="_blank" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(144, 141, 255);">climate encyclical</a> why climate inaction is morally wrong — it’s quite safe to say that knowingly spreading disinformation for the purpose of delaying action on preventing catastrophic global warming is uniquely immoral.</div><footer class="post__tags" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; letter-spacing: 1px; line-height: 2rem; margin-bottom: 2em; clear: both;"><a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/tag/climate/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase;">#CLIMATE</a>, <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/tag/climate-change/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase;">#CLIMATE CHANGE</a>, <a href="https://archive.thinkprogress.org/tag/climate-change-deniers/" style="box-sizing: inherit; text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase;">#CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS</a></footer>

==</div></div></div></div>