Cohen, Ken

===powbak 922 bad format

retiring? mccarron vp

pension?

<a href="http://exxonknew.org/exposing-exxons-lies/">http://exxonknew.org/exposing-exxons-lies/</a>

<div class="field-content">=</div><div class="field-content">
</div><div class="field-content">{{ royal society</div><div class="field-content">
</div><div class="field-content"><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">led to Exxon having to dump CEI</div><div style="font-size: small;">
<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">desmog uk tag: <a href="https://www.desmog.co.uk/directory/vocabulary/765" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.desmog.co.uk/directory/vocabulary/765</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">API wm o'keefe tried to get ward fired?!</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22102015/exxon-sowed-doubt-about-climate-science-for-decades-by-stressing-uncertainty/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22102015/exxon-sowed-doubt-about-climate-science-for-decades-by-stressing-uncertainty/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">see below</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">...The Royal Society of the United Kingdom, for centuries a renowned arbiter of science, harshly criticized Exxon in 2006 for publishing "very misleading" statements about the IPCC's Third Assessment Report. The IPCC found that most of the observed warming of the planet in the late 20<span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" line-height="line-height" position="position" relative="relative" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" top="top" em="em" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">th century was probably caused by humans.[CEI ebell ctr-slap?]</div><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">The Society's communications manager Bob Ward reminded Exxon pointedly that one of its own scientists had contributed to the IPCC chapter in question.<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2006/royal-society-exxonmobil/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">The Royal Society said</a> it had no problem with Exxon funding scientific research, but "we do have concerns about ExxonMobil's funding of lobby groups that seek to misrepresent the scientific evidence relating to climate change."<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">Ward said Exxon <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/Royal%20Society%20Letter%20to%20Exxon%20%282006%29.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">was funding at least 39 organizations</a> "featuring information on their websites that misrepresented the science on climate change, by outright denial of the evidence that greenhouse gases are driving climate change, or by overstating the amount and significance of uncertainty in knowledge."<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">...<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">----<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2006/royal-society-exxonmobil/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2006/royal-society-exxonmobil/</a><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">ref<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">4 September 2006<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">The Society welcomes open debate, underpinned by sound science, on the subject of climate change. In September 2006, the Royal Society wrote to ExxonMobil to express concern that some of its corporate publications were presenting a misleading view of the scientific evidence about climate change and were over-emphasising uncertainties about what we do and don't know. This letter followed a meeting which had taken place at the request of ExxonMobil where the Society raised concerns about Exxon's position on climate change and the company's funding of lobby groups that misrepresented the science. At the meeting ExxonMobil indicated that it intended to stop funding these organisations. The letter asked for clarification as to when the company would carry out this pledge. Although we have exchanged further letters with ExxonMobil, it has still not addressed this issue.<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">Downloads<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">Letter from the Royal Society to ExxonMobil no cut paste to nick thomas esso uk reply to BS?<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">In, particular I was very surprised to read the following passage...<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://royalsociety.org/-/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2006/8257.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://royalsociety.org/-/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2006/8257.pdf</a><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">PDF, 597.0KB<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">Letter from ExxonMobil to the Royal Society ken cohen to Rees no cut paste<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">complex and varying opinions exist... <p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://royalsociety.org/-/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2006/8257-Reply.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://royalsociety.org/-/media/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/2006/8257-Reply.pdf</a><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">PDF, 1.4MB<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">As the UK's national academy of science, the Royal Society has a responsibility to speak out when scientific evidence is misrepresented. We will continue to do this on climate change and on other issues.<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">It is essential that the scientific evidence on climate change is accurately represented so that policymakers, industry, the public and other stakeholders can make informed decisions about what actions to take.<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">
<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">In particular, it is important to note that:<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">The Royal Society's objective is to promote debate on climate change and to ensure that it is informed by sound science; it is not our intention to stifle debate.  <p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">The Society has never objected to the funding of scientific research by ExxonMobil. We actively promote scientific research that seeks to improve our understanding of climate change. <p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">We do have concerns about ExxonMobil's funding of lobby groups that seek to misrepresent the scientific evidence relating to climate change.<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">very good 2022 BBC doc big oil v world  = frontline</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">ep 1 <a href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8clxva" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"> </a><a href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8clxva" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8clxva</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">taylor boast of role/ success, bill O; says sci made harder, wishs had time machine wrestle self BA PR hack 32 min</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Big Oil v the World episode 1: The story of what the fossil fuel industry knew about climate change more than four decades ago, as scientists working for Exxon reveal how they sounded the alarm about the effects of fossil fuels.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-variant-numeric="font-variant-numeric" normal="normal" font-variant-east-asian="font-variant-east-asian" vertical-align="vertical-align" baseline="baseline" white-space="white-space" pre-wrap="pre-wrap">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">pt 2 raymond confronted (shareholder mtg? by cli sci) reads oregon?! 15 min <a href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8cnif4" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8cnif4</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">sci heins sp? Arthur Green geosci BS denier ppt, culture polite.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">200m$ on BP PR 2x solar John Browne raymond furious brk ranks, exxon ppl ha grnwash</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">mccraken gore clinton holdover w aggressive agenda sci bias randy randol</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> ipcc watson </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">mcc resignation ltr?</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">37 min BO ocean slow planet heal bennet Freeman PR corp hu rights?</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">=</div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">NARRATOR:The plan emerged as the 2008 presidential campaign was ramping up. Republican candidate John McCain came out in support of the cap and trade approach.SEN. JOHN McCAIN, R-Arizona:The facts of global warming demand our urgent attention, especially in Washington.NARRATOR:So did his opponent, Democrat Barack Obama.SEN. BARACK OBAMA, D-Illinois:I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.HEATHER ZICHAL, Environmental policy director, Obama campaign:Having worked on many presidential races and around presidential politics, that was the first year where we really saw climate change as something that American voters really wanted to hear from candidates on. It was interesting, because we were not necessarily having a debate about whether or not climate change was real. It was really, "How collectively can we make a meaningful contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions across the economy?"NARRATOR:Shortly before the presidential election, Exxon Mobil contacted corporate responsibility specialist Bennett Freeman.BENNETT FREEMAN, SVP, Calvert Investments, 2006-15:I had an informal conversation in the back of a limousine with Ken Cohen at Exxon Mobil, who was essentially their chief policymaker and public affairs officer. I think the observation that got Ken Cohen's attention was that we had this unprecedented situation where both the Republican and the Democratic nominee for president both committed to the climate agenda. And we had a pretty frank conversation about the implications for the company, particularly on climate.I thought that Exxon was shamefully out of the action because it had become so apparent that climate science was real. So my advice to Ken was for the company to finally take a public position on climate policy. To make an unequivocal statement accepting the reality of climate science. To make a unequivocal commitment to not fund any more climate denial research, which Exxon was infamous for supporting, for funding directly. And to take a positive, proactive position supporting action at the U.S. federal level.NARRATOR:Two weeks before President Obama was inaugurated, Exxon Mobil CEO Tillerson would give a speech that went farther than the company had ever gone on the urgency of the climate change issue.BENNETT FREEMAN:Amazingly, that speech happened.January 2009REX TILLERSON:Globally, the outlook for energy expects energy-related carbon dioxide emissions to rise by an average of 1% per year through the year 2030. These two fundamental realities, meeting enormous demand growth and managing the risk of greenhouse gas emissions, are the twin challenges of our time.BENNETT FREEMAN:It was, I think, the first time that at least at the CEO level, they started, just started to take a policy position that was potentially constructive. It's important to acknowledge that this was an initial step. But it's equally important, even more important, in my opinion, to emphasize that it was a step that was little and late.RUSSELL GOLD, FRONTLINE consultant:I covered Exxon Mobil at The Wall Street Journal at that time, and Rex Tillerson was a breath of fresh air. He starts talking about the importance of pursuing a lower carbon path. But at the end of the day, I can't really point to anything substantive that changed.NARRATOR:Rex Tillerson did not respond to interview requests.Despite his speech, Exxon Mobil did not endorse cap and trade. The bill, sponsored by Democrats Henry Waxman and Edward Markey, narrowly passed the House.MALE SPEAKER:</div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">
</div><div times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb">=</div></div><p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">=<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;">1962 ALUM<h3 times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); color: rgb(22, 30, 107);">The Looming Climate Crisis</h3>By Chip Neville<p times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large" box-sizing="box-sizing" inherit="inherit" margin="margin" px="px" em="em" padding="padding" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 8px;"><a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#chap-VIII" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#chap-VIII</a>Part II. Politicians, scientists, and think tanks.
How a small group of conservative think tanks and obstructionist scientists, supported by the fossil fuel and tobacco industries, have successfully delayed action on climate change for years.Chapter VII. The political global warming debate.Taking action against global warming would be an open and shut case, one would think, but nothing could be farther from the truth politically. Despite the fact that SCIENTIFICALLY the case is open and shut, we are now engaged in a bitter and divisive POLITICAL debate on curtailing global warming. To see why, we must look at who has much to lose if we radically change the way we produce energy in this country and the world. (Not if we radically change our way of life -- I am certainly not advocating that -- but if we radically change the way we produce energy.) As radical changes typically involve action by the Federal Government as well as private industry, we must also look at who is ideologically opposed to government regulation and intervention in the market place.In his Technology Review article, Bill Gates says that to raise an extra 11 billion in R&D funds for energy research, "you'd only have to tax energy 1 percent."<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-41" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[41]</a> If we multiply 11 billion by 100 (because 1% is 1/100) we find that the total market for energy in the United States comes to 1.1 TRILLION dollars. That's not chump change even for multi-billion dollar corporations.<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-42" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[42]</a> 80% of our energy in the U.S. comes from coal, oil, and natural gas, and while this figure represents actual energy produced rather than dollars expended, it indicates that a drastic change in the way we produce our energy stands to cost the coal, oil, and natural gas companies around 80% of that 1.1 TRILLION dollars. And that's just in the U.S. alone. No wonder the fossil fuel industry is unenthusiastic about meeting the challenge of climate change.
[SMOKING GUN]Conservative commentators like to point to left wing paranoid conspiracy theories when people talk about concerted efforts by the fossil fuel industry to spread disinformation about the threat of climate change, but unfortunately there is DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE of just such efforts dating from the first days of the political global warming debate. In 1998, as the New York Times reported:<blockquote times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"Industry opponents of a treaty to fight global warming have drafted an ambitious proposal to spend millions of dollars to convince the public that the environmental accord is based on shaky science.""Among their ideas is a campaign to recruit a cadre of scientists who share the industry's views of climate science and to train them in public relations so they can help convince journalists, politicians and the public that the risk of global warming is too uncertain to justify controls on greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide that trap the sun's heat near Earth.""An informal group of people working for big oil companies, trade associations and conservative policy research organizations that oppose the treaty have been meeting recently at the Washington office of the American Petroleum Institute to put the plan together."<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-43" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[43]</a></blockquote>The Times report goes on to list Exxon (now ExxonMobil), Chevron, the Southern Company, as well as The George C. Marshall Institute and The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (now The Advancement of Sound Science Center or TASSC) as participants, in addition, of course, to the American Petroleum Institute where the participants met. The group planned to spend $5 million over two years to, in the words of the Petroleum Institute memo on which the report was based, "maximize the impact of scientific views consistent with ours on Congress, the media and other key audiences." The memo also called for $600,000 to be to be spent on 20 or so "respected climate scientists," recruited "to inject credible science and scientific accountability into the global climate debate, thereby raising questions about and undercutting the 'prevailing scientific wisdom'." This campaign was to be directed at science writers, editors, columnists and television network correspondents.<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-44" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[44]</a>Public exposure of the plan seems to have caused it to be abandoned, but the strategy outlined in the Petroleum Institute memo has continued to be used by the coal and oil companies and their conservative think tank allies to great effect.Chapter VIII. The Royal Society's "Dear Nick" letter.The Royal Society, sometimes known as the Royal Society of London, is the oldest and most prestigious scientific body in the world. On September 4, 2006, in its famous "Dear Nick" letter, it took the unprecedented step of taking ExxonMobil to task for misrepresenting climate science, and for funding groups which mislead the public about climate science and global warming.<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-45" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[45]</a> The letter was addressed to Nick Thomas, Director, Corporate Affairs, Esso UK Limited, and was signed by Bob Ward, Senior Manager, Policy Communication for the Royal Society. The letter is quite interesting for what it reveals about ExxonMobil's tactics at the time, and is worth quoting almost in full:<blockquote times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"Dear Nick""Thank-you for your recent letter and accompanying copies of the 2005 ExxonMobil 'Corporate Citizenship Report' and the 'UK and Ireland Corporate Citizenship' brochure. I have read both with interest, but I am writing to express my disappointment at the inaccurate and misleading view of the science of climate change that these documents present.""In particular, I was very surprised to read the following passage from the section on Environmental performance under the sub-heading of 'Uncertainty and risk' (p.23 in the 'Corporate Citizenship Report':"'While assessments such as those of the IPCC have expressed growing confidence that recent warming can be attributed to increases in greenhouse gases, these conclusions rely on expert judgement rather than objective, reproducible statistical methods. Taken together, gaps in the scientific basis for theoretical climate models and the interplay of significant natural variability make it very difficult to determine objectively the extent to which recent climate changes might be the result of human actions.'"As I mentioned in July, these statements are very misleading. The 'expert judgement' of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was actually based on objective and quantitative analyses and methods, including advanced statistical appraisals, which carefully accounted for the interplay of natural variability, and which have been independently reproduced.""Furthermore, these statements in your documents are not consistent with the scientific literature that has been published on this issue. ...""At our meeting in July, I also told you of my concerns about the support ExxonMobil has been giving to organizations that have been misinforming the public about the science of climate change. ...""I have carried out an ad hoc survey on the websites of organizations that are listed in the ExxonMobil 2005 Worldwide Giving Report for 'public information and policy research', which is published on your website. Of those organizations whose websites feature information about climate change, I found that 25 offered views that are consistent with the scientific literature. However, some 39 organizations were featuring information on their websites that misrepresented the science of climate change, by outright denial of the evidence that greenhouse gases are driving climate change, or by overstating the amount and significance of uncertainty in knowledge, or by conveying a misleading impression of the potential impacts of anthropogenic climate change. My analysis indicates that ExxonMobil last year provided more than 2.9 million to organizations in the United States which misinformed the public about climate change through their websites. ...""Yours sincerely""Bob Ward"
"Senior Manager, Policy Communication"</blockquote>This letter reveals that as late as 2006, ExxonMobil was still following the strategy laid out in the American Petroleum Institute memo of "raising questions about and undercutting the 'prevailing scientific wisdom'" in regard to global warming and climate change. It reveals that ExxonMobil was working through a variety of organizations "which misinformed the public about climate change," and it reveals that ExxonMobil was supporting these organizations by helping fund them to the tune of $2.9 million for the single year 2005.Of course, companies have the right to get their message out, but note that ExxonMobil was playing both ends against the middle: it also featured links to the websites of 25 organizations that "offered views that are consistent with the scientific literature." In this way, ExxonMobil could give the appearance of impartiality in a scientific debate which was still undecided. Of course the debate had long been OVERWHELMINGLY DECIDED in favor of anthropogenic global warming with serious future consequences, but ExxonMobil's support strategy was cleverly designed to undermine that proposition.ExxonMobil and other corporations fighting environmental progress have got a very good return for their dollars. ExxonMobil spent a mere $2.9 million on various organizations fighting action on climate change in 2005 according to the Royal Society, and the entire budget of the conservative Heartland Institute for 2010 was a mere $4.4 million according to a recent article in the conservative but extremely well written Weekly Standard. But this same article in The Weekly Standard points out that the Natural Resources Defense Council took in $99 million in 2010.<a href="https://yale1962.org/speakout/The-Looming-Climate-Crisis.html#ref-46" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[46]</a> The highly successful corporate campaign to delay action to stop climate change has been one of the most successful examples of asymmetric warfare on record. Unfortunately, it may also have jeopardized the future of our Republic and our entire civilization.<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">}}</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div></div></div><div class="field-content">desmog:</div><div class="field-content"><h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 1.28205em; margin-top: 1.28205em; margin-bottom: 1.28205em;">Exxon & Climate Change Denial</h3>ExxonMobil has spent tens of millions of dollars funding organizations questioning the existence of man-made climate change. From 1997 to 2005, Exxon gave at least $19.5 million in grants to climate change denial organizations. A total of at least<a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/exxonmobil-funding-climate-science-denial" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"> $35 million in grants</a> went to climate change denial groups between 1997 and 2016 with over $5 million of those donations earmarked for climate change. Many grant recipients were members of the <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/cooler-heads-coalition" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Cooler Heads Coalition</a>.<a href="http://climateinvestigations.org/exxon-did-cohen-2/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">Climate Investigations Center noted</a> that Lee Raymond was responsible for promoting Ken Cohen, formerly Legal Counsel for Exxon, to the position of Vice President for Public and Government Affairs. Steve Coll wrote in Private Empire: <a href="https://www.desmogblog.com/lee-raymond#s11" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">[11]</a><blockquote style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 1.5em 30px;">“Ken Cohen and his public affairs shop, in tandem with the K Street office in Washington, oversaw contributions to free-market advocates who published, spoke out, and file lawsuits to challenge policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or assess the long-term impact of global warming.”</blockquote><h2 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 2em; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;">Stance on Climate Change</h2></div><div class="field-content"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">=</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ref</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22102015/Exxon-Sowed-Doubt-about-Climate-Science-for-Decades-by-Stressing-Uncertainty" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22102015/Exxon-Sowed-Doubt-about-Climate-Science-for-Decades-by-Stressing-Uncertainty</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">as he wrapped up nine years as the federal government's chief scientist for global warming research, Michael MacCracken lashed out at ExxonMobil for opposing the advance of climate science.</div>His own great-grandfather, he told the Exxon board, had been John D. Rockefeller's legal counsel a century earlier. "What I rather imagine he would say is that you are on the wrong side of history, and you need to find a way to change your position," he wrote.Addressed to chairman <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/lee-raymond" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); box-sizing: inherit;">Lee Raymond</a> on the letterhead of the United States Global Change Research Program, <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/MacCracken%20Letter%20to%20Exxon%20%282002%29.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">his September 2002 letter</a> was not just forceful, but unusually personal.No wonder: in the opening days of the oil-friendly Bush-Cheney administration, Exxon's chief lobbyist had written the new head of the White House environmental council demanding that <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/mike-maccracken" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">MacCracken</a> be fired for "political and scientific bias."Exxon was also attacking other officials in the U.S. government and at the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), MacCracken wrote, interfering with their work behind the scenes and distorting it in public.Exxon wanted scientists who disputed the mainstream science on <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/topic/climate-change" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit;">climate change</a> to oversee Washington's work with the IPCC, the authoritative body that defines the scientific consensus on global warming, documents written by an Exxon lobbyist and one of its scientists show. The company persuaded the White House to block the reappointment of the IPCC chairman,[ROBERT watson] a World Bank scientist. Exxon's top climate researcher, <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/brian-flannery" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">Brian Flannery</a>, was pushing the White House for a wholesale revision of federal climate science. The company wanted a new strategy to focus on the uncertainties.MacCracken had a long history of collaboration with Exxon researchers. He knew that during the 1970s and 1980s, well before the general public understood the risks of global warming, the company's researchers had worked at the cutting edge of climate change science. He had edited and even co-authored some of their reports. So he found it galling that Exxon was now leading a concerted effort to sow confusion about fossil fuels, carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect."To call ExxonMobil's position out of the mainstream is thus a gross understatement," MacCracken wrote. "To be in opposition to the key scientific findings is rather appalling for such an established and scientific organization."Exxon had turned a colleague into its enemy.It was a vivid example of Exxon's undermining of mainstream science and embrace of <a href="https://insideclimatenews.org/topic/climate-denial" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">denial</a> and misinformation, which became most pronounced after President George W. Bush took office. The campaign climaxed when Bush pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2001. Taking the U.S. out of the international climate change treaty was Exxon's key goal, and the reason for its persistent emphasis on the uncertainty of climate science.This <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">in-depth series by InsideClimate New</a>s has explored Exxon's early engagement with climate research more than 35 years ago – and its subsequent use of scientific uncertainty as a shield against forceful action on global warming. The series is based on Exxon documents, interviews, and other evidence from an eight-month investigation."What happened was an incredible disconnect in people trained in physical science and engineering," recalled <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/martin-hoffert" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit;">Martin Hoffert</a>, a New York University professor who collaborated with Exxon's team as its early computer modeling confirmed the emerging scientific consensus on global warming. "It's an untold story of how we got to the point where climate change has become a threat to the world."The Uncertainty AgendaAs the Bush-Cheney administration arrived in the White House in 2001, ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM) now had partners for a climate uncertainty strategy.Just weeks after Bush was sworn in, Exxon's top lobbyist Randy Randol <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/Exxon%20Lobbyist%27s%20Memo%20to%20the%20White%20House%20%282001%29.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102); box-sizing: inherit;">sent the White House a memo</a> complaining that "Clinton/Gore carry-overs with aggressive agendas" were still playing a role at the IPCC as it prepared its next assessment of the climate science consensus.MacCracken and three colleagues should be replaced, or at least kept out of "any decisional activities," he wrote. Meanwhile, U.S. input to the IPCC should be delayed.Further, two scientists highly critical of the prevailing consensus should be enlisted: John Christy of the University of Alabama should take the science lead and Richard Lindzen of MIT should review U.S. submissions to the IPCC.Exxon had been circulating a proposal to fundamentally overhaul MacCracken's global change research program, by emphasizing the uncertainties of climate science.The timing was not coincidental because the administration, as required by law, was about to lay out a new federal climate research strategy. Exxon and its allies wanted the work done during the Clinton-Gore years to be marginalized.In March 2002, Flannery, Exxon's science strategy and programs manager, contacted John H. Marburger, the president's incoming assistant for science and technology, <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/Exxon%20Scientist%20Lobbies%20the%20White%20House%20%282002%29.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">to pitch the company's favored approach of emphasizing the uncertainty</a>. Earlier discussions, he asserted, "have not sought to place the uncertainty in the context of why it is important to public policy."Exxon's position paper, attached to his letter, took a dig at the work of the IPCC."A major frustration to many is the all-too-apparent bias of IPCC to downplay the significance of scientific uncertainty and gaps," the memo said.A Seat at the TableExxon had not always been so at odds with the prevailing science.Since the late 1970s, Exxon scientists had been <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/Exxons-own-research-confirmed-fossil-fuels-role-in-global-warming" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">telling top executives</a> that the most likely cause of climate change was carbon pollution from the combustion of fossil fuels, and that it was important to get a grip on the problem quickly. Exxon Research & Engineering had <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/16092015/exxon-believed-deep-dive-into-climate-research-would-protect-its-business" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit;">launched innovative ocean research</a> from aboard the company's biggest supertanker, the Esso Atlantic. ER&E's modeling experts, by the early 1980s, had <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/18092015/exxon-confirmed-global-warming-consensus-in-1982-with-in-house-climate-models" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; background-color: transparent; box-sizing: inherit;">confirmed the consensus</a> among outside scientists about the climate's sensitivity to carbon dioxide."The facts are that we identified the potential risks of climate change and have taken the issue very seriously," said Ken Cohen, Exxon's vice president of public and government affairs, <a href="http://news.exxonmobil.com/press-release/exxonmobil-says-climate-research-stories-inaccurate-and-deliberately-misleading" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">in a press release</a> on October 21 addressing the ICN reports. "We embarked on decades of research in collaboration with many parties."Exxon has declined to answer specific questions from InsideClimate News.<div class="media media-element-container media-image_full" style="box-sizing: inherit; width: 532.188px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><figure id="file-266438" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/ImageObject" class="file file-image file-image-png" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 100%; margin: 0px 0px 1.5em;"><a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/exxon-science-vs-misinformation" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent;">[</a>grfx dialogue]</figure></div>A <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/PR%20Plan%20for%20Exxon%27s%20CO2%20Research%20%281980%29.pdf" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">1980 memo proposed an ambitious public-relations plan</a> aimed at "achieving national recognition of our CO2 Greenhouse research program.""It is significant to Exxon since future public decisions aimed at controlling the build-up of atmospheric CO2 could impose limits on fossil fuel combustion," said the memo. "It is significant to all humanity since, although the CO2 Greenhouse Effect is not today widely perceived as a threat, the popular media are giving increased attention to doom-saying theories about dramatic climate changes and melting polar icecaps."Most of all, Exxon wanted a seat at the policy-making table, and the credibility of its research had earned that. In 1979, David Slade, manager of carbon dioxide research at the Energy Department, called it "a model for research contributions from the corporate sector."Sen. Gary Hart, a Colorado Democrat, invited <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/15092015/henry-shaw" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit;">Henry Shaw</a>, an early Exxon scientist, to join the policy deliberations. He was the only industry representative invited to an October 1980 conference of the National Commission on Air Quality, newly set up by Congress, to discuss "whether potential consequences of increased carbon dioxide levels warrant development of policies to mitigate adverse effects."</div><div class="field-content">www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/06/exxon-ken-paxton-first-amendmentnat sDoes Exxon Mobil have a constitutional right to sow doubt about climate science? That’s the subject of a high-stakes legal battle playing out between dozens of state attorneys general, members of Congress, corporate executives, and activists.Last fall, investigations by <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">Inside Climate News</a> and the <a href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-research/" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">Los Angeles Times</a> revealed that the oil giant has decades of internal documents showing that its own scientists and executives knew fossil fuels contributed to climate change. Publicly, the company <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22102015/Exxon-Sowed-Doubt-about-Climate-Science-for-Decades-by-Stressing-Uncertainty" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">argued</a> that the threats posed by global warming were far from certain, presumably as part of an effort to fight off regulations.<div class="inline inline-right" style="box-sizing: inherit; padding-top: 0.5rem; margin: 0px 0px 1.5rem 1rem; float: right; display: table; width: 650px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="caption" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.3;">
</div><div class="caption" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.3;">[doc]</div><div class="caption" style="box-sizing: inherit; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-stretch: normal; line-height: 1.3;">
</div></div>The revelations have sparked a barrage of legal actions. The attorney generals of Massachusetts, California, and New York launched investigations of Exxon, while <a href="http://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-former-vice-president-al-gore-and-coalition-attorneys-general-across" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">Democratic AGs</a> from other states have expressed their support. Some have drawn parallels to the tobacco industry’s deception on the dangers of smoking. Exxon has countered that the investigations are unconstitutional and has <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2892129-Exxons-Lawsuit-to-Block-VI-Investigation.html" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">filed motions</a> asking courts to <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/22062016/exxon-climate-change-investigation-subpoena-virgin-islands-federal-court" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">block the subpoenas</a>. “This…is about freedom of political speech,” the company recently argued in the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-exxon-mobil-climatechange-idUSKCN0Z128V" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">Massachusetts case</a>.In March, US Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker served the company with a subpoena seeking records that he claimed might prove that Exxon had defrauded consumers and the government by “misrepresenting its knowledge” that its fossil fuels contribute to climate change. Walker specifically pointed to a state racketeering statute that prohibits obtaining money by false pretenses. He demanded any documents detailing Exxon’s knowledge of climate change and its strategies to address it, including research studies, publications, statements, and communications with outside groups. Exxon responded by filing a lawsuit against Walker to block the subpoena. Exxon prevailed on Wednesday, when Walker agreed to withdraw the subpoena.Exxon received some unusual assistance in its victory in the Virgin Islands case. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a tea-party-aligned Republican, went so far as to formally <a href="https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/wp-content/uploads/epress/wp-content/uploads/2016/2016-05-16_exxon_states_intervention.pdf" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">intervene</a>—that is, he asked the court to allow the state of Texas to become a party to the case. Exxon, he wrote, had a First Amendment right to withhold the documents Walker was seeking. The brief was also signed by Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange (R). (Paxton and Strange also objected to Walker’s <a href="http://www.americanlawyer.com/id=1202755008631/In-Exxon-Suit-Paul-Weiss-Targets-Cohen-Milsteins-Ties-to-Climate-Probe?slreturn=20160529125548" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">use of a private law firm</a> to help conduct the investigation.)“This is about the criminalization of speech and the criminalization of thought,” he said.In a press conference in May, Paxton had <a href="https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-general-paxton-intervenes-in-first-amendment-case" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">called</a> Walker’s investigation “a fishing expedition of the worst kind” and said it represented “an effort to punish Exxon for daring to hold opinions on climate change that differ from theirs.”Two days later, Republican members of the House Science Committee sent <a href="https://science.house.gov/news/letters/gop-member-letter-state-attorneys-general-coordinated-efforts-deprive-scientists-first" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">letters</a>to Walker and 16 Democratic attorneys general requesting documents related to the various Exxon investigations. They followed up with additional letters in <a href="https://science.house.gov/news/letters/gop-member-follow-letters-state-attorneys-general-coordinated-efforts-deprive" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">June</a>.On June 15, Paxton and 12 other GOP attorneys general signed a <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2862197-AG-Coalition-Resp-Letter-2016-06-15.html" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">letter</a> criticizing the Exxon investigations. The letter laid out a free-speech argument in stark terms, saying, “Actions indicating that one side of the climate change debate should fear prosecution chills speech in violation of a formerly bi-partisan First Amendment consensus.”Exxon, which is headquartered in Texas and is a major employer in the state, did not respond to a request for comment. The company’s former vice president of public and government affairs, Kenneth P. Cohen, previously told <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/06/science/exxon-mobil-under-investigation-in-new-york-over-climate-statements.html?r=0" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">the New York Times</a>, “We unequivocally reject the allegations that Exxon Mobil has suppressed climate change research.”Paxton’s involvement in the case alarmed some environmentalists, who note that attorneys general are charged with enforcing state laws and regulations. It’s unusual for a state to intervene in support of a company that is under investigation, said Stacey Geis, managing attorney at Earthjustice, an environmental law organization.It’s as if Paxton were trying to act as Exxon’s lawyer, she said.Paxton’s deputy Brantley Starr disputed that allegation.“If we were intervening on behalf of someone, it would be the Constitution,” he said in a phone interview.<div class="incontent-promo" id="incontent_promo_3" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgb(242, 243, 239); position: relative; left: -358.156px; height: auto; width: 100vw; margin-bottom: 1rem; clear: both;"><section id="mj-incontent-ad-widget-11" class="widget mj-incontent-ad-widget" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="incontent-ad-container" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 1300px; margin: 0px auto; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px;" /></section></div><div class="mj-floating-ad-wrapper" style="box-sizing: inherit; min-height: 282px; right: calc(0px + 6rem); position: absolute; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); height: 708px;">
</div>Michael McConnell, a Stanford law professor and senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution, agreed that Paxton’s intervention was “highly unusual.” Nevertheless, he added in an email that Walker’s subpoena was “quite possibly unconstitutional.” Exxon, he said, has “a right to have a position on global warming.”Other scholars and activists reject that argument. Naomi Ages, a project leader at environmental advocacy group Greenpeace, called the Virgin Islands investigation “legitimate” and said Paxton’s intervention was “unprecedented” and based on “pretty specious legal grounds.”Robert Post, the dean of Yale Law School, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/exxonmobils-climate-change-smoke-screen/2016/06/24/2df8b29c-38c4-11e6-9ccd-d6005beac8b3_story.html" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">argues that it is</a> “irresponsible to invoke the First Amendment” to defend Exxon. “There are circumstances when scientific theories must remain open and subject to challenge, and there are circumstances when the government must act to protect the integrity of the market, even if it requires determining the truth or falsity of those theories,” wrote Post in a Washington Post op-ed last week. “Public debate must be protected, but fraud must also be suppressed.”Starr counters that the Texas AG’s office was not claiming corporations can never be investigated for fraud, but rather that an investigation cannot be based on a public policy debate. “What we shouldn’t do is investigate public debate and say that there’s only one side of the public debate that we’re investigating,” he said.Paxton has received nearly $1 million dollars in <a href="http://www.followthemoney.org/entity-details?eid=6599313" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">contributions</a> from the oil and gas industry during his seven runs for public office, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics. During a recent event at the conservative Heritage Foundation, he warned that the investigation of Exxon could have resulted in job losses in his state, though he declined to provide a specific estimate of how many jobs were in jeopardy.Meanwhile, Paxton is facing legal challenges of his own. The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2799231-SEC-Complaint.html?ga=1.114851015.1791784153.1465572490" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">complaint</a> against him in April, alleging that he had recruited investors for a company without disclosing that he was receiving compensation in the form of stock in the company. This complaint followed three state criminal <a href="http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2016/05/ken-paxton-appears-in-appeals-court-to-fight-indictments-on-securities-fraud-charges.html/" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">indictments</a> on charges of securities fraud and failing to register as an investment adviser.In a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkHnCfyBuNE&ga=1.157389306.1791784153.1465572490" target="blank" wp-content="wp-content" themes="themes" motherjones="motherjones" css="css" img="img" orange-border.png="orange-border.png" background-repeat="background-repeat" repeat-x="repeat-x" text-shadow="text-shadow" rgb="rgb" px="px" style="text-decoration-line: none; outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; background-position: 0px 90%; background-image: url(">video</a> released by his campaign in May, Paxton called the charges “false” and “politically motivated.”When asked for comment on the SEC investigation at the Heritage Foundation event, Paxton declined to answer.<div class="incontent-promo" id="incontent_promo_5" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgb(242, 243, 239); position: relative; left: -358.156px; height: auto; width: 100vw; margin-bottom: 1rem; clear: both;"><section id="mj-incontent-ad-widget-10" class="widget mj-incontent-ad-widget" style="box-sizing: inherit;"><div class="incontent-ad-container" style="box-sizing: inherit; max-width: 1300px; margin: 0px auto; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px;" /></section></div><div class="mj-floating-ad-wrapper" style="box-sizing: inherit; min-height: 282px; right: calc(0px + 6rem); position: absolute; text-align: center; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); height: 763.313px;">On Thursday, Paxton released a statement hailing the withdrawal of Walker’s Exxon subpoena as a triumph for free speech.“The so-called ‘investigation’ by Walker was a constitutionally improper attempt to suppress the freedom of speech based only on the content being communicated. In America, we have the freedom to disagree, and we do not legally prosecute people just because their opinion is different from ours.”This article has been updated.</div></div><div class="field-content"></div>

<div class="field-content">exxon busted</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content"><a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/29102015/exxon-overstates-uncertainty-climate-science">http://insideclimatenews.org/carbon-copy/29102015/exxon-overstates-uncertainty-climate-science</a></div>

</div>

<div class="field-content"><a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/polluter-info/207">http://www.polluterwatch.com/polluter-info/207</a></div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/2014/10/13/Exxon-Blasts-Movement-Divest-From-Fossil-Fuels</div>

</div>

xon Mobil is wielding its public relations might against the fossil-fuel divestment movement, signaling that climate-change activists have struck a nerve at the world’s biggest publicly traded oil and gas company.

Exxon Mobil’s blog, titled “Perspectives,”<a href="http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2014/10/10/some-thoughts-on-divestment/" style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> posted a lengthy attack</a> Friday about the divestment movement, which urges universities, churches, pension funds, and other big institutional investors to dump their shares of oil and coal companies as part of the fight against global warming.

But the blog post calls the movement “out of step with reality,” saying it’s at odds with the need for poor nations to gain better access to energy, as well as the need for fossil fuels to meet global energy demand for decades to come.

So far, the climate advocates’<a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/philanthropies-are-divesting-from-fossil-fuels-but-does-it-matter-20140921" style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; text-decoration: none;"> progress</a> at getting a growing number of institutions to shed holdings in fossil fuel companies remains pretty small compared with the scale of the industry they’re battling.

</div>

</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">Not only does Ken Cohen work in the oil and gas sector, one of the largest, most complex, and vital global industries, he is VP of public and government affairs at ExxonMobil, the biggest player in the market and the largest company in the world.

ExxonMobil reported 2011 global earnings of slightly more than $41 billion. With those numbers the company was able to regain the top spot on the Fortune 500 list, pushing Walmart into second place. Earnings for the first nine months of 2012 were $34.9 billion, up 10% compared to the same period in 2011.

Cohen began his career at Exxon in 1977 as a lawyer working his way up on the legal side until 1999, when the company acquired Mobil, and he was asked to build and run a combined public affairs group.

Today, Cohen leads a global team of 460 full-time staffers who handle all external facing communications, including media relations, government affairs, and CSR, for the 80,000-employee company and is chairman of the ExxonMobil Foundation. The only exception is investor relations, which is handled by a different team.

Around the time of the acquisition, Exxon-Mobil invested resources on research with constituencies including customers and media to define effective ways to handle external challenges in areas such as corporate reputation. That information spurred the company to develop an integrated department that has evolved during the last decade. "If you were to go to a big public and government affairs firm they would have their best people ready and able to jump in and solve the problem," says Cohen. "That is the integrated approach we take."

The research also flagged up the growing power of social media, resulting in a much more proactive approach for the company on YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook and more engagement of constituencies by senior management, including Cohen, via blogs.

Social media outreach will increase going forward because it allows a conversation. "You can ask me questions, I can respond," adds Cohen, as opposed to having the story interpreted by journalists via traditional media.

1999-present

ExxonMobil, VP of public and government affairs

1977-1999

Various posts at Exxon. Began as attorney, legal department, (1977-1985). Named as chief attorney in refining, environment and health (1985-1989). Promoted to assistant general counsel, Exxon International (1989-1991); and to senior counsel and coordinator, law department (1991-1995); and later to general counsel, Exxon Chemical (1995-1999)

</div>

Educating the public

"The biggest challenge ExxonMobil and the industry face is that people don't know a lot about us. It's very frustrating. The extent of America's knowledge is when they pull up at the pump or plug something into the wall," explains Cohen. "We have to lay part of the blame at the doorstep of the industry. We have not done a very good job historically of explaining what we do."

And doing that requires clear and direct communication because even explaining the cost of gasoline, let alone the process behind the newer technologies of hydraulic fracturing, can be complex.

A lot of discussion now is centered on natural gas production. "North America has discovered this great bounty of natural gas. If you asked me six or seven years ago 'Is this going to change the landscape?' I would have questioned it," adds Cohen. "Today I sit here and say it's a game changer. Now, we are trying to explain the process by which we produce it and then the environmental benefits and issues that need to be man- aged from the production."

As with many communications efforts at ExxonMobil, the arc of that explanation must engage and educate the public in a story that began more than a decade ago. The gasoline a consumer buys today is the result of significant investment at least 10 years ago - five years of planning, five years in construction.

Job growth has been a powerful messaging point. In an economic downturn, one of the few bright spots in the US has been the oil and gas industry.

"ExxonMobil contributed $72 billion to the US economy through activities including taxes, salaries, returns to our investors, and payments to other businesses and industries," notes Cohen. "Some may feel there are political reasons for singling out the industry for punishment, but there aren't good economic ones. By seeking to remove standard tax provisions available to all other manufacturers and producers, the policy being suggested by the president and others would undermine one of the few sectors investing in America and creating jobs."

<h2 style="margin: 20px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; text-align: center; background: transparent;">Funding for the future</h2>

The quality of math and science education in the US is an important issue for ExxonMobil and Ken Cohen, VP of public and government affairs.

"We are a company of scientists and engineers - 18,000 employees are scientists," explains Cohen. "The present and future of ExxonMobil is totally tied to the scientific and technology capabilities of our people."

In response ExxonMobil has committed $125 million to a national initiative to improve math and science education in the US.

"Ken is an invaluable member of our board," explains Tom Luce, chairman and founding CEO of The National Math and Science Initiative.

"He is strategic, focused, and results oriented and always seeking other corporate and foundation partners for our national effort."

</div>

Cohen, soft-spoken, but clearly passionate and inspired by the changes he sees in the industry, is based at corporate headquarters in Dallas and reports to Michael Dolan, SVP, ExxonMobil.

"The global energy industry is critical to economic progress and operates in a complex geopolitical environment; and Exxon- Mobil is an industry leader with a good story to tell," says Dolan. "Ken and his team understand that story and the world we are operating in. They help us cut through the noise with the right tools, tone, and messages to support our business objectives."

An important tool on the education front is the annual Outlook for Energy report the company generates that includes information from about 100 countries. It is built from the ground up every year and is the basis for ExxonMobil's business planning.

The comprehensive outlook includes an examination of all energy sources, consumption levels, future demand, and even drills down to what research is being done by auto- makers. During the last five years there has been a much broader dissemination of the report. ExxonMobil launched the 2013 version at a press conference in November in part to be more open about its research, but also to create a starting point for dialogue with policymakers and consumers.

Addressing opponents

"One of the challenges is that we have a very vocal and well-funded group of adversaries. Their objective is to get up every day and criticize what we do and convince policymakers that action is needed to restrict the operations of firms such as Exxon-Mobil," says Cohen.

"We have to find the right tone and way of engaging someone who has an entirely different point of view," he adds. "We should all at least make an effort to understand what the facts are so we have some common understanding of what the problem is."

The company is looking at getting into areas in the Middle East previously only open to government-owned entities; taking a bigger position in Argentina on natural gas produced through new technologies; and looking to expand in Africa.

Cohen says the hottest energy market is in North America, but "85% of potential oil- and gas-producing areas are off limits and in federal hands because of political reasons."Areas of interest include the outer continental shelf along the western part of the US, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and northern part of Alaska. "We have active discussions about opening areas up for exploration and development," he adds.

CSR can play a big role in those discussions both here and abroad. ExxonMobil is working with partners including the World Health Organization and Harvard to eradicate malaria in Africa, as well as funding programs that create job opportunities for women in areas such as the Middle East, and has made a commitment to fund education initiatives in the US (see sidebar).

Last year employees donated 729,000 hours of community service and the foundation gave $278 million in contributions. "We hope people realize that when we are operating in a community we are a good neighbor and a philanthropic force," explains Cohen.

</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">coll: exxon public affairs cheif Kenneth P Cohen worked  w/ Walt Buchholz (PR exxon chem), heartland, CEI (sued BC admin on climate review, claimed sci  unreliable) p 86 </div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">Annapolis, backed bogus books </div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">perhaps learning from tobacco blowback, exxon and api did not create or promulgate ("malic distort inhouse) what they knew to be lies, more nuanced doubt? 87</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">cohen started in exxon chem; risk analysis favored corp (used against kyoto) 479 shift burden of proof, vs precaut, funded harv bs shop even paul </div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">thacker gop, said bs  pthalates.</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">cohen to k st: all about 60th vote; arlington cit action team wrangled employees and retires [RETIRED big cat]</div>

</div>

<div class="field-content">company <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/exxonmobil">ExxonMobil</a></div>

</div>

<div class="views-field-field-title-value">position Vice President of Public Affairs</div>

<div class="field-content">bio

Ken Cohen studied undergraduate at Northwestern University and earned his J.D. degree from Baylor Law School, where he was Editor-in-Chief of the Baylor Law Review. He earned his LL.M. from Yale Law School, where he was a Sterling Fellow.

Ken Cohen joined the Exxon’s legal department in 1977 after serving as an Assistant Professor of Law at Indiana University School of Law in Indianapolis. He held a variety of staff assignments and, in 1985, he became Chief Attorney, Refining, Environment and Health. In 1989, he was named Assistant General Counsel, Exxon Company International; in 1991, he became Senior Counsel and Coordinator, Exxon Corporation Law Department. In 1995, he became General Counsel, Exxon Chemical Company; and in November 1999, he was named to his current position as Vice President of Public Affairs.

In this position Cohen has worldwide responsibility for the Company's government relations, communications, media relations, global community relations and corporate citizenship activities.

He is also the head of ExxonMobil's PAC, and the head of the ExxonMobil Foundation that distributes charitable grants.

From: <a target="_blank" href="http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/05/exxon.htm">The Washington Post</a>

</div>

<div class="polluter-subtitle">Evidence</div>

PR weekly lists <a target="_blank" href="http://www.prweekus.com/ken-cohen-vp-of-public-affairs-exxonmobil/article/119326/">political influence</a> as one of Ken Cohen's “Defining qualities.”

Ken Cohen claims that “Exxon Mobil Corp. never in the past decade doubted the risk from climate change” though Exxon, with <a target="blank" href="http://mydd.com/2007/2/12/exxonmobil-is-tacky">Cohen in charge</a>, has spent an estimated <a target="blank" href="http://www.desmogblog.com/exxon-caught-with-fingers-crossed-new-report">$23 million</a> from 1998 to 2007 on think tanks and associations that <a target="_blank" href="http://www.desmogblog.com/exxonmobil-slowly-shedding-its-skeptical-skin">attack the scientific evidence</a> for human-induced global warming.

Cohen received a <a target="_blank" href="http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Environment/documents/2009/07/02/LettertoCohen6March200.pdf">letter</a> from lead scientists at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment London School of Economics and Political Science asking why Exxon, under his leadership, continues to fund climate denial groups after he had committed to cutting off funding.

As Vice president of government affairs, Ken has presided over almost <a target="blank" href="http://dirtyenergymoney.com/view.php?type=search&com=1737">$4 million</a> on political campaign donations the Since 1999, including the <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/polluter-info/13">$400,000 spent in 2010</a>. and over <a target="blank" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?year=2010&lname=Exxon+Mobil&id=">$100 million</a> on lobbying since 2005.

Cohen <a target="blank" href="http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2010/11/05/natural-gas-gets-a-presidential-endorsement/">regularly</a> <a href="http://www.polluterwatch.com/blog/exxonmobil-refuses-tell-fracking-truth">greenwashes</a> the gas extraction process known as fracking, calling it safe and responsible.  Fracking is known to use <a target="blank" href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/us/series/drilling_down/index.html?scp=1&sq=urbina&st=cse">millions of gallons of toxic and radioactive wastewater</a>, which has polluted drinking water.

Ken Cohen writes a blog on exxonmobil’s website called “<a target="_blank" href="http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/about/">ExxonMobil perspectives</a>” which promotes exxon’s propaganda talking points

Cohen has personally donated <a target="_blank" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.php?name=cohen%2C+ken&state=&zip=&employ=exxon&cand=&all=Y&sort=N&capcode=h323p&submit=Submit">$51,023</a> to political campaigns.

</div>

<div class="polluter-subtitle">Links and Resources</div>

<div class="field-item field-item-0"><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.php?name=cohen%2C+ken&state=&zip=&employ=exxon&cand=&all=Y&sort=N&capcode=h323p&submit=Submit" target="_blank">Open Secrets</a></div>

<div class="field-item field-item-1"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/1611" target="_blank">Desmogblog</a></div>

<div class="field-item field-item-2"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/directory/vocabulary/1611" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a></div>

<div class="field-item field-item-3"><a href="http://www.vote-4-energy.org/" target="_blank">Vote 4 Energy</a></div>

</div>

<div class="polluter-subtitle">Quotes</div>

“It's like you think this [climate change] is a <a target="_blank" href="http://mydd.com/2007/2/12/exxonmobil-is-tacky">moral issue</a>”

"We didn't believe the Kyoto Protocol was an effective solution to reduce <a target="_blank" href="http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/05/exxon.htm">global emissions</a>."

"We try very hard to be a <a target="_blank" href="http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/05/exxon.htm">good corporate citizen</a> and take our responsibilities seriously."

"The Valdez spill was a tragic accident. We took immediate responsibility for the spill, cleaned it up and stayed with it until it was declared complete by the State of Alaska and US Coast Guard… Today, <a target="_blank" href="http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/05/exxon.htm">the ecosystem in Prince William Sound is healthy, robust and thriving</a>, according to many studies carried out by experts in this area."

“Exxon Mobil Corp. never in the past decade <a target="_blank" href="http://www.desmogblog.com/exxonmobil-slowly-shedding-its-skeptical-skin">doubted the risk from climate change</a>”

</div>

</div>

</div>