zlacker

[parent] [thread] 7 comments
1. pavlov+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-11-20 08:49:07
Exxon shareholders are also part of humanity. The company has known about the dangers of climate change for 50 years and did nothing because it could have impacted short/medium-term profits.

In reality ownership is so dispersed that the shareholders in companies like Microsoft or Exxon have no say in long-term issues like this.

replies(3): >>nxm+P5 >>nobody+lf >>nobody+nf
2. nxm+P5[view] [source] 2023-11-20 09:22:34
>>pavlov+(OP)
There was incredible global economic growth the last 50 years which had to fueled somehow. If Exxon didn’t provide the energy, other oil and gas companies wound have
replies(2): >>Fossil+t6 >>_heimd+Rz
◧◩
3. Fossil+t6[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 09:27:20
>>nxm+P5
Incredible global economic growth by what measurement, and how does that measurement translate to something beneficial to society at large?

Also, I mean, you're kinda assuming that there weren't any stifled innovations (there were) or misleading PR to keep people from looking for alternatives (there were) or ...

Interestingly, we've continued with incredible global economic growth by most measures, despite the increasing use of newer alternatives to fossil fuels...

4. nobody+lf[view] [source] 2023-11-20 10:21:32
>>pavlov+(OP)
Did nothing?
5. nobody+nf[view] [source] 2023-11-20 10:21:45
>>pavlov+(OP)
Did nothing? What do you mean?
replies(1): >>agsnu+Uf
◧◩
6. agsnu+Uf[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 10:25:30
>>nobody+nf
It's worse than did nothing, they actively suppressed climate research. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_deni...
replies(1): >>_heimd+nA
◧◩
7. _heimd+Rz[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 12:44:41
>>nxm+P5
That economic growth wasn't an absolute necessity that had to be powered, it was a choice based on the assumption that creating new stuff is always a positive and that we have functionally limitless natural resources that we should use before someone else does.
◧◩◪
8. _heimd+nA[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-11-20 12:48:20
>>agsnu+Uf
I interned at Exxon during the gulf oil spill and saw two interesting actions play out while there.

Exxon was responsible for the oil spill response that coagulated the oil and sank it. They were surprisingly proud of this, having recommended it to BP so that the extent of leaked oil was less noticeable from the surface.

Exxon also invested heavily in an alternative energy company doing research to create oil from a certain type of algae. The investment was all a PR stunt that gave them enough leverage to shelve the research that was successful enough to be considered a threat.

[go to top]