ExxonMobil responds to Royal Society
Late last week we pointed you to the Guardian's report on a letter that the Royal Society wrote to ExxonMobil demanding that the oil company stop funding organizations that undermine the theory of global warming. I quite wasn't sure just how Exxon would parry the blow, but now that we have the response I'm not entirely surprised. It essentially lacks any sort of substance.
They said that both the letter and the Society's public statements "inaccurately and unfairly" describe the company as a sceptic to climate change. They go on to say, "We know that carbon emissions are one of the factors that contribute to climate change - we don't debate or dispute this."
ExxonMobil says they are taking steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from its operations, yet defend an apprehensive course of action by saying, "We support approaches to reduce emissions more broadly in ways that are cost effective for society and that consider the uncertainties that remain."
Apparently, the Guardian isn't flawless in their reporting. The article says that ExxonMobil allegedly distributed $2.9 billion to organizations that misrepresented the science of global warming. The Royal Society's letter instead states $2.9 million.
Related:
[Source: Guardian]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
yes_i_am_an_american 6:49PM (9/28/2006)
I can tell you that I do not buy gas from BP/Shell/Exxcons/Mobil. That does not leave me many choices.
Shell supports Open Loop LNG facilities (very bad for the Gulf of MX http://www.rodnreel.com/lng/index.asp).
Exxon/Mobil supports drilling in the Wildlife Refuge
BP does not maintain their infrastructure among other issues.
So to sum it up, oil companies are literally money hungry, environment hating, international conglomerates that will do anything to make a buck and greenwash the unsuspecting public.
Reply