If a pivotal year for climate awareness exists, it might be 1988. In June, NASA climatologist James Hansen testified before Congress about ongoing global warming driven by fossil fuel emissions. Shortly after, the United Nations formed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Weeks before the U.N.’s decision, Frank Sprow from Exxon’s corporate research issued a warning in an internal memo, stating that consensus on mitigating greenhouse gases could harm Exxon.
This memo is among documents released in a Massachusetts lawsuit against ExxonMobil from 2019. While quoted in a Wall Street Journal article in 2023, the full document wasn’t published. New records reveal Exxon scientists contesting claims about biofuels and carbon capture.
These documents, consistent with previous confidential files uncovered by Inside Climate News and others, provide insights into Exxon’s internal debates from the 1980s to the 2010s.
The documents emerge as lawsuits challenge the oil sector’s accountability for climate change. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed a case involving Boulder, Colorado, that could affect over 20 other claims against oil companies.
Aaron Regunberg from Public Citizen highlighted the fear oil companies have of public exposure, noting the Massachusetts case indicates only a fraction of the evidence is visible. He questions how many more incriminating reports exist.
Many lawsuits demand oil firms contribute to climate-related costs, citing their role in sowing doubt about climate science. These costs have risen, exceeding $100 billion annually in the U.S. Exxon, meanwhile, reported nearly $19 billion in profits in the first half of this year.
Exxon has denied misleading the public about climate change and contested the lawsuits’ validity, claiming such matters belong to policymakers, not courts.
The Massachusetts attorney general’s case claims Exxon misled state consumers and investors, focusing on public relations rather than reducing climate impacts, seeking fines and an injunction against Exxon’s practices.
Documents highlight how Exxon promoted biofuels and carbon capture despite internal doubts. In a Wall Street Journal report, an Exxon scientist called a 10,000-barrel-per-day algae biofuel target by 2025 “impossible,” adding the 2018 press release was misleading.
Exxon later abandoned algae biofuels but still promotes carbon capture. Documents show Exxon’s internal skepticism about the technology’s scalability, noting major investments and market incentives would be necessary.
A 2014 presentation highlighted challenges to scaling up carbon capture, while a scientist criticized the company’s claims of leadership in the field.
Despite this, Exxon continued promoting carbon capture and algae advertising, considered “All-Around Winners” in company presentations.
By 2021, Exxon targeted political and financial leaders with campaigns positioning itself as a climate helper, though proposed projects like the Houston carbon capture hub were not pursued.
Earlier documents in the Massachusetts case reveal Exxon’s climate strategy origins. In 1988, Sprow proposed Exxon research focus on maintaining fossil fuel value and business options.
Sprow recommended engaging with climate modeling and monitoring alternative energy technologies for potential business development.
A 1997 Exxon memo from the American Petroleum Institute outlined strategies to question climate policies and touted economic cost concerns, aligning with conservative think tanks to challenge climate science.
Jonathan Adler, linked to the API meeting, denies promoting climate denial, emphasizing adherence to his organization’s principles.
By the 2010s, Exxon shifted its stance, ceasing to question climate science as consensus grew, instead contributing to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
However, the Massachusetts case argues Exxon still relied on unlikely climate solutions, while expanding oil and gas production by over 15 percent by 2030.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org