Climate and Development Lab
Connect with the CDL on Twitter:
  • Home
  • About
    • Authors
    • Alumni
  • CDL in the News
  • Publications
    • Scholarly Articles & Chapters
    • Policy Briefings
    • Books & Special Issues
    • Submissions to the UNFCCC
  • Projects
  • Multimedia
  • Contact

Three Theories on the Silence of the Fossil Fuel Industry at the Paris Climate Summit

4/7/2016

 
By Timmons Roberts and Robert Brulle
Picture
In our previous piece, we described how the fossil fuel industry has successfully delayed action on climate change, but noted a distinct difference in their response in Paris, compared to at previous key moments in the global effort to address the issue.
​
Why was 2015 different, with little public action by climate deniers? In an effort to expand the public discussion and understanding of what might actually be going on behind the scenes on this crucial issue, we propose three very different theories of why the climate denial machine was quiet in the Paris round. We provide some pointers to some evidence as they are available, but much of this story remains uninvestigated. Our final section describes the outlines of what appears to be the new strategic focus of the fossil fuel industries in the face of inevitable global action on climate change.
Hypothesis 1: Weather, public opinion, and the pope mattered. This theory holds that the Paris round was different because the two hottest years on record in 2014 and 2015 combined with Pope Francis’ June Encyclical Laudato Si to make it impossible for climate denialists’ past tactics to gain traction with the public. Pope Francis’ speech in the U.S. Congress made it more difficult for their representatives in the chambers to make full-throated attacks on the science and on efforts to protect the most vulnerable. People are perceiving climate change in a different way than they did, even as recently as 2009.
Hypothesis 2: Fight the battle at home. In this theory, fossil fuel industries didn’t even bother undermining Paris since they know it rests entirely on national-level actions. Oil, gas, and coal lobbies are much more effective in Washington than in Brussels or in Bonn, the headquarters of the EU and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), respectively. Being visibly negative on the big stage in Paris was risky for major oil or gas companies. Rather, simply sabotaging Obama’s Clean Power Plan, attacking Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implementation of the effort through congressional appropriations, and tipping the presidential election in November for a pro-fossil candidate probably seemed to be far better bets with less downside risk.
In this view, the denial machine has become strongly institutionalized within the Republican Party, arguably at a far stronger level than was the case during the second George W. Bush administration. In 2016 no Republican presidential candidate has dared to utter the words that climate change is a real and actionable threat. A more sophisticated manipulation of climate politics has emerged, involving top PR companies, millions of dollars in TV ads, inside lobbying, and massive campaign efforts we will see in the months ahead.
Hypothesis 3: The treaty is too weak to bother. A third view holds that fossil fuel interests have already won the climate battle by driving down what can even be proposed in global governance of this issue. There is nothing binding in the treaty: everything important is expressed as Parties (nations) “should” take an action, not “shall.” Top-down, binding approaches to dividing up the remaining atmospheric space are entirely off the table. By this reckoning, the fossil fuel industry has won already.
On the positive side, leaders have stated important goals to which civil society can now hold governments accountable, including keeping warming to 2 degrees C above pre-industrial levels, with the aspirational goal of staying under 1.5 degrees. But several top climate scientists have argued that in fact the gap between those goals and the actions actually offered is so great as to make Paris inadequate. In some experts’ view, the reliance of the agreement on negative emissions by unproven BECSS (biomass energy carbon sequestration and storage) methods makes it a fantasy. Since nothing legally binding was really up for grabs, there was no need for the fossil fuel industry to try to drive the negotiations, and it wound up as inadequate scientifically anyway.  
Outlines of an emerging strategy
So which of these hypotheses is the most plausible?  Our answer is that it’s likely some combination of all of them. First, outright opposition to the Paris climate accord was unpalatable in the much-changed cultural landscape of America in 2015. After the pope’s visit, the increasing recognition of the connection between the California drought and climate change, and an uptick in public concern about climate change with seemingly increasing weird weather events, outright denial of the issue was no longer an option. Additionally, since ExxonMobil is now being investigated for misleading their investors on their knowledge of climate change since back in the 1980s, continued insistence on denying the science of climate change could further exacerbate their legal situation. So corporate interests had to try to exert leverage on this process, but not in a public way. 
Overall our read is that fossil fuel interests have played a rather duplicitous game of simultaneous nominal public support for and quieter private opposition to the Paris COP21 accords. Essentially, they said that they supported the accord, while acting to undermine it. First, the fossil fuel industry’s long-term strategy of facilitating and supporting opposition in the Republican Party to any climate accord has clearly paid off by creating an effective firewall against any global binding treaty in the U.S Senate. It was a foregone conclusion at Paris that the agreement could not have any binding components that would require Senate approval. This guaranteed that only a weak and mostly symbolic outcome could emerge from COP21.
Rather, fossil fuel interests continue to work in the domestic U.S. political arena to undermine any climate change action that would come close to what scientists now tell us is necessary. On the one hand, ExxonMobil released a statement of support of the COP21 proceedings in which they maintain their support for an “all of the above” energy strategy. Their level of complacency can be seen by a piece in ClimateWire which observed that oil majors are barely shifting their overall business strategies.
But on the other hand, even as the Paris conference was ongoing, ExxonMobil was workingwith other fossil fuel interests to undermine the main basis of the reduction pledge the U.S. brought to Paris: the Clean Power Plan. As nations met in Paris, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) was meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona for three days to figure out how to scuttle the power plan.  This is the group that had orchestrated the lawsuits against the EPA for the Plan, an effort that was successful in leading the U.S. Supreme Court to issue a temporary stay against its enactment.
For the past couple years, ExxonMobil has sometimes maintained that the correct way to address climate change is through a carbon tax. However based on statements by top company officials, it is unclear if they actually do support such a tax, and if so, whether they would support a tax at a level adequate to address the issue.
During and just following the COP21 agreement in Paris, fossil fuel interests rolled out sophisticated ads designed to enhance the corporate reputation of fossil fuel interests and influence the fall 2016 elections. ExxonMobil’s ads ambiguously describe how “Energy Lives Here,” and their #beanengineer campaign depicted the exalted lives of engineers, which no one could oppose. Chevron’s ads, meanwhile, talked about their staff as “doers”.
Even more visibly, the Vote4Energy campaign has been running ads on nearly every presidential debate, major sporting event, and news show. The campaign’s website rails against red tape and regulations, and asks voters to sign a pledge to support “A true ‘all-of-the-above’ energy strategy that values and leverages America’s full-range of energy resources.” Quite difficult to find is information that this is the campaign of the American Petroleum Institute. Kantar media datashow that spending for these campaigns is going through the roof, reflecting where fossil fuel industry is placing its bets in 2016. As public opinion expert Riley Dunlap points out, it is likely that the amount of coverage of climate change and energy issues in the news in 2016 will be far outweighed by these fossil industry commercials.
So we see a very sophisticated effort to steer the discourse around climate change into channels that allow business as usual to prevail. Fossil fuel industries and their supporters didn’t need to be major players at COP21, as they are focusing on shifting the cultural and institutional factors that will support or undermine any real and enduring action. Assessing the evidence, we suspect the fossil fuel industry saw COP21 as a grand sideshow of voluntary, unenforceable, and thus non-threatening goals that preserve the legitimacy of the UNFCCC process and little else. Ingolfur Blühdorn calls this sort of effort a systematic self-delusion that sustains unsustainability. As Kari Norgaard’s research suggests, people are deeply predisposed to accept positions that reassure them that they and their social institutions and family and friends are doing enough on climate, because to think otherwise would undermine our self-conceptions as decent people and a great country.
Still, it seems a high-risk strategy for the fossil-fueled denial industry to put all their bets on Republican candidates. Bernie Sanders has come out against fracking of natural gas, for example, but Hillary Clinton has not been clear about her position on fracked natural gas and the building of pipelines and power plants.
Indeed, 2015 turned out to be quite a different year than 2009, and for some observers, surprisingly positive on global action on climate change. But the stakes were truly much lower, since a binding accord was never on the table, precisely because the U.S. Senate had promised to not ratify any agreement with such elements.
Will the Paris Agreement shift society quickly away from fossil fuels? Not if ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute can avoid it. During the Paris negotiations ExxonMobil released a statement saying that: “ExxonMobil believes all economic energy sources will be necessary to meet growing global demand, and the evolution of the energy system toward lower atmospheric emissions will take many decades due to the energy system’s enormous scale, capital intensity, and complexity.”
ExxonMobil appears to be buying time, hoping to not scare away its investors. The battleground now has shifted from the halls and hallways of Le Bourget to the TV sets, computers, smartphones, and ultimately the voting booths of America. Who can best reach the hearts of Americans? Will they vote for “all of the above” energy system or a rapid shift to renewable energy?
The science suggests that getting off of all fossil fuels needs to happen very quickly indeed. The dark clouds of investigations about deception and lawsuits over the impacts of their products loom on the horizon, but the amount of time left for the fossil fuel industry to continue with business as usual is highly uncertain. The sea is rising, and fossil fuel empires appear to be beginning to contract. More research is needed, but from all observable signals, the fossil fuel industry seems to be investing in the best floodwall the Public Relations industry and Republican Party can provide.

Originally published by Reuters News


Comments are closed.
    Tweets by @ClimateDevLab
    CDL in the News

    28 Dec 2018 - Edwards in the NYT on electric vehicles in Latin America

    24 Dec 2018 - The Public's Radio RI interviews Roberts on how the fossil fuel industry outspends environmental groups on campaign contributions & lobbying

    19 Dec 2018 - EcoRI News: New Report Claims RI Climate Council Falling Behind Targets

    17 Dec 2018 - 'We must move beyond business as usual,' says new report on Rhode Island's inadequate climate plan.

    12 Dec 2018 - 
    Isabel Cavelier, Guy Edwards and Lina Puerto “COP25 en 2019: reto y oportunidad para elevar la ambición climática en América Latina” El Espectador

    4 Dec 2018 - Whitehouse, Ciciline meet with climate lab

    28 Nov 2018 - Edwards quoted in New York Times story on Brazil backing out of hosting UN summit on climate change

    11 Oct 2018 - Brookings Institute Climate reality requires starting at home: Weaning from fossil fuels

    23 Sep 2018 - Edwards quoted in Financial Times on Argentina energy future

    13 Jul 2018 - Europe and Latin America can blaze a trail on implementing the Paris Agreement
    ​
    1 Jun 2018 - Brookings Institute One year since Trump's withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement

    21 May 2018 - Edwards article in World Politics Review: Is the G-20 Heading for a Showdown With Trump on Climate Change?

    11 May 2018 - Edwards Op-Ed in Washington Post 

    22 Jan 2018 - Roberts Op-Ed The climate solution no-one in Davos will be talking about

    ​15 Dec 2017 - Edwards' article on how Regional and domestic politics could sabotage Brazil's bid to host UN climate change talks in 2019 ​
    ​
    8 Nov 2017 - Roberts quoted in Reuters story on financing loss and damage

    9 Oct 2017 - EcoRI article describes Roberts' testimony against the natural gas power plant proposed for construction in Burrillville, Rhode Island

    17 Sep 2017 - BBC Radio 5 featured a live interview with Roberts about Trump's conditions for staying in Paris

    4 Sep 2017 - Roberts comments on the use of his work in a report by Rhode Island Department of Health on the proposed power plant in Burrillville, Rhode Island 

    17 Jul 2017 - Roberts mentioned in NPR's story on the US having a say in UN climate spending
    ​
    15 Jul 2017 - Roberts calls for solid climate policies in RI

    5 Jul 2017 - Roberts demands swifter action on CO2 release

    5 Jul 2017 - Roberts demands RI Governor Raimondo to take climate action

    30 Jun 2017 - Roberts gives advice on owning and using electric cars

    23 Jun 2017 - Roberts comments on how voters are persuaded by the terms 'climate change' and 'global warming'

    20 Jun 2017 - Roberts' involvement in local climate group is helping to fight fossil fuel development

    3 Jun 2017 - WPRO Radio's Steve Klamkin interviews Roberts on the Paris Agreement

    2 Jun 2017 - Roberts comments on US involvement in the Green Climate Fund

    2 Jun 2017 - BBC Radio 5's Faye Rusco interviews Roberts on Trump's withdrawal from Paris

    2 Jun 2017 - Roberts discusses the role of mayors and private sector companies post US pull-out of Paris

    1 Jun 2017 - Roberts gives more details about the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

    1 Jun 2017 - Roberts organizes emergency protest in RI

    1 Jun 2017 - Roberts comments on the implications of US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

    1 Jun 20117 - Roberts share his views on the US exit from the Paris Accord

    31 May 2017 - Roberts cited on the far-reaching implications of US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement

    31 May 2017 - RI left vulnerable if US pulls out of Paris Accord, says Roberts

    24 May 2017 - Roberts chimes in on Trump's proposed EPA budget

    30 Apr 2017 - Roberts helps to 'fact check' Trump's first 100 days in office

    25 Apr 2017 - Roberts lobbies for people's march in RI to mark Trump's first 100 days in office

    23 Apr 2017 - Roberts cautions against threats to science at march for science in Rhode Island

    7 Apr 2017 - White House Chronicle's Llewelyn King interviews Roberts on Trump’s executive order and climate policy directions

    10 Mar 2017 - Roberts quoted in Providence Business News about new proposed fossil fuel infrastructure in Rhode Island

    6 Feb 2017 - Devex article on climate finance under the new administration quotes Roberts

    18 Jan 2017 - Roberts featured in NPR Marketplace segment on Obama's $500m donation to the Green Climate Fund

    29 Dec 2016 - Roberts quoted in Common Dreams article about the state of environmental justice in 2016

    19 Nov 2016 - EcoRI profiles Roberts and the new Civic Alliance for a Cooler Rhode Island

    14 Nov 2016 - Roberts featured in Rhode Island Public Radio segment on Trump and the Paris Agreement 

    12 Nov 2016 - Roberts quoted in Climate Home article on Republican plans to defund climate change programs

    10 Nov 2016 - Roberts quote appears in EcoRI article about Trump and the environment 

    9 Nov 2016 - Roberts quoted in InsideClimate News article on COP22 reaction to Trump's election

    9 Nov 2016 - Science Daily discusses new CDL article on paying for loss and damage

    9 Nov 2016 - Roberts quoted in Climate Home article on COP22 reaction to Trump's election

    8 Nov 2016 - Roberts' paper on paying for loss and damage discussed and quoted in Phys.Org

    7 Nov 2016 - Roberts' paper on paying for loss and damage discussed and quoted in Futurity article

    21 Sep 2016 - Roberts quoted in a Breitbart News article about Clinton's support following shift in climate change language

    20 Sep 2016 - Roberts quoted in a Climate Home article on Clinton's language around climate change after Sanders' endorsement

    5 May 2016 – Climate Home quotes Edwards on the announcement that Patricia Espinosa will lead the UNFCCC from this July 

    5 May 2016 - Dialogo Chino quotes Edwards following announcement that Patricia Espinosa will replace Christiana Figueres as head of the UNFCCC

    24 Apr 2016 - Deutsche Welle quotes Edwards on how ratifying Paris Agreement can boost prosperity in Latin America

    23 Mar 2016 – Edwards provides extended quote to Dialogo Chino on Obama’s trip to Cuba and Argentina
     
    25 Dec 2015 -  ConexiónCOP conversó con Guy Edwards sobre el nuevo acuerdo climático y America Latina

    14 Dec 2015 - Rhode Island Public Radio quotes Roberts on how Paris Climate Pact should steer New England toward clean energy

    11 Dec 2015 - Associated Press quotes Romain Weikmans on “Wild West” account on climate finance

    10 Dec 2015 -  Climate Home talks to Roberts about the lack of an independent system on climate finance

    Read more...

    Archives

    January 2021
    December 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    April 2012
    December 2011
    February 2009
    December 2008

    Authors

    The pieces featured in the blog are authored by CDL members and a diverse group of partners from around the world. The opinions expressed in these articles are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect those of Brown University. 

    Categories

    All
    Civil Society
    Climate Finance
    Conference
    COP17
    COP19
    COP20
    COP21
    Energy
    Equity
    Latin America
    LDCs
    Legislation
    Loss And Damage
    Mitigation
    Policy Brief
    Publications
    Rhode Island
    Small Island Developing States
    UNFCCC
    United States

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly