<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font size="+1"><i>December 2, 2017<br>
</i></font> <br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://inthesetimes.com/article/20723/gop-tax-bill-senate-climate-environment/">The
GOP Tax Bill Is Basically Like Throwing Gasoline On The Dumpster
Fire That Is the Climate Crisis</a></b><br>
The latest Republican scheme isn’t just bad news for the economy, it
will be terrible for the environment<br>
For starters, the bill would extend a generous corporate tax cut to
the very industries now careening the planet and humanity toward a
hotter, wetter future, namely coal, oil and gas. It would also open
up 1.5 million acres of Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for
oil and gas drilling. An analysis from Oil Change International
released last year found that nearly two-thirds of fuel reserves in
existing oil and gas fields need to remain undeveloped to keep the
earth from warming beyond 2 degrees, a threshold that itself would
mean large-scale climate impacts and severe loss of land in
low-lying areas.<br>
The bill could also make it harder for the United States to break
its addiction to fossil fuels. Though it wouldn’t eliminate existing
tax credits for renewable fuel sources, the legislation could make
these credits harder to access. On November 22, a provision many
renewable energy advocates hoped would get left behind in the House
version of the tax package—the Base Erosion Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT)
provision—re-emerged in the Senate version, prompting a vocal
response from solar and wind trade associations. “We normally don’t
speak in these kinds of terms, where we talk about collapse of the
tax equity market,”<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.acore.org/resources/press-releases/6305-acore-awea-cres-and-seia-submit-joint-letter-calling-on-senate-to-repair-provisions-that-undermine-renewable-energy-in-the-senate-tax-bill">
a joint letter from several renewables trade associations</a>
stated in response. “We’re looking at the end of the principal
financing mechanism that has fostered growth of the renewable energy
sector since the 1990s.”<br>
The BEAT provision would essentially add uncertainty for investors
in renewable projects that they could collect tax equity from
Production and Investment Tax Credits, which currently subsidize
around a third of wind and solar development. According to a <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/158454/us-tax-equity-market-could-shrink-under-senate-tax-bill?utm_source=vuture&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20171122%20base%20erosion%20tax_23%20november%202017">blog
post</a> from Keith Martin, a lawyer specializing in tax and
project financing, so-called tax equity financing provides around 40
to 50 percent of the funds for the average solar project and 50 to
60 percent for the average wind project.<br>
Were it to be implemented, the BEAT provision would mean that
neither renewable energy companies nor their investors could be sure
at the onset of a wind or solar project whether they could claim the
relevant tax credits as tax equity, threatening to upend one of the
primary incentives offered by the government to spur investment in
renewable energy. Because the measure would also apply
retroactively, Martin told the trade publication Utility Dive that
it could cut into tax credit claims on deals “closed as far back as
2008.”l(For more detailed explainers on the BEAT provision, see <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/knowledge/publications/158454/us-tax-equity-market-could-shrink-under-senate-tax-bill">here</a>
and <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2017/11/29/devastating-provision-in-senate-tax-bill-would-hobble-the-itc/#.Wh6-Vkcf7kU.twitter">here.)</a>
... Kate Aronoff<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://inthesetimes.com/article/20723/gop-tax-bill-senate-climate-environment/">http://inthesetimes.com/article/20723/gop-tax-bill-senate-climate-environment/</a></font><br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/01/trump-climate-change-paris-withdrawal-ford-walmart">Top
US firms including Walmart and Ford oppose Trump on climate
change<br>
</a></b>Big businesses appear at Miami summit to show progress on
sustainability<br>
'We've been working on this for a long time, prior to this
administration'<br>
Several of the country's corporate giants, including Walmart,
General Motors, Ford and Mars, appeared this week at the second <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://usa.solveclimatechange.com/index.php">annual
Companies v Climate Change</a> conference in Miami to showcase
their progress and reinforce their belief that sustainability and
other green targets can be achieved irrespective of the policies and
purpose of the White House.<br>
Other companies at the conference in Miami - a poignant venue
following flooding from Hurricane Irma in September and the threat
of obliteration from sea-level rise within the next century - touted
their own achievements in defiance of Trump's climate stance. For
example, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.gm.com/mol/GM-renewable-energy-by-2018.html">General
Motors' purchase of 200 megawatts of wind energy for its Ohio and
Illinois plants </a>achieves 20% of its target to use only
renewable energy sources by 2050. Confectionery giant Mars,
meanwhile, has launched a $1bn sustainability plan, targeting a 70%
reduction in greenhouse gases.<br>
"The message is one of optimism and hope. The president can only do
so much, he's full of bluster and likes to talk a lot and kind of
exaggerates his influence. The companies are seeing they can take
the lead and influence what happens on the ground, so there's hope
and optimism. Companies around the world are moving forward and not
letting this one rogue administration hold them back."<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/01/trump-climate-change-paris-withdrawal-ford-walmart">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/01/trump-climate-change-paris-withdrawal-ford-walmart</a></font><br>
<br>
<b><br>
<a
href="https://thebulletin.org/good-news-about-climate-change-unexpected-quarters11319">Good
news about climate change, from unexpected quarters</a><br>
</b>In a pair of dramatic reversals over the past few days, the
Trump administration now appears to have changed its positions on a
key pair of earlier, Obama-era environmental efforts-a laudable
change of events, albeit in back-door fashion, that one can only
hope is a sign of real things to come.<br>
After saying the opposite a few months ago...the Trump
administration now says that it will back the phasing-out of a
powerful new class of greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons
(HFCs), said a US State Department official at a conference last
Thursday in Montreal.<br>
Reading between the lines, it seems that manufacturing giant
Honeywell and chemical company Chemours-a spin-off of Dupont de
Nemours-had already invested more than $1 billion in manufacturing
systems to make refrigerants that are more ozone-friendly than HFCs,
and didn't want to go back to the old way of doing things, which
would have required a fortune to re-tool. They formed an alliance
with environmental organizations to oppose Trump's EPA (proving that
politics does indeed make strange bedfellows)...<font size="-1"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://thebulletin.org/good-news-about-climate-change-unexpected-quarters11319">https://thebulletin.org/good-news-about-climate-change-unexpected-quarters11319</a></font><b><br>
</b><br>
<br>
<b><a
href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2017/11/dark-shadow-over-russian-arctic-comes-coal">This
dark shadow over the Russian Arctic comes from coal</a></b><br>
Company VostokCoal has backing from the highest political level for
its extraction and export of 30 million tons of coal per year from
Taybass, the coal basin on the northern tip of great Taymyr
peninsula.<br>
By Atle Staalesen<br>
November 29, 2017<br>
It is one of the remotest places on earth. Nobody makes it to Taymyr
without the right papers, contacts and security clearance. The vast
lands of the peninsula are inhabited by only a few thousand people
and infrastructure is almost nonexistent.<br>
This is where VostokCoal is developing its huge project. Over the
next few years, the company intends to extract hundreds of millions
of tons of coal, build new roads and infrastructure, ...<br>
It is anthracite, a hard kind of coal with high carbon content,
which is located in abundant layers north in the Arctic peninsula.
It is used mostly in the metallurgy sector and mined only by a few
countries in the world. The 30 million tons from Taymyr will account
for almost five percent of annual global production.<br>
According to VostokCoal, this material needs no processing and can
be easily digged out of the area and directly loaded on board ships
for exports.<br>
It is a high-profit project, project owner Aleksandr Isayev says in
an interview with Prime. «The extraction is conducted in the
immediate vicinity to the port», he says and adds that in 2017-2018
the company will spend only about $20 per ton extracted and sent to
port, $5 on local terminal loading and $20 on shipment to Amsterdam.<br>
And the works are in full progress. In 2016, the first 100,000 tons
of coal were extracted and the first ship load sent towards foreign
buyers. More out-shipments followed this year...<br>
According to company plans, as much as 30 million tons of the
high-quality coal is to be extracted every year by 2025. Already in
2019, production will amount to ten million tons.<br>
And it is all going to be shipped out and exported through Arctic
waters.<br>
Ultimately, this coal will constitute a lion's share of shipments on
the Northern Sea Route. A memo from the federal Ministry of Natural
Resource, made available by news site PortNews, shows that more than
half of Russian Arctic shipments in year 2025 might come from
VostokCoal.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2017/11/dark-shadow-over-russian-arctic-comes-coal">https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2017/11/dark-shadow-over-russian-arctic-comes-coal</a></font><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/11/30/breaking-youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel-in-the-world/">Breaking:
YouTube terminates largest Climate Science channel in the World</a></b><br>
YouTube cites spam, scam, and deception<br>
...after YouTube just last February took down the Climate State
channel, and now again. The Climate State channel had close to
18,000 subscribers and 6.5 million views, over 600 videos - the
biggest climate change focused channel on the planet.<br>
If visitors now try to access the channel, a highlighted message
reads:<br>
"This account has been terminated due to multiple or severe
violations of YouTube's policy against spam, deceptive practices,
and misleading content or other Terms of Service violations."<br>
Back in February it took several days before the channel was enabled
again - and nobody provided any explanation. The channel is in good
standing, meaning there are zero copyright strikes, there are no
valid copyright claims, and no other community violations we made
aware of. The community guidelines are very broad, and <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/policies/#community-guidelines">can
be read here</a>.<br>
<blockquote>We'd like to inform you that due to repeated or severe
violations of our Community Guidelines (<a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines">https://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines</a>)
your YouTube account Climate State has been suspended.<br>
After review we determined that activity in your account violated
our Community Guidelines, which prohibit spam, scams or
commercially deceptive content ( <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801973?hl=en">https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2801973?hl=en</a>
).<br>
Please be aware that you are prohibited from accessing, possessing
or creating any other YouTube accounts. For more information about
account terminations and how our Community Guidelines are
enforced, please visit our Helper Center<br>
</blockquote>
The appeal was rejected, citing the community guidelines.
Apparently, the decision is wrong when YouTube cites spam, scams and
deception.<br>
If you feel that YouTube should activate our channel, <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.change.org/p/youtube-should-release-our-created-content-and-reinstate-our-channel">sign
below petition</a>. It takes just a few minutes. If the channel
stays inactive then I have no longer the option to publish video
content, the stuff I did the past two years extensively, hundreds of
videos. A YouTube policy prohibits me from doing climate videos ever
again in light of a termination. The petition will be send to
YouTube's CEO.<br>
Our video backup can be accessed here <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/ClimateState">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/ClimateState</a>
If you want to support us you can <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://patreon.com/ClimateState">become a Patreon, </a>or <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climatestate.com/support-future-climate-change-coverage/">donate</a>.
Climate State is entirely independent, without funding.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/11/30/breaking-youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel-in-the-world/">http://climatestate.com/2017/11/30/breaking-youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel-in-the-world/</a></font><br>
-<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2017/11/25/the-weekend-wonk-stephen-schneider-from-1990/">Peter
Sinclair</a>: "Climate State has been doing an absolutely amazing
job of providing a useful historical archive of important experts
warning on climate issues through past decades."<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2017/12/01/youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel/">YouTube
Terminates Largest Climate Science Channel</a></b><br>
Peter Sinclair Dec 1, 2017<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2017/12/01/youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel/">https://climatecrocks.com/2017/12/01/youtube-terminates-largest-climate-science-channel/</a></font><br>
-<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/12/01/inside-youtubes-climate-state-channel-termination/">Inside
YouTube's Nuclear War on Climate Change Science</a></b><br>
Why did they Really terminate Climate State?<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/12/01/inside-youtubes-climate-state-channel-termination/">http://climatestate.com/2017/12/01/inside-youtubes-climate-state-channel-termination/</a><br>
-<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/11/23/willie-soon-brought-to-you-and-funded-by-exxon/">Willie
Soon brought to you and funded by Exxon</a></b><br>
November 23, 20172017, Climate Crocks, Denial <br>
<font color="#cc0000">(Willie Soon YouTube video taken down <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxXTgcwk3jQ">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxXTgcwk3jQ</a>)</font><br>
No surprise to those who saw this video last year, Dr Willie Soon,
one of the most frequently cited climate deniers with any science
background, (although his Phd is in aerospace engineering, not
climate..) is in the news, as a new Greenpeace report shows where
the bodies are buried. <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://climatecrocks.com/2011/07/01/willie-soon-powered-by-exxon">https://climatecrocks.com/2011/07/01/willie-soon-powered-by-exxon</a>
The Soon fallacy <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/the-soon-fallacy">http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/02/the-soon-fallacy</a>
Video via <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcgzTJgeLE">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcgzTJgeLE</a>
Sourcewatch <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Willie_Soon">https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Willie_Soon</a><br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://climatestate.com/2017/11/23/willie-soon-brought-to-you-and-funded-by-exxon/">http://climatestate.com/2017/11/23/willie-soon-brought-to-you-and-funded-by-exxon/</a></font><br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcgzTJgeLE">(reposted by
Peter Sinclair) Willie Soon and Funding from Exxon</a></b><b><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcgzTJgeLE">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcgzTJgeLE</a><br>
</b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/28/climate-change-sceptic-willie-soon">Climate
sceptic Willie Soon received $1m from oil companies, papers show</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/28/climate-change-sceptic-willie-soon">https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/jun/28/climate-change-sceptic-willie-soon</a><b><br>
</b><br>
<br>
YouTube Channel Climate One Published on Dec 1, 2017<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc11QUzCOpk">(50 second
video) Slowing Down Progress</a></b><br>
Stanton Glantz, director at the University of California San
Francisco's Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education,
details why the Koch brothers and tobacco industries' bottom line is
more important than making progress in public health matters.<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blaGbZv1aKM">(1:32 Video)
The Playbook for Deception</a></b><br>
Adrienne Alford from the Union of Concerned Scientists breaks down
her organization's, "playbook of deception" which is used to show
how "business interests deceive, misinform, and buy influence at
the expense of public health and safety."<br>
-<br>
[Union of Concerned Scientists]<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#.WiHoBFXtxph">The
Disinformation Playbook </a></b><br>
<b>How Business Interests Deceive, Misinform, and Buy Influence at
the Expense of Public Health and Safety</b><br>
The deceptive practices that make up the Playbook are used by a
small minority of companies-and yet, as we show, they are found
across a broad range of industries, from fossil fuels to
professional sports.<br>
Here are five of the most widely used "plays" and some of the many
cases where they have been used to block regulations or minimize
corporate liability, often with frightening effectiveness-and
disastrous repercussions on public health and safety:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#playbook-tactic-1"><b>1.
THE FAKE</b></a><br>
Conduct counterfeit science and try to pass it off as legitimate
research<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#playbook-tactic-2"><b>2.
THE BLITZ</b></a><br>
Harass scientists who speak out with results or views inconvenient
for industry<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#playbook-tactic-3"><b>3.
THE DIVERSION</b></a><br>
Manufacture uncertainty about science where little or none exists<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#playbook-tactic-4"><b>4.
THE SCREEN</b></a><br>
Buy credibility through alliances with academia or professional
societies<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#playbook-tactic-5"><b>5.
THE FIX</b></a><br>
Manipulate government officials or processes to inappropriately
influence policy<br>
<font size="-1">Union of Concerned Scientists <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#.WiHoBFXtxph">http://www.ucsusa.org/our-work/center-science-and-democracy/disinformation-playbook#.WiHoBFXtxph</a></font><br>
-<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYUwpZpfxPw&t=467s">(video)
Climate One TV: The New Political Climate</a></b><br>
With the People's Climate March as a backdrop, Climate One is on the
road in Washington D.C., where Tea Party co-founder, Debbie Dooley,
Executive Director of 350.org, May Boeve and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
(D-RI) come together and discuss what it takes to make real progress
in the fight against Climate Change.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://youtu.be/RYUwpZpfxPw">https://youtu.be/RYUwpZpfxPw</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30112017/exxon-climate-fraud-investigation-judge-court-hearing-schneiderman-new-york-healey-massachusetts">Judge
Questions Exxon's Attempt to Block Climate Fraud Investigations</a><br>
The hearing edged a federal judge closer to deciding whether to
dismiss the oil giant's case against the attorneys general of New
York and Massachusetts.<br>
</b>ExxonMobil drew tough questions and skeptical responses from a
federal judge on Thursday as it urged her to shut down two state
investigations into whether the oil giant misled investors and the
public about climate change risks. The judge's inquiries suggested
the company had failed to build a strong enough case to halt the
probes.<br>
U.S. District Judge Valerie E. Caproni pressed Exxon's lawyers to
demonstrate how the <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/tags/exxon-climate-change-investigation">investigations</a>
by the attorneys general of Massachusetts and New York are
politically motivated efforts to suppress its free speech, as the
company claims.<br>
"I can expect you to come forward with something that doesn't
require wild leaps of logic," she told Exxon's lawyers.<br>
The two attorneys general, Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura
Healey of Massachusetts, have asked the judge to dismiss Exxon's
lawsuit. Caproni gave them until Dec. 21 to file additional written
arguments. Exxon will then have until Jan. 12 to respond...<br>
The hearing in a Manhattan court was yet another step in the nearly
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/05062017/exxon-climate-change-fraud-investigation-eric-schneiderman-rex-tillerson-exxonmobil">two-year
battle </a>by Exxon to thwart investigations into how the company
represented its understanding of the risks climate change poses to
investors and potential investors. The time frame in question
includes the years when Rex Tillerson, now U.S. secretary of state,
was Exxon's chief executive. (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/politics/state-department-tillerson-pompeo-trump.html">News
reports today</a> suggest Tillerson could be pushed out as
secretary of state in the coming weeks.)...<br>
Exxon attorney Justin Anderson told Caproni the company could have
legitimate differences about the causes and severity of climate
change. He said discussions of those differences were being
suppressed by the attorneys general.<br>
Much of the hearing centered around this question, with Caproni
pressing Anderson for an explanation of why the investigations
should not be allowed to proceed and then, at times, mocking his
responses.<br>
"If they're wrong, they don't have a case," she said. "If they're
right, then Exxon should be held to account." <br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30112017/exxon-climate-fraud-investigation-judge-court-hearing-schneiderman-new-york-healey-massachusetts">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/30112017/exxon-climate-fraud-investigation-judge-court-hearing-schneiderman-new-york-healey-massachusetts</a></font><b><br>
-<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22082017/study-confirms-exxon-misled-public-about-climate-change-authors-say">Harvard
Study Finds Exxon Misled Public about Climate Change</a><br>
</b>An analysis of Exxon's research and public statements shows a
sharp contrast between what the oil giant knew about climate change
and what it told the public.<br>
A comprehensive, <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f">peer-reviewed
academic study of ExxonMobil's internal deliberations, </a>scientific
research and public rhetoric over the decades has confirmed
empirically that the oil giant misled the public about what it knew
about climate change and the risks posed by fossil fuel emissions,
the authors said on Tuesday.<br>
The paper confirms the findings of a <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken">2015
investigative series by InsideClimate News</a> that was based
largely on the company's internal records, and also of independent
work published by the Los Angeles Times. That reporting ignited
investigations by state attorneys general that are still in
litigation.<br>
"On the question of whether ExxonMobil misled non-scientific
audiences about climate science, our analysis supports the
conclusion that it did," Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes of
Harvard University wrote in the study, published today in the
scientific journal Environmental Research Letters.<br>
Across the board, the paper found "a systematic discrepancy between
what ExxonMobil's scientists and executives discussed about climate
change privately and in academic circles and what it presented to
the general public," the authors said.<br>
"ExxonMobil contributed quietly to the science and loudly to raising
doubts about it," they wrote.<br>
<font size="-1"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22082017/study-confirms-exxon-misled-public-about-climate-change-authors-say">https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22082017/study-confirms-exxon-misled-public-about-climate-change-authors-say</a></font><br>
<b>-<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f">Assessing
ExxonMobil's climate change communications (1977-2014)<br>
Geoffrey Supran1 and Naomi Oreskes</a><br>
</b>
<blockquote><b>Abstract</b><br>
This paper assesses whether ExxonMobil Corporation has in the past
misled the general public about climate change. We present an
empirical document-by-document textual content analysis and
comparison of 187 climate change communications from ExxonMobil,
including peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed publications,
internal company documents, and paid, editorial-style
advertisements ('advertorials') in The New York Times. We examine
whether these communications sent consistent messages about the
state of climate science and its implications-specifically, we
compare their positions on climate change as real, human-caused,
serious, and solvable. In all four cases, we find that as
documents become more publicly accessible, they increasingly
communicate doubt. This discrepancy is most pronounced between
advertorials and all other documents. For example, accounting for
expressions of reasonable doubt, 83% of peer-reviewed papers and
80% of internal documents acknowledge that climate change is real
and human-caused, yet only 12% of advertorials do so, with 81%
instead expressing doubt. We conclude that ExxonMobil contributed
to advancing climate science-by way of its scientists' academic
publications-but promoted doubt about it in advertorials. Given
this discrepancy, we conclude that ExxonMobil misled the public.
Our content analysis also examines ExxonMobil's discussion of the
risks of stranded fossil fuel assets. We find the topic discussed
and sometimes quantified in 24 documents of various types, but
absent from advertorials. Finally, based on the available
documents, we outline ExxonMobil's strategic approach to climate
change research and communication, which helps to contextualize
our findings.<br>
</blockquote>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f">http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa815f</a><b><br>
<br>
</b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history"><br>
</a><font size="+1"><b><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history">This Day in
Climate History December 2, 1970 </a> - from D.R. Tucker</b></font><b><br>
</b>December 2, 1970: The United States Environmental Protection
Agency is established.<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history">http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history</a><b><br>
</b><b><br>
</b><br>
<font size="+1"><i>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
</i></font><font size="+1"><i><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote/2017-October/date.html">Archive
of Daily Global Warming News</a> </i></font><i><br>
</i><span class="moz-txt-link-freetext"><a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/pipermail/theclimate.vote</a></span><font
size="+1"><i><font size="+1"><i><br>
</i></font></i></font><font size="+1"><i> <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="a%20href=%22mailto:contact@theClimate.Vote%22">Send
email to subscribe</a> to this mailing. </i></font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><small> </small><small><b>** Privacy and Security: </b>
This is a text-only mailing that carries no images which may
originate from remote servers. </small><small> Text-only
messages provide greater privacy to the receiver and sender.
</small><small> </small><br>
<small> By regulation, the .VOTE top-level domain must be used
for democratic and election purposes and cannot be used for
commercial purposes. </small><br>
<small>To subscribe, email: <a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:contact@theclimate.vote">contact@theclimate.vote</a>
with subject: subscribe, To Unsubscribe, subject:
unsubscribe</small><br>
<small> Also you</small><font size="-1"> may
subscribe/unsubscribe at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote">https://pairlist10.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/theclimate.vote</a></font><small>
</small><br>
<small> </small><small>Links and headlines assembled and
curated by Richard Pauli</small><small> for <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://TheClimate.Vote">http://TheClimate.Vote</a>
delivering succinct information for citizens and responsible
governments of all levels.</small><small> L</small><small>ist
membership is confidential and records are scrupulously
restricted to this mailing list. <br>
</small></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>