[Vision2020] 3-22-19 "All Rhetoric and No Action’: Oil Giants Spent $1 Billion on Climate Lobbying and Ads Since Paris Pact"

[Ted Moffett]

‘All Rhetoric and No Action’: Oil Giants Spent $1 Billion on Climate
Lobbying and Ads Since Paris Pact, Says ReportRead time: 7 mins

By Sharon Kelly <https://www.desmogblog.com/user/sharon-kelly> • Friday,
March 22, 2019

https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/03/22/paris-oil-exxon-chevron-bp-total-shell-billion-climate-lobbying-advertising-influencemap?utm_source=dsb%20subscriber%20newsletter

A new report by a British think tank estimates that since the 2015 Paris
Agreement, the world’s five largest listed oil and gas companies spent more
than $1 billion lobbying to prevent climate change regulations while also
running public relations campaigns aimed at maintaining public support for
climate action.

Combined, the companies spend roughly $200 million a year pushing to delay
or alter climate and energy rules, particularly in the U.S. — while
spending $195 million a year “on branding campaigns that suggest they
support an ambitious climate agenda,” according to InfluenceMap
<https://influencemap.org/>, a UK-based non-profit that researches how
corporations influence climate policy.

InfluenceMap cites as an example ExxonMobil’s heavily-touted algae-biofuels
research, which the oil giant says
<https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/research-and-innovation/advanced-biofuels/advanced-biofuels-and-algae-research>
“offers some of the greatest promise for next-generation biofuels” with
significant climate benefits and has made it the focus of its “The Tiny
Organism” ad campaign
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=13&v=K__JC4agw0o>.

InfluenceMap notes that “detailed disclosures from the company show its
goal of 10,000 barrels of bio-fuel a day would equate to only 0.2
percent of its current refinery capacity.”

“Oil majors are projecting themselves as key players in the energy
transition while lobbying to delay, weaken, or oppose meaningful climate
policy,” Edward Collins, author of the new report, said in a statement.
“They advocate gradual implementation of market-based and technological
climate solutions, but the latest [United Nations Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change] report makes clear that urgent policy action and
limitations on fossil fuel use are needed to avoid dangerous
climate change.”

Today’s report updates the group’s 2016 report that estimated these
companies spent $115 million a year lobbying against climate regulations —
even policies companies said they supported.

“Say one thing,” said Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, as he described
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vckL6yRUkkY&feature=youtu.be>
InfluenceMap’s 2016 research on the floor of the U.S. Senate, “do another.”

The new estimates suggest that spending to influence climate policy by the
five oil giants has increased sharply over the last two years.

It also comes as global banks are investing more
<https://www.desmogblog.com/2019/03/20/jpmorgan-chase-tops-banks-financing-fossil-fuels-climate-change>
in fossil fuel projects since the Paris Agreement. In addition, the five
oil companies are spending heavily on finding and producing more fossil
fuels — and putting only a tiny fraction of their budgets into efforts to
transition away from climate-altering fuels.

“This spending accompanies the expansion of the companies’ operations with
combined annual sales of over $1 [trillion] and profits of $55 [billion in]
2018, the vast majority of which is oil and gas related,” InfluenceMap
wrote. “Combined capital investment will increase to $115 [billion] in 2019
but only about 3 percent of this will go to low carbon investments,
according to company disclosures.”
Lobbying One Message While Advertising Another

The report focuses on the world’s five largest listed oil and gas
companies, ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Total, and Chevron, leaving out
state-controlled oil giants like Saudi Aramco and China’s Sinopec.

InfluenceMap examined the extent to which each company’s branding efforts
and advertising campaigns focused on climate change.

“The research suggests that Total maintains the highest proportion of its
branding activities on climate (29 percent),” the new report finds.
“Following this, ExxonMobil, which has faced significant negative media
attention in 2018, allocates 19 percent. Shell and BP followed with 16
percent and 14 percent respectively. Chevron appears far less concerned,
using approximately 2 percent of its branding budget on climate issues
in 2018.”

The think tank's research also looked at what the companies were saying to
government regulators, either directly or through industry groups funded by
the oil majors.

“Since Paris, Chevron, BP and ExxonMobil have led in opposition to a range
of climate-motivated policy stands,” InfluenceMap wrote. “For example, in
2018 both BP and Chevron have directly lobbied U.S. policymakers for a
rollback on U.S. methane requirements.” (Methane is a powerful greenhouse
gas and the major constituent in natural gas.)

The report credits Shell and Total for becoming “more positive on a number
of climate policy issues” since 2015, but adds that they “continue to
support policies that will extend the role for fossil fuels in the energy
mix and remain part of highly climate-oppositional trade associations.”
Mixed Messages and Industry Trade Groups

At times, the public stances of a corporation’s leadership stand starkly at
odds with the messages from industry groups funded by that same corporation.

For example, on electric vehicles, Shell’s CEO Ben Van Beurden had a very
direct and simple message in July 2018. “We need battery electric
vehicles,” he said. And a year earlier, at the oil industry conference,
CERAWeek, in 2017, he expressed support for “regulations that speed up
investment in low carbon technologies and ― at the same time ― move
consumer demand.”

In May 2018, the American Petroleum Institute
<https://www.desmogblog.com/american-petroleum-institute>, the largest U.S.
trade group for oil and gas, pushed the U.S. Congress to move in the
opposite direction by rolling back incentives for electric vehicles.

“American Petroleum Institute (API) opposes mandates and subsidies,” API
testified before the U.S. House of Representatives, according to
InfluenceMap’s new report. The fossil fuel trade group voiced its
opposition for subsidies for electric vehicles, adding that “the level of
market penetration achieved by electric vehicles should not rely on
government interference.”

The report also notes the difficulty in tracking corporate lobbying in the
U.S. given the rise of so-called “dark money” groups and the lack of
transparency surrounding political contributions in the U.S. “Political
contributions that were made without full disclosure of their ultimate
source totaled $539 [million] in the 2018 election cycle according to
OpenSecrets.org,” the report says.
Social Influencers

InfluenceMap also dives deep into how companies used social media to
influence Americans during the mid-term elections last year.

“During this time ExxonMobil was by far the most prolific spender, racking
up over $400K in four weeks on over 360 individual political ads,”
InfluenceMap wrote. “The ads urge rejecting specific ballot initiatives
whilst promoting the benefits of increased fossil fuel production.
Facebook’s data indicates that ExxonMobil’s ads made over 10 million
‘impressions’ in this time with users in Colorado, Texas, and Louisiana.”

All of this spending has implications for shareholders, InfluenceMap
observed — and some shareholder groups appear to be listening.

“InfluenceMap’s research confirms a widely held suspicion that Big Oil’s
glossy sustainability reports and shiny climate statements are all rhetoric
and no action,” Catherine Howarth, Chief Executive of ShareAction
<https://shareaction.org/>, a UK charity focused on responsible investment,
said in a statement accompanying the report. “These companies have mastered
the art of corporate doublespeak — by boasting about their climate
credentials while quietly using their lobbying firepower to sabotage the
implementation of sensible climate policy and pouring millions into groups
that engage in dirty lobbying on their behalf.”

DeSmog has reached out to ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, Total, and Chevron
for comment.

“We firmly reject the premise of this report. We are very clear about our
support for the Paris agreement, and the steps that we are taking to help
meet society’s needs for more and cleaner energy,” Shell said in a statement
provided
<https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/mar/22/top-oil-firms-spending-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-says-report>
to The Guardian. “We make no apology for talking to policymakers and
regulators around the world to make our voice heard on crucial topics such
as climate change and how to address it.”

“We have not been afforded the opportunity to review the data but we
disagree with the assertion that Chevron has engaged in ‘climate-related
branding and lobbying’ that is ‘overwhelmingly in conflict’ with the Paris
Agreement,” Chevron said in a statement provided to DeSmog, adding that the
company was taking “prudent, cost-effective actions” and seeking “balanced
and transparent” policies to reduce greenhouse gas pollution. “We believe
climate change is real and human activity contributes to it. We accept the
findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

*Updated:* This article has been updated on March 22, 2019 to reflect a
statement from Chevron.

---------------------------------------

Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20190322/3d7f9db4/attachment-0001.html>