I don't really think so. Petroleum products make everything from plastic to medicine to food.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Confirmed: ExxonMobil knew about climate change in the 70s
- Thread starter Hackworth
- Start date
- Status
I don't really think so. Petroleum products make everything from plastic to medicine to food.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
EV cars are probably going to be the single biggest killer in terms of oil usage.
And like many things, it's not an "IF" EV cars take off, it's only a matter of "WHEN".
The batteries that are used for EV cars have already hit 2020 projections, five years ahead of schedule. Shocked? Well I don't blame you, considering organizations like the EIA constantly shit out completely garbage projections on anything renewable or tech. for the last decade. (Average projection for Lith Ion was around $300 kWh, which is near the cost of it today)
Yea, that's $200 kWh for Lith Ion in 2040, which was projected two years ago.
These are current projections for 2020, and Tesla has already stated that there is a good chance Lith Ion could reach near $100 kWh
And note, for EV cars to become truly cost competitive with ICE and cheaper, Lith Ion need to be around $150 kWh
The shift is coming and I wouldn't be shocked if a lot of the current major car manufactures go the way of the dinosaurs in a decade or 15 years.
SaganIsGOAT
Junior Member
Hurt a planet because of greed... Pathetic.
PlayALLtheGames
Banned
Not a major surprise. What will be a surprise is if this gets attention, despite the fact that it is entirely the same as when the tobacco industry tried to convince people the science linking smoking to cancer was inconclusive, and was found to be full of shit.
Also makes you realize how many decades the U.S. squandered with respect to energy production. The first solar cell was developed in the early 1950s, hydrogen fuel cells were used in the 1960s, and back then people were already saying this is going to lead to a new age of energy production, recognizing what seemed to be obvious. Then we discovered a major, environmental impact that developing those technologies would help mitigate. Perfect setup.
Yet here we are, 60-some-odd years later, without a ton of progress. Alternatives are growing but stands no chance fighting the fossil fuel lobby, who dictates energy policy. PR wars are waged regularly. Major investment and incentives for alternative energy is prevented, keeping development costs higher and efficiency lower, then those things are used against it as reasons not to invest. Totally transparent and idiotic logic, yet, politicians, primarily on the right, eat it up. The climate change argument doesn't compel them, either. Many of them don't give a shit if the science is there or not; they know climate change can't be real because God is the only who can affect something like global climate and anyone who argues otherwise is, in fact, arrogant.
Imagine if America had invested in developing those technologies back then. Think about how quickly things we invested consistently in developed. Economy, energy, standards and cost of living, dependence on imports, foreign policy, all kinds of social impacts. Would have almost certainly made a huge difference by now.
Also makes you realize how many decades the U.S. squandered with respect to energy production. The first solar cell was developed in the early 1950s, hydrogen fuel cells were used in the 1960s, and back then people were already saying this is going to lead to a new age of energy production, recognizing what seemed to be obvious. Then we discovered a major, environmental impact that developing those technologies would help mitigate. Perfect setup.
Yet here we are, 60-some-odd years later, without a ton of progress. Alternatives are growing but stands no chance fighting the fossil fuel lobby, who dictates energy policy. PR wars are waged regularly. Major investment and incentives for alternative energy is prevented, keeping development costs higher and efficiency lower, then those things are used against it as reasons not to invest. Totally transparent and idiotic logic, yet, politicians, primarily on the right, eat it up. The climate change argument doesn't compel them, either. Many of them don't give a shit if the science is there or not; they know climate change can't be real because God is the only who can affect something like global climate and anyone who argues otherwise is, in fact, arrogant.
Imagine if America had invested in developing those technologies back then. Think about how quickly things we invested consistently in developed. Economy, energy, standards and cost of living, dependence on imports, foreign policy, all kinds of social impacts. Would have almost certainly made a huge difference by now.
Palette Swap
Member
Funnily enough, a number of large corporations are starting to back pedal on their voluntary myopia about climate change.
Typically, insurance companies have come to realize they might be in a world of shit sooner than later. - I think there's a quote by a CEO floating around that essentially says their business wouldn't be sustainable with a temperature increase of four degrees.
In the same way, some analysts and consultancies are working on the financial effects of climate change, i.e. how much it would fuck markets in the long run and how much their clients would lose.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not cheering for these guys, but I wouldn't be too surprised if that same greed pushed a number of companies to actually try to protect their assets by fighting what they empowered for so long.
old manatee
Banned
It's a good thing they continue to dictate our government's energy policies behind closed doors.
googleplex
Member
I keep thinking back to that episode of NDT's Cosmos. The one about how the lead companies tried to suppress the truth about the damaging effects of lead in the environment.
AstroNut325
Member
So we ride this out until earth turns into Venus-lite? We can't be bothered to reduce meat consumption? Get EVs or use mass transit (maybe even just a couple days a week)? Or donate to Pacs/Super PACs that focus on supporting green candidates/legislation? Or research new ways of making the medicine?
We have defeated major industries before for the good of the planet. Why can't we do it again? Because it's harder now?
Human nature....
We can definitely reduce our reliance on petroleum for energy (despite the fact that alternative energy sources are not as efficient), but we can't eliminate it totally because hydrocarbons are crucial to make food, plastics, and medicine, and oil and natural gas are the best sources of hydrocarbons.
If we found a different, easily extractable source of hydrocarbons, that would be something. But we haven't. The best source of hydrocarbons come from other things that had them...deceased biomatter.
I'm interested in if carbon capture technology is something that will end up being the answer to our problems. Take the carbon we expel out into the air and insert it back into the earth.
NullPointer
Member
No doubt.
We're slaves to our own abstractions.
And we'll see whether our current era of zero accountability continues its road to ruin.
diffusionx
Gold Member
I don't even know what else there is to say at this point. We all know this is happening, and everybody is preparing for it. The fact that people and orgs are still out there who think it is fake... I don't know what to say. It's just beyond words.
Thread theme? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXE_n2q08Yw
The most hilariously infuriating part about it all is money isn't even real. It's a set of ideas and evocations over reality.
And yet, the concepts placed upon reality matter more than reality. Paper means more than people. Figures that have no innate wealth to them matter more than the natural ebb and flow of life on this earth.
How can humans be so capable of doing phenomenal things, yet be caught into the most pedestrian of dogmas?
TheFierceGentleman
Banned
Yes, is there is a way to file a class action lawsuit for this shizznizz business?
Epsilon-delta
Banned
Damn straight.
RedHotChimiChanga
Banned
I wonder how we can change everyone's mentality so that no one drives cars and gas is reserved for commercial use until a clean alternative is developed.
The world relies on mass transit systems and the CO2 would slowly decrease by Earth's natural air scrubbers.
I have no hope.
The world relies on mass transit systems and the CO2 would slowly decrease by Earth's natural air scrubbers.
I have no hope.
DonasaurusRex
Online Ho Champ
they were
Hexa
Member
Its complicated but I think that we can solve most of the problem. On one hand, electric cars are improving in big ways recently, and I think with self driving cars and what not taking off we'll finally cross into them being the norm.
As for standard electricity usage, alternative energy is making major strides, but one of the biggest gaps is that we need a much smarter grid. That's just a cost issue in terms of infrastructure. Also we need to get rid of the stigma on nuclear.
As for plastics and such, I don't think we'll ever get away from them, but AFAIK they don't really contribute to global climate change. Different issue in terms of people just throwing them away and not recycling, but that too is an issue we can solve.
I think the last big issue is planes and boats. There really hasn't been that much progress on that front.
DonasaurusRex
Online Ho Champ
we could all take a break from eating beef and other meats, that would reduce the methane that is way more effective green house gas than CO2 which plants consume anyway.
Here's what I was talking about with carbon capture tech
https://www.facebook.com/Shell/videos/981029695273969/
https://www.facebook.com/Shell/videos/981029695273969/
Mengy
wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
This has kind of been known for awhile now about Exxon, and how they knew decades ago and covered it up. I would love to see them get prosecuted for it like Sanders wants to do, but the oil industry just influences too much of our government right now, I don't see it happening until it really won't matter anymore. Sadly, they will most likely get away with it.
AstroNut325
Member
Yes I understand that petrochemicals are used in just about everything. And because of the petrochemical industry we are 5-7 decades behind in terms of research for alternatives. We are simply where we should have been in the 60s or 70s. And it will take time to figure out how to substitute petrochemicals in our daily products. Until then we, as humanity, need to curb consumption.
And yes, I agree carbon capture technology will play a significant role in mitigating/reversing the affects of climate change.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
That's interesting. Thanks for bringing that up.
Indeed. That's how stupid it really is.
eBay Huckster
Member
Amory
Member
We live in a world that was and mostly still is completely dependent on oil.
If they had gone out and screamed from the rooftops "HEY THIS IS CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING" it wouldn't have done shit.
I'm not saying this is great news, but the world demanded oil, and they supplied it. That's pretty much what you'd expect an oil company to do.
If they had gone out and screamed from the rooftops "HEY THIS IS CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING" it wouldn't have done shit.
I'm not saying this is great news, but the world demanded oil, and they supplied it. That's pretty much what you'd expect an oil company to do.
Ziltoidia 9
Member
The Right are masters of messaging. The say anything from "biggest hoax of all time" to "Global warming will be good for us".
The people that love to here it eat it up and there is no changing their minds Even if waters rise 10 feet, after the fact, they will just say "well we didn't cause it, the earth has cycles."
The people that love to here it eat it up and there is no changing their minds Even if waters rise 10 feet, after the fact, they will just say "well we didn't cause it, the earth has cycles."
AstroNut325
Member
Oh really? So all the cover up and misinformation was just Exxon doing the world a favor? We couldn't have invested in alternative methods, technologies, and means of going about our lives? If they had worked to find solutions to climate change back then we probably would have found more significant ways of curbing greenhouse gas emissions by now.
smokeandmirrors
Banned
If only... They need to be mad an example of.
Exactly. We're decades behind where we should be. There was a right and wrong way to go about business during and after the oil crisis in the 70s, and we probably chose the worst possible option that not only has had severe negative repercussions for the world's climate and environment, but also helped set in stone our disastrous Middle East foreign policy for the next 40+ years.
Imagine if Reagan with all his charisma and ability to change people's minds instead decides to keep Carter's white house solar panels up and decides to invest heavily into alternative technologies buoyed by the fact that the entire public knows Big Oil's big "secret" about climate change and oil. What if.
Amory
Member
The misinformation is the most damning part of all this. I don't expect any company to actively try to stop people from buying/using their product, so I could've understood if they knew and remained silent. Actively spreading misinformation is pretty evil though.
To Far Away Times
Member
"Fuck you, I got mine."
Signed Exxon and the GOP.
Signed Exxon and the GOP.
It is insane.
This is the planet we are all actually living on. It's not like a hot market or natural resources on piece of land that when it dries up and you can say "fuck it" and move elsewhere. There is no elsewhere. WE'RE ALL HERE, and it's literally all we have.
Holy shit reading about this is frustrating.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Ummm No, that's because of destroyer pricing by Saudi Arabia to drive as many Major US oil companies to bankruptcy as it can so it can eventually increase the price again, and face much less competition in the market.
HalfBakedProphet
Member
just to be clear, this is part of the problem. We can't trust these multibillion dollar companies with the keys to our future because of where their priorities lie. Unfortunately they're the ones with a lot of the energy money and means to do this resaerch, so we don't really have a choice. If oil is our addiction, then oil companies are the dealer. Shockingly enough, it's in the dealers best interest to keep their clients addicted.
But they are also competing with each other because they all want to be the first ones to figure out a profitable and efficient alternative energy solution OR something like carbon capture technology.
lol like this is an American only problem
HalfBakedProphet
Member
Given the topic of this thread, I don't trust the invisible hand or capitalist competition to solve a problem like this. No alternative energy solution is going to be as profitable short term for these companies as oil and I don't trust them to think long-term if it comes at the expense of quarterly earnings. They've dragged their feet, lobbied against anything that would hurt their bottom line and flat out lied concerning the damage of global warming.
Carbon capture at best is mitigation, not a solution. It also conveniently is pushed by those already producing oil and coal and have money sunk into oil and coal infrastructure as a way to not stop using oil and coal. Maybe 30-40 years ago we could discussed mitigation, but we're already past that point of worrying about lessening the damage. Unless it can be used to directly remove the CO2 already in the atmosphere and reverse ocean acidification, it's just a way to lessen what were dumping into the atmosphere. That isn't good enough by a long shot, not anymore.
- Status