Jump to content

1 post in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline
Posted
ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson's predecessor Lee Raymond was famous for providing "logistical and moral support" (like cash) to climate change deniers, but these days Tillerson's taking a different, sort of casual-sounding tack: just deal with it. Speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations Wednesday, Tillerson suggested that rising levels of carbon in the atmosphere probably would have an impact on the environment. Tillerson said, in part:

And as human beings, as a species, that's why we're all still here. We have spent our entire existence adapting, OK? So we will adapt to this. Changes to weather patterns that move crop production areas around -- we'll adapt to that. It's an engineering problem, and it has engineering solutions. And so I don't -- the fear factor that people want to throw out there to say, 'We just have to stop this,' I do not accept.

He said this while casting doubt on scientists' current ability to accurately predict just how warm the earth might get, saying:

So I'm not disputing that increasing CO2 emissions in the atmosphere is going to have an impact. It'll have a warming impact. The -- how large it is is what is very hard for anyone to predict. And depending on how large it is, then projects how dire the consequences are.

Tillerson is staking out a posture on climate change that is starkly different than his adversarial predecessor, as documented in a 2006 New York Times article. Raymond accepted climate change's existence, but doubted much of the data surrounding it. So it's not his acknowledgement that the climate is changing that's new so much as his casual-sounding prescription for it.

RELATED: A Solar Showdown in the Southwest; Big Oil's Republican Buy

There are, as you might have guessed, already some differences of opinion with Tillerson bubbling up in the day since his remark. Steve Coll, author of Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power, told The Guardian, for instance, "Moving entire cities would be very expensive," by which he meant that slowing the rate of emissions would most likely be much cheaper than adapting to its effects. Perhaps so, but it probably wouldn't be cheaper for Exxon.

http://news.yahoo.co...cGFnZQ--;_ylv=3

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...