Oil companies don’t act despite climate vows – U.S. House panel
Although there have been public commitments from energy companies to reduce their negative impacts on the environment, they still do not do enough to protect themselves against the negative effects of climate change. A House panel has said that the documents that were released on Friday were those that it obtained as part of an ongoing inquiry.
Earlier this week, Democratic members of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform subpoenaed oil executives to provide documents, including internal corporate emails, relevant to the investigation. A hearing had been held after which they were grilled about what their plans were for dealing with climate change.
There were a number of documents presented in the hearing that showed major oil companies discussing the concept of selling off their oil and gas fields to smaller companies under the mistaken belief that this would reduce their own emissions – a move the panel said merely shuffles these emissions from one company to the next without actually reducing them.
For instance, in 2019 Jack Collins, the former CEO of BPX, the onshore oil and gas unit of BP (BP.L), wrote to an inner colleague in an email informing them that the company was planning to cut emissions through a solar pump project as part of its efforts to reduce the company’s carbon footprint.
According to the documents, Collins wrote that despite the potential outcomes of these projects, they decided to halt nearly all of them owing to the planned divestment measures.
An internal email from Shell’s spokeswoman Curtis Smith describes divesting assets in Canada’s oil sands as follows: “No doubt, when we divest our assets we shift our CO2 liability to other companies.”
The issue is no different when we are denied access to resources in the U.S. (or elsewhere), and the energy need is then met with resources in a country that (most likely) has far fewer regulations than we do in a modern, civilized society,” he explained in an email.
It was in the documents that were seized by the House panel, however, that a colleague of Smith’s wrote: “Instead of divesting, what exactly should we do … pour concrete over the oil sands and burn the land’s deed in order to prevent anyone from buying them?” “He was likely referring to how we should burn the land and pour concrete over it …”.
As of the time of writing, BP did not respond to a request for comment.
The spokesperson for Shell has claimed that the House panel failed to uncover any evidence of a campaign of climate disinformation during its investigation.
As Smith pointed out, the Committee’s selection of documents the Subpoena Committee chose to highlight are evidence of Shell’s considerable efforts to set aggressive targets, transform its portfolio, and participate meaningfully in the ongoing energy transition as evidenced by the handful of documents subpoenaed from Shell.”
According to the documents, API’s (American Petroleum Institute) 2021 climate change strategy outline has begun to be organized around the promotion of natural gas in an energy economy characterized by carbon constraints as part of the industry’s 2021 climate change strategy.
According to an internal e-mail sent out by Mike Sommers, the head of API, the technology available now can help further secure the “license to operate” of fossil fuel drilling by mitigating emissions, by flaring methane at production fields, and by using carbon capture and storage equipment.
API’s deputy vice president for policy, Megan Bloomgren, told the publication that drillers are helping to protect the environment while producing affordable energy. It is our position that any claims to the contrary are unfounded.
Carolyn Maloney, the chairwoman of the committee, said in her statement to the panel last year. She said the executives admitted to them that oil and gas production contributed to the emergence of a climate emergency. It has been a challenge for them to deal with this issue. However, they have not done enough to deal with it.
“Today’s new evidence clearly demonstrates that these companies are aware that their climate pledges are inadequate, but that they are putting the record profits of Big Oil over the harm caused by climate change on society and the environment.”
This release of the documents comes a few months after Democrats lost control of the House of Representatives in the election in November. In early January, when Republicans take over as CEOs of the panel, they will no longer be able to direct the investigation of the panel.
A few weeks ago, the administration of President Joe Biden repeated its request to oil and gas drillers to increase production in light of the National Energy Policy. It was a form of aid to allies during Russia’s war against Ukraine. It is also a way of preventing high energy bills in the country for domestic consumers.
A memo released by a House panel on Sept. 14 explored how oil majors have attempted to greenwash their record on climate change, claiming that they have “used deceptive advertising and climate pledges, without in fact reducing emissions in any meaningful way.”
Prachi, an accomplished Chief-Editor at The Sustainable Brands Journal, has 15+ years of experience in Europe, the Middle East, and India, managing 90+ global sustainable brands. She’s a prolific writer in sustainability, contributing to various publications. Prachi’s unwavering passion and expertise make her a recognized authority, driving positive change and inspiring a sustainable future.
