Guest ridicule by David Middleton
It just doesn’t get any more fracking stupid than this:
NEWS
06/04/2018 1:12 AM IST
In 1998, Shell Predicted It Would Be Sued Over Climate Crisis Someday
By Chris D’Angelo
Oil giant Royal Dutch Shell was well aware of the world-altering climate risks associated with carbon dioxide emissions by at least the mid-1980s, according to a trove of internal company documents recently uncovered by a European journalist.
In a confidential 1988 report titled “The Greenhouse Effect,” Shell researchers wrote that planetary warming largely driven by burning fossil fuels could “create significant changes in sea level, ocean currents, precipitation patterns, regional temperature and weather” — changes that they predicted would “impact on the human environment, future living standards and food supplies, and could have major social, economic and political consequences.”
[…]
(Blah, blah. blah… #ExxonKnew redux ad nauseum.)
The triple top secret 1988 evil oil industry secret science confidential report on “The Greenhouse Effect” is drawn from published scientific literature that was publicly available in 1988.
At least one of the sources had been publicly available since 1861.
The “Greenhouse Effect” wasn’t an industry secret in 1988. It was even mentioned in some of my Earth Science textbooks (albeit briefly and dismissively) in the 1970’s. My Historical Geology textbook even mentioned Tyndall.
Suggestion that changing carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere could be a major factor in climate change dates from 1861, when it was proposed by British physicist John Tyndall.
[…]
Unfortunately we cannot estimate accurately changes of past CO2 content of either atmosphere or oceans, nor is there any firm quantitative basis for estimating the the magnitude of drop in carbon dioxide content necessary to trigger glaciation. Moreover the entire concept of an atmospheric greenhouse effect is controversial, for the rate of ocean-atmosphere equalization is uncertain.
Dott, Robert H. & Roger L. Batten. Evolution of the Earth. McGraw-Hill, Inc. Second Edition 1976.
“Moreover the entire concept of an atmospheric greenhouse effect is controversial, for the rate of ocean-atmosphere equalization is uncertain”…
And… Notably not highlighted by the junk science journalists…
This is just a redux of the moronic #ExxonKnew crap. No secret science, no proprietary oil industry climate models… Just summaries of the publicly available publications on the state of the “science” and potential for future regulatory malfeasance.
The pièce de résistance idiotic babbling about Shell’s 1998 “prediction” that it could face a “climate crisis” lawsuit. This was cherry-picked from an internal publication: The Group of the Future and Group Scenarios 1998-2020.
The document laid out many (more than I have time to count) challenging scenarios that could occur from 1998-2020. These ranged from Gorebal Warming junk lawsuits, to Indian politics, to the Supercar…
No… Not that Supercar… This Supercar:
Technically Gerry Anderson and Reg Hill predicted the Supercar in 1961 and Stan Lee created Elon Musk Tony Stark in 1963.
So… There you have it. Shell didn’t know anything that the Climatariat didn’t already know in 1988.
The “Report of the second session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 28 June 1989”
Gives a pretty good idea about the scaremongering that was already going on at that time. Obviously, the authors of internal documents must have been influenced by what was published at that time:
ref: https://www.ipcc.ch/meetings/session02/second-session-report.pdf
“In welcoming the delegates to the UNEP Headquarters … The Executive Director of UNEP, hailed the fruitful alliance between WMO and UNEP. The firm commitment of prof. Obasi, the Secretary-General of WMO, coupled with the determination of UNEP leadership, has resulted in a partnership which is helping to unify the scientific and policy-making communities of the world to lay the foundation for effective, realistic and equitable action on climate change.”
“The Executive director stated that the impacts of climate change and global warming would have serious consequences for humanity. In Egypt alone, global warming could flood much of the Nile Delta and Drown 70 centuries of civilization in less than one, and could inundate one fifth of the nations arable land.”
“It would be desirable for the Panel´s report to be ready by august 1990 for presentation to the Second World Climate Conference and to the United Nations General Assembly. It should be born in mind that both the governing council of UNEP and the executive Council of WMO expected the first report of IPCC to form the basis for international negotiations on a global convention on climate change. The report can also play a valuable guiding role for the large number of conferences, meetings and symposia on climate change being held all over the world. For all of these reasons, the report should be completed in good time.”
«The issuance of the report would only be the beginning of a far more arduous task. To tackle the problem of climate warming effectively, radical changes would be necessary in international relations, trade, technology transfer, and bilateral and multilateral strategies. The panel´s continued work would be the only guarantee of the concerted response to the global threat of climate change”
«In his opening remarks , Prof. Bolin said that the primary objective of IPCC, in making its first assessment, is to produce a document which could provide guidelines for the formulation of global policy and which would enable the nations of the world to contribute to this task»
I don’t know about Shell, but the thing with Exxon is their own scientists reported to management in the late 1970s that FF emissions were likely to result in global warming, sea level rise, melting glaciers, etc. OK, nothing wrong with that, but there is something wrong when Exxon got together with other members of the American Petroleum Institute to convince the >>>conservative<<< public that the science was full of uncertainty, the scientists were subject to bias, and global warming might not be such a bad thing – in other words, they launched a decades-long series of propaganda campaigns to spread misinformation. They "trained" (their word) select scientists (Patrick Michaels is mentioned in their memos) to be their "experts." (Exxon also lobbied Bush 2 to place scientists of their own selection in particular high-ranking IPCC spots.) Because the propaganda was so successful, we are at a national impasse today in which half the country apparently doesn't trust the world's scientific community enough to believe they are rational, capable and scientific. Or rather, the climate scientist community and any scientist who studies anything related to climate change – except those who don't think it's a problem. In other words, the conservative public has selected those scientists they think are trustworthy based on their stance rather than their ability, experience or expertise. Maybe you think this is right, but I don't.
Something David does not quote:
" Shell spokesman Ray Fischer said: 'The Shell Group’s position on climate change has been a matter of public record for decades. We strongly support the Paris Agreement and the need for society to transition to a lower carbon future, while also extending the economic and social benefits of energy to everyone. Successfully navigating this dual challenge requires sound government policy and cultural change to drive low-carbon choices for businesses and consumers. It requires cooperation between all segments of society.'”
Also interesting is the fact that Shell drew a link by 2010 between public reaction to the FF industry and tobacco. Not surprising when some of the same players (e.g. S. Fred Singer) were big names in both controversies, working on behalf of industry to manipulate public opinion.
Your ignorance is manifest.
Ms Silber, the minor little problem with your argument is the “misinformation” was true. CAGW was always oversold, and always political.
The model was plausible in 1979, but the demonstrations of it relied on cherry picking, and with the Mann hockey stick in the 2000 IPCC report, went off the deep end into self deception. Climategate just shoveled a few more dirt onto an intellectually indefensible enterprize.
Hey Kristi do you:
Drive a FF car?
Heat your house with FF?
Light your house with FF electricity?
Use plastics made from FF?
Travel on public transport powered by FF?
Eat food processed using FF?
Attend schools or hospitals powered by FF?
How is your computer powered?
Will you reject an ambulance running on FF?
If you currently use FF powered mod-cons you’re a raving hypocrite and a virtue-signalling irrelevance to the real World with far more pressing issues such as:
Road accidents.
Corruption.
Health.
Education.
Money going to your green mates is an immoral disgusting perversion that robs real people of real needs.
I know what your going to say; you’ll claim you and your green mates are preventing an impending catastrophe.
The con-artists stock in trade . . . if you don’t believe in THIS something will happen to you!
.
How many government self-selected so-called “scientists” can you buy for 30 years of government ten billion-dollar budgets?
ye Kristi, we already know you are creationist flat-earther. You didn’t tell if you are also organic eater, anti-GMO, anti-vaxer, cellphone radiation-afraid, conspiracy theorist about JFK and 9/11, but let me guess: you are.
Makes sense
Now, the truth is, “only paranoid will survive”, so you ARE right to be afraid of big oil. Some of these guys paid D. Nuccitelli, a guy running a blog spreading dirt on carbon, hurting concurrent coal business more than theirs. We know that these guys were not afraid to push war for a lucrative oil-field, or to pay ISIS or other terrorists to continue operation. They do deserve all the contempt you have for them.
You are just not paranoid enough. You should just be as afraid of “big green”. Actually, much more afraid. Fossil fuel is the energy running the ~100 slave-worth of work you benefit, and allowing you to post here instead of scraping the Earth for your daily food. Big green don’t do that. They plan to reduce your energy allowance by no less than 4, and your standard of living by no less than half (some fairy somehow doubling of the standard of living/energy ratio). Well, just try that, and come back spreading your big green propaganda…
paqyfelyc, wtf are you talking about here? Are you really this nuts? Man, I know that everyone is a dog on the internet, but between you and Mr Kristi, this is just crazy. Or did I miss a /sarc somewhere. Good f’n grief.
Chuck, are you really this naive and uninformed? No need to check conspiracy site, all I talked about is official history, so you will have no problem finding that, and more (bribes, “strange” death, etc.).
Doesn’t mean that oil companies are evil. It just means that they are cynical, government tied entities, not afraid to do what it takes (including immoral or illegal) for business, profit, and national interest (continued oil supply).
100% abject bull schist.
Grade-A Alex Jones crackhead conspiracy theory nonsense.
The oil industry doesn’t pay Dana Nuccitelli to be an idiot any more than it pays me to write WUWT posts supporting all fossil fuels, including coal, and nuclear power.
Of course Kristi does all those things but his hypocrisy is forgiven because his virtue signaling covers all his sins. He after all is a true believer and all grace is given to him because of his faith.
On 7 December 2009, the EPA issued its notorious “endangerment “ finding.
As an Australian, I am curious to see why the federal government here has a National Pollution Inventory on which neither Carbon nor CO2 appear.Some 93 éléments and substances are listed.
The NPI is for industrial and commercial users and, while we read daily that CO2 is a “ pollutant”, there does not appear to be any direct official finding that such is the case.
My research indicates that in 1995/96 when a government appointed committee looked into this and drew up the NPI, the greenhouse effect was even then controversial and a finding that C and CO2 were pollutants (or not) was deferred to a later date.
I am aware that since late 2016 it has been announced by the relevant Federal Government Department that the NPI is to be reviewed.
This may open the way for an “ adverse” finding on C and CO2.
Does anyone have any more recent information on this as I fear an Australian “ endangerment” equivalent is in the wind.
Who cares if #ShellKnew . . .
If California wants to avoid paying for Nuisance loss or damage (Cal. Civ. Code § 3479) occasioned by FF combustion, Cal must ban combustion or impose a levy on it.
Judge Alsup will subvert the law if he allows the case to continue for an ‘hour’ past commencement IMHO.
No liability exists under Nuisance for the big-5 oils (unless a well evidenced Nuisance event occurred within the past three years).
Judge Alsup has a duty to ask Cal (on commencement) if they have evidence of a specific Nuisance event (in the past three years). If they cannot show they have detailed evidence (and expert witnesses to testify) Alsup must dismiss the case and award costs to the defendants.
In any event, FF burning is not a matter for the courts, it’s a political matter (Alsup well knows this as well).
Just on the news here in Australia, plans to turn brown coal from the Latrobe Valley in to hydrogen! How much energy would that consume? I think this is another example of Australian subsidy farming.
Famous last words…
https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/reality-check-on-a-half-billion-dollar-brown-coal-hydrogen-project-20180412-p4z98n.html
Certainly a lot of acting going on there.
O/T …but interesting. Earlier today when I was on FB a comment about earthquake caught my attention. The comment showed a USGS graph depicting which months had the highest rate of 6.0+ mag quakes. April was the month with the highest historical count of 6.0+ quakes. The reason why I am mentioning this is that the daily quake map caught my attention over the last 4 days as the rate of quakes per 24 hour period is currently running higher than average, imo, for what it should be in conjunction with the Moon. I have been watching the dailies almost every day since March of 2011.
Monday will be the New Moon which would typically be a time of a higher rate of quakes per 24 hour period, as is the Full Moon and to a lesser extent the mid Moons. So if the current 24 hour rate is already elevated, and April is the prime month for large quakes is this a signal of an approaching larger quake somewhere between Sunday and Tuesday?
I know I probably shouldn’t be giving Elon Musk or Uber any extra brilliant ideas (not for free, anyway), but I recall one of the super-hero series also had a super car which was effectively driven backwards. That is, the driver was seated facing backwards and drove while looking forwards through mirrors. It was for some very good reason that temporarily escapes me. Perhaps to make extreme braking more comfortable?
Anyway, how do I get a job writing internal science fiction stories for wealthy oil companies?
Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons … A classic. (I have the DVD sets of Fireball XL5, Stingray and Captain Scarlet).
Yes, Captain Scarlet was the dog’s bollocks. Not least because Captain Black was the Darth Vader of the day.
Hans Christian Andersen knew 180 years ago that human “thinking” is an emotion driven system, and that it is possible for people to bypass logic and common sense, under public pressure to conform to the consensus. And many so called “educated” people would ignore reality, in order to hide their own insecurities about their ability to “think for themselves” and be exposed as “not worthy” to be a member of the consensus group.
“Isn’t it a beautiful piece of goods?” the swindlers asked him, as they displayed and described their imaginary pattern.
“I know I’m not stupid,” the man thought, “so it must be that I’m unworthy of my good office. That’s strange. I mustn’t let anyone find it out, though.” So he praised the material he did not see. He declared he was delighted with the beautiful colors and the exquisite pattern. To the Emperor he said, “It held me spellbound.”
All the town was talking of this splendid cloth, and the Emperor wanted to see it for himself while it was still in the looms. Attended by a band of chosen men, among whom were his two old trusted officials-the ones who had been to the weavers-he set out to see the two swindlers. He found them weaving with might and main, but without a thread in their looms.
“Magnificent,” said the two officials already duped. “Just look, Your Majesty, what colors! What a design!” They pointed to the empty looms, each supposing that the others could see the stuff.
“What’s this?” thought the Emperor. “I can’t see anything. This is terrible!
Am I a fool? Am I unfit to be the Emperor? What a thing to happen to me of all people! – Oh! It’s very pretty,” he said. “It has my highest approval.” And he nodded approbation at the empty loom. Nothing could make him say that he couldn’t see anything.