-Caveat Lector-
How the high priests of capitalism run roughshod over fears for
planet
With Bush at its side, the world's most profitable firm waits for the
science to 'get crisp'
Special report: global warming
Special report: George Bush's America
Julian Borger in Irving, Texas and Terry Macalister
Tuesday April 17, 2001
The home of global capitalism can be found just outside Dallas. Set
in the midst of a sprawling industrial park, it is a huge, squat pink
stone edifice, with a sloping black roof like a rustic villa, but a
villa made for giants.
It is the headquarters of Exxon Mobil, and it houses a plush
management suite that is known across the energy industry as the "God
Pod", with the reverence befitting a corporation which last month
emerged as the most profitable in the history of human endeavour.
It is no exaggeration to say the decisions made here in Irving, in
this high temple of private enterprise, will shape the future of the
planet.
Exxon Mobil, which trades in Britain as Esso, does not believe in the
certainty of global warming - it casts doubt on evidence that
industrial emissions of greenhouse gases are raising temperatures.
And not only is it sceptical, it has conducted an aggressive and
expensive public relations operation to challenge scientific
orthodoxy on the subject, as part of its battle to halt international
efforts to put an expensive cap on the smokestacks.
Now a new Republican government, elected with the help of $1.2m from
Exxon Mobil, has abandoned the centrepiece of those international
efforts, the Kyoto treaty on global warming. The Bush administration,
staffed from the president down by former oil executives, has also
ruled out plans to limit US emissions of carbon dioxide in the
foreseeable future.
The exact link between campaign contributions and the subsequent acts
of an administration can only be guessed at. But Exxon's critics
argue that the behemoth's assertive embrace of any scientific
evidence against global warming - however anecdotal or dubious in
origin - has lent it a credibility it does not deserve. It has also
given President George Bush "cover" for his rejection of Kyoto.
The mood in Irving in the new Bush era is confident, even jovial. But
it is equally clear that its executives have been put on their guard
against complacency. Exxon Mobil (born of a mega-merger in 1999) has,
to say the least, an image problem.
In Australia, the first ever conference of the world's green parties
yesterday agreed to launch a boycott against Exxon and other US oil
companies. They want to "send a message" to the companies on the role
they allegedly played in getting Mr Bush elected.
"We know we have a giant target painted on our chests," said Ken
Cohen, Exxon Mobil's head of government relations and public affairs.
Consequently, the company has decided to emerge from its customary
insularity and mount something resembling a charm offensive.
And that is presumably why the outer gates of the God Pod were opened
last week, and two of the corporation's vice presidents were deployed
to explain why Exxon Mobil remains dubious about global warming and
how it is nevertheless cleaning up its act the free-market way.
Mr Cohen and Frank Sprow, in charge of safety and environmental
health, both insist that Exxon Mobil's position has been
misunderstood. Rather than denying the existence of global warming
outright, they argue, Exxon Mobil is simply pointing out the room for
error in such an ever-changing and unpredictable phenomenon as
climate, and urging caution.
"You really can't bring human influence out of the noise of natural
variability at this point," Mr Sprow said. "Science is a process of
inquiry... I'd like the answer tomorrow afternoon but it may be a
decade before the science really gets crisp, because there's so much
fundamental information that has to be worked on."
Even though the science may not be rock hard, Mr Sprow said, Exxon is
working on alternative energy sources, such as low emission fuel
cells for cars, and cutting down emissions in its refineries. It
spends $12m a year researching means of reducing carbon dioxide
emissions, and has so far managed to reduce its own output by 3%.
These arguments have not convinced the corporation's enemies in the
green camp. It is big enough and controversial enough to have
galvanised an entire environmental movement, Campaign Exxon Mobil,
devoted to keeping it under surveillance.
The campaign's spokesman, Peter Altman, argues that the vaunted $12m
in carbon dioxide research is a fairly paltry share of the $17bn net
income Exxon Mobil earned last year. Furthermore, he said, whatever
beneficial effect that money might have is more than outweighed by
the corporation's role in undermining the accepted wisdom that global
warming is a real threat.
Other oil companies, such as BP and Shell, have crossed the
barricades. At its annual general meeting on Thursday, BP will come
under pressure from green activists who have
