Oil company backs Greenpeace

Written By: - Date published: 2:07 pm, July 14th, 2009 - 6 comments
Categories: climate change - Tags:

Who’d have thought? An oil company coming out on the side of New Zealand’s biggest environmental organisation over emission reduction targets.

Gull says let the science dictate how much New Zealand cuts its greenhouse gases by, and that the cost of inaction will far outweigh the cost of urgent cuts.

Curious times call for curious bedfellows…

6 comments on “Oil company backs Greenpeace”

  1. Draco T Bastard 1

    Perhaps they’ve been given a bit of a push

    Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

    For more than a decade the Global Climate Coalition, a group representing industries with profits tied to fossil fuels, led an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign against the idea that emissions of heat-trapping gases could lead to global warming.

    “The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,’ the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder’ provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ’ on the issue.

    But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.

    “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,’ the experts wrote in an internal report compiled for the coalition in 1995.

  2. Bill 2

    Dear. Oh dear. Oh dear.

    It’s like I broke your legs but am claiming, and expecting to be accepted as the good guy ’cause I’m offering you crutches.

    I notice they make a bit of a thing about being a signatory to the Poznan Communique….along with Shell and a whole strange smorgasbord of companies.

    Corporate spin and corporate reality only coincide in minds capable of containing the most bizarre and extreme contradictions.

    • BLiP 2.1

      Like when BP painted its forecourts green?

      Corporate spin is, surely, one of the most toxic influences in the MSM. Not only do the corporates get away with telling lies, the MSM serves these drippings of half-truths up on a platter – special “science sections” below the fold after page 7 and before the Editorial; or lovingly teased throughout a broadcast bulletin so that the evening news might finish on a tender moment as corporate funded science comes to the rescue of some poor beast. We’ve come to expect such sloppy journalism from the MSM, but I have to say I am bitterly disappointed about the conduct of those calling themselves “scientists”.

      Those buggers should be second up against the wall when the revolution comes . . .

  3. So Bored 3

    What the f do they want???????

  4. Hopeful 4

    OK its easy to be cynical of PR spin – but perhaps don’t shoot the messenger even if it is an oil company, at least they are asking government to make rapid and large cuts in our emissions.

    After all what do you put in your car? Who is accountable – I guess every consumer of fossil fuels – after all thats who put us in this situation.

    At least Gull sells biofuel blends compared to the other oil majors – the lesser of the evils you may say, but its a start.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts