Early this year, scientists will put the final touches of the Sixth Assessment Report from the International Panel on Climate Change.
It will not be an easy read.
The hope of containing global warming to under 1.5 degrees on pre-industrial levels will be all but gone and the current target of reaching net zero emissions by 2050 will be revealed as being far too little, far too late.
One of the report’s lead writers, Australian climate scientist Joëlle Gergis, gave us a taste when she wrote in October, “what concerns me is that we may have already pushed the planetary system past the point of no return. That we’ve unleashed a cascade of irreversible changes that have built such momentum that we can only watch as it unfolds”.
With fossil fuels responsible for the bulk of global warming, it’s little wonder that oil, coal and gas companies are concerned about community support. In fact, pre-COVID, the mining sector more broadly identified social licence at its greatest threat.
And the decades of delaying climate action by deliberately casting doubt on the science is coming to an end. Only 8% of Australians believe global warming is not at all serious.
So that leaves fossil fuels companies with only a few tactics left to maintain their social licence: sponsorships, marketing, community engagement and greenwashing.
Greenwashing is a pretty soft term for what is basically misleading, misdirecting, minimising and spinning facts to enable companies to make a profit at our expense.
In short, oil, gas and coal companies are pretending to solve the very problem they are creating.
They speak of “net zero” targets, but those targets are far in the future, don’t include all their emissions, or rely on carbon capture projects that aren’t yet delivering. Their commitments are full of weasel words, dodgy accounting and wishful thinking.
Like Woodside, which boasts of planting trees to offset 700,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide while also planning Barrup Hub, the largest fossil fuel project in Australia’s history with a carbon bomb of six billion tonnes.
Like Shell, which runs an “eco-marathon” while also expanding production at three Australian sites.
Like Santos, which tells us they will be net zero by 2040 while also welcoming gas expansion and planning hundreds of new coal seam gas wells near precious ground water.
Or Chevron, which offers a photography prize to teach West Australian kids about their responsibilities towards the natural world while also being the world’s second largest carbon polluter.
They pretend gas is “clean” when its methane is actually 84 times more potent at heating the atmosphere than carbon dioxide.
And they continue to tell us that fossil fuels are necessary for “progress”, “keeping the lights on” or “keeping Australia moving”, despite renewables being the cheapest source of power.
Last year they tried to convince us that we need to open more gas wells and coal mines to boost employment, even though they employ less than 2% of the population.
Most offensively, the NSW Minerals Council equated miners with “frontline workers”, comparing people that earn up to $145,000 a year in remote locations with nurses who earn less than half of that while bravely risking their lives to treat COVID patients.
Last year a marketing deck from BP was leaked. It revealed the depth and sophistication of the company’s greenwashing tactics. They ranged from subtle language changes, such as stopping using the word “hydrocarbons”, to research-based, grass-roots marketing campaigns to persuade people to associate gas with renewable energy. The aim was for BP to be seen as “part of the solution”.
The only solution is to stop. We have no more time to waste.
Belinda Noble is founder of BeNoble Communications, co-founder of Comms Declare and producer of FiredUp.
Thanks so much Belinda for an excellent summary + helpful links.
700K of CO2 mitigation sounds “a lot”, until it is put in the context of 6 billion!
And none of this deliberate destruction and dishonesty creates the community outrage it deserves.
Media, lobby groups, have constantly been present to befuddle the opinion of Joe Average. On behalf of their corporate clients. Economic teaching is only the neo Liberal model. A system which only strives for profit at all costs with constant support of govts worldwide by providing financial subsidies. Plus the mantra of jobs and trickle down rewards. Look at the disdain against “greenies”! Good example of media influence on the public. Nowadays the words “green, macro, non GMO, bio, natural, oil infused, prebiotic” are on almost every processed food – but sugar content is way above normal. As consumers we are told we have free choice to choose (whatever it
is). Not so. We are constantly bombarded to consume until we die. Probably need some kind of socialist system which could look at resources and allocation of same – but who would be willing to forgo the latest kitchen, garden, beauty, fashion etc purchase to save the world? Not many.
“The only solution is to stop.” Everything else is verbiage!
Yes, Belinda!!! 2021 for outing the green-washers – and working to get fossil fuels on the declining species list…
Something central to ‘greenwashing’ has been the confected and conflated dynamics of ‘population growth’ and/or ‘immigration’ to blame others and/or deflect away from robust environmental legislation and regulation.
How often does one hear (often white collar vehicle commuters) complain of ‘traffic congestion’ due to ‘high immigration’ and ‘population growth’, when in fact Australians are the problem (and incentives); cited by Nixon, Farage, Morrison et al..
The ‘movement’ starting with eugenics, morphed into an environmental focus via ZPG, with Paul Ehrlich and white nationalist John Tanton, Rockefeller (ExxonMobil) Bros. and Ford Foundations….. the same ideas are now widely accepted in the mainstream.
Tone Goodfellow did an excellent article titled ‘Green Anti-Immigration Arguments Are A Cover For Right Wing Populism‘ in Green Agenda late 2019, an good overview from an informed Australian.
Even Bob Brown still cites the same old tropes…… like many other nativist conservatives.
Will be interested to read how increased immigration, 20 years at record levels, doesn’t lead to traffic congestion. Should be some interesting factoids in that research.
Traffic congestion is caused by several variables including the fact that many Australians prefer to drive (while our fuel standards are low and dirty, ROM92), and like many claiming ‘populatin growth’ as the issue…..
However, population growth had spiked due to a statistical increase after the NOM definition was inflated by the UNPD 2006 (adopted y the ABS but not noticed by media) sweeping up temporary residents under the expanded 12/16+ month rule (vs. previous 12 month), especially students who have greater influence on numbers, but as we see they can ebb and flow…..
Few if any international students have cars, let alone drive round during peak hour….
Victorian Public Tranpsort Users Association had done research (not the govt.) to show that vehicle usage has outstripped population growth due to tax incentives, increase in logistics, relatively low fuel prices etc.