> If anyone doubts that they are greed-driven, just ask. They don't hide it.
They have a legal obligation to pursue profits for shareholders. This is their fiduciary duty.
And they are like this because their consumers are like this. If people weren't so "greedy" demanding hydrocarbons at rock bottom prices, and instead wanted to pay a premium for solar powered EVs, well then hell believe me they would pursue those businesses.
But the demand isn't there. Consumers are too greedy. Consumers don't want to change their behavior.
EDIT: Downvotes, but no replies. Really HN, we just downvote people we disagree with? How about tossing your hat in the ring.
The downvotes are because you are parroting a common misconception. There is no 'duty' (legal or otherwise) for a company to pursue producing profits for shareholders.
They have to act in the interest of the shareholders, which could mean all sorts of things other than producing profit. That could include things like "not paying huge amounts of money on lobbying and advertising campaigns to spread misinformation about renewable energy and try to cast doubt on climate change for decades while they knew it was real"...
Oil companies/execs should be held accountable for misdeeds.
But that is a tiny fraction of the problem facing us. Let's say they came out decades ago and said "hey, there's probably going to be some repercussions for using our products" ... do you really think that would have changed anything?
We know right now what needs to be done. And yet Biden is running around pleading with OPEC to increase production to bring gasoline prices down. Why? Because people want cheap hydrocarbons, no matter how many downvotes you throw at me.
> Let's say they came out decades ago and said "hey, there's probably going to be some repercussions for using our products" ... do you really think that would have changed anything?
Yes. Big oil's lies and disinformation seeded the denialism that took hold in the Republican party decades ago.
Fine. What would that have changed? You can blame denialism all you want but a much more powerful motive is economic. For most of their history, fossil fuels have been the cheapest source of energy.
It's not as if I see half of the US (Democrats) driving EVs, installing solar on their roofs, eating plant based diets, etc. Blaming Republican denial is just dishonest.
I think Exxon et al saying climate change is real and their own internal research confirms it would have changed policy. Better policies could have meant batteries, nuclear, solar, wind, etc could all have been cheaper faster. It could have meant a carbon border tax which would have hamstrung a lot of US manufacturing going to China. The negotiations between Obama and Lindsey Graham for a carbon price might have succeeded.
There's a whole "What if?" where the innovation and beginnings of a post-denial GOP could have happened earlier.
Of course this is absurd because consumers have no access to information about the emissions that factor into their products, and various corporations work very hard to prevent this kind of transparency (including misleading people on the calculus a la TFA).
Not only that, but most consumers don't concretely understand the implications of "climate change" because most people can't summon a dozen climate researchers to do a study and communicate the results (indeed, in most places the actual studies are paywalled). And here too, corporations are deeply invested in making sure people believe that climate change is just a myth or that the implications aren't as severe as the science leads us to believe.
They have a legal obligation to pursue profits for shareholders. This is their fiduciary duty.
And they are like this because their consumers are like this. If people weren't so "greedy" demanding hydrocarbons at rock bottom prices, and instead wanted to pay a premium for solar powered EVs, well then hell believe me they would pursue those businesses.
But the demand isn't there. Consumers are too greedy. Consumers don't want to change their behavior.
EDIT: Downvotes, but no replies. Really HN, we just downvote people we disagree with? How about tossing your hat in the ring.