Speaking with the Enemy--Part I

This is the first of three posts on a recent conference call I took part in with the VP for Public Affairs of ExxonMobil, Ken Cohen, on Exxon's recent (apparent) change in positions on climate change policy.  Part one deals with the background on Exxon's climate policy position.  Part two lays out some of my reactions to Exxon's seemingly new position.  Part three sums up with some random observations.

For years I have been brainwashed to believe that ExxonMobil represents all that is inconsistent between big business and environmental responsibility.  After all, the Exxon Valdez oil spill served to propel environmental valuation--my preferred field of research--into the mainstream of economic research.  So when representatives from APCO, a PR firm, called to ask if I would participate in a conference call with Ken Cohen, VP for Public Affairs at Exxon Mobil, on Exxon's recent softening on climate change I agreed.  Keeping in mind that I am not a journalist and that I was trying to get the gist of what everyone was saying while trying sound coherent myself, here's my thoughts on the conference call yesterday.  Keep in mind, this is not a report on the conference call, but rather my impression of what was said.

First some background.  Here's a story on MSNBC.com detailing the beginnings of Exxon's changing stance on climate change.  The upshot:

Oil major Exxon Mobil Corp. is engaging in industry talks on possible U.S. greenhouse gas emissions regulations and has stopped funding groups skeptical of global warming claims —  moves that some say could indicate a change in stance from the long-time foe of limits on heat-trapping gases.

In December, Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil gave a talk in Boston where he outlined Exxon's stance on climate change policy:

Policies that promote free markets and investment and strengthen export-import partnerships broaden the diversification of our nation's energy portfolio and enhance our energy security.

Policies that promote stable tax, regulatory and legal frameworks over the long-term encourage the investments needed to not only meet current needs, but also the technological advances required to meet future needs while reducing environmental impacts.

Policies that promote open access to untapped oil and natural gas resources in our own country can help reduce our dependence on imports in an effective and environmentally-sensitive way. Ours is the only country in the world with major oil and natural gas resources that as a matter of policy denies its own citizens the economic benefits of developing and utilizing those resources that belong to its citizens.

So what would such a climate change policy look like?  Just prior to the call (5 minutes), we received a packet outlining Exxon's talking points for a climate policy framework.  Here are Exxon's "First Principles" of climate policy design:

1. Maximize use of markets
2. Ensure a uniform and predictable cost of carbon across the economy
3. Promote global participation
4. Minimize complexity to reduce administrative costs
5. Provide transparency to companies and consumers
6. Build flexibility into policy design to accommodate ongoing understandings of climate science and the economic impact of policies

Fully equipped with this information, the call started.  In on the call were Pam Franklin (moderator from APCO), Ken Cohen, Geoffrey Styles (from the energy outlook blog) and Carter Wood (from shopfloor.org, a blog for the National Association of Manufacturers).

Continue to part II?

Comments

[John Whitehead]

Tim,

Great posts!

By the way, I had to back out of the conference call when it conflicted with class.