4 ms·

The great irony is that BP and Shell did plan for global warming and did upgrade their infrastructure accordingly. Even back in the 80s, they build their ocean

The great irony is that BP and Shell did plan for global warming and did upgrade their infrastructure accordingly. Even back in the 80s, they build their ocean drilling rigs to be high above the water knowing full well that they were causing the icebergs to melt and the water level to rise. They just kind of forgot to let us rubes know about it.

borissk 4y ago
There were plenty of scientists letting the public know about the global warming in the 80s. The public didn't want to know about it.
- einpoklum 4y ago
  Don't blame "the public". This wasn't some conscious informed choice by millions of people. The public sucks the glass teat of mass media, and the interests controlling it did not want to present global warming as a problem. In fact, this state of affairs has not even changed that significantly.
  - borissk 4y ago
    All right, but blaming the mass media is not much more helpful. What do suggest - nationalize it all?
  - johnsea 4y ago
    Of course the public was (and is!!) the culprit. Only the individual "footprint" is so small that almost nobody does something. Real structural changes are hard to enforce. There is always something more pressing, just look e.g. at the 100 billion Germany spends on war (how many trees that would give?). As a politician it would be the end of the career if you tried to enforce something really drastic (and so nobody does it, incl. "the greens").
  - the_only_law 4y ago
    > The public sucks the glass teat of mass media Ok I'll blame them for that then.
eternauta3k 4y ago
As you were writing this post, did you have a source for this, or was this hearsay? Not asking you to look for a source now, just curious about the quality of information in HN.
- LQDH 4y ago
  I don't know about BP, but this internal memo from 1988 is what people are referring to when they say shell knew about climate change in the 80s: https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/Shell_Climate_1988.pdf https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/Shell_Climate_1988.pdf
- afry1 4y ago
  Source here: https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ The investigative research that brought this up was a big development in proving that they knew on an institutional level that the science was real.
- hristov 4y ago
  https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/
- replyOnce 4y ago
  There is this article from ArsTechnica talking about a lawsuit from the city of New York against chevron which describes the issue described by the OP https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/judge-dismisses-new-york-city-climate-lawsuit-against-oil-companies/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/judge-dismisses-... The direct quote from the complaint (found here on page 5: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/show_temp.pl-15.pdf https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/show_...) would be: Meanwhile, beginning in the mid-1980s, Exxon and other major oil and gas companies, including Mobil and Shell, took actions to protect their own business assets from the impacts of climate change, including raising the decks of offshore platforms, protecting pipelines from coastal erosion, and designing helipads, pipelines, and roads in the warming Arctic)
heliodor 4y ago
Global warming is caused by burning fuel, not by extracting it. To say Shell and BP caused the icebergs to melt is ridiculous.
- AlwaysRock 4y ago
  They suppressed the information that global warming was happening.
  - heliodor 4y ago
    Yes they did. But the original statement is still ridiculous.
    - jdgoesmarching 4y ago
      Are you seriously arguing that two of the largest oil and gas companies in the world have no hand in contributing to global warming? Over a 27 year period, they are collectively responsible for producing 3% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10... Glad to know people will still be pedantically splitting hairs as the world literally burns.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Gunshot wounds are caused by the impact of the bullet, not the pulling of the trigger. To say I killed that guy is ridiculous. edit: at least someone who sells bullets or guns has the excuse that they can be used for sports or entertainment. If you pull oil out of the ground, it's meant to be burned, made into plastic, or put outside to roast in the sun.
  - heliodor 4y ago
crote 4y ago
Are you sure about the oil rigs? The thing with ocean is that there tend to be waves. They are designed to survive once-in-1.000-year storms or worse, especially since the Draupner E platform got hit by a huge rogue wave in 1995. Sea level rise is measured in millimeters per year. When a platform is already 20-30 meters above the sea, the handful of centimeters of sea level rise over its lifespan is completely insignificant.

borissk 4y ago

There were plenty of scientists letting the public know about the global warming in the 80s. The public didn't want to know about it.

einpoklum 4y ago
Don't blame "the public". This wasn't some conscious informed choice by millions of people. The public sucks the glass teat of mass media, and the interests controlling it did not want to present global warming as a problem. In fact, this state of affairs has not even changed that significantly.
- borissk 4y ago
  All right, but blaming the mass media is not much more helpful. What do suggest - nationalize it all?
- johnsea 4y ago
  Of course the public was (and is!!) the culprit. Only the individual "footprint" is so small that almost nobody does something. Real structural changes are hard to enforce. There is always something more pressing, just look e.g. at the 100 billion Germany spends on war (how many trees that would give?). As a politician it would be the end of the career if you tried to enforce something really drastic (and so nobody does it, incl. "the greens").
- the_only_law 4y ago
  > The public sucks the glass teat of mass media Ok I'll blame them for that then.

eternauta3k 4y ago

As you were writing this post, did you have a source for this, or was this hearsay? Not asking you to look for a source now, just curious about the quality of information in HN.

LQDH 4y ago
I don't know about BP, but this internal memo from 1988 is what people are referring to when they say shell knew about climate change in the 80s: https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/Shell_Climate_1988.pdf https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/blog/Shell_Climate_1988.pdf
afry1 4y ago
Source here: https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ The investigative research that brought this up was a big development in proving that they knew on an institutional level that the science was real.
hristov 4y ago
https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/ https://graphics.latimes.com/oil-operations/
replyOnce 4y ago
There is this article from ArsTechnica talking about a lawsuit from the city of New York against chevron which describes the issue described by the OP https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/judge-dismisses-new-york-city-climate-lawsuit-against-oil-companies/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/judge-dismisses-... The direct quote from the complaint (found here on page 5: https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/show_temp.pl-15.pdf https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/show_...) would be: Meanwhile, beginning in the mid-1980s, Exxon and other major oil and gas companies, including Mobil and Shell, took actions to protect their own business assets from the impacts of climate change, including raising the decks of offshore platforms, protecting pipelines from coastal erosion, and designing helipads, pipelines, and roads in the warming Arctic)

heliodor 4y ago

Global warming is caused by burning fuel, not by extracting it. To say Shell and BP caused the icebergs to melt is ridiculous.

AlwaysRock 4y ago
They suppressed the information that global warming was happening.
- heliodor 4y ago
  Yes they did. But the original statement is still ridiculous.
  - jdgoesmarching 4y ago
    Are you seriously arguing that two of the largest oil and gas companies in the world have no hand in contributing to global warming? Over a 27 year period, they are collectively responsible for producing 3% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions: https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10... Glad to know people will still be pedantically splitting hairs as the world literally burns.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pessimizer 4y ago
Gunshot wounds are caused by the impact of the bullet, not the pulling of the trigger. To say I killed that guy is ridiculous. edit: at least someone who sells bullets or guns has the excuse that they can be used for sports or entertainment. If you pull oil out of the ground, it's meant to be burned, made into plastic, or put outside to roast in the sun.
- heliodor 4y ago

crote 4y ago

Are you sure about the oil rigs? The thing with ocean is that there tend to be waves. They are designed to survive once-in-1.000-year storms or worse, especially since the Draupner E platform got hit by a huge rogue wave in 1995. Sea level rise is measured in millimeters per year. When a platform is already 20-30 meters above the sea, the handful of centimeters of sea level rise over its lifespan is completely insignificant.