The problem is that the social interests we expect Big Oil to pursue (or at least the ones the Guardian does) are contradictory. The Guardian wants Big Oil to t

The problem is that the social interests we expect Big Oil to pursue (or at least the ones the Guardian does) are contradictory. The Guardian wants Big Oil to throttle back production in order to reduce CO2 emissions, but at the same time it attacks them for the direct consequence of this which is that fossil fuels and everything produced with them increase in costs until the amount that people can afford to consume shrinks to match that decreased production, making people worse off in real terms. This is an inherent consequence of reducing CO2 emissions this way because it's not possible to burn fossil fuels that aren't there.