For decades, oil and gas multinationals have acted behind the scenes to delay environmental policies and minimize the driving role of their activities in the climate crisis. By calling on Donald Trump, on Tuesday, November 12, not to keep his promise to withdraw (again) the United States from the Paris climate agreement, the boss of Exxon Mobil created a surprise in the aisles of COP29, which is being held in Baku, Azerbaijan. “You influence things by being in [the conversation], not by leaving,” Woods told the president-elect, who will take office in January.
Elaborating on his thinking in an interview with Politico,(New window) the CEO acknowledged that “the challenge or the need to address global emissions” continues, with or without the support of the United States, which has historically been responsible for the overwhelming majority of greenhouse gas emissions. As the window for action continues to shrink, to the point of compromising any chance of limiting temperature rise, Woods stressed that “anything that happens in the short term is only going to make the long term even more difficult.”
“A second exit from the Paris climate agreement would have profound repercussions for the United States’ efforts to reduce its own emissions and for international efforts to combat climate change,” added an Exxon spokesperson, quoted by CNN,(New window) in the wake of the “boss”.
These statements, or rather the credit given to them, exasperated the American author and activist Genevieve Guenther. “It’s greenwashing,” reacted this specialist in the communication strategies of oil and gas multinationals, on X(New window). “[Darren] Woods knows that the Paris agreement is not legally binding” and that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which orchestrates climate negotiations, “doesn’t bite,” she continued, calling for wariness of these expressions of good will.
“Exxon prefers that there are regulations, especially since they do not force it to change its model,” also translates Romain Ioualalen, campaign manager for the NGO Oil Change International.
As I see it, what Exxon is saying is that it is better to stay within the framework of an agreement that does not constrain it to much, while adorning itself with a veneer of climate action, rather than slamming the door and taking the risk of seeing the climate movement strengthen.