SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Exxon Investors Reject Green Initiatives
May 29, 2008
The world's biggest oil company emerged bruised but victorious from a bust-up with the billionaire Rockefeller family yesterday as an effort to foist green initiatives on ExxonMobil failed to capture wholehearted support from shareholders.Preliminary figures suggested 39.5% of Exxon's investors backed a motion demanding the appointment of an independent chairman to stimulate debate about global warming on the board. A resolution to limit Exxon's greenhouse gas emissions won 30.9%, while a policy backing renewable energy won 27.4%.
The poll, at the company's annual meeting in Dallas, demonstrated that a sizeable chunk of Exxon's investor base is uncomfortable with the Texas-based company's hardline attitude towards climate change and alternative energy.
But the environmental vote barely rose from last year's level, in a disappointment to the Rockefellers, who have campaigned vigorously for change. The family describes itself as Exxon's longest-standing shareholder - the company's roots lie in the Standard Oil empire founded by their ancestor, John D Rockefeller.
Protesters wielded banners outside the meeting in Dallas with slogans such as "People before profits" and "Oil: the new Black Death". A small plane towed a banner urging a boycott of the firm and police used sniffer dogs amid tighter security.
Rex Tillerson, chairman and chief executive, said he took critics seriously and insisted Exxon was aware of the threat of climate change: "We have the same concern as people around the world - to provide the world with its energy needs while reducing harmful emissions."
But Tillerson repeated Exxon's mantra that the demand for energy was set to rise 40% by 2030 and that oil and gas would have to meet 60% of this. Arguing that renewables lacked technological scale, he said "meaningful environmental improvements" would come from more efficient ways of delivering existing fuels.
His remarks failed to satisfy environmentalists. One, Stephen Viederman, accused Exxon's directors of leaving their responsibilities at the door. "Exxon is acting like a dinosaur in not adapting ... ExxonMobil-asaurus will disappear," he said.
Exxon's assumptions of future energy consumption were questioned by the Rockefellers, who suggested projected growth in demand from developing countries could not materialise if those nations faced catastrophes from global warming.
Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, an economist, called Exxon's approach "significantly flawed". "If energy technologies develop at the pace demonstrated by telecoms or the internet over past decades, they will seriously undermine Exxon's assumptions in demand for petroleum."
Exxon's board stonewalled almost every question by simply referring shareholders to the company's written responses.
(c) 2008 The Guardian
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
The world's biggest oil company emerged bruised but victorious from a bust-up with the billionaire Rockefeller family yesterday as an effort to foist green initiatives on ExxonMobil failed to capture wholehearted support from shareholders.Preliminary figures suggested 39.5% of Exxon's investors backed a motion demanding the appointment of an independent chairman to stimulate debate about global warming on the board. A resolution to limit Exxon's greenhouse gas emissions won 30.9%, while a policy backing renewable energy won 27.4%.
The poll, at the company's annual meeting in Dallas, demonstrated that a sizeable chunk of Exxon's investor base is uncomfortable with the Texas-based company's hardline attitude towards climate change and alternative energy.
But the environmental vote barely rose from last year's level, in a disappointment to the Rockefellers, who have campaigned vigorously for change. The family describes itself as Exxon's longest-standing shareholder - the company's roots lie in the Standard Oil empire founded by their ancestor, John D Rockefeller.
Protesters wielded banners outside the meeting in Dallas with slogans such as "People before profits" and "Oil: the new Black Death". A small plane towed a banner urging a boycott of the firm and police used sniffer dogs amid tighter security.
Rex Tillerson, chairman and chief executive, said he took critics seriously and insisted Exxon was aware of the threat of climate change: "We have the same concern as people around the world - to provide the world with its energy needs while reducing harmful emissions."
But Tillerson repeated Exxon's mantra that the demand for energy was set to rise 40% by 2030 and that oil and gas would have to meet 60% of this. Arguing that renewables lacked technological scale, he said "meaningful environmental improvements" would come from more efficient ways of delivering existing fuels.
His remarks failed to satisfy environmentalists. One, Stephen Viederman, accused Exxon's directors of leaving their responsibilities at the door. "Exxon is acting like a dinosaur in not adapting ... ExxonMobil-asaurus will disappear," he said.
Exxon's assumptions of future energy consumption were questioned by the Rockefellers, who suggested projected growth in demand from developing countries could not materialise if those nations faced catastrophes from global warming.
Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, an economist, called Exxon's approach "significantly flawed". "If energy technologies develop at the pace demonstrated by telecoms or the internet over past decades, they will seriously undermine Exxon's assumptions in demand for petroleum."
Exxon's board stonewalled almost every question by simply referring shareholders to the company's written responses.
(c) 2008 The Guardian
The world's biggest oil company emerged bruised but victorious from a bust-up with the billionaire Rockefeller family yesterday as an effort to foist green initiatives on ExxonMobil failed to capture wholehearted support from shareholders.Preliminary figures suggested 39.5% of Exxon's investors backed a motion demanding the appointment of an independent chairman to stimulate debate about global warming on the board. A resolution to limit Exxon's greenhouse gas emissions won 30.9%, while a policy backing renewable energy won 27.4%.
The poll, at the company's annual meeting in Dallas, demonstrated that a sizeable chunk of Exxon's investor base is uncomfortable with the Texas-based company's hardline attitude towards climate change and alternative energy.
But the environmental vote barely rose from last year's level, in a disappointment to the Rockefellers, who have campaigned vigorously for change. The family describes itself as Exxon's longest-standing shareholder - the company's roots lie in the Standard Oil empire founded by their ancestor, John D Rockefeller.
Protesters wielded banners outside the meeting in Dallas with slogans such as "People before profits" and "Oil: the new Black Death". A small plane towed a banner urging a boycott of the firm and police used sniffer dogs amid tighter security.
Rex Tillerson, chairman and chief executive, said he took critics seriously and insisted Exxon was aware of the threat of climate change: "We have the same concern as people around the world - to provide the world with its energy needs while reducing harmful emissions."
But Tillerson repeated Exxon's mantra that the demand for energy was set to rise 40% by 2030 and that oil and gas would have to meet 60% of this. Arguing that renewables lacked technological scale, he said "meaningful environmental improvements" would come from more efficient ways of delivering existing fuels.
His remarks failed to satisfy environmentalists. One, Stephen Viederman, accused Exxon's directors of leaving their responsibilities at the door. "Exxon is acting like a dinosaur in not adapting ... ExxonMobil-asaurus will disappear," he said.
Exxon's assumptions of future energy consumption were questioned by the Rockefellers, who suggested projected growth in demand from developing countries could not materialise if those nations faced catastrophes from global warming.
Neva Rockefeller Goodwin, an economist, called Exxon's approach "significantly flawed". "If energy technologies develop at the pace demonstrated by telecoms or the internet over past decades, they will seriously undermine Exxon's assumptions in demand for petroleum."
Exxon's board stonewalled almost every question by simply referring shareholders to the company's written responses.
(c) 2008 The Guardian
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.