ExxonMobil’s Climate Knowledge: New Study Reveals Early and Accurate Predictions

A recent study published in the journal Science by academics from Harvard and the University of Potsdam has revealed compelling evidence that ExxonMobil, the oil and gas giant with a market capitalization of $466 billion, accurately predicted global warming as early as the 1970s.

This research, led by Geoffrey Supran from Harvard and his colleagues, provides detailed insights into ExxonMobil’s internal reports, which consistently anticipated climate change with remarkable precision.

Supran, who conducted this research while working as a research associate at Harvard, highlighted the study’s significance: “We now have airtight, unimpeachable evidence that ExxonMobil accurately predicted global warming years before it publicly contradicted climate science.”

This finding adds a new dimension to previous reports, corroborating earlier conclusions by scholars, journalists, and activists about the company’s misleading public stance on climate science.

The study’s catalyst was a viral tweet from Stefan Rahmstorf, a physics professor at the University of Potsdam.

Rahmstorf compared historical climate data with ExxonMobil’s projections, revealing a striking alignment between the company’s predictions and actual temperature increases. This prompted the researchers to explore ExxonMobil’s climate projections in depth.

The study found that between 63% and 83% of ExxonMobil’s climate projections were accurate, forecasting a temperature rise of 0.20° ± 0.04 degrees Celsius per decade, consistent with academic and governmental predictions from 1970 to 2007.

This discovery underscores the company’s deep understanding of climate science, which contrasts sharply with its later public denial of these facts. ExxonMobil has consistently denied wrongdoing, calling the “ExxonKnew” movement a coordinated campaign to stigmatize the company.

Despite a 2019 court ruling that found no fraud in ExxonMobil’s climate change disclosures, the new study reinforces earlier findings and fuels ongoing debates about corporate responsibility in climate science.