[Committee] BP, Shell, Exxon

Tue Feb 6 14:19:54 UTC 2007

Hi,

I agree that time is short and we do not have the leisure of working 
against everyone, which wasn't what I meant anyway. I like your phrase 
about worthy losers etc, quite fitting. (just for the record, I am pretty 
anti-corporate and anti-capitalistic [while actually quite freetrade], just 
saying it here so that people can point out to me when I'm 
reverse-engineering arguments to fit my view; it's always good to know what 
you believe in happily and what you hate, but must accept).

On the other hand, there is a great need to be more critical of many 
organisations beyond Exxon, because most of them won't change out of the 
goodwill of their heart and they are susceptible to public pressure. 
Moreover, currently they benefit from "being nicer than the worst: Exxon". 
And greenwashing won't save the planet either. So I think that as Zero 
Carbon we should be very suspicious of big claims and real cc/co2-related 
policies, but not waste our energy on anti-corporate campaigns. Probably by 
comparing who's doing really well (environmentally). The example that 
springs to my mind is M&S who might very well be spearheading a proper 
green campaign as a supermarket. Taking them on for the reason they are a 
big corporation would be counterproductive and the same applies to other 
sectors. But we still should expose them if all they are doing is 
greenwash.

Sorry for the long and unprecise email, always remember I'm a Mathmo,

Marc xx

   On Feb 6 2007, Stephen Stretton wrote:

> Hi, My personal opinion is to differentiate between the oil companies; 
> which are doing well, which aren't. In my opinion this is a battle for 
> survival and we may need to take a 'divide and rule' attitude to the 
> corporate world, rather than an anti-corporate one.
>
> Re BP it's a complex and many-faced picture. As far as the climate change 
> message that is being put out, BP have actually been quite helpful. Their 
> CEO admits that global warming is a very serious risk and have been 
> pushing to get things done about it. They were first to have broken ranks 
> with the other oil companies. However, as far as their main 
> business/money is concerned, obviously its still oil. So we have to be 
> careful, autonomous and independent; aiming to succeed in our objectives 
> rather than be worthy losers.
>
>On the other hand Exxon are actively supporting many different climate
>denying groups.
>
>My perception of Shell is somewhere in the middle.
>
>I think having one or two enemies is no bad thing.
>
> One concern I have that these companies (excluding Exxon) will actually 
> put quite a lot of investment into renewables, but it won't in any way 
> keep track with energy demand which is rising even more, since renewables 
> in general start from such a low base. For them it is convenient to 
> support technologies which are 'symbolically green' -'micro' in more ways 
> than one- but quantitatively (at the moment) don't make a great 
> difference.
>
>We need a quantitatively and comprehensively low-carbon approach.
>
> So avoid oil like the plague, but we must not have an 'anti-business' 
> image. Any other opinions?
>
>Rgds
>Steve
>
>
>
>On 05 Feb 2007 22:48:09 +0000, M. Kaufmann <mk472 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Argh, damn Hermes, my message was somehow lost.
>>
>> My two points:
>>
>> 1. Should we put the message below on the calendar, I think it's quite
>> important.
>>
>> 2. I've put the Exxon thing on the calendar as an orangy thing, so 
>> should't yet be seen by anyone but us. I felt that it should be quite 
>> clear that we don't like them if we put it on the calendar
>>
>> sorry for all the spamming, just going through an email-session,
>>
>> Yours disorganisedly,
>>
>> Marc
>>
>> On Feb 5 2007, M. Kaufmann wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> >From: "Careers Service" <CLICK at careers.cam.ac.uk >
>> >Subject: CLICK - Science - a career in science communication?
>> >Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 17:30:12 -0000
>> >
>> > If moving into science communication may be of interest, don't miss the
>> > main media event of the Cambridge year, Thursday 15 February 2007:
>> >
>> >Careers Service WORKING IN THE MEDIA information event
>> >Thurs 15 February
>> >6.00-9.00pm (doors open 5.30 pm)
>> >Exam Halls
>> >New Museums Site, Downing St
>> >
>> > It's THE place to make contacts, unearth opportunities, and find out 
>> > the
>>
>> > possibilities of science media work.
>> >
>> >Plus talks programme throughout the evening.
>> >
>> > Meet over 70 graduates working in the media, course providers, student
>> > societies and some of the organisations which have taken on science
>> > graduates from Cambridge.
>> >
>> >For web info go to:
>> >www.careers.cam.ac.uk/sectors/media/event2007/index.asp
>> >For full list of visitors and their details see:
>> >www.careers.cam.ac.uk/sectors/media/event2007/who.asp
>> >
>> > BE PREPARED! - come to the briefing session on how to make the most 
>> > of the event, Monday 12 February, Mill Lane Lecture Room 4, 
>> > 4.00-4.50pm(see diary on www.careers.cam.ac.uk)
>> >
>> >*********************************************************
>> >This message sent by RuthSmith at careers.cam.ac.uk
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________ Committee mailing 
>> > list Committee at zerocarbonnow.org 
>> > http://mail.zerocarbonnow.org/mailman/listinfo/committee_zerocarbonnow.org
>>
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Committee mailing list 
>> Committee at zerocarbonnow.org 
>> http://mail.zerocarbonnow.org/mailman/listinfo/committee_zerocarbonnow.org
>>
>