There is something worrisome about the oil and gas industry that Big Oil is working so hard to make the public look away from.
But let’s first take a street travel to the 1950s, in the United States. An advert pops out at us; a white Doctor with his classic white lab cloth, a cigarette in hand.
The header reads, “More Doctors Smoke Camels than any other Cigarette!” Walking to another newstand, we see a red and yellow poster, “No adverse effects on nose, throat, and sinuses of group from smoking Chesterfield; reports a MEDICAL SPECIALIST…”
In the 1950s, the public and scientific community began to worry about the correlation between smoking and lung cancer, supported by clinical data. By the following decade “1960s”, two more damning reports came out that clearly stated that smoking was a proven cause of lung cancer.
Yet, despite all these reports, the Tobacco industry continued to deny or sow doubts about the injurious nature of tobacco to health, moving instead to marketing “lighter” flavours, which promised low tar smoke.
Let’s fast forward to 2025.
We have just witnessed a devastating Hurricane Melissa in the Caribbean and Bill Gates, one of the ultra-billionaires in a world where around a billion live in extreme poverty, just framed climate change as a rival to poverty alleviation.
In a 17-page memo to COP30, Gates said he would rather pay more attention towards combating disease and poverty than combatting climate change.
COP30 is “a chance to refocus on the metric that should count even more than emissions and temperature change: improving lives”, Gates said.
“Although climate change will have serious consequences – particularly for people in the poorest countries – it will not lead to humanity’s demise,” he noted, dismissing that apocalyptic sticker that activists once fantasised.
His pulling back from climate investment is seen as a big disappointment but Gates said it was a necessary move.
Many silicon valley execs in the Trump era feel climate goals as unrealistic in the age of data centres and the AI race.
As stakeholders and policymakers from across the world gather in Brazil for the latest COP; Big Oil executives are lounging with them while subsidies for their product still abound, and adverts and sponsorships are still being run everywhere in their name.
Documents show that Big Oil, especially ExxonMobil, knew about the effects of their product on the climate as far back as 1968, but just like Big Tobacco, it denied and sowed doubts on the validity of climate models.
When James Hansen brought the issue into mainstream public discourse in 1988, oil companies simply changed tack and focused on ‘cleaner fuel’ and the ever elusive carbon capture.
Why eco-credibility matters and the lesson from Big Tobacco
Big Oil, Big Tobacco, Big Agro, Big Auto, and other “Big” corporations, have often taken this well-trodden road of denial, doubt, and “lighter” evil.
But in an age of carbon credits – even with its flaws – the irreversible momentum of green energy enhanced public scrutiny, thanks to the power of social media.
A dangerous bend awaits them on this road unless they stop all the green lies they have told.
Greenwashing leads to brand distrust and hate.
Unsustainable practices often lead to heavy legal risks as local communities increasingly sue companies with a polluting past.
For some, a mere downplaying of the influence of fossils on our climate alienates and leads to boycotts. This alone can dip revenue and profits.
Consumers favour companies that proactively embrace eco-consciousness, while investors are increasingly using Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria to guide their decisions.
Outside being transparent with their carbon emissions reporting, Big Oil should leverage technological innovation to cut emissions.
That’s how to earn eco-credibility in a world that is undeniably going green.
The future of our energy doesn’t lie in fossils, and the sooner Big Oil transitions to a sustainable and more publicly accepted form of energy, the brighter their future.
As Ursula K. Le Guin once said;
“We live in ‘Big Oil’. Its power seems inescapable. So did the capital right of Big Tobacco”.
But here is the big question: did we move past the Stone Age because of a lack of stones? How about the coal era? I guess you know the answers already.