WASHINGTON – The first ever congressional hearing on Big Oil's history of climate denial is Wednesday.

Led by Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and co-chaired by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., the hearing aims to show that more than 40 years ago, oil industry research proved that burning fossil fuels harms the environment, but that oil companies, including ExxonMobil, misled the public about those results to keep profits up.

And according to Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, the oil companies maintained a multi-million dollar publicity campaign to undermine the science.

"They know they're making a product that's going to cause big problems,” Wiles points out. “They do it anyway. They lie about it – and then, in the end, with climate, they want the public to pay for all of the damages, and all of the adaptation and preparedness that we're going to need to do for climate change."

ExxonMobil says it hasn't done anything wrong and its officials dismiss reports of its climate denial as the work of anti-fossil fuel activists.

The hearing starts the day after ExxonMobil went on trial in New York for securities fraud, and for minimizing global warming risks to investors.

And it comes two days after a new report, "America Misled," offers new details comparing oil industry deception about climate change to the tobacco industry's cover-up of the health effects of smoking.

Wiles says another issue likely to come up at the hearing is how people of color and low-income communities are hit hardest by global warming.

"It's people that have suffered the most from the damages of any of the climate-juiced hurricanes,” he asserts. “It's always the poor communities that are left behind, and this isn't going to be any different.

“So, it's a really serious problem that we're going to have to address."

Wiles says the hearing aims to hold Big Oil accountable, and that the industry's rejection of climate science prevented governments from taking action to avoid what is now widely considered a worldwide crisis.


get more stories like this via email

Montana's environmental advocates are criticizing Gov. Greg Gianforte for signing a bill they said will allow the state to ignore the impacts of climate change when developers construct large-scale energy projects such as coal mines and power plants. The measure received a lot of attention during the legislative session, most of it in opposition.

House Bill 971 builds on a decade-old law prohibiting the state from including actual or potential impacts which are "regional, national or global in nature" in environmental reviews of big energy projects.

Anne Hedges, spokesperson for the Montana Environmental Information Center, said the measure is a direct attack on the state's most precious natural resources and leaves them unprotected.

"You're telling the public and you're telling the state their rights don't matter," Hedges asserted. "That they don't really have a right to a clean and healthful environment and the state has no obligation to protect people from the very real dangers of the climate crisis."

The bill prohibits regulators such as the state's environmental quality department from measuring greenhouse-gas emissions and the effects of climate change when they review the overall impacts of large projects such as coal mines and power plants. The bill's supporters argued they are trying to avoid excessive state regulation and contend measuring and regulating greenhouse-gas emissions and other impacts on the climate should be left up to federal laws like the Clean Air Act.

Hedges countered the state understands local issues better than the federal government does, and added the whole purpose of Montana's environmental agencies doing these sorts of studies is to be able to educate residents who live here about the impacts of a major energy project.

"On the land, on the air, water, wildlife, economy, cultural resources, et cetera," Hedges outlined.

Hedges pointed out ultimately, the bill will create longer and more dangerous wildfire seasons, a shrinking snowpack, and reduced stream flows as emissions from power plants add to a warming climate and unstable atmosphere.

A law known as the "Halliburton Loophole" is under growing scrutiny. It exempts oil and gas companies from revealing the chemicals they use in the hydraulic fracking process.

The latest study finds between 2014 and 2021, companies used hundreds of millions of pounds of toxic chemicals - without any governmental oversight.

Another report published last year by scientists and medical organizations says living near fracking sites increases risks for cancer, respiratory diseases, heart problems, birth defects and more.

Leatra Harper, managing director of the Freshwater Accountability Project, explained that the loophole prevents communities from understanding potential harms.

"People need to know what the exposures could be," said Harper. "We need to know what the chemicals are to look for when we find water contamination. And we don't even know how to test for it, because we don't know what to test for."

The Independent Petroleum Association of America and other industry groups argue that fracking poses little to no risk of harmful health effects.

The group FracTracker estimates hydraulically fractured wells produce about 2.3% of the oil and gas output in Ohio.

Harper added that previously proposed federal legislation would have addressed the issue by requiring companies to reveal which chemicals they use in the fracking process.

"There's something called the FRAC Act that has just basically been mothballed," said Harper. "And we need to revive that and fix this problem that started at the federal level, that allowed this industry to take off."

As of 2022, hydraulic fracturing techniques have been used on an estimated 1.7 million wells across the U.S.

Memorial Day is considered the unofficial beginning of summer in the United States, with many Texans keeping an eye on what the weather has in store.

Federal forecasters said there is a 40% chance of a "near-normal" hurricane season for Texas and the rest of the Gulf and East coasts, and are more concerned about what the development of an El Niño could bring.

Brad Pugh, meteorologist at the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, said before El Niño's arrival, drought is still a factor for the Southwest.

"The seasonal drought outlook, which is valid through the end of August, calls for persistence of ongoing drought through much of New Mexico and Texas," Pugh reported. "Although we are forecasting improving drought conditions over the northeast Texas panhandle."

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting between 12 and 17 named tropical storms will form this season. One to four of those storms could become hurricanes rated Category 3 or higher, with wind speeds of at least 111 miles per hour. Much of Texas is considered vulnerable to the impacts of storms, made worse by rising sea levels.

El Niño is a natural climate pattern, but could send global average temperatures soaring to a record high.

Johnna Infanti, also a meteorologist at the National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, said the chance for it to develop is about 55%, likely producing the chance for excessive rain and snow starting in the fall.

"So with the El Niño, we expect a transition between the May through July season," Infanti noted. "We're expecting that to form during the May through July season and we're expecting that to persist into winter."

As might be expected because of climate change, NOAA predicts this summer will bring hotter-than-average temperatures across most U.S. states, including Texas.


get more stories like this via email