Exxon is not serious about #climatechange part 4

I've written not just one, or two, but three previous pieces about how eXXXon is not that serious about climate change in general and certainly isn't serious about a carbon tax. (These have in part been shadow-blogging reactions to a business editor and columnist at a newspaper.)

This is how serious eXXXon really, truly is about climate change—
its expected shift in global energy production.

On carbon taxes, said columnist has said that a carbon tax does need sticks as well as carrots. Well, I think he still disagrees with me on the issue of rebating. I have been consistent in opposing direct rebates at least, because the actual pain of not getting money back is the single biggest stick of a carbon tax. That said, that's the single biggest stick that eXXXon would like to remove, too.

Well, DeSmog Blog points out now just how unserious Exxon is on climate change in general. It doesn't expect serious changes in fossil fuel production as a percentage of its portfolio over the next 25 years. It also claims that it won't have stranded reserves due to climate change regulatory issues — issues it continues to fight.

Its hypocrisy DOES include worrying about stranded reserves early in the Obama Administration, fearing that new deepwater drilling regs after the Deepwater Horizon blowout would cause exactly that.

And, eXXXon isn't even incorporated in Texas' largest city. Not sure why said columnist might be that worried about making sure to say Big Oil is taking climate change seriously.

It's probably more accurate to say that Big Oil is taking the possibility of other people taking climate change seriously, seriously itself.

DeSmog Blog shows we simply can't release those fossil fuels to keep a climate change-related temperature spike to no more than 2C. Hell, with eXXXon's projections, we can't even stay inside 3C.

So, again, how seriously does it take climate change?