The fossil fuel industry has been around for decades Dissemination of propaganda To limit how Americans think about taking on climate change. They did this not only through political mobilization and advertising. They have taken a more subtle approach – shaping the school curriculum. This is what I and Climate journalist Amy Westwellt have to say in this new podcast in collaboration with Drilled. BB Oil ABCs.
We wanted to know about the first class how Fossil fuel companies think they should invest in education first. You have to give us a good idea that we dug.
he said Magic Barrel, Petrochemical Chemicals “Accelerated Civilization; It gave people the comfort they needed to live. ” American Organization–Thanks to mining, no one was treated except William Shatner, who said:
These projects secretly convey the message that American independence is the result of extra-capitalism. Carol Muffet, CEO and President of the International Center for Environmental Protection The law sets out some ideas behind this message. It is part of a program dedicated to the Petroleum Engineers Association in the early 2000s.
Muffett only shared it with Ether and Borebore, and we got Amy and me on stage. But to get the full result, it really has to be seen. He worked with John Tobin, a well-known consultant in the oil industry, for the Industrial Support Group.
The slide show is sometimes a little difficult to analyze, but the basics are clear. In it, Tobin argues that the energy education will help maintain the social will of the oil industry, albeit a small one. Scientists warn from time to time About the role it plays in driving climate change and Increasing public interest To get rid of fossil fuels. In his words, “the industry, despite its image, can be profitable.”
“People have had a negative attitude toward the industry for years,” said Tobin in an interview. And to get a more positive outlook, continue from K to 12 and continue with adults and the like? We like to call it ላይ Developing scientifically educated citizens, who wisely rely on natural resources, oil and gas use, who can make rational decisions, and how well they can make informed decisions. They want the industry to be controlled.
Although Tobin’s approach is not limited to any kind of energy education. In the presentation, he outlines what he calls the “improved image (and, perhaps, improved path) approach.” SS stands for power, economy and the environment and seems to be in that order.
The idea is that each policy decision must weigh the impact on these three aspects of human life. Exxon uses three examples of S –They called it the “Cube of Power.”
That may seem reasonable, because of course, we have to take into account the economic impact of policies on ordinary people. Destroying the fossil fuel industry will have environmental, economic and energy impacts. (Well done, Those effects are all positive.) But even though its ES is “environment”, it does not say much about the environmental effects of oil and gas in the slide show – the word “climate” appears only once and the word “pollution” never appears. But he notes that environmental protection comes with a price. A slide show shows a mountain landscape with the title [sic] “The Value of Holiness”
“This is a wonderful image of our mountain in Colorado in the fall,” said Tobin in an interview. These kinds of views, which we consider to be part of our lifestyle, cost us what we want.
I asked Toby if he thought climate change should be the first driver to change the energy mix. “Climate change is definitely there, and it’s not good,” he said. “Judgment Day? That is a serious argument. ”
There are some other interesting slides, such as Tobin, that explain how different hydrocarbons end up in “Anne” and, for some reason, cocaine.
But while some slides are weird, the basic message is clear: The oil industry people need to know how much energy access and the economy are dependent on. In a slide, Tobin writes:
I asked Toby if he thought that people should go to school for the environmental implications of using different forms of violence. He is, of course, but the “free markets” are no different from the rest of the SS. I think the answer is yes, but in the context of the big picture, what does the economy need in terms of energy?
Amy Westwell contributed to this article.