Opinion: All Nonrenewable Fuel Source Advertisements Ought To Be Prohibited
by
Alexandra Grant-Hudd|December 8, 2021
Picture: Penn State
I believe we need to prohibit all fossil fuel ads, plain and simple. I understand it sounds severe, but its vital for the future of our planet.
On October 28, 2021, ExxonMobil, BP America, Chevron, Shell Oil, American Petroleum Institute, and the president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce testified in front of Congress to resolve Big Oils calculated and deliberate spread of climate change false information. If their company had ever authorized of an environment change disinformation campaign, executives were straight asked. In spite of being under oath, each executive, one after another, claimed they had not– a bold-faced lie.
More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific short articles conclude: environment modification is brought on by people, mostly through the burning of fossil fuels such as gas, coal, and oil. Whats worse is that fossil fuel business have actually known and downplayed for decades the effect of fossil fuel burning on the environment, much like how the tobacco industry denied the connection in between smoking cigarettes and cancer.
In 2015, a series of internal files referred to as “the Climate Deception Dossiers” were published by the Union of Concerned Scientists, exposing that as early as 1981, nonrenewable fuel source companies knew their items were contributing to international warming. These files shed light on how Big Oil rejected this fact and promoted doubt: paying scientists to publish research and speak out in opposition to climate scientists, and using misleading advertising to trick the larger public.
These strategies were hugely successful. To date, there is no extensive U.S federal policy to attend to environment change, and the nonrenewable fuel source industry continues its deception.
Big Oil is wise. Today, rather of motivating doubt that climate change is occurring, a belief that most of Americans disagree with, they have actually moved their marketing towards something more nuanced: greenwashing.
Greenwashing is a marketing method that misinforms the public into viewing a business as environmentally friendly when in actuality they arent. And the fossil fuel market is a substantial offender. Between 2008 and 2017, oil companies forked out $1.4 billion on ads, 2 thirds of which carried out greenwashing strategies like promoting wind and solar. Yet, only 1.3 percent of their combined 2018 spending plan was invested on renewable energy sources.
The consequences of greenwashing, like those of rejection and doubt, are alarming: shifting blame far from fossil fuel companies and delaying required climate action. Laurence Tubiana, European Climate Foundation CEO and author of the Paris Climate Agreement verifies, “Greenwashing is the brand-new climate denial.”
We can not trust Big Oil companies to represent themselves honestly, because they never ever have, and certainty arent now. A total restriction on nonrenewable fuel source advertising is the option. And we understand it can work because it has in the past– with the tobacco market.
And after a landmark 1964 surgeon generals report strengthened this, laws were passed imposing health cautions on tobacco items. These restricted policies had little effect on tobacco usage, largely because the tobacco industry worked fast and hard to market doubt on the very scientific agreement that supported these actions.
It wasnt till the 1971 restriction on television and radio cigarette ads went into effect that a marked decrease in cigarette usage was reported among Americans.
However once again, the tobacco market reacted promptly by transitioning much of its advertising to print and prioritizing attracting youth and ladies into tobacco use. Luckily, the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between the four biggest U.S tobacco business and 46 states, the District of Columbia, and 5 U.S. areas nipped this in the bud, prohibiting tobacco advertising in cartoons, public transit, billboards, in addition to targeted marketing to minors.
Today, just 16% of Americans report smoking at least once a week. And research validates that marketing bans– paired with cigarette taxes, public cigarette smoking bans, and anti-tobacco campaigns– played a concrete role in the declining trend of tobacco intake over the last 70 years.
Plainly, advertising bans worked for managing tobacco, and they can work for nonrenewable fuel sources also– they simply need to be comprehensive. Minimal restrictions or health cautions leave excessive room for market to reallocate their marketing funds into alternative courses of persuasion. We can not enable the nonrenewable fuel source market any additional chances to adjust to uninspired regulations. This is why prohibiting all nonrenewable fuel source advertisements is essential.
In spite of campaigns of doubt, the key to the success of tobacco advertising bans rested merely on the fact: that cigarette smoking posed a public health crisis for Americans. When it comes to Big Oil, scientific agreement validates a much more powerful truth: environment change will trigger an estimated 250,000 additional deaths annually, and require more than 100 million people into extreme hardship by 2030.
The fossil fuel market is largely accountable for those deaths and human suffering, as 70% of all human-made greenhouse gas emissions– the main chauffeur of climate change– are produced by the industry and its products. Greenwashed ads summon public compassion for the fossil fuel market, making it appear as if they are doing a lot more than they actually are to protect our planet. This threatens frantically needed climate action by softening public opposition to the really activities that are triggering a warming world.
At the end of the October 28 hearing on nonrenewable fuel source false information, it was revealed that subpoenas will be released for a series of internal files that the nonrenewable fuel source organizations in attendance originally declined to offer. Such documents are most likely to shed even more light on Big Oils lies.
And as more information trickles out of these hearings, we as a society gain increasing momentum, truth, and power to lastly put a stop to deceit, and ensure the future health of individuals and planet. The initial step: a detailed nonrenewable fuel source marketing restriction.
Alexandra Grant-Hudd is a trainee in Columbia Climate Schools masters program in Climate and Society.
A total ban on fossil fuel marketing is the service. Clearly, marketing bans worked for managing tobacco, and they can work for fossil fuels as well– they just have to be comprehensive. We can not enable the fossil fuel industry any additional chances to adapt to dull guidelines. The fossil fuel market is mainly responsible for those deaths and human suffering, as 70% of all human-made greenhouse gas emissions– the main driver of environment modification– are produced by the industry and its items. Greenwashed advertisements muster public compassion for the fossil fuel market, making it appear as if they are doing much more than they actually are to protect our planet.
