“The WSJ writes, Chris Wright, Trump's nominee for energy secretary, says climate change poses only a modest threat to humanity”, by DOUG SHERIDAN
"It's probably almost as many positive changes as there are negative changes," he has said. “Is it a crisis, is it the world's greatest challenge, or a big threat to the next generation? No."
The WSJ writes, Chris Wright, Trump's nominee for energy secretary, says climate change poses only a modest threat to humanity. The biggest US oil companies disagree.
Wright acknowledges burning fossil fuels is contributing to rising temps. But he also says climate change makes the planet greener by increasing plant growth, boosts agricultural productivity, and likely reduces temperature-related deaths annually.
"It's probably almost as many positive changes as there are negative changes," he has said. “Is it a crisis, is it the world's greatest challenge, or a big threat to the next generation? No."
Many oil-and-gas execs have lauded Wright's nomination, as they expect he'll give their industry a boost. Still, Wright's climate pronouncements highlight the chasm between the Trump admin and the country's biggest oil companies on a crucial issue.
Oxy CEO Vicki Hollub this year called climate change "the greatest crisis our world has ever faced." ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods said last month that Trump shouldn't pull the US from the Paris climate pact. This compares to most smaller, private operators like Continental Resources that have set no emissions-reduction goals.
Wright has said fighting climate change is less important than allowing the world's poorest to improve their lives by burning oil and gas. The benefits of cheap and reliable energy, he argues, more than outweigh the costs of climate change.
Scientists see a 1.5 C temp increase over several decades as creating potentially irreversible changes for the planet, with profound implications for health, food security and water management. Earth's average temp is expected to pass the mark this calendar year.
Wright has engaged with and promoted controversial climate thinkers. They include Steven Koonin, a physicist who served at DOE under Obama, and who says the impact of mankind on climate change is too uncertain to warrant radical climate action, and Alex Epstein, a philosopher pushing for using more fossil fuels.
Our Take 1: The WSJ has lost the plot. Alas, we no longer trust its reporting on either energy or climate change. Its newsroom now seems incapable of consistently presenting facts objectively—no doubt green-whipped by Emma Tucker, who became editor in chief in 2022 and apparently has a climate-change obsession.
Our Take 2: Not that the WSJ Energy or Climate Desk has any interest in the concept, but a probability-weighted assessment of the causes, consequences, and optimal response to climate change would almost certainly look more like what Wright, Koonin and Epstein believe than the conventional wisdom held on the WSJ newsfloor.
Our Take 3: Hey, WSJ... both Oxy and ExxonMobil need their hands in taxpayers' pockets to help pay for their massive investments in suspect clean-tech. That's why they take different positions than Wright. Virtually every other company in the oilfield disagrees with Oxy and Exxon, by the way.
