Disclosure


Who Obstructs Global Action On Climate Change? More Companies Than You Think, According To A New Analysis

, lead analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

UPDATE (Sep. 16, 4:05 p.m.): InsideClimate News reported this morning new evidence showing that ExxonMobil knew about the harms of global warming way back in 1977—several years before the 1981 ExxonMobil internal documents that UCS shared a few weeks ago. In fact, Exxon didn’t just know about the reality of global warming then, they were conducting scientific studies on the quantity, trends, and future impact of human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide. Instead of preparing for these future challenges, the company instead chose to bury this deep scientific understanding and engage in more than 30 years of deceiving the public about the dangers of global warming. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Are Oil Companies Ready for the Next Katrina?

, lead analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

Ten years ago this week, a hurricane was gaining strength in the North Atlantic.  Meteorologists worked around the clock to understand and predict its future path and strength. That path and strength, it turns out, would make the record books. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Chevron, Exxon, Phillips 66 React to UCS’ Stormy Seas, Rising Risks Report

, lead analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

Last month, my colleague Christina Carlson and I released our report, Stormy Seas, Rising Risks: What Investors Should Know About Climate Change Impacts at Oil Refineries. The report analyzed the risk that five companies—Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Marathon Petroleum, Phillips 66, and Valero—face from sea level rise and storm surge, and compared that to what risk companies did and did not disclose to their investors. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Willie Soon, Academic Freedom, and How We Can Deal With Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

, lead analyst, Center for Science and Democracy

In the last week, the Internet has blown up. There were llamas, dresses, and bird-riding weasels. But what also blew up was an important discussion about conflict of interest disclosure and what information academic scientists should be expected to make public. Above all else, the debate has made clear that conflict of interest disclosure rules are lacking and that we need clarity from Congress, scientific societies, and academic institutions on how these issues should be addressed. Read more >

Bookmark and Share

Rep. Grijalva’s Requests and the Real Problem with Conflict of Interest Disclosure

, program manager, Center for Science & Democracy

On Tuesday, Arizona Representative Raul Grijalva asked seven academics for their sources of funding and earlier drafts of testimony they have delivered before congressional committees. Since then, many have debated whether the requests cross the line into harassment or witch hunts or McCarthyism. Lost in the discussion around whether the requests are too broad is a bigger question to address: Why don’t we already know who funds the work of those who testify before Congress? Read more >

Bookmark and Share