Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document details a leaked 1998 memo from the American Petroleum Institute (API) outlining a 'Global Climate Science Communications Plan' designed to make scientific uncertainties in climate change part of 'conventional wisdom'. It contrasts this industry strategy with the 1995 IPCC findings that indicated a 'discernible human influence on global climate'. The text notes that API, representing companies like ExxonMobil and Shell, has continued to challenge the science of climate change, including a 2011 legal challenge against the EPA's endangerment finding.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • A leaked 1998 memo from the American Petroleum Institute (API) revealed a planned 'Global Climate Science Communications Plan' aimed at using a national media relations programme to spread uncertainties about climate science to the public and policymakers.
  • The API's stated goals for success included making the recognition of climate science uncertainties part of 'conventional wisdom' and making proponents of the Kyoto treaty appear 'out of touch with reality'.
  • The industry's efforts to cast doubt occurred despite scientific consensus; the 1995 IPCC report had already concluded that human influence on the global climate was discernible and that observed warming was unlikely to be entirely natural.
  • API, a trade association including members such as BP, Chevron, Shell, and ExxonMobil, has continued to oppose federal greenhouse gas regulations, including a 2011 lawsuit challenging the EPA's endangerment finding on the basis that the record did not support the EPA's level of certainty regarding anthropogenic emissions.

Cite the original document

APA
Union of Concerned Scientists (2015). Climate Science vs. Fossil Fuel Fiction. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/03/APIquote1998_1.pdf
Chicago
Union of Concerned Scientists. Climate Science vs. Fossil Fuel Fiction. 2015. https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/03/APIquote1998_1.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Union of Concerned Scientists |title=Climate Science vs. Fossil Fuel Fiction |date=March 2015 |url=https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/03/APIquote1998_1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{unionofconcernedscientists2015climate, author = {{Union of Concerned Scientists}}, title = {{Climate Science vs. Fossil Fuel Fiction}}, institution = {Union of Concerned Scientists}, year = {2015}, month = mar, url = {https://www.ucs.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/03/APIquote1998_1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated