Maria stared at the electricity bill on her kitchen table, the numbers dancing in front of her tired eyes. Another month, another spike in costs. Outside her Phoenix apartment, the temperature hit 115°F for the third day straight, and her ancient air conditioner wheezed like an old dog. She’d heard the news reports about record-breaking heat, about climate change, about how “we all need to do our part.” But as she calculated whether she could afford to keep the AC running without skipping groceries, one question burned in her mind: who exactly created this mess?
That same question has been haunting climate scientists for decades. And now, after years of painstaking research, they finally have names, numbers, and proof.
The answer isn’t what you might expect.
The Moment Everything Changed
Picture a sterile conference room in Houston, 1982. The air conditioning is cranked so high you can almost see your breath. A young climate scientist stands at the front, hands trembling slightly as she clicks through slides showing temperature graphs that bend upward like hockey sticks. In the front row sit executives from some of the world’s largest oil companies, their expensive suits and gold watches gleaming under fluorescent lights.
She explains how their products are literally reshaping Earth’s atmosphere. Someone coughs. Someone checks their watch. Someone scribbles notes that will never see daylight.
When the presentation ends, one executive leans forward with a polite smile: “Thank you. Very interesting.”
Then the meeting ends. They knew. And they carried on anyway.
This scene wasn’t fiction. According to recently uncovered documents, major fossil fuel companies received detailed climate warnings from their own scientists starting in the 1970s. Yet for decades afterward, many of these same companies publicly questioned climate science while privately planning for a warming world.
“The internal documents show they understood the risks better than anyone,” says Dr. Geoffrey Supran, a climate accountability researcher. “They had the best scientists money could buy, and those scientists told them exactly what would happen.”
The Names Behind the Numbers
For years, climate scientists struggled with a frustrating problem. Everyone talked about global warming in vague terms – “humanity” did this, “our lifestyle” did that, “we’re all responsible.” It felt like trying to focus a blurry photograph.
Then researchers decided to sharpen the image. They dug through corporate archives, matched CO₂ records to production logs, tracked cargo shipments, and analyzed refinery outputs. What they found eliminated any poetic ambiguity about responsibility.
The breakthrough came with something called the “Carbon Majors” analysis. Climate scientists asked a deceptively simple question: who actually extracted, processed, and sold the fossil fuels that created most greenhouse gas emissions?
The results were staggering:
| Company/Entity | Emissions Responsibility | Time Period |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Aramco | 4.38% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
| Chevron | 3.27% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
| Exxon | 3.22% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
| National Iranian Oil Co. | 2.28% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
| BP | 2.47% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
| Royal Dutch Shell | 1.67% of global emissions | 1988-2015 |
Just 100 fossil fuel producers were responsible for more than 70% of global industrial greenhouse gas emissions since 1988. That’s the year climate scientists achieved scientific consensus that human activities were warming the planet.
The list reads like a who’s who of energy giants:
- ExxonMobil and its predecessors
- Shell and Royal Dutch Shell
- BP (British Petroleum)
- Chevron Corporation
- ConocoPhillips
- Total SE (France)
- Eni S.p.A. (Italy)
- Gazprom (Russia)
- Coal India Limited
- Peabody Energy Corporation
“When you see the data laid out like this, it’s impossible to maintain the fiction that climate change is everyone’s fault equally,” explains Dr. Richard Heede, who led the Carbon Majors research. “A very small number of companies made decisions that affected the entire planet.”
What This Means for Real People
Remember Maria from Phoenix, staring at her electricity bill? She represents millions of people worldwide who are paying the price for decisions made in corporate boardrooms decades ago. The climate scientists’ findings reveal a troubling pattern: while ordinary people scramble to reduce their carbon footprints, a handful of companies continue operating as if nothing has changed.
The real-world impacts are mounting:
- Extreme heat waves that force families to choose between cooling costs and other necessities
- Flooding that destroys homes and businesses
- Droughts that devastate farming communities
- Rising sea levels threatening coastal cities
- More intense hurricanes and wildfires
Meanwhile, many of these same companies have spent millions funding climate denial campaigns and lobbying against clean energy policies. Internal documents show that some executives privately acknowledged climate risks while publicly casting doubt on climate science.
“It’s like a tobacco company knowing cigarettes cause cancer but spending decades telling people they’re safe,” says Dr. Naomi Oreskes, a science historian who has studied corporate climate campaigns. “The parallels are disturbing.”
The human cost extends beyond individual utility bills. Small island nations face extinction from sea-level rise. Farmers watch their crops fail as weather patterns shift. Indigenous communities see their traditional lands transformed by warming temperatures.
Yet there’s also reason for hope. As climate scientists continue revealing the truth about responsibility for global warming, courts are beginning to take notice. Several major lawsuits are working their way through the legal system, seeking damages from fossil fuel companies for climate impacts.
Some companies are finally changing course. Shell recently agreed to reduce emissions faster than previously planned after losing a landmark court case in the Netherlands. Other major oil companies have announced investments in renewable energy, though critics argue these efforts remain insufficient given the scale of the problem.
“The science is clear about who bears primary responsibility,” notes Dr. Michael Mann, a prominent climate scientist. “Now the question is whether our legal and political systems will hold them accountable.”
For people like Maria, this research offers something invaluable: clarity. The next time someone suggests that climate change is everyone’s fault equally, she’ll know the truth. A small group of companies, armed with the best scientific advice money could buy, made calculated decisions to prioritize short-term profits over planetary stability.
They knew what would happen. And they carried on anyway.
FAQs
How did climate scientists identify which companies were most responsible for emissions?
Researchers used the “Carbon Majors” methodology, tracking fossil fuel production from extraction through sale and matching it to atmospheric CO₂ data dating back to the 1850s.
When did oil companies first learn about climate change risks?
Internal documents show major fossil fuel companies received detailed climate warnings from their own scientists starting in the 1970s, decades before public awareness grew.
Are these companies still operating the same way today?
While some have announced emission reduction plans and renewable energy investments, many climate scientists argue these efforts remain insufficient given the urgency of the climate crisis.
What legal consequences might these companies face?
Multiple lawsuits are pending in courts worldwide seeking damages for climate impacts, with some cases already resulting in orders for companies to reduce emissions faster.
How does this research change the climate conversation?
It shifts focus from vague collective responsibility to specific corporate accountability, providing clear evidence about who made the key decisions that shaped our climate crisis.
What can ordinary people do with this information?
Understanding corporate responsibility can inform personal choices about investments, voting, and which companies to support, while also supporting legal and political efforts to hold major emitters accountable.
About the Author
