Abstract
Greenwashing has been a common practice among companies since the 1980s. There are some companies that take that practice to an extraordinary level. These companies create a sustainability report, dedicate pages on their website touting their environmental stewardship, spend money on projects that make them appear “green” and at the same time spend millions of dollars lobbying the government to decrease environmental regulations and stop any plan to curtail carbon emissions. We will call these companies green gilded as they are coated in a thin layer of environmentalism as a means to deceive the public. This paper analyzes some of the largest US oil producers with an in-depth analysis of ExxonMobil and Chevron Corp. It examines the money they spend on lobbying efforts to undermine actual sustainable policy. It looks into their sustainability reports, money spent to limit their carbon footprint, and money spent on environmental stewardship. It also compares the carbon footprint of each company. It analyzes the dangers of green gilding and bilking the public. It defines and describes what a neo-sustainable approach in the oil business would look like.
Highlights
Sustainability has been a buzzword for at least the last decade; almost every major corporation, complete with sustainability officers and sustainability reports, has embraced it
This study looks into the actual money spent by the US oil majors on hindering climate action using political funding and faux science
Outside of the examples analyzed in this paper, there are a few energy companies that are moving towards neo-sustainability that we will discuss in the conclusion
Summary
Sustainability has been a buzzword for at least the last decade; almost every major corporation, complete with sustainability officers and sustainability reports, has embraced it. This study looks into the actual money spent by the US oil majors on hindering climate action using political funding and faux science It analyzes faux sustainability and looks for a path forward using a neo-sustainable approach. This study compares some of the largest companies in the petroleum industry in the US according to size and impact as well as their political donations It compares their claimed sustainability, actual money spent on sustainable projects, and analyzes the long-term sustainability of their business models. These politically active US petroleum and petroleum services companies spent $94 million in the 2018 election cycle alone [3] Their green gilding practices undermine sustainable actions and progress by creating a public image that misleads the public into believing that without major structural changes to their businesses and their holdings the company can be sustainable. Outside of the examples analyzed in this paper, there are a few energy companies that are moving towards neo-sustainability that we will discuss in the conclusion
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
