Al Gore did it and David Attenborough too, but there is probably no more compelling documentary on climate change than one from those who made a significant contribution to the crisis.
Climate of Concern, a half-hour film from Shell, explains how fossil fuels cause global warming and charts with great clarity the likely impacts.
Glacial melting, sea level rise, storm surges, drought, desertification, food scarcity, climate refugees — all are calmly laid out by the oil giant for viewer to digest.
“What the computer modellers are looking at is the possibility of change at a rate faster than at any time since the end of the ice age,” the narrator explains, “change too fast perhaps for life to adapt to without severe dislocation.”
Remarkably, the film was produced 30 years ago. It could have been made yesterday. Even more surprising is that Shell made it for general public viewing.
Although it’s not clear how widely it was distributed, it raises the question: why would a company make such a confession?
The same company that last week announced it would appeal against an internationally groundbreaking ruling from a Dutch court requiring it to cut its carbon emissions in half by 2030.
Jelmer Mommers is the Dutch journalist who rediscovered the documentary in 2017, along with a confidential report, The Greenhouse Effect, from 1988, which not only sets out the data for the subsequent film but calculates Shell’s direct contribution to the problem.
He has since written a book, How Are We Going To Explain This?, now translated into English and updated to include reflections on the Covid pandemic, which looks at all aspects of the climate crisis from its origins to its possible outcomes and the influences we may yet bring to bear for good and bad.
Taking part in the West Cork Literary Festival this week, he assessed Shell’s strategy. “One thing they were clearly doing was trying to own the subject, which is very smart,” he says.
“If you find out that your product is a problem, it’s best to own the conversation about it and to be seen as a source of valuable information about what can be done about it.”
The company did not propose cutting oil production but stressed the need for better technology to drive greater fuel efficiency in cars, electricity production and industry. It also referenced the potential of wind and solar in what could be interpreted as an invitation to governments to incentivise diversification into renewables.
Either the hint was too subtle or else it was intended as a covering exercise so the company could not later be accused of opposing new ways of operating.
“The whole oil and gas industry, and the coal industry, have taken part in lobbying campaigns like this and they still do,” Mommers says.
“It was always about showing governments what kind of policies would be wise, what kind of policies would be prudent, what kind of policies would be good for the economy, which is a very appealing way to talk about these things because it will give people the impression that you are the most sane person in the room.
“If someone else comes in from an NGO and says we have to take much more action, more quickly, there is a disaster coming right at us, then policymakers will look around the room and think, well, these Shell people are much easier to talk to.”
That dynamic remains at play today, Mommers feels. The disaster version of global warming is true in parts of the world and could become reality for all, but it can put people off.
Even in the Netherlands, where millions live below sea level, greater vulnerability to disaster doesn’t necessarily heighten awareness or willingness to act.
He says the feeling of “having your mind in two places at once” was a major characteristic of our time.
“We know what will happen or might happen in the future, we know we’re in big trouble, we know we have to act but then… we think about what to eat and whether to get an ice cream,” he says.
“Those two realities co-exist and that’s one of the very hard things about this topic. One of the big challenges is not to retreat into the present.”
Mommers is closely watching preparations for COP26, the UN climate conference, trying to be hopeful world leaders might achieve a real breakthrough in climate action.
After 30 years of mildly heeded warnings, it’s hard to be confident but he says the recent floods in central Europe and wildfires across the US and Russia may concentrate minds.
He is also adamant that individuals have a role to play. He no longer flies or eats meat, believing his actions can influence others.
“It might not change the world overnight because yes, you are just one individual, but you’re also part of a group and of a culture and in that sense of a bigger story and everybody has an influence on that.”
Jelmer Mommers was interviewed by Caroline O’Doherty as part of the West Cork Literary Festival. The full interview will be available to view online in the coming days. westcorkmusic.ie
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/3CNDG2AWTVJKNP6AAPIZ6NWTEA.jpg)
