Back in the 1970s, Exxon’s own scientists stood in a wood-paneled boardroom and laid out the future with startling clarity. They told the company’s top executives that burning fossil fuels was altering the climate, that carbon dioxide was building up in the atmosphere, and that the consequences would be severe and potentially irreversible. The board listened. They understood the science. And then they did absolutely nothing worthy of the moment. They could have gone public, warned the world, and used their enormous wealth to lead a transition to cleaner energy. Instead, they made a cold, capitalistic calculation: keep the information secret, keep the profits flowing, and let future generations deal with the wreckage. When the truth finally leaked out, the industry did not admit what it had known for years. It borrowed the Big Tobacco playbook and launched a coordinated disinformation campaign, casting doubt on climate science, funding friendly experts, and convincing the public that the jury was still out. Greenwashing became the order of the day. Oil companies produced commercials about solar panels and polar bears while continuing to drill, frack, and refine at full speed. They told us they were committed to net zero, even as their business plans required exactly the opposite. Then came the blame game. The industry turned to consumers and said: you are the problem. Your car is the problem. Your plastic straw is the problem. It is true that if we eliminated demand for fossil fuels, the industry would collapse. But the industry itself spent decades manufacturing that demand, suppressing alternatives, and building a world where driving and heating and living all depend on oil and gas. They created the machine, sold it to us, and then blamed us for using it.
Now, whenever anyone seriously suggests that the fossil fuel era should end, the industry reaches for its favorite scare tactic: catastrophe. They warn that if Big Oil goes under, the entire global economy goes down with it. Is that true? Is worldwide fiscal security really dangling from such a tenuous thread? It is worth asking whether an economy is healthy when it depends on an industry that is making the planet increasingly uninhabitable. And it is worth asking why that industry needs welfare. The Inflation Reduction Act was attacked in 2022 by critics who said it “picked winners” instead of letting market forces work. But what about the $37.5 billion in government subsidies handed to the fossil fuel industry in 2025? What about the $3.3 trillion in profits the industry raked in that same year? Trillions. With a T. And still they needed handouts? That isn’t free-market capitalism. That is corporate welfare with a camouflage jacket. The industry also loves to claim that it is the backbone of employment. In Colorado, fossil fuel companies employ somewhere between 1% and 1.8% of the total workforce. Renewables employ 2.4%. That may not sound like a massive difference, but it tells us something important: the energy transition is not a job killer. It is a job creator. The industry wants us to believe that moving away from oil and gas would throw millions of hardworking people onto the street. In reality, clean energy is hiring more people, paying competitive wages, and growing fast. If the fossil fuel industry were truly confident in its future, it would not need subsidies, propaganda, and political influence to keep itself alive.
One of the most successful pieces of greenwashing in recent years has been the myth of natural gas. The industry spent a fortune rebranding methane gas as a “clean” energy source, a bridge fuel that would carry us from the dirty coal era to a renewable future. It sounds great until you look at the chemistry. Methane is roughly 84 times more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide in the near term. And when you account for extraction methods like fracking, which leak methane throughout the process, the so-called clean fuel can be worse than coal. The Rocky Mountain Institute studied the beliefs that sustain this myth and found them fragile. First, the claim that gas leaks are normal and not too costly. Globally, about 280 billion cubic meters of methane escape into the atmosphere every year. Texas alone lost $1 billion worth of gas to leaks in a single year. That is not a normal operating cost; that is a waste of resources and a massive insult to the climate. Second, the claim that gas loss is inevitable. It isn’t. When gas prices rise, methane capture suddenly improves. When prices fall, leaks increase. That proves the industry knows exactly how to stop the bleeding; it just doesn’t care unless it affects the bottom line. Third, the claim that gas is natural and therefore clean. Methane gas in its natural state is underground. Once it is extracted, it comes with toxic hydrogen sulfide and carcinogenic benzene, and it contributes to smog that sickens communities. There is nothing wholesome about breathing it. Fourth, the claim that gas prices are reliable. Wars in Ukraine, confrontations with Iran, and political chaos in Venezuela have sent gas prices swinging wildly. That is not stability. That is a geopolitical roller coaster.
If you want to see the true power of the fossil fuel industry, look at politics at the state and local level. In 2018, Colorado voters considered Proposition 112, a common-sense proposal to require a 2,500-foot setback between new drilling operations and homes, schools, and other sensitive areas. Environmental groups barely had enough money to make their case. They spent about $800,000. The fossil fuel industry spent $40 million to defeat the measure. Outspent fifty to one, the proponents still managed to pull in 45% of the vote. It was a narrow loss, but a loss nonetheless, and it was bought with an avalanche of television ads. When you see an industry drowning the airwaves with expensive commercials, that is a sign of too much money and too little conscience. Thirty seconds of ad time is not cheap. And the industry does not spend that kind of money because it wants to inform the public. It spends it to control the public. This year, the industry is pushing a ballot initiative called the “Right to Natural Gas,” designed to prevent municipal governments from banning gas hookups in new buildings. Crested Butte and Berkeley have already enacted gas bans, trying to make sure future homes are all-electric and climate-friendly. The industry wants to end that movement in its tracks. Brace yourself for another flood of polished advertisements. They will show grandmothers baking pies, nurses flipping switches, and families gathered around gas stoves. They will talk about freedom and choice and government overreach. But the freedom they are defending is the freedom to pollute, and the choice they are protecting is the choice to keep pouring money into their pockets.
The fossil fuel industry also likes to point its finger at other countries. They say: why should we stop when China is still building coal power plants? It is true that China is building coal plants, but China has also added more renewable energy than the rest of the world combined. With more than a billion people to power, China is taking an all-of-the-above approach. That does not excuse our own failures. Here at home, the industry insists that renewables are expensive and unreliable. Tell that to Holy Cross Energy, which is 92% renewable and provides some of the cheapest electricity in Colorado. And if you want to talk about unreliable, look at Xcel Energy’s Comanche 3 coal-fired plant in Pueblo. Since coming online in 2010, it has been up and down like a yo-yo, breaking down, shutting off, and failing to deliver the dependable power coal was supposed to provide. Meanwhile, the industry wraps itself in the flag of community charity. It says its property taxes keep schools open. But property taxes are legally required. The industry is not doing us a favor; it is paying for the right to operate in our neighborhoods and often expecting favorable decisions in return. The wildlife commercials are even harder to swallow. Chevron talks about protecting migration routes for antelope, as if it would turn down a lucrative drilling project just to let a pronghorn pass by. The American Petroleum Institute says it cares about pheasants and quail. Coloradans for Responsible Energy Development claims extraction is environmentally beneficial, even though burning fossil fuels is responsible for 84% of all carbon dioxide emissions. These efforts are not about the environment. They are about branding, distraction, and maintaining the illusion that a destructive industry can also be a gentle one.
All of this brings us to the present moment, where climate change is no longer a distant threat but a daily reality. Heat domes bake our cities. Droughts turn farmland to dust. Wildfires consume whole towns. Floods wash away roads and homes. And still, the Prevaricator-in-Chief insists climate change is a “con job.” Ask yourself: who profits from that lie? The man who says it profits. The industry that backs him profits. The paid consultants who produce slick advertisements about “natural” gas and untouched wilderness profit. The scientists warning about climate change are not getting rich; they are getting attacked, censored, and dismissed. The wind turbine technicians and solar installers are not buying elections or funding super PACs. The obscene money in this fight is all on one side, and it is being used to delay, deny, and protect an industry that has known the truth for fifty years and chosen profits over people. If fossil fuels had to compete honestly in a free market, without subsidies, without externalized damage, without political influence, they would have died out long ago. The only reason they are still standing is the money they spread around to politicians, voters, and media gatekeepers. It is time to break those bonds. We can end fossil fuel subsidies. We can strengthen environmental regulations. We can support workers and communities through a fair transition rather than keeping them chained to a dying industry. The fossil fuel industry is not going to change its heart. It has proven that repeatedly. It has to be changed from the outside, by voters, by activists, by anyone who refuses to accept that the species that built cities and created art and reached for the stars is now willing to be extinguished by greed. The fossil fuel era had its run, and it brought us many wonders. But it also brought us to the brink. The question is whether we will have the courage to phase out the industry that is phasing us out, or whether we will leave it to write our obituary while the world burns.