Well, activists have been trying for quite a long time to get things like shareholder resolutions passed at fossil fuel companies.
So, the fact that we got such big changes yesterday at both Exxon, with the board vote — keep in mind that Exxon has 12 board members, I believe. And a relatively new organization called Engine 1 said, let’s field some new candidates, some people who care about climate change.
And why did they do that? Because Exxon is doing very poorly financially. Investors who have been giving their money to this company have been seeing pretty poor returns. And so, shockingly, really large institutional investors like BlackRock, for example, said, you know what, we are going to back those candidates for the board. We want to have different voices.
At Chevron, it was a sort of resolution to get the company to similarly think about the effects of its products. So, just like the Shell ruling, which said that you have to think about, how are your products creating pollution, at Chevron, they’re saying, we want you to be thinking about, what are the climate impacts of the drug, so to speak, you’re selling, which is oil and gas and fossil fuels?
So, these are really big changes. And it’s a tactic that activists have used for a long time, but we’re starting to see breakthroughs. And I think that is because investors are seeing that continuing to prevent that climate change is not here is a bad financial decision.
Read More: What the shakeups, legal losses for fossil fuel companies mean for climate change efforts