ExxonMobil Claims Leaving Refrigerators Open Can Solve Climate Change


Written by: Millie You

“Global warming is temporary, but commercial refrigerants are forever,” said ExxonMobil CEO Darren Woods.
Photo by Farhad Taraporevala

In the wake of this year’s extreme weather, from tropical storms to blazing wildfires, the world’s CO2 emissions are under great scrutiny. ExxonMobil, one of the most prominent oil and gas companies, released a study last week predicting that the world’s CO2 emissions in 2050 would be more than twice the goal set by the Paris Agreement in 2016. In a statement posted earlier this week, however, ExxonMobil claims that they “remain committed to reaching climate goals” regardless of current progress — and there’s more than one way to help.

“We are unfortunately not omnipotent,” CEO Darren Woods posted on X, “and I say this as both a billionaire and the CEO of one of the most influential corporate entities in the world. Much like ephemeral happiness in this cold — or I guess warm, or windy, or however this climate stuff is changing things — and careless world, money can’t solve everything. We need you, the non-billionaire citizens of the world, to carry us through these trying times.”

ExxonMobil subsequently released a package of proposals on how governments and American citizens should help to stymie the damage done by CO2 emissions. The most prominent proposal — with a “92% success rate” — is for all households to leave their fridges open to “mitigate the effects of climate change on local weather patterns and atmospheric conditions at large.” The proposal states: “The increase in cool air should even make the temperatures in urban areas more moderate, countering the hot fumes emitted by city traffic.”

“This is utter nonsense,” clean energy expert Conan Irwin lambasted in an X thread. “Spoiled food aside, this actually hurts the climate. @ExxonMobil refused to disclose that refrigerators use large amounts of electricity, and the more you leave them open, the more energy they need to use to keep the temperature steady — and guess who benefits from all that electricity use?”
In response to criticism, Woods stated in a press conference that “jumping to conclusions without actual testing in real life is dangerous and cowardly.”

“ExxonMobil will piss in a cup and call it rain,” said climate scientist Grace Borough in a BBC interview. “Have you looked at the other proposals in that bullshit package? Some poor fuck had to stand on the floor of Congress and talk seriously about Americans vaccuming three hours a day to suck all the CO2 out of the air. Exxon must have their research division at gunpoint. We all know the science, and we know the solutions lie in policy, so why aren’t we seeing anything done?”

Many across the world share the same sentiment, with several other package suggestions being highlighted as “expensive or just downright ludicrous.” Among these are the creation of synthetic phytoplankton for greater CO2 absorption in the oceans, a massive “rehoming project” for all existing flora and fauna as their original habitats become unsuitable, and a state-of-the-art latticework laser that can split CO2 molecules into carbon monoxide and oxygen.

“Look, we know what we’re doing,” Woods said at a climate meeting. “We’re working on a lot of things right now — you can’t just switch to solar willy-nilly and leave our poor muddy oil rig workers to fend for themselves! That’s what y’all did with coal!”

“What’s being suggested barely qualifies as first aid,” Borough said during a rally for greater regulations on factories, “and we will never be free of this environmental burden so long as
the government tolerates this farce.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *