This part of the presentation focuses on the time period since the late 1980s. Efforts to stall the climate policy process in include: Climate science denial campaigns aimed at discrediting climate science impacts assessments, individual scientists, specific studies, reports and institutions. Campaigns aimed at destabilizing the UNFCCC process starting with Rio Earth Summit and undermining the Kyoto or Paris agreements for example Campaigns against national greenhouse gas reduction measures such as the Obama Clean Power Plan or McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act. Case studies in our presentation: a. 1996 IPIECA report after UNFCCC COP-26 This document is a report back from COP-2 from oil industry attendees. A list reveals that representatives from multiple companies went to COP2 and attended as members of International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association (IPIECA) and Global Climate Coalition (GCC) delegations. Companies represented included Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco (now merged with Chevron), BP and Total. It shows, among other things, shows that multiple corporations were deploying their scientists who actively contributed to the completion of IPPC 2nd Assessment Report (SAR). On the issue of an IPCC Informal Workshop on Technology Assessment that the “IPIECA input to IPCC on this issue was evident in the draft” and quoted IPCC Chair Bob Watson citing the “IPIECA contribution as a major source.” IPIECA also held a side event with UNEP that was “a good opportunity to demonstrate the positive role that the oil and gas industry can play” b. GCC draft Primer7 This document, a “Primer on Climate Change Science- Final Draft” is dated December 1995 is dated December, 1995 after the release of the IPCC 2nd Assessment. It acknowledges the growing scientific consensus up front stating “The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and its potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied.” However, the IPCC report is criticized for going too far by suggesting that “the balance of evidence suggests that there is a discernable human influence on global climate.” The GCC Science and Technical Advisory Committee “believes that the statement goes beyond what can be justified by current scientific knowledge.” It goes on to say that “Claims that human 6 Robin Aram, Shell International Limited, “IPIECA Report: Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) COP2,” Jul. 29, 1996 (available at http://www.climatefiles.com/ipcc-unfccc/1996-shellipieca-report-cop2/). 7L.S. Bernstein, Mobil Oil Corporation, “Predicting Future Climate Change: A Primer (Draft),” Dec. 21, 1995 (available at http://www.climatefiles.com/denial-groups/global-climate-coalitioncollection/global-climate-coalition-draft-primer/). Climate Investigations Center - September 2018 page 4