Climatic Change (2015) 132:157–171 159 Fig. 1 Under allocation schemes based on current annual CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement production, China leads the pack, followed by the U.S. and India (a). Analysis of current per capita emissions brings small oil-producing states into the top tier (b). Analysis based on historic emissions (without land use changes) places the U.S. first, followed the USSR/Russia, China and Germany (c). Including historic land use changes brings Brazil and Indonesia into the top tier (d). (Boden et al. 2013; Matthews et al. 2014) emissions of carbon dioxide have occurred since 1988: after the establishment of the IPCC, after leading scientists had stated publicly that anthropogenic climate change was underway, and after a vigorous and visible public discussion of its causes and risks had begun. We highlight producers for five reasons. First, a relatively small number of corporations have produced the fossil energy that has contributed a large proportion of the total historic emissions that drive disruptive climate change. Second, as major corporations with a high level of internal scientific and technical expertise, they were aware of and in a position to understand the available scientific data. Third, an alternative was available to them: they could have adjusted their business models to anticipate policies motivating a transition to low-carbon energy by substantially investing in low-carbon energy technologies, constructively engaging in policy design, and taking other steps to reduce the adverse impact of their products. But they did not. Even today, they continue to explore for new and increasingly more carbon-polluting sources of fossil fuels, encouraging the expanded use of the products that they know to be responsible for disruptive climate change. Fourth, fossil fuel producers, particularly in the United States but also in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, have sought to discredit and disparage the scientific evidence, and to deny, diminish, or discount the reality and significance of climate change as a problem (Gelbspan 2005; Ward 2006; Oreskes and Conway 2010). Many companies lobbied to prevent policies that would encourage the