166 Climatic Change (2015) 132:157–171 use climate projections to identify new opportunities to exploit fossil resources that are becoming accessible as a result of melting sea ice and other consequences of global warming. Royal Dutch Shell’s plans to drill in the Chuckchi Sea, for example, draw explicitly on IPCC projections for a lengthening period of open water in the Arctic (Skuce 2012). Other companies claim to accept the core findings of climate science and the serious risks associated with continued reliance on their products, while acting in ways that belie that claim. Chevron acknowledges that the use of fossil fuels Bis contributing to an increase in greenhouse gases … in the Earth’s atmosphere^ and claims to Bshare the concern of governments and the public about climate change^ (Chevron Corporation 2014). ExxonMobil (2014a) unequivocally declares that Brising greenhouse gas emissions pose significant risks to society and ecosystems.^ BP (2014) goes even further: BAccording to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and is in large part due to an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities.^ Yet, none of these companies has accepted the proposition that accepting the science and understanding the risks of climate change implies the need to change their business plans. On the contrary, they argue that the world needs more fossil fuels rather than less. ExxonMobil (2014b), for example, in its 2014 energy outlook, insists that oil and gas will continue to be our major energy sources for the foreseeable future; the terms Bclimate change^ or Bglobal warming^ are nowhere to be found. BP, Shell, and ExxonMobil have each developed detailed projections of future energy use. While they differ in their particulars, none anticipates a global price or cap or other strict regulatory limit on carbon for decades. On the contrary, these companies plan for a future in which the world will continue to rely on fossil fuels at levels that will lead to highly disruptive climate impacts. In Energy Outlook: 2035, BP envisions that global CO2 emissions from energy use will continue to grow on average by 1.1 % per year, bringing emissions in 2035 to nearly double levels of 1990 and temperatures towards or above 4 °C by the end of the century, by their own admission Bwell above the path recommended by scientists…^ (BP 2014). Shell explicitly acknowledges that the energy futures they envision will have highly disruptive consequences, Bovershoot[ing] the trajectory for a 2 °C goal^ (Royal Dutch Shell plc 2013). Yet, knowing this, they continue to bank on a high carbon future (Fig. 4). Industry projections of future emissions that bring atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to concentrations well in excess of safe limits may turn out to be correct. But if so this will be in no small part because of the intensive efforts that industrial carbon producers have made—and continue to make—to prevent meaningful regulation of their products. The fossil fuel industry is knowingly participating in a pathway by which, in the words of Shell CEO Ben van Beurden, climate change Bis just going to happen whether we like it or not^ (Mufson 2014). They are actively creating the future that they claim to accept the need to avoid. 7 Conclusion The analysis presented here suggests that the world’s largest investor-owned fossil energy producers bear substantial responsibility for anthropogenic climate change. This is because: 1) They have produced a large share of the products responsible for dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system;