The likely reason for the low % of "yes" votes on those resolutions is that ExxonMobil (XOM) is very, very good with their "public relations". Read their persuasive arguments against the proposals -- they agree, say they're already doing it so it's unnecessary, they've been funding climate change research at Stanford, and so on...
XOM, General Motors, etc fund the website Tech Central Station. TCS uses the usual deceptions to advocate drilling in the Arctic Refuge, often with an XOM ad on the page. They push XOM's stance on climate change with columns written by climate "skeptics". A good analysis of TCS,
http://www.sourcewatch.org/
index...Central_Station
On the other hand, it also sounds like ExxonMobil released a report that said that peak oil would happen in the next 5 years, and that we need more efficient cars.
More here.
Thanks for the nice comparative work. Well said.
Commenting by HaloScan
