ExxonMobil, one of the world’s largest oil and gas companies, has been a major contributor to climate change. And this is not only through its fossil fuel production but also through decades of climate disinformation. You’d be hard-pressed to find a company that’s done more to push climate change than Exxon. Yet, despite all this, Exxon’s leadership seems to oppose President Donald Trump’s stance on the Paris Agreement.

Speaking in two interviews, CEO Darren Woods called withdrawing from the agreement “extremely inefficient” and said it “creates a lot of uncertainty.”

“I don’t think the challenge or the need to address global emissions is going to go away,” Woods said. “Anything that happens in the short term would just make the longer term that much more challenging.”

A yo-yo stance that not even Republicans like

As one of the world’s largest economies and emitters, U.S. climate policies have global implications. The Paris Agreement, signed in 2015 during the Obama administration, was a landmark moment in global climate collaboration. However, after taking office in 2017, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the pact, calling climate change a “hoax.” This was reversed under President Joe Biden, whose administration rejoined the agreement and made historic investments in renewable energy. Trump, now re-elected, is expected to withdraw from the pact again.

Despite record-high global temperatures, Trump has continued to advocate for increased fossil fuel production, criticizing renewable energy and policies supporting electric vehicles. Yet, even some Republican lawmakers and industry leaders, including ExxonMobil, have pushed back against the idea of wholesale reversals of Biden’s climate initiatives. In states like Texas, for instance, renewable energy has made an important contribution and are quickly becoming the backbone of energy generation.

For Exxon, this is both good news and bad. Getting subsidies and payouts to invest in new drilling projects is obviously great, but this isn’t something you can just do overnight. Trump’s position seems to be extreme even for members of his party, and when he ultimately steps down four years from now, future presidents may be far less willing to support such investments.

Woods said it was unhelpful for businesses “to have the pendulum swing back and forth as administrations change”.

“I’ve been advising that we have some level of consistency,” Woods said. “One of the challenges with this polarized political environment we find ourselves in is the impact of policy switching back and forth as political cycles occur and elections happen and administrations change. That’s not good for the economy.”

Exxon’s tensioned relationship with Trump

Fossil fuel companies generally welcomed Trump’s policies (after all, they sponsored him), but ExxonMobil’s relationship with him has been more nuanced. Former CEO Rex Tillerson, who became Trump’s Secretary of State, left after only 13 months amid tensions with the administration. Meanwhile, under Woods’ leadership, ExxonMobil has tried to reposition itself as environmentally conscious, emphasizing investments in renewables alongside record oil production during Biden’s term.

At the same time, Exxon is trying to rebrand itself as a “sustainable” company. Even though they’re pushing and lobbying for more oil and gas, they are also trying to scale up investment in renewable projects. They’ve also had a productive few years under Biden, when, despite a push for renewable energy, America’s oil production surged to unprecedented records. At a time when much of the world is pushing and lobbying for continued support for renewables, Exxon can’t completely jump into the Trump ship while still maintaining a facade of sustainability.

Woods went as far as to caution other companies to do the same and emphasize environmental performance.

“We all have a responsibility to figure out, given our capabilities and ability to contribute, how can we best do that,” Woods said. “How the Trump administration can contribute in this space is to help establish the right, thoughtful, rational, logical framework for how the world starts to try to reduce the emissions.”

How extreme will Trump be?

All signs are pointing towards a Trump presidency that will be even more aggressive than the past one. Here’s a telling example: in 2017, Elon Musk withdrew from all presidential advisory councils after Trump pulled out of Paris earlier that same day. Musk blasted “climate change is real” — but Musk has changed his position substantially since then.

Now, Musk fashions himself part of a “dark MAGA” movement and has greatly toned down his support for climate measures. He seems to be saying that there’s no real need for climate action as things will work out for themselves.

“We still have quite a bit of time, we don’t need to rush,” Musk said, “If, I don’t know, 50 to 100 years from now we’re mostly sustainable, I think that’ll probably be okay.”

Trump has controversially suggested that rising sea levels might be a positive development, joking that they would create “more oceanfront property.” Climate activist and 350.org founder Bill McKibben dismissed the remark as “the dumbest climate conversation of all time.”

At the same time, the United States continues to bear the brunt of climate change’s escalating effects. Rising temperatures, driven by unchecked emissions, are fueling more frequent and severe hurricanes, droughts, and wildfires. These events cost the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars annually in damages, strain emergency response systems, and disrupt lives across the country.

We don’t know how extreme Trump will be (or try to be) in this presidency, but one thing’s for sure: when the Exxon boss is telling the US president to tone it down with the climate denial, things can’t be looking good.