Data Analysis Reveals Contrary Results to Initial Claims

In a recent episode of his immensely popular podcast, “The Joe Rogan Experience,” host Joe Rogan claimed that “big money” is driving policy decisions that favor renewable energy over fossil fuels. This assertion, made during a conversation with climate skeptic Richard Lindzen, has drawn sharp criticism from former U.S. climate negotiator Lia Newman, who argues that the evidence points to exactly the opposite conclusion.

Newman, who regularly analyzes climate policy and its everyday impacts on her TikTok channel @liaandtheworld, has systematically dismantled Rogan’s claims by presenting data that shows the fossil fuel industry’s overwhelming financial dominance and political influence.

“The data shows the exact opposite,” Newman stated bluntly in her response video, before laying out compelling evidence of the fossil fuel industry’s economic power.

According to figures cited by Newman, the oil industry consistently outperforms even the highly profitable technology and finance sectors. In 2022, energy giants including Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, and TotalEnergies reported combined profits approaching $200 billion—a record-breaking year for the industry. The following year also saw substantial earnings, with these companies collectively generating more than $100 billion in profits, according to Energy Monitor and Energy Profits.

These staggering financial figures stand in stark contrast to the renewable energy sector’s relatively modest market share. Despite growing investment, clean energy sources still account for only about 30% of the global energy mix, underscoring the continued dominance of traditional fossil fuels.

The disparity becomes even more pronounced when examining political spending. Newman highlighted that renewable energy political action committees (PACs) spent approximately 100 times less than their fossil fuel counterparts on election campaigns and lobbying efforts in 2024. Data from Open Secrets, also referenced by Yale Climate Connections, shows oil and gas companies contributed approximately $219 million to political candidates that year, while renewable energy PACs managed just $2.5 million.

Newman also addressed the long history of climate disinformation propagated by the fossil fuel industry. “They invented the modern disinformation playbook,” she asserted, referencing internal documents revealing that Exxon executives were aware of the climate-warming effects of their products as early as the 1970s—decades before this information became widely acknowledged.

This claim is supported by a 2021 Senate investigation that implicated not only Exxon but also Shell, BP, Chevron, and the American Petroleum Institute. According to Newman, despite their awareness of climate impacts, these companies chose to invest in organizations designed to discredit climate science and confuse public understanding of the issue rather than address the environmental consequences of their business models.

“So yeah, the only big money is in Big Oil,” Newman concluded. “So it seems Joe Rogan and the regularly discredited climate contrarian Richard Lindzen have drunk the fossil fuel Kool-Aid.”

Rogan’s podcast, which boasts tens of millions of listeners, has previously been criticized for spreading misinformation on various topics. This latest controversy highlights the significant platform given to climate skeptics despite overwhelming scientific consensus on human-caused climate change.

The exchange between Rogan and Newman reflects a broader tension in public discourse about climate policy, where scientific findings often compete with powerful economic interests and their influence on media narratives. As the transition to cleaner energy continues to evolve as a political and economic issue, the accuracy of information shared on influential platforms like Rogan’s remains critically important for informed public decision-making.