As Joe Romm of ClimateProgress observes, Fiorina's recent dance around the question of whether she accepts the peer-reviewed science on global warming puts her at odds with HP's public statements on the issue. In its most recent Global Citizenship Report, HP asserts its strong belief in the soundness of global warming science:
Our planet’s climate is changing, and scientific consensus is that greenhouse gas (GHG)1 emissions are the main culprit. The effects are forecasted to be far-reaching and substantial. The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, published in 2007, warned that unmitigated climate change would likely trigger a range of environmental problems threatening agriculture, natural habitats and communities in low-lying coastal areas.And that's not all. The good folks at HP have a very specific recommendation that might sound familiar to clean energy and climate bill advocates:
The economic toll will be high as well. The cost of responding and adapting to unmitigated climate change could reach between 5 and 20 percent of annual global gross domestic product (GDP), according to the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change.
HP also joined more than 140 leading global companies in signing a communiqué from the Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change at the Poznan negotiations in December 2008. The communiqué called for a treaty to be agreed in Copenhagen in December 2009 to be based on targets for emission reductions by 2050.
A Copenhagen treaty, you say? That's funny, because that's the sort of international agreement that Fiorina endorser and fellow climate science skeptic Sen. James Inhofe has been attacking ad hominem, including with a planned "truth squad" of science deniers to Copenhagen himself in order to derail negotiations.
While it's certainly not the most embarrassing thing Fiorina has ever done to HP, questioning the science that the company has integrated into its long-term business plan certainly can't be what HP was hoping for from its former CEO.