- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Exxon Mobil CEO on the ‘dirty secret’ of Net Zero
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:10 pm
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:10 pm
quote:
As it stands, we’re not on the path to net-zero emissions by 2050, Exxon Mobil CEO Darren Woods said. And maybe that’s not Big Oil’s fault.
“The dirty secret nobody talks about is how much all this is going to cost and who’s willing to pay for it,” Woods, who replaced Rex Tillerson at the helm of Exxon Mobil in January 2017, said. “If you look at the policies [governments] are putting out, the cost is very implicit. It’s not an explicit cost.”
Most objective analyses would suggest that “we’ve waited too long to open the aperture on the solution sets in terms of what we need, as a society, to start reducing emissions,” Woods told Fortune CEO Alan Murray and editor-at-large Michal Lev-Ram on a recent episode of the Leadership Next podcast. Plus: “We’re not investing nearly enough in the technology.”
Exxon Mobil is No. 3 on the Fortune 500 and the largest gas and oil corporation in the U.S., having posted a $36 billion profit in 2023. The firm has “tabled proposals” with governments worldwide, Woods said, “to get out there and start down this path using existing technology.” But it’s been hamstrung by a need for cost transparency—and the fact that everyday people are responsible for generating the emissions too.
quote:
Woods, though the head of a fossil fuel giant, has some ground to stand on; he was the first oil and gas CEO to appear at a UN climate summit when he attended COP28 late last year, advocating for reducing emissions and investing in clean energy. In 2022, Exxon Mobil invested $17 billion in its lower-emission initiatives. It has long maintained that greenhouse gas emissions, not fossil fuels, are behind climate change—claims over which it is now being sued.
The main issue, in any case, is that fixing the problem is currently too expensive, Woods told Murray and Lev-Ram. “People can’t afford it, and governments around the world rightly know that their constituents will have real concerns,” he went on. “So we’ve got to find a way to get the cost down to grow the utility of the solution, and make it more available and more affordable so that you can begin the [clean energy] transition.”
quote:
The challenge, in Woods’ mind, is reframing the cost as necessary on both a corporate and personal level, rather than a nice-to-have. It’s anyone’s guess how long that would take. “I can’t predict if we’ll be successful in that space or not.” A popular suggestion for passing the cost off to consumers is carbon taxes or a built-in charge on purchased goods, though many experts nonetheless encourage the most offending firms to shoulder the cost burden, not individuals.
quote:
Murray pointed out the subsidies Exxon Mobil has received through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act that are geared at encouraging low-carbon energy solutions. But Woods said that too is a Band-Aid solution. “The way that the government is incentivized and trying to catalyze investments in this space is through subsidies,” he said. “Driving significant investments at a scale that even gets close to moving the needle is going to cost a lot of money.”
The U.S. government is trying to “get things moving” through those subsidies, he added. “But I would tell you building a business on government subsidy is not a long-term sustainable strategy—we don’t support that.” Exxon Mobil has committed to using its IRA subsidies to advance its low-carbon energy solutions, “but at the same time, we’re advocating to move to market forces, either through regulation and prices on carbon.”
The challenge with all those solutions, he said, “is the cost ultimately, explicitly bears itself in the price of products out there.” And nobody wants to pay up.
LINK /
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:13 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The dirty secret nobody talks about is how much all this is going to cost and who’s willing to pay for it,
John Q. Taxpayer
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:13 pm to ragincajun03
Nothing "secret" about any of that for anyone with half a brain.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:16 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
“We’re not investing nearly enough in the technology.”
So aim for 2070 instead of 2050.
Technology will be cheaper then.
20 years aint shite in the grand scheme.
Also at the rate we're going we'll have nuked each other by then anyway
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 7:19 pm
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:25 pm to ragincajun03
No fricking way, Jim Bob in the trailer park fricking predicted this shite.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:27 pm to ragincajun03
Who is saying in 2024 that getting away from fossil fuels will be less expensive than the status quo? This is a “secret?”
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 7:29 pm
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:29 pm to ragincajun03
We'll still be heavily dependent on fossil fuels in 30+ years.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:41 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The dirty secret nobody talks about is how much all this is going to cost and who’s willing to pay for it
This isn’t a “dirty secret”.
It is abundantly clear to anyone who has ever had to sit through any amount of net zero lectures or training.
The cost for”LEED” certified new construction is absurd.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:45 pm to ragincajun03
The dei commercials are helping
Posted on 2/27/24 at 7:53 pm to ragincajun03
The whole “climate” movement is about power and money, not saving the planet. Proof #1 is their disapproval of carbon free nuclear power in favor of environmentally destructive wind and solar projects.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:18 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
ragincajun03Exxon Mobil CEO on the ‘dirty secret’ of Net Zero
That really wasn’t a secret to anyone with an ounce of common sense
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:24 pm to ragincajun03
The premise is flawed. “Net zero” emissions is unnecessary and a concept dreamed up by the climate change cult which is driven by an effort to control the living standards of the masses while our overlords do whatever they want. Produce cheap energy, use hydro, nuclear, natural gas, clean coal and other methods where they are efficient. Minimize pollution as much as you can.
Quit trying to control the world.
Quit trying to control the world.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 8:39 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
It has long maintained that greenhouse gas emissions, not fossil fuels, are behind climate change—claims over which it is now being sued.
Support the narrative or else.
God I hate progs.
Posted on 2/27/24 at 10:26 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
It has long maintained that greenhouse gas emissions, not fossil fuels, are behind climate change
Someone explain this part to me. I thought fossil fuels were considered to be the major factor in greenhouse effect.
ETA: is this why we've seen such a big push against farming and cow gas? So O&G execs can point the finger somewhere else?
This post was edited on 2/27/24 at 10:27 pm
Posted on 2/29/24 at 9:32 pm to ragincajun03
Now do Illegals
Same concept
Same concept
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News