In case anyone is starting to get confused about the point of this thread, what with all the US and state DOJs, and US Congressional shenanigans, I will try to make it simple:
My exhibit A is this: Exxon's "The Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040", proudly hosted on their own corporate website:
http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/energy/energy-outlook
Exxon and the other majors have published annual reports since I was a little kid about the state of world energy, filled with charts about the use and future needs for different fossil fuels. Often magazines will do lengthy review articles or special issues on energy, I remember one from National Geographic in the 1970s, which draw heavily from this source material.
These reports represent a decades long PR effort (that I had no problem with) that seeks to connect the dots in people's minds:
--everything you and civilization does needs energy
--we (the oil majors) ARE energy
--you and civilization NEED us (the oil majors).
And I think it was highly effective. There are a lot of people that are having a very hard time believing that we can have a modern society that does not use as much oil as ours does. Like half as much, or a quarter. They deep down thinks its just impossible.
IMO, these decades of reports have drilled into us that: MODERN LIFE == ENERGY == OIL
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson said it plainly this past week: "
The reality is there is no alternative energy source known on the planet or available to us today" He is not an AGW denier....he is a
Renewable Energy denier. For evidence in that comment he
specifically cited Bill Gates' "
controversial calls for investment in new technology over a widespread transition to the solar and wind technologies we do have."
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/05/25/3781929/exxon-votes-against-climate-action/
In other words: LIFE == ENERGY == OIL, there are NO ALTERNATIVES!
A little history:
First, decades ago, we had 'Wind and solar are for CRAZY HIPPIES'
then, we had 'Wind and solar DON'T WORK'
then, we had 'Wind and solar are TOO EXPENSIVE'
then, we had ''Wind and solar will BREAK THE GRID, and rebuilding the grid will be TOO EXPENSIVE"
even as lots of places and grids seem to be doing just fine with lots of wind and solar, we had a parallel narrative:
'OIL is irreplaceable as a transportation fuel'
'We can't grow our food without OIL'
'We can't make plastics or pharmaceuticals without OIL'
And now we know that the above statements are just as untrue as the ones about solar and wind. More than half of current oil goes to light transportation that can be readily substituted with existing or near future EVs, at lower total cost of ownership (!) and the ENERGY supplied by the existing GRID, with off-peak charging. The chemical and Ag uses are in the single digits of oil usage....we are not getting rid of oil, we are getting rid of half of it.
In 2016, we can see replacing half of electricity (e.g. coal) with solar and wind, and we can see replacing half of oil use with EVs. Most people think that by the time we get to replacing half, we will probably have figured out how to replace most of the other half. For materials...biomass can provide nearly all the needed feedstock
Is this bad for Rex....Yup....in a world where we use half as much oil as currently OPEC and other low cost producers could provide nearly ALL of it. In a world using half a much oil, the expensive producers (i.e. the oil sands, US oil frackers and US offshore) are all GONE. Exxon will continue as a gas company, an oil refiner and a chemical company, a shadow of its former self.
When will we get to half the oil usage? Science tells us that we must get there ASAP, and Paris says that all the countries of the earth are putting together plans to get there!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other words: the content of the Exxon 'Energy Outlook' is BULL. And everyone knows it. OIL is (largely) REPLACEABLE and will be (largely) REPLACED, and anyone who knows econ 101 knows that XOM lives mostly in the half that is going away. We are supposed to believe that XOM's greatest minds who are great at three-dimensional chess and outmaneuvering all the competition DIDN'T SEE the coming trainwreck that will destroy their oil business?
We must believe that **because they have never issued any statements on the subject, that address the possibility in an even hypothetical way**.
They just keep peddling the 'exponential growth of oil consumption until 2040' story, the 'Energy Outlook to 2040'. And lots of folks still read it with a straight face.
This is their pivot on Global Warming....not that global warming is not real, but that there's nothing anyone can do about it. Sure, levy a $10/ton tax on Carbon if you want....our projections still see robust growth until 2040....other scenarios...there are no other scenarios.
When they are asked about the increasing ridiculousness of this position, Rex says '
The reality is there is no alternative energy source known on the planet or available to us today'.
In their single 'white paper' on the carbon bubble released last year, now taken down,
https://web.archive.org/web/20140702013306/http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/Files/Other/2014/Report - Energy and Carbon - Managing the Risks.pdf
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/to-strand-or-not-to-strand-that-is-the-question-for-xom.143389/
Exxon argued that their projected exponential growth in oil consumption was lower than that assumed by the other majors like BP and the US govt agency the EIA. Notably, the EIA is required by details of their charter to assume that renewable energy growth
goes to zero in the near future. The EIA works for the same congress discussed upthread, and the requirement is explicit and they mention it in their report to explain what some people find to be an absurd projection.
And Bill Gates, noted technology expert and futurist, who also thinks renewable energy kinda sucks.
That's what they've got for 'cover' in 2016...a faulty analysis done by a hamstrung govt agency and the opinion of Bill Gates.
The alternative is that they have known that decreasing global demand (due to AGW) is an existential threat to their business, have known that their production and assets are more expensive than OPEC and other sovereigns, and have known about it for decades, and have done what they could to forestall the inevitable while **denying it to their shareholders**. The last bit is
illegal, since it means that their financial reports do not reflect their opinion of future business prospects and company valuation.
And that is the RICO case.
Their 'tell' is their near total silence on the issue, the contested shareholder votes to maintain that silence, and the increasingly ridiculous 'Outlook'.
Here is what it says about renewable energy:
Modern renewable fuels – wind, solar and biofuels – also will grow rapidly. Globally, these sources will more than triple from 2014 to 2040. The largest volume growth will come from wind, which by 2040 is projected to supply about 2 percent of the world’s energy and nearly 10 percent of its electricity.
http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/energy/energy-outlook/fulfilling-future-supply/future
Wind provided 3.5% of US electricity in 2014, has already grown to 5% by 2016, and they are saying for the world to get to 10% will take
25 more years. Solar, at 1% of US electricity and its 50% annual growth rate do not rate being mentioned at all in the projection...it might 'triple' over the next 25 years. Compare that to solar's 5000% growth over the last 15 years.
They are lying, and they know it, and they've known it for a l
nice job in resetting up your argument. all great points. the one thing you leave out is, here it comes, all you have said is not possible without FF! from mines to final setup FF rule and will continue. time will be the most important factor, rushing any or all will ca
se needless economic pains. our winter electric rate in New England as an example. close what are really clean coal plants before replacement is ready?(sorry for the underline, don't know what I did?) good discussion, never fail to learn something ,thanks
let's add this little ditty, love to do this to my facility. if we did put it up the local criminals would steal it all."Walmart is reportedly the top solar customer in the U.S., having already installed 260 solar projects on store rooftops -- which can provide as much as 30% of the power used by that facility. Walmart says it has already saved more than $5 million on its energy bill.