We can’t expect much from the oil industry, but Greenpeace’s newest finding is as ugly as it gets.

Read more of this story »

ExxonMobil has been slow to invest in biofuels. Actually, until now, they have not invested in them at all while their competitors have spent the last year making what they hope are strategic investments. Well, slap me silly, but today ExxonMobil announced a $600 million investment with J. Craig Venter (best known for mapping the human genome) whose company, Synthetic Genomics is developing a photosynthetic algae biofuels program. This venture includes more than $300 million invested in Synthetic Genomics specifically and $300 for other projects Venter is developing. This investment should cover five-to-six years of research.

Now, I should clarify, that the partnership is with ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company (EMRE) just like ExxonMobil Chemical Company is working with Electrovaya to produce the Maya 300. It’s not unusual for the oil companies to use or create offshoot companies for their renewable energy investments. For example, Valero, which has been extremely active in biofuels investments now has a division branded as Valero Renewables.

As reported by Earth2Tech, Emil Jacobs, vice president of R&D for Exxon’s Research and Engineering Co., said in a call with reporters that it will likely take billions of dollars in additional investment to commercialize the technology for distribution in Exxon’s existing infrastructure. Within 5-10 years, Jacobs expects the project to be producing “large quantities” of transportation fuel.

Read more of this story »

Today, the oil industry has become a player in the auto industry. ExxonMobil is launching the Maya 300, a lithium-ion battery powered car that can drive up to 120 miles on one charge yet has the look and feel of a gasoline-powered car.

This announcement comes on the heels of a whirlwind of investments by the oil industry to help position them as players in the biofuels industry. Many oil companies have either purchased ethanol or biodiesel plants and/or made investments in cellulosic technology and development companies. Does this announcement set the stage for the rise of other players to take over the helm of U.S. auto industry?

The Maya 300 was developed in conjunction with Electrovaya, a pioneer in the development and manufacturing of Lithium Ion SuperPolymer battery systems. The two companies have worked together to, “develop the innovative urban vehicle that will be a ‘game changer’ in advancing transportation alternatives.” ExxonMobil actually developed the lithium-ion battery separator film and was the first company to introduce the lithium-ion battery in 1991.

Read more of this story »

Late in the Bush administration, the president lifted an executive order banning offshore drilling. A few months later, facing skyrocketing gas prices, Congress allowed a congressional moratorium, dating back to 1982, to lapse. Offshore drilling has been blatantly polarizing national politics ever since.

Read more of this story »

Obama Wants to Double Renewable Energy in Three years: In Barack Obama’s weekly TV address he outlined a plan to create three to four million new jobs. Half a million of those jobs would be in the area of clean energy and energy efficiency. The president-elect also said he would commit to doubling the country’s renewable energy production in three years.

Waxman Thinks House will Pass Carbon Legislation This year: The new chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, U.S. Representative Henry Waxman said he is “determined” to pass a climate bill this year in the House.

Timber Company Drops Road Deal with Forest Service: Plum Creek Timber Company announced it will no longer pursue changes in rules governing its use of U.S. Forest Service roads. Despite the innocent-sounding name, Plum Creek Timber is actually the largest owner of forestland in the U.S. Critics complained the rule change could transform forests into housing subdivisions.

Bush Creates More Marine Protected Areas in Pacific: George W. Bush is clearly working to make his environmental legacy through the preservation of marine areas. This week, Bush moved to protect another swath of area in the Pacific by designating them National Monuments. The new monuments will protect the Mariana Trench, the deepest canyon on Earth; coral reefs off the cost of the Mariana Islands; and an atoll known as the “Islands of Seabirds.”

ExxonMobil, which has been hit before with environmental charges, will pay a $6.1 million penalty for failing to comply with pollution regulations in refineries in California, Louisiana and Texas. The company had agreed to reduce pollution in four refineries in those states, but came up short.

Read more of this story »

According to the New York Times, Exxon has exceeded $10 billion in profit in nine of the last 12 quarters. Earlier this year, in the second quarter, the company posted a then-record profit. In the third quarter, Exxon reaped an increase of nearly 60 percent beyond that, setting yet another record while dropping its production by 8 percent for the quarter.

Read more of this story »

In the October 2008 Atlantic magazine, as no doubt in many others, BP runs a full-page ad that says, “Investing in America’s most diverse energy portfolio.” It includes little clip art silhouettes for an oil drop, a gas flame, a wind turbine, the sun and a green plant, triggering our cutesy awwww factor. Then it says:

“Oil in the Gulf. Natural gas in the Rockies. Solar in Maryland. Wind in Texas. Biofuels research in California and Illinois. Diversity starts right here. BP is the largest investor in new U.S. energy development. In fact, over the last five years we’ve invested more than $28 billion in U.S. energy supplies.”

They are providing some concrete details for sure. Now is it true? (And, cynicism aside for a moment, if it is, will it do any good?)

Read more of this story »

This year was no different, as protesters with HAZ-MAT suits and paper brooms labeled “Clean Up Chevron” greeted shareholders at the company’s front gate Wednesday morning. Inside the meeting, speakers from as far away as Africa told shareholders that Chevron has contaminated part of the Ecuadoran rain forest, subsidized the military regime in Burma and paid Nigerian soldiers who shot and killed protesters at a Chevron oil platform.

According to an article in Thursday’s San Francisco Chronicle, Chevron’s top executives rarely comment on these controversies, relying instead on lawyers and public relations specialists to present the company’s views. But Wednesday’s meeting was different, as there were several coarse exchanges between the activists and Chevron executives.

Read more of this story »

When I and other bloggers interviewed Exxon’s Vice President of External Affairs, Ken Cohen, in January, the question of funding these sorts of groups naturally came up. Cohen explained that Exxon does not fund specific programs within these organizations, but rather gives money for their general operations. Therefore, there is no particular issue on which Exxon’s money must be used and the company has no control over it. “We had no knowledge that this was going on,” he insisted.

Exxon has stopped funding the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which was a particularly vocal denier of global warming science. However, Cohen confirmed that they do continue to fund the American Enterprise Institute. The Greenpeace report says that, along with AEI, Exxon also funds the Heartland Institute, Heritage Foundation, and others attempting to discredit climate science.

In January, Cohen made it explicit that Exxon believes global warming is real, is caused by humans, and that something needs to be done. Greenpeace believes that Exxon’s funding of these skeptic groups is an attempt to control the debate on any emerging federal legislation on the issue. Actually, I would expect most companies would try to do that, and many of them aren’t hiding the fact. Utilities like PG&E believe that carbon dioxide regulation is coming down the pipeline and that they need to get involved in the early stages of discussion, ensuring that future policies benefit any steps their company has already taken.

In any case, Exxon must be part of the solution. We need every company, every community, and every government tackling climate change. Greenpeace’s research director, Kert Davies, agrees, “…unless they start pulling with the rest of the world, we're going to have a hard time solving global warming."

ABC News
Greenpeace

That's why it's more important that ever to make the right choice when deciding where to fill 'er up. In today's Tip o' the Day, we at Green Options will try to make that choice easy for you. The best decision you can make is to drive on over to your local ExxonMobil.

Last year, ExxonMobil sold more gasoline in the United States than any other company. By keeping ExxonMobil America's top gasoline retailer, we'll be ensuring that more oil is in their hands than anyone else's. That's great news for the environment for many reasons. For one, by keeping ExxonMobil #1, there's a good chance that when the next inevitable oil spill happens, it will most likely happen to ExxonMobil. Because of their unparallelled expertise in dealing with these unfortunate situations, we can rest assured that ExxonMobile will be there to provide top-notch clean-up services before any real ecological damage can be done. Are we willing to concede that another company can provide the same level of quality environmental management? For the sake of the earth, we simply cannot afford to make that assumption.

You'll also know that ExxonMobile will use any profits they may make in environmentally responsible ways. Not only has ExxonMobil taken over the reigns here at Green Options, but for decades, they've been contributing heavily to some of the world's leading environmental groups like the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the American Enterprise Institute, the Free Enterprise Education Institute, and the Center for Defense of Free Enterprise to name just a few. When you fill up at ExxonMobil, you're making a difference.

The next time you visit your local ExxonMobil station, you'll also want to sign up for your very own ExxonMobil Credit Card. When gas prices start going up like they have been lately (which the oil companies have little control over, and which are largely due to government regulations and the invisible hand of the free market), you can give your wallet a rest by using your new Exxon Card for all your gas, snack, and lottery purchases. Since you'll have a super-low interest rate and easily affordable minimum monthly payments, you won't have to worry the next time you're out of gas, out of cash, and need to make that 65 mile commute to work. Just use your card at the pump, run inside and grab a cup of coffee and a donut, and pay for all of it when you get that overdue raise a few months from now.

Depending on which of ExxonMobil's credit cards you choose to sign up for, you'll even have the chance to earn gas rebates and travel rewards! The more gas you buy, the more rewards you'll receive. Just ask your friendly ExxonMobil store clerk for more information.

As the old Iroquois Confederacy used to say, "In every deliberation, we must consider the impact of our decisions on the next seven generations." With that in mind, there's no doubt that it's essential, for your children and for your children's children and for your children's children's children and so on, to "put a tiger in your tank." Make ExxonMobil your pump of choice.

UPDATE: April Fools! 

But the waters get a bit muddy when he is asked Exxon’s opinion on the best route to take to slow global warming. For example, Cohen explained that any carbon policies that are enacted need to be global in nature:

If we focus on Western Europe and focus on the USA to the exclusion of the developing economies in Asia, we’re not successfully addressing the problem…The developing world must be encouraged to join us.

But at the same time, he continued, industrialized nations should recognize that carbon emissions aren’t high priorities in many developing countries, where issues like public health and education take precedence.

So, Tom Yulsman from Prometheus asked, does that mean Exxon would support a cap-and-trade program? Cohen explained that Exxon is “not anti cap-and-trade or pro cap-and-trade. The devil’s in the details.”

Does this mean that Exxon would favor a carbon tax instead? asked Susan Smith of the Environmental Law Prof Blog. Cohen answered that most economists have found that a carbon tax makes the most sense because of its efficiency and because it doesn’t favor one sector of the economy over the other. Again, though, “the devil’s in the details.”

I was perplexed. Exxon believes that action should be taking to mitigate global warming, but doesn’t appear to have a course of action. It seemed that they were advising a rather slow, cautionary approach and insisting every question under the sun be answered before a particular policy direction is taken. I’m not advocating that we rush to impose sky-high gas taxes or outlaw air conditioning either, but the world has got to take decisive action now to make a difference.

So in an email, I asked Cohen what a market-based solution to global warming would like, if Exxon had its way. Although Exxon does not officially endorse any particular policy, it does envision

…a world-wide approach in which countries take action - but these action steps look different depending on where you are starting. For example, a cap and trade approach might not be a viable proposition for rapidly growing economies in the developing world. Options like a carbon tax and cap and trade are under consideration (or, are actually in place) in several countries in the [Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development], but as we discussed, the design features of these specific policy measures can vary significantly.

A market-based solution would preferably be something applied to the broadest possible cross section of the economy…We believe there are existing policy mechanisms that would be available to take into account different market-based approaches to climate policy.

Cohen is very aware that Exxon’s stamp of approval on any policy could also be the death of it. During our phone conversation, in response to a question by Stuart Staniford of The Oil Drum as to whether anyone would take Exxon seriously on its global warming commitment, Cohen admitted that if Exxon came out in favor of a particular policy, many people’s first reaction would be: “If Exxon’s for it, then something must be wrong with it.” I saw this myself when I commented to a colleague about Exxon’s lack of investment in renewable energy projects like wind and solar. “Good,” he said. “They’d just screw it up anyway.”

But Exxon has to stay competitive in this changing fossil fuel market. Its competitors like BP and Chevron are increasing their use of renewable energy and are talking about impending carbon regulation. I asked Cohen, “What is Exxon doing on the ground right now to prepare for carbon regulation and the shift to renewables? How is the company assuring its investors that they’re staying competitive with this regulation coming down the pipeline?”

The answer I got was perhaps one of the most straightforward of the conversation.

Cohen flatly stated that until Exxon sees its competitors making money from renewable energy projects, Exxon is keeping its distance. The company invests heavily in biofuels, is the biggest blender of ethanol in the United States, and the most efficient petrochemical company, according to him. But Exxon will only work with technologies that are “robust enough to stand on their own two feet” and at this time, solar and wind don’t fit the bill.

Good news, Mr. Cohen! Chevron is reporting double digit increases in revenues from renewable energy projects, and last May, BP recorded its first profits from its solar division. Looks like this is the perfect time for ExxonMobil to make a move into the renewable energy market and diversify its business. I’ve got great recommendations on some flat land in the Upper Midwest that could use a few wind turbines.

Renewable Energy Access

ExxonMobil

But can Exxon defend itself? Has it joined the rest of the world in recognizing global warming is happening? If so, what are its plans to slow it?

I had the privilege of participating in two telephone news conferences with ExxonMobil’s Vice President of Public Affairs, Ken Cohen, to answer some of these questions. Other bloggers on the call were Jesse Jenkins from Watthead, Tom Yulsman from Prometheus, Susan Smith from the Environmental Law Prof Blog, and Stuart Staniford from The Oil Drum. One call took place on January 26, a week before the IPCC report was released. The next happened on February 2, the day the IPCC report and the Guardian article came out. This post is the first of a 2-part series on Exxon’s response to the allegations in the Guardian, its position on global warming, and what it thinks should be done about it.

I went in with an open mind: To be sure, Exxon was making a concerted effort to reach out to the blogosphere and discuss its position on global warming – that in itself was big news. But I also expected some real answers that would give me at least a glimmer of hope that this behemoth was taking decisive action.

“The IPCC report is the best compilation of the thinking on the subject,” Cohen told us, insisting that Exxon takes global warming very seriously and has in fact recognized the problem for twenty years. He spelled it out further:

Is the climate warming? Yes. Are CO2 emissions up? Yes, they’ve never been as high as they’ve been [now]. Man’s use of fossil fuels and land use changes and other human activity contribute to that CO2 rise.

So did ExxonMobil fund AEI to muddle the dialogue on global warming?

“We had no knowledge that this was going on,” insisted Cohen. He explained that Exxon funds a lot of different groups, and “when we fund them, we want good analysis." Exxon does not condone what AEI did, but Cohen confirmed that it does continues to fund AEI, although other groups like the Competitive Enterprise Institute are not funded by them anymore.

Cohen assured us that Exxon is “trying to be a constructive player in the policy discussion and not associate [themselves] with those that are marginalized and are not welcome in that discussion.” The IPCC report “is what it is,” and Exxon does not believe in engaging in scientific research that preordains an answer. Cohen:

…that's the issue with AEI: Are they preordaining an answer?…I can understand taking a market approach or a government interventionist approach, but this is not a question of trying to find who’s right or who’s wrong. Let’s let the process work.

But, I asked, how can you grant AEI nearly two million dollars and not know what they’re doing with the money? Turns out that Exxon conveniently funds the “general operations” of AEI, not specific programs that would allow them to track how the money is being used. Perhaps Exxon needs to think hard next time before it funds an organization so clearly disinterested in constructive solutions.

Cohen was consistently explicit in Exxon's position that global warming is happening and mainly caused by human activities. If that is true, then how will Exxon fight the huge misperception that it’s still the planet's largest naysayer? Cohen conceded that the company needed to do a better job of communicating its position on global warming, rather than allowing a fact sheet or news release on their website to do the work.

Jesse Jenkins asked whether it would consider joining the new U.S. Climate Energy Action Partnership, a coalition of major corporations and environmental organizations calling for federal carbon dioxide regulation. When Cohen answered this question in our first conference call, he seemed cool to the idea, pointing out that Exxon is already part of many global warming discussion groups and that some of their scientists participate in the IPCC. However, Cohen brought the idea up himself on our second call, this time saying that the Partnership is a group “…that we might join and participate in the discussions – if they’ll have us.”

Coming up Thursday: What is Exxon doing to mitigate its contributions to global warming? Which policies and market-based solutions does it think would be the most effective? How is Exxon staying market-competitive in a shifting energy system?

CBS News.com
News Release: ExxonMobil's response to publication of the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report of Climate Science
News Release: Addressing the Risks of Climate Change: ExxonMobil's Views and Actions
The Guardian: Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study