Billy Madison Dumb: ‘Constraining oil supply is key to cutting demand’… Ron White was right!

Guest “I couldn’t make this sort of schist up if I was trying” by David Middleton

‘Constraining oil supply is key to cutting demand’
INTERVIEW: Follow This founder Mark van Baal talks exclusively to 💥Energy Flux💥

Seb Kennedy

Oil prices might be riding high on robust post-Covid demand, but don’t expect supply-side pressures to relent. Follow This, the Dutch pressure group whose climate resolutions are winning over investors, is redoubling its campaign to force international oil companies to slash Scope 3 emissions this decade. Outspoken founder Mark van Baal believes this won’t happen unless shareholders oblige IOCs to halt exploration and invest in renewables. He told Energy Flux that the onus is on Western IOCs to lead the oil industry into a post-crude future – and ignore short-term market signals along the way.

[…]

Oil is the new tobacco. ESG investing is all the rage on Wall Street. Even providing IOCs with services such as underwriting or advanced computing is becoming frowned upon – let alone financing their exploration and production activities.

Combined with insatiable demand for commodities to fuel the global economic recovery, these factors are conspiring to keep oil prices high. Yet IOC shareholders are increasingly voting to tie the hands of Big Oil bosses, who hope to secure bumper profits during a period of structural market tightness.

Amsterdam-based pressure group Follow This has been instrumental in energising this movement by tapping into shareholder appetite for change. The organisation won notable victories this year at the AGMs of Chevron and ConocoPhillips, and support for its climate resolutions is rising among shareholders at BP and Shell.

Mark van Baal is adamant that stoking the fires of discontent among typically conservative institutional shareholders is the only viable route to emissions reductions.

[…]

Energy Flux

Translation: “Mark van Baal is adamant that stoking the fires of discontent among typically conservative institutional shareholders is the only viable route to” free unicorn ponies for everyone.

Mark Van Baal, you’ve earned a Billy Madison Lifetime Achievement Award with a Ron White Oak Leaf Cluster Frack!

Guess what happens to divested assets…

A $140 Billion Asset Sale: Investors Cashing in on Big Oil’s Push to Net Zero
The pressure on listed oil majors could have unintended consequences if prod
uction passes to private or state-owned companies.

Anjli Raval, Financial Times

Thu, 07/08/2021 – 03:00 AM

One company’s transition away from fossil fuels is another’s opportunity to double down.

Under intense pressure from investors and activists to take more action on climate change, some of the world’s biggest oil and gas companies are putting billions of dollars’ worth of assets up for sale.

Watching from a distance are people like Brian Gilvary, the head of Ineos Energy, an arm of the private UK chemicals company. As many energy companies try to shift from oil to gas and lower-carbon technologies, Ineos is buying up unwanted fossil fuel assets.

[…]

Hart Energy (subscription required to read full article) Link to original Financial Times article

Smaller, more aggressive companies will snap those assets up.

To make matters even more hilarious…

Jul 8, 2021,08:45am EDT
Can One Man’s Vision Lead The Shale Industry Out Of The ESG Desert?

David Blackmon Senior Contributor Energy

As the consolidation of the upstream, E&P sector of the U.S. shale business continues to heat up, there is debate over whether it is taking place too slowly, just fast enough, or too quickly for the good of the industry. Based on what he told me in a recent interview, you can put Ben Dell, Chairman of the Board at DJ Basin producer Civitas and Managing Partner at the Kimmeridge Energy Management private equity company, down on the side of “too slowly.”

[…]

“That’s all coincided with this ESG narrative,” Dell continued, “and you can debate which one came first, but it’s been accelerated in my view by COVID. But you’re finally at a turning point in the industry where you are beginning to see what I call the three pillars of reform to actually make the sector investible again. This is important because this sector has got a long way to run. It’s not going to be done in 10 years – probably won’t be done in 50 years if we’re brutally honest about it – and there’s a lot of profitability still to be generated.”

Dell’s three pillars include:

1) Establishing a profitable business model that creates a return above the cost of capital and returns free cash flow to investors;
2) Establishing a corporate governance model that is aligned with the goals of investors and which bases executive compensation on metrics aligned with those goals; and
3) Getting to net-zero on emissions.

Regarding that third point, Dell asks, “One of the things I ask people is, if all the E&Ps were net zero and have no carbon footprint, or if you could sequester carbon for a dollar, would you change any of the energy infrastructure you have today? And most people say ‘no,’” he said. “Because, why would you change it? It works well, it’s very functional. Why would you invest trillions of dollars in something else if what you already have works?” Good question.

“For the E&Ps, the question right now is do they have a license to operate?” Dell continued. “My view is, if you are net-zero, you are earning your license to operate. If the entire E&P space is net-zero, why wouldn’t you have it? What is the argument at that point? Then it’s just politics, and some people will say, well, I just don’t like it. Some people just hate the industry, and you can’t really address that. But that’s not really a strong, sticking argument over time. So, my goal is to be net-zero.

Dell believes that the entire E&P industry, and ultimately every step in the oil and gas supply chain, is going to have to get to net zero in order to retain its license to operate in the United States. “We saw Devon come out with a commitment by 2050, Diamondback has done it, everyone’s ultimately going to follow suit. It’s an inevitability,” he said.

“We want to be at the forefront of that movement. We want to set the standard. And if you can, you want to attract capital, to get a lower cost of capital, because if you can trade at a premium, it can only help you accelerate consolidation by taking out the poor performers in the basin.”

[…]

Forbes

Most oil & gas companies could get to net-zero Scope 1 & 2 emissions by injecting a modest volume of CO2 into depleted reservoirs and/or saline aquifers or through enhanced oil recovery operations. Some oil companies, like Denbury are already on the path to Scope 3 net-zero, if not “carbon negative” oil production. See Energy Transition: Blue Oil Edition.

If Little Oil was able to snap up Big Oil’s assets and then achieve something close to net-zero CO2 emissions, the war on fossil fuels would be laid bare for what it is: A bunch of whiny Enviromarxist greentards demanding free free unicorn ponies for everyone.

4.9 19 votes
Article Rating
95 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 15, 2021 10:11 am

Al Gore sez he is giving his $100 mill+ fortune to carbon sequestration now becuz the earth is in the balance and time is runnin’ out as we approach the tipping point…NO! Al is NOT! Sorry.

Reply to  David Middleton
July 15, 2021 10:20 am

Sorry, Al appears to be a phony who does not really believe his own words. He is greedy …..he doesn’t need all that money and could help save earth. Sad.

leowaj
Reply to  Anti_griff
July 15, 2021 1:11 pm

Twenty years ago, didn’t Gore boy claim the earth is in the balance and time is running out?

brentc
Reply to  leowaj
July 15, 2021 2:09 pm

In 2014 three party boats that planned to cruise the ice-free waterways of the Arctic Passage had to be rescued by a Russian icebreaker after they got inconveniently stuck in the ice. This per Gore’s 2004 prediction that the Arctic would be ice-free in ten years.

I kid you not.

Hawaii guy
Reply to  brentc
July 16, 2021 7:15 am

Greenland, 12+ gigaton snow mass gain in June of this year!

Herbert
Reply to  leowaj
July 16, 2021 12:05 am

leowaj,
In 1992 Gore published his book “Earth in the Balance” of which “An Inconvenient Truth”is essentially a re-run,with implausible additions like drowning polar bears.
At the time Gore said that “The theory of global warming will never be disproved” and “the time to act is now”.
P.J.O’Rourke does a terrific take down of Gore in the chapter on ecology and environment in “All the Trouble in the World”(1992).
As P.J.says,when the science was settled against him as per FAR (1990) Gore was maintaining that scientists were siding with him,”almost unanimously”.
So time ran out in 1992.

TonyG
Reply to  Herbert
July 16, 2021 10:30 am

“At the time Gore said that “The theory of global warming will never be disproved””

Well, technically he was right, since they just adjust the predictions to account for any possibility. You can’t “disprove” a theory that says that “anything is possible”

Gunga Din
Reply to  leowaj
July 16, 2021 5:55 pm

That was about the dreaded O3 molecule.
Cash ran out on Ozone so he switched to CO2.

brentc
July 15, 2021 10:17 am

All this effort to curb CO2 emissions…and the atmospheric CO2 levels will naturally continue to trend up. Not to mention the Phrack-you emissions that will continue from India, China, and wherever else FF-powered electricity plants are being built. I wonder what the woke will say then?

Oh, yeah – the protests will be redirected at the extensive mining needed to make the green dream come to fruition.

I hope this train wreck hits the end of the track soon so we can do the Great Reset Reset and get back to sanity.

Tom Halla
July 15, 2021 10:24 am

Much of what socialists think they know about economics is flatly wrong, and the common epithet for the green blob of “Watermelon” is quite appropriate.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 15, 2021 10:47 am

Much???
Try ALL.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 15, 2021 11:47 am

Tom,
My favorite one is the belief that the rich get their money by stealing it from the poor!
Hello! The poor don’t have any money to steal!
If that was the case, why does the country with the highest number of billionaires (the US) also have the wealthiest poor people in the world? Why are people in North Korea so poor that they eat grass?
That Marxist Utopia thing is working out really well for the “useful idiots!”

Gunga Din
Reply to  Abolition Man
July 16, 2021 6:06 pm

😎
Another is that “The Rich” will pay the bills for all the socialist’s dreams.
What happens when all “The Rich” become as poor as the rest of us living in their utopia?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 15, 2021 8:38 pm

When an entire “brain trust” are diligently attempting to follow the ideas of history’s most over rated mutton-head there is little that can go right with socialism. How Marx got the reputation as one of history’s great intellects is also one of its great mysteries. As an intellectual, moral and fiscal bankrupt who lived on the charity of “capitalists” while criticizing their means of employment, he was also one of its great hypocrites. That doesn’t even cover his deplorable family life.

road dog
Reply to  Rory Forbes
July 16, 2021 2:41 am

Bernie Sanders has done a remarkable job of duplicating Marx’ path through life.

Iain Reid
Reply to  Tom Halla
July 15, 2021 11:19 pm

Tom,

all of what the socialists think they know about renewables being capable of taking over from fossil fuels is wrong and this needs to be made clear to them.
They cannot, and cannot be made, to replace conventional generation!

Nicholas Harding
July 15, 2021 10:29 am

Want no CO2 emissions? Innovative! Come up with a better, cheaper fuel and motor. Best way to do this. Get richer than Gates et al at the same time. It is just that simple.

Dave Yaussy
July 15, 2021 10:44 am

Dave, I agree that smaller companies will buy some of those assets that could be divested by the majors, like Exxon or Shell. But isn’t it more likely that state petroleum companies, like Aramco and the Russians, will buy it up? They have more capital, and it would pay them just to take it out of competition with their own production.

bigoilbob
Reply to  Dave Yaussy
July 15, 2021 11:59 am

GOM and shale production does not seriously “compete” with OPEC+ production. The latter has MUCH lower CAPEX and OPEX/boe costs, and will continue to for many years. This is why the GOM E&P that employs Mr. Middleton is death spiraling and why he and they is/are pimping CCS, paid for with deficit increases, to bail him/them out.

bigoilbob
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 12:18 pm

And with 3 separate WUWT posts in one work day, maybe I should belay any mentions of who “employs” Mr. Middleton. LOTS of spare time, apparently, and an “employer”, who is not only in a sunset business, but who has run out of both hedge funders and business sense. Maybe he’s “consulting” now….

Sunsettommy
Editor
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 3:33 pm

All posts are free of charge and no author is paid, it is all voluntary, just as the Moderator are also unpaid volunteers.

Maybe you should reconsider making idiotic assertions?

bigoilbob
Reply to  Sunsettommy
July 15, 2021 3:43 pm

All posts are free of charge and no author is paid, it is all voluntary, just as the Moderator are also unpaid volunteers.”

Please show me where I ever said differently. Or maybe more reading comp. You might be thinking that I was accusing a poster of being paid by WUWT to post, as opposed to an “unpaid volunteer” who posts to increase his chances of being a Smithers style industry survivor.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 4:59 pm

Bitter much?

paul courtney
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 12:42 pm

Mr. bob: The “self” reply is not a trait of an organized mind. Considering that you are simply regurgitating the same bile you’ve posted before, a particularly bad sign. Can’t you just pull all your little “DM” 3″x5″ cards and put them in one post?
BTW, do you suppose OPEC prices its oil based on costs alone?

bigoilbob
Reply to  paul courtney
July 15, 2021 1:11 pm

“The “self” reply is not a trait of an organized mind.”

Must be plenty here. WUWT is replete with folks who add on to their posts, after the short edit period times out.

“BTW, do you suppose OPEC prices its oil based on costs alone?”

Not JUST “alone”, only mostly. OPEC+ needs only to price below the sustainable breakeven prices of their competitors. They are doing this quite well, even if they WISH they could sell for more. They can – and are – run(ning) their businesses profitably, AND are keep(ing) the North American oil biz on life support.

davidmhoffer
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 5:18 pm

OPEC+ needs only to price below the sustainable breakeven prices of their competitors. 

Oh my. So much to get wrong in so few words.

Which scenario is best for an oil producer?
a) all of the volume at very low prices (no profit)
b) none of the volume at very high prices (no profit)
c) 1/2 the volume at medium prices (lotsa profit)

OPEC+ endeavors to maximize their profits by the best combination of volume and price, just like any other business. That floats around based on a myriad of factors, and the sustaining costs of the competition or only a part of the story. Shipping cost sky rocket when volumes get high as a single example among many. But OPEC+ has giant geo political issues also. Drive prices down too much, and OPEC upsets Russia. Drive them too high, China gets upset. Neither country is to be trifled with. Plus many countries in OPEC would like to lock in long term supply contracts to box in Iran should the US conclude a new agreement that lets them return to the world market. I could go on.

Casting this as “mostly” about the break even costs of their competitors is just silly.

bigoilbob
Reply to  davidmhoffer
July 15, 2021 7:03 pm

A true dogs breakfast of PC BS. OPEC is a collection of self interested entities. They are not immune from Econ 101. Whether they act together or not, they will keep prices low enough to crowd out most of CONUS production. Since they are almost all of them lower cost producers than us, it’s easy. Yes, they politic internally, but ALL of their actions work in practice to keep North American oil production on life support.

davidmhoffer
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 7:12 pm

And yet, the US is the number 1 oil producer in the world.

You’re correct about them not being immune from Econ 101 though. Funny you should state that since it falsifies your entire thesis. I gather you’ve never taken Econ 101 and know no more about it than what PC BS is.

bigoilbob
Reply to  davidmhoffer
July 15, 2021 7:24 pm

 Funny you should state that since it falsifies your entire thesis.”

The all too common claim with no back up. Lower cost producers displacing higher cost producers is precisely Econ 101.

davidmhoffer
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 9:25 pm

So your claims are that the US is a high cost producer AND that high cost producers are displaced by low cost producers. Reality defies your claim. The largest producer of oil in the world is the United States.

Econ 101 allows for low cost producers to gain market share at the expense of high cost producers, but it also allows for the maximization of profits. These drivers sometimes support each other and sometimes oppose each other. There is no zero sum game in economics.

bigoilbob
Reply to  davidmhoffer
July 15, 2021 9:36 pm

The largest producer of oil in the world is the United States.”

For one country. For a limited time period. Competing with OPEC, not to mention OPEC+, we lose. Big time. ~35.5 MBOPD. I.e., about 3 * what we put out.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/265205/oil-production-in-opec-countries-in-barrels-per-day/

There is no zero sum game in economics.”

Agree. Oil wise, OPEC+ wins, we lose. For at least another decade…

davidmhoffer
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 10:02 pm

Ah, so you’ve now demonstrated that you also don’t know what a zero sum game is. Shocker.

meab
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 12:54 pm

Bigoilyboob,

There’s a reason WTI is lower in price than Brent despite WTI being sweeter and inherently more valuable. It’s because the production of oil in the midwest is high, a supply that is reliable and available. That includes shale oil production. Why are you lying about the “death spiral”?

bigoilbob
Reply to  meab
July 15, 2021 1:22 pm

It’s because the production of oil in the midwest is high, a supply that is reliable and available.”

True, and at CAPEX and OPEX/boe costs WAY lower than ours.

“That includes shale oil production.”

Not true. Read about their “capital discipline”. This “capital discipline” is the same phenom as pent up demand for food in Bangladesh and Yemen. I.e. it naturally accrues from not having any capital and not being able to get any. Why?

  • Frac hits
  • Competitive drainage.
  • The final bleed out of the oilfield service industry that they have been sucking dry for nearly a decade.
  • Increasing recognition of the Trumpian YUGE asset retirement costs they are accruing, coupled with the fear that Biden might actually make them pay for them.

NONE of these are problems for the Emirs. Princes, Putin kleptocrats or the rest of the zoo that comprises OPEC+…

Why are you lying about the “death spiral”?”

Reading comp. That reference, was to ONE company, In fact, the CONUS oil biz will have a final, short resurgence in the next decade or 2.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 15, 2021 3:00 pm

Boilybob, You are clearly someone who understands neither petroleum nor economics/finance. Research, maybe even get a degree, then come back to “impress” us. (And if you try to tell me you already have degree(s), I will laugh my a** off, clearly money wasted and/or you got it(them) from a “Woke™” university.)

bigoilbob
Reply to  Red94ViperRT10
July 15, 2021 3:44 pm

And yet you have no technical rebut to anything I’ve written so far.

bigoilbob
Reply to  David Middleton
July 15, 2021 7:11 pm

There’s no way to technically rebut vapid, nonsensical blather from a pathological liar.”

Even given your desperately faux, fact free name calling, sure there is.

  • You could show us the combined market caps of a collection of US shale producers 5 years ago, v now.
  • You could show us how successful your employer? has been for the last few years.
  • You could show us how successful the US oilfield service business has been in the 2010-2021 era.
  • You could show how CCS projects will be paid for by any other means than borrow/spend.
    Now you….

    https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/TALO?p=TALO

    Mods: I do not discuss who I work for in WUWT posts, because I am not representing my employer in my WUWT posts. This person, Bob Davis, stalked my LinkedIn page a couple of months ago, until I blocked his access.

bigoilbob
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 19, 2021 8:52 am

Mods: I do not discuss who I work for in WUWT posts, because I am not representing my employer in my WUWT posts. This person, Bob Davis, stalked my LinkedIn page a couple of months ago, until I blocked his access.”

No “stalking” required. I was curious what your deal was and my guess was confirmed after a few mouse clicks. You are obviously shilling for your current/past employer. The blatant hypocrisy between your AGW denialism and your eagerness to take $ from the rest of us for self serving CCS projects tells it all.

bigoilbob
Reply to  David Middleton
July 19, 2021 9:28 am

No, I’m not. Which is why you don’t point to any specific “lie”.

Interesting how you tout your WUWT posts in linkedin – effectively making that activity part of your PDR, but hide identifying your current/past “employer” in your WUWT posts..

paul courtney
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 19, 2021 1:10 pm

Mr. bob: So you go to linkdin every day?! Are you lookin’ for a job in the energy field? They may want somebody who has a clue.

John Garrett
Reply to  Dave Yaussy
July 15, 2021 6:24 pm

That’s exactly what CNOOC was set up to do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_National_Offshore_Oil_Corporation

bigoilbob
Reply to  John Garrett
July 15, 2021 7:29 pm

Except they didn’t, at least in the GOM. They are pretty much dead in the water there. All of my fellow ex Nexen’ers who went to work in Houston with CNOOC are “consulting” now. I.e., kicking rocks…..

bigoilbob
Reply to  David Middleton
July 19, 2021 9:23 am

Smart of you to avoid discussing profitability. Channels the old Grand Ol’ Opry joke about the farmer who raised melons for $1 each and sold them in town for 90 cents. When he got low on cash, he borrowed to buy a bigger truck…..

FYI, CNOOC is circling the drain in the GOM, even as a non operator.

Editor
July 15, 2021 10:51 am

Thanks once again, David, for another informative and very entertaining post.

Regads,
Bob

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Bob Tisdale
July 15, 2021 5:01 pm

He sure stirs up the peanut gallery!

MarkW
Reply to  Carlo, Monte
July 16, 2021 7:12 am

It’s only a handful of very vocal nuts. Hardly an entire gallery.

Paul Johnson
July 15, 2021 11:26 am

in order to retain its license to operate in the United States.”
Any administration that seeks to deny the American people cheap and abundant energy will find itself on the losing end of the next election.

Kevin kilty
Reply to  Paul Johnson
July 15, 2021 11:41 am

Depending on the cognitive abilities of the average American voter, of course.

JamesD
Reply to  Kevin kilty
July 15, 2021 12:02 pm

No. Depends on who is counting the votes.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  JamesD
July 15, 2021 3:01 pm

…and/or what Big Tech “allows” to make it through censorship.

road dog
Reply to  JamesD
July 16, 2021 2:49 am

Boy howdy on the vote counting.
As regards abundant energy, surely the electorate will pay some attention when the price of electricity has tripled, and the supply is constantly fraught with blackouts?

Last edited 14 days ago by road dog
Doonman
Reply to  Kevin kilty
July 15, 2021 8:43 pm

It doesn’t take much cognition to realize $2.00 a gallon is a better deal than $5.00 a gallon.

MarkW
Reply to  Doonman
July 16, 2021 7:13 am

That depends on whether you are buying or selling.

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Paul Johnson
July 15, 2021 4:25 pm

Don’t know about that: Biden has touted the Greenie New Deal and has managed to fool enough folks…

PCman999
Reply to  Paul Johnson
July 16, 2021 10:42 am

That’s practically all Biden campaigned on, but people in general, or at least a slight majority of them, couldn’t understand that Green/energy transition/wind turbines/solar panels/”good green jobs” are all spin that really means poverty for everyone in the country.

Thomas Gasloli
July 15, 2021 11:29 am

As I have posted before, CO2 sequestration by oil & gas companies is a scam to get a government subsidy for what they are already doing profitably.

Natural gas industry already strips the CO2 out of the natural gas and sends it back to the field to kept the pressure up.

Industry spends a lot more money lobbying than on development. They are more than willing to repackage what they are already doing to get a green new deal subsidy.

Abolition Man
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
July 15, 2021 11:56 am

When morons in government make stupid policies and regulations, smart people in private industry try to find ways to profit from them! That’s human nature! Look at the housing bubble and the mortgage crisis! Those were largely caused by specific govt actions with long term effects most nitwits could have foreseen!
Expecting something different is like expecting a bunch of college students to ignore a party that advertises “Free Beer!” Not gonna happen!

bigoilbob
Reply to  Abolition Man
July 15, 2021 7:20 pm

When morons in government make stupid policies and regulations, smart people in private industry try to find ways to profit from them!”

True, but CCS is a bipartisan corporate welfare scheme, so it my very well stay afloat for awhile. Mr. Middleton is pimping for his (current/former) death spiraling E&P employer who thinks they can stop loss with CCS. He thinks they will then bone throw him at least some consulting work. This is why he would rather **** a **** than tell us how the gubmint will actually pay for it.

MarkW
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 16, 2021 7:15 am

The death of the oil companies, much like peak oil, successful socialism, fusion power and the climate apocalypse is always a couple of decades away.

Last edited 14 days ago by MarkW
bigoilbob
Reply to  MarkW
July 16, 2021 7:27 am

The dying process in the CONUS has been underway thru most of the teens. All you need to do is to watch the decreasing market caps for both producers and servicers. Both for shalers and the rest. Throughout North America.

AGAIN, they won’t completely vanish, except to buy and sell each other in order to make it harder for the laws to make them responsible for their asset retirement obligations. And there will be a relatively brief resurgence in the ’30’s, as OPEC+ produces off it’s lower cost PDP and PUD’s. But they will fade away, a la coal. And like coal, they will leave us holding the bag for the clean up. In this case 12-13 figures worth…

paul courtney
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
July 15, 2021 12:45 pm

Mr. Gasloli: Did you notice how very willing the gov’t is to be scammed?

MarkW
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
July 15, 2021 1:40 pm

If the government is going to pay me for something I was already planning on doing, I’d be an idiot not to take the money.
The idiots are the green scammers who think that sequestering CO2 is such a good idea they think government should subsidize it.

bigoilbob
Reply to  MarkW
July 15, 2021 7:21 pm

f the government is going to pay me for something I was already planning on doing, I’d be an idiot not to take the money.”

Wrong order w.r.t. Mr. Middleton’s repeated CCS pimps for his current/former employer..

MarkW
Reply to  bigoilbob
July 16, 2021 7:16 am

Like most liberals, bugoilboob assumes that the only reason why someone would disagree with his nonsense is because they are being paid to.

Bruce Cobb
July 15, 2021 11:58 am

Oil is the new tobacco.

The Anti-Carbon Climate Liars just love that analogy, as false and idiotic as it is. It is merely an irrational Appeal to Emotion, useful for the brainwashed and brainless Believers.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
July 15, 2021 8:57 pm

Appeals to emotion are generally directed towards the 50+% of the population who are known for such appeals.

JamesD
July 15, 2021 12:00 pm

Yep, when Big Oil is forced to divest, smaller companies are going to take over. Should actually increase production.

Meanwhile Big Oil will need government subsidies for their bird killing wind farms in order to keep paying a dividend.

Big oil is totally converged. Just big social justice group therapy institutions. I’m all for them exiting the oil industry.

John Pickens
July 15, 2021 12:03 pm

Why should anyone invest in “renewables” if they intend to reduce CO2 emissions?
Manufacturing wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, power interconnections, and their backup systems produce more CO2 than doing nothing.

Prove me wrong, show me a “renewable” manufacturer using solely the output of wind and solar systems to manufacture their product.

Its like unicorns, they don’t exist.

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  John Pickens
July 15, 2021 12:32 pm

And the (excuse me) REAL power plants (read: fossil fuels and nuclear) will have to be kept in place, running to some degree or method inefficiently on “standby,” to back up the virtue-signalling bird, bat and bug killers anyway.

What’s truly amazing is that, the supporters of this “renewable energy” garbage have not, for one moment, even considered any of the potential environmental impacts of extracting energy on an industrial scale from the wind and the Sun. They ignore the killing of mass numbers of birds and bats, ignoring the upset of “nature’s balance” that occurs with those deaths; they ignore the killing of endangered species including magnificent raptors that goes along as part of those bird and bat deaths; they ignore the amount of insects killed, and how that might upset “nature’s balance;” and ironically, they haven’t given a moment’s thought on how the extraction of energy from the wind and the Sun may impact the weatherwhich for all we know could be far worse that what they speculate will result from “global warming” or “climate change” or whatever they call it next week.

Maybe those hurricanes that move really slowly aren’t moving along as quickly as the people sitting under their rain clouds would like because there’s less wind energy to keep the fronts moving due to the energy extracted by wind farms! They wouldn’t consider for a moment any such “bad” effects of worse-than-useless wind farms and solar farms when that’s what they want to shove down everyone’s throat as a non-solution to their imaginary “crisis.”

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
July 15, 2021 3:10 pm

I have done some resiliency/sustainability studies recently. Solar and/or wind are not counted as either resilient nor sustainable because they are not dispatchable, they work only when the sun shines and/or the wind blows. Consequently, you cannot count them as “replacing” anything. Item “B” replaces Item “A” if and only if, upon completion of Item “B” construction, Item “A” can be completely shut down and demolished without affecting the final output. You cannot remove a single kW of other resources when you complete a wind or solar installation.

Bruce Ranta
Reply to  AGW is Not Science
July 15, 2021 5:21 pm

Harvesting energy has an impact. Harvesting energy from the wind will have an impact. Ecologists know this, but few care. Ignorance is bliss.

Red94ViperRT10
Reply to  John Pickens
July 15, 2021 3:06 pm

Yep, I dumbfounded a liberal with that one once, in person. We were working in the field, inventorying equipment, and somehow he managed to say something about it “…getting replaced by solar PV…” I replied, “If wind and solar was a good idea and worked, they would use wind and solar to build wind and solar systems.” The look on his face was priceless!

old engineer
July 15, 2021 12:15 pm

David –

Oil and gas is not my area of expertise, nor is investing for that matter. But I can’t help but wonder if all this ESG investing talk, is just so much talk. Are big oil companies not putting money into finding and producing oil? Are investors not buying stock in companies that are finding and producing oil?

Isn’t the MSM hype of ESG investing just that – hype without substance?

ResourceGuy
July 15, 2021 12:16 pm

Maybe they can diversify to the rare earth open pits of Inner Mongolia and the labor camps of western China.

China’s rare earth hub Baotou introduces massive subsidies (msn.com)

Or China’s growing oil refinery capacity to the world’s largest
Oil Refiners in China Log Another Record in Challenge to U.S. (yahoo.com)

WXcycles
July 15, 2021 2:03 pm

The green vandals are just trying to choke the economy out to sew political discontent and instability. How else can authoritarian communism with Chinese characteristic flourish all over the world?

Red94ViperRT10
July 15, 2021 2:54 pm

3) Getting to net-zero on emissions.

And again I say unto you, “Why?!?!?!” While I will concede that CO2 is I greenhouse gas, empirical data conclusive shows it is not a “climate control knob”, so why eliminate CO2 emissions? Plants need CO2, we eat many plants, and the meat we eat likewise eats plants, the more CO2 the better.

So, once again, WHY?!?!?!

BrianB
July 15, 2021 3:15 pm

Cripes, I’ve been counting on the fossil fuel guys to keep us from diving into another LIA, or worse. Now even they want to start sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere?
That moon wobble next decade’s going to be a bear if the tides are tossing icebergs up onto Wall Street and the ESG cretins.
Of course it would be a creditable trade off if polar bears ate Larry Fink and a few other busybody billionaire brats.

Reply to  BrianB
July 15, 2021 5:17 pm

The eternal war by Marxists goes on….the climate change battle goes on…Exxon was sort of out maneuvered by an ESG group getting board members….some financial ETF or ETN or whatever was allowed to vote as if it was a single shareholder when in fact many people hold the shares….you mention Fink the fink….it’s the kind of thing he would do.

Last edited 14 days ago by Anti_griff
2hotel9
July 15, 2021 5:57 pm

One word, Black Market. Tell the government to go f*ck itself, then make it go f*ck itself. Ain’t going to be pretty, oh well, it is what America is all about.

Vincent Causey
July 16, 2021 12:13 am

I don’t get why it is only the oil industry that must get to net zero. What about financial industry? Media? Don’t their emissions count?

road dog
July 16, 2021 2:36 am

Activist investors and board members at the oil majors are constraining necessary investment. Much will be their surprise when the price of oil reaches a price so high that no one will be able to resist jumping back in, strenuously. “Lord just give me one more boom. I promise not to pi** it away.”

Hawaii guy
July 16, 2021 7:12 am

Only green energy I’d invest in is if they invented a device that that ran on democrats.

Jeffery P
July 16, 2021 7:16 am

Once again showing liberals don’t understand the common meaning of words. Supply and demand are in opposition, they cannot be interchanged.

What he probably intended to say “Constraining oil supply is key to cutting consumption.”

July 16, 2021 5:19 pm

‘Most oil & gas companies could get to net-zero Scope 1 & 2 emissions by injecting a modest volume of CO2 into depleted reservoirs and/or saline aquifers or through enhanced oil recovery operations.”

I’m probably one of the few readers here who has actually worked for a CO2 pipeline company.

CO2 in the atmosphere, and as emitted from cars and powerplants, is at one atmosphere. Does anyone know what the cost and energy requirements of compression to reservoir pressure are? This is insane. Further, most CO2 is mixed with water vapor or water. Duh! This is a corrosive mix. Warming, warning! This requires very expensive stainless steel tubulars.

Who is going to pay for this? You can’t fix stupid!

Gunga Din
July 16, 2021 5:51 pm

Let’s just constrain oxygen.
Fossil fuels can’t burn and produce the dreaded and magical CO2 molecule without oxygen!

We start by cutting down all the trees and making them into wood pellets to burn for energy. Trees produce lots of oxygen. We cut them all down and burn them (using up lots of oxygen) and then the dreaded “fossil fuels” won’t have enough oxygen to ignite and produce the dreaded and magical CO2 molecule!
A Win-Win! (In California Dreamin’ Land)

(I lost my sarc tag again. Anyone have a spare?)

James F. Evans
July 18, 2021 1:01 pm

Let the oil flow!

%d bloggers like this: