Is ExxonMobil Really the "Green Company of the Year"?

We Really, Really Hope So

It was hard, at first, to know whether the Forbes headline was tongue-in-cheek: ExxonMobil: Green Company of the Year.

But the story seemed sincere. Exxon is finally beginning to invest in renewable alternatives, putting $600 million into algae farms that would turn sunlight into automotive fuel. And the company is putting more effort than ever into developing and distributing natural gas.

Gas (methane) is unquestionably "greener" than Exxon's conventional oil products. As Forbes says:

"Per unit of energy delivered, methane releases 40% to 50% less carbon dioxide than coal and a quarter less than petroleum. Coal fuels half of U.S. power generation. Replacing all of it with methane would cut CO₂ emissions by 1 billion tons a year."

Of course, Exxon isn't actually "replacing" anything. It's adding significantly to the global capacity to generate more greenhouse gases, even if some of the increase will come at a slower marginal pace.

Even the $600-million algae investment begins to pale when you put it into context. Exxon's five-year capital expenditure plan runs to $125 billion, almost all of it on conventional oil and gas infrastructure. The algae farm amounts to a commitment of less than half of one per cent.

Forbes is right that Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson has nudged his company away from the course of unrestrained climate destruction that was championed by his predecessor, Lee Raymond. And as the most profitable company in the history of companies, Exxon is in a position to do a huge amount of good (or to continue doing a huge, huge amount of damage).

"Green company of the year"? Not quite. Not yet.

But we'll keep hoping.

 

Follow James Hoggan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/james_hoggan

Comments

[twofish]

There are just three words you need to remember when you see these Exxon/Mobil ads telling you how wonderful and green and science-oriented they are (especially on public television):

Prince William Sound

The right-packed Supreme Court cut their fine to a piddling amount. People in the area are still suffering loss of living in fishing and tourism and degredation of the environment. Here's a little song you can sing whenever you hear what a wonderful company ExxonMobil is:

(To the tune of "A-hunting we will go")
Clean up Prince William Sound
Clean up Prince William Sound
Just open your books
So we'll know you're not crooks
Clean up Prince WIlliam Sound.

[Felix Desroches]

Let's look at this logically: rewarding any company for greenER behavior is surely a good thing. Sure, money is one incentive, but so too is peer pressure - and awards are basically designed to reflect public opinion, creating exactly this type of (hopefully positive) pressure.

So is Exxon destined to be a truly "green" company? No way, not yet anyway. But is it a mistake to reward a step in the right direction? Like tug boats pushing a tanker into port, this will take a while - so let's keep tugging!

[dukeitout]

If "Green" means money, they are the greenest according to their accountants.

[drymartini1]

and thats the only green that matters !!

[alvdh1]

It is a very simple world that you live in Drymartini when the only thing that matters is making money at any cost and killing brain cells via your dry martini's- which may account for your simplistic view of the world.

[NC4Obama]

With Cap and Trade you can make it more profitable to go green, thats when you will really start to see energy companies take green energy seriously.

[Scarborian]

Exxon has a legal obligation to do what it can to to make money for it's shareholders, it is not legally obliged to pioneer green technology. When going green coincides with making money then Exxon can be expected to invest.

Along with all the other giant corporations, they follow the money and the way to get all that industrial might working to our advantage is simply to make sure there is more profit in doing the right thing than in doing the wrong thing.

[AEFleming]

Adrienne here with ExxonMobil. Many people don't realize our efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions extend beyond our $600 million investment in algae. In fact, since 2004 we've invested more than $1.5 billion in activities that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy efficiency in our own operations. And we're seeing results - in 2008 we reduced greenhouse gas emissions from our operations more than 10 million tons, the equivalent of taking 2 million cars off the roads in the US.

We're also developing new technologies to help consumers improve their use of energy. Have a look: http://exxonmobil.com/citizenship

[fleaba]

Adrienne,
Anybody with a pond and zebra mussels can have an investment in algae, just ask the folks who live around Lake Erie.
Instead, why don't you guys clean up the e.. fing mess you made in Prince William Sound over 20 years ago? There is still oil on the beaches and fish stocks have never recovered.

Nice try, but until Exxon actually ponies up the millions of dollars of investments of fishing permits for Prince William Sound then their word means squank. That piddling amount awarded by the U.S. Supreme court will never absolve Exxon and the shareholders of that responsibility.

[SelenicMagick]

Possibly that is because people KNOW that you have 3 MILLION BARRELS ( that's 165,000,000 gallons or 660,000,000 quarts or 2,640,000,000 cups) of raw crude sitting in the Drift River Terminal at the base of Mount Redoubt in Alaska.

PERHAPS people would be a mite more likely to BELIEVE the spiel with regards to "good citizenship" if not for the UNDENIABLE FACT that Exxon *deliberately* refused to answer ANY questions with regards to emergency plans for the Drift River Terminal until AFTER a volcano started erupting. Exxon cited "Homeland Security" as the REASON that you were refusing to answer any questions AND it took until several WEEKS after Mount Redoubt started erupting (what IS Exxon going do when you have to deal with pyroclastic flow instead of lahars? It is going to be one HUGE explosion... and that terminal is sitting on the edge of the plate rather than a mere fault line... ) for Exxon to remove even PART of the oil from the storage tanks.

You COULD HAVE pumped them full of water... That volcano goes and WATER is a LOT safer in those tanks with lava streaming down around them than OIL ever thought of being.

What do *I* know though... I'm JUST an environmental engineer working in the petroleum industry.

[sonofsamphm1c]

Chevron.

[Felix Desroches]

Good on ya @SelenicMagick, hang in there :)

[FoonTheElder]

They're a green company alright. They've got more green than any company on earth. No matter which 'green' project they start, it is nothing more than a scheme to dominate any viable alternative energy sources, like they do with oil.

[drymartini1]

As an Exxon shareholder, I want govt and greenies' filthy hands off the company. This company makes more money than those loser ass companies losing billions.

[fleaba]

The gov't and greenies will lay off Exxon when they layoff owning Congress and the U.S. Supreme court.

[FoonTheElder]

Most oligopolies do make big money. The one thing they are not is a business that is part of a free market. That is why they should have never been allowed to acquire all of their competitors in the first place. But then again, we haven't had any anti-trust enforcement in the last 30 years.

"The new oligopoly is made up of multinational corporations that have chosen specific product or service categories to dominate. In each category, over time, only two to four major players prosper. Starting a new company in that market segment is difficult, and the few that do succeed are often gobbled up or run out of business by the oligopolies."

http://www.oligopolywatch.com/stories/2003/04/17/definingTheNewOligopoly.html

[Rayso]

You don't seem to 'get it'. ExxonMobil is investing $600 million in a project that will allow it to produce and sell renewable methane. Let's hope it makes a ton of money so that Exxon can increase production capacity, do right by its shareholders and pay the government a fair share of taxes as it currently does.

Or don't you really care about green energy, green jobs and green corporate profits?

[SelenicMagick]

Sure I do... I ALSO care about the 3 MILLION barrels of raw crude that they have sitting at the base of Mount Redoubt in Alaska... A Volcano that COULD well erupt ANY time.... A Terminal that is CURRENTLY surrounded by HOT ASH FLOW from said volcano...

GEE... there's NOTHING like leaving raw crude sitting at the base of a volcano that is sitting on the edge of a continental plate WITH AN ACTIVE VOLCANO for a next door neighbor...