myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Exxon in California
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
J64TWB



Joined: 24 Dec 2013
Posts: 1564

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 5:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Out with the old, in with the new.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/exxon-board-members-lose-seats-climate-fight-77920805
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2021 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is buggy whip off the board?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oil companies are literally killing it.

Quote:
A new study published in Nature Climate Change found that climate change has boosted global heat-related deaths during warm seasons by an average of 37 percent. The report found that, despite multiple factors that play a role in mortality, wealthier regions such as North America and East Asia were more likely to have a smaller proportion of climate-related deaths than their less-wealthy counterparts, with some Central and South American nations experiencing a nearly 70 percent proportion of heat-related deaths linked to global warming. (The New York Times)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Jun 03, 2021 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Buggy whips belong in museums--and the trash heap of history.

Quote:
By THOMAS FRIEDMAN |
PUBLISHED: June 3, 2021 at 4:45 a.m. | UPDATED: June 3, 2021 at 4:45 a.m.
Since the 1990s, the wisest oil-producing countries and companies have regularly reminded themselves of the oil patch adage that the Stone Age did not end because we ran out of stones; it ended because we invented bronze tools. When we did, stone tools became worthless — even though there were still plenty on the ground.

And so it will be with oil: The petroleum age will end because we invent superior technology that coexists harmoniously with nature. When we do, there will be plenty of oil left in the ground.

So be careful, wise producers tell themselves, don’t bet the vitality of your company, community or country on the assumption that oil will be like Maxwell House Coffee — “Good to the last drop” — and pumped from every last well. Remember Kodak? It underestimated the speed at which digital photography would make film obsolete. It didn’t go well for Kodak or Kodachrome.

Alas, though, not every oil company got the memo.

One that most glaringly did not is the one that in 2013 was the biggest public company in the world! It’s ExxonMobil. Today, it is no longer the biggest. As a result of its head-in-the-oil-sands-drill-baby-drill-we-are-still-not-at-peak-oil business model, Exxon lost more than $20 billion last year, suffered a credit rating downgrade, might have to borrow billions just to pay its dividend, has seen its share price over the last decade produce a minus-30% return and was booted from the Dow Jones industrial average.

But last week — finally — Exxon got the memo, in the form of a shareholder revolt in what was one of the most consequential weeks in the history of the oil and gas industry and shareholder capitalism.

I’ve long argued that if environmentalists want to have an impact on the climate they can’t be “nice greens.” They have to be “mean greens.” They have to be as mean and tough, as diligent and vigilant, as the industry they’re trying to change.

Well, last week a little hedge fund called Engine No. 1 delivered an unprecedented master class in mean green using the tools of democratic capitalism. A plucky, purpose-driven investment fund, Engine No. 1 set out to force Exxon to improve its financial returns by getting much more serious about gradually transitioning — through innovation and acquisitions — into being an energy company, not just an oil and gas company.

At Exxon’s annual meeting, Engine No. 1 offered up a slate for four new members of Exxon’s 12-member board. The four represent deep energy expertise and climate solutions. The slate committed to push the oil giant to a net-zero emissions strategy by 2050, more investments in clean energy systems and more transparency about Exxon’s energy transition, with metrics and milestones, as well as disclosure of its lobbying payments and partners, suspected of undermining the science around climate change.


And darn if half the slate — Gregory Goff and Kaisa Hietala — wasn’t immediately elected by wide margins, and at least one other member might be as well when ExxonMobil finishes counting the votes from its very, very bad day.

Engine No. 1 was successful because it got three of the four biggest pension funds in America — fed up with Exxon’s relentless value destruction — to vote for its nominees. We’re talking about the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the California State Teachers’ Retirement System and the New York state Common Retirement Fund. Also, three of the world’s biggest fund managers, Vanguard, State Street and Black Rock, which together own more than one-fifth of all Exxon stock, each voted for part of the dissident slate.

In a world where Ford just unveiled an all-electric version of its F-150 full-size pickup truck, one of its top-selling vehicles, and says that it envisages electric cars and trucks making up 40% of its production by the end of the decade, they think Exxon has got to stop betting that the good ole days of oil and gas profits will return — and start becoming a more diversified energy company. That means not only investing more in future carbon capture, batteries and other renewables, but also using its engineering prowess to invent that future — while it still has an income stream from oil and gas.

Everyone knows it won’t be easy. Making the kind of profits that Exxon once piled up from oil and gas will be very, very hard as a more diversified energy company. But it beats becoming a corporate fossil by betting the house on increasingly unprofitable, increasingly obsolete, increasingly unhealthy fossil fuels.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Greenpeace U.K.'s investigative platform pretended to be a headhunter to interview the senior Exxon Mobil Corp. lobbyist Keith McCoy, who said on tape that the company has joined third-party "shadow groups" to fight against legislative action on climate change and that McCoy specifically has lobbied key senators such as Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to remove or limit climate change measures in President Joe Biden's infrastructure package. (Channel 4 News) In response, Exxon Chief Executive Darren Woods apologized and said McCoy's comments do not reflect the company's views on climate change. (The Wall Street Journal)


Yeah, we believe that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 8607
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Thu Jul 01, 2021 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
Quote:
Greenpeace U.K.'s investigative platform pretended to be a headhunter to interview the senior Exxon Mobil Corp. lobbyist Keith McCoy, who said on tape that the company has joined third-party "shadow groups" to fight against legislative action on climate change and that McCoy specifically has lobbied key senators such as Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) to remove or limit climate change measures in President Joe Biden's infrastructure package. (Channel 4 News) In response, Exxon Chief Executive Darren Woods apologized and said McCoy's comments do not reflect the company's views on climate change. (The Wall Street Journal)


Yeah, we believe that.


Exxon has been going backwards, getting owned by Mike Worth at Chevron. As Exxon moves to invest in money losing projects, Chevron moves forward. Now, a little known activist HF named Engine 1 has forced three clean energy fans onto the board....so its no wonder the company is holding onto the past.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2021 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What happens when you lose your moral compass. From the Guardian. Buggy whip guys took over.

Quote:
Experts’ discoveries lie at the heart of two dozen lawsuits that hope to hold the industry accountable for devastating damage

Are you a fossil fuel industry insider? We want to hear from you
Supported by
guardian.org
About this content
Emma Pattee
Fri 2 Jul 2021 06.00 EDT

As early as 1958, the oil industry was hiring scientists and engineers to research the role that burning fossil fuels plays in global warming. The goal at the time was to help the major oil conglomerates understand how changes in the Earth’s atmosphere may affect the industry – and their bottom line. But what top executives gained was an early preview of the climate crisis, decades before the issue reached public consciousness.


What those scientists discovered – and what the oil companies did with that information – is at the heart of two dozen lawsuits attempting to hold the fossil fuel industry responsible for their role in climate change. Many of those cases hinge on the industry’s own internal documents that show how, 40 years ago, researchers predicted the rising global temperatures with stunning accuracy. But looking back, many of those same scientists say they were hardly whistleblowers out to take down big oil.

Some researchers later testified before Congress, using their insider knowledge to highlight the ways in which the oil industry misled the public. Others say they have few qualms with how the petroleum giants handled their research.

Few, however, could have predicted the imprint their work would have on history in efforts to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable for our climate emergency. The Guardian tracked down three of those scientists to see how they view their role today.

Dr Martin Hoffert, 83, physicist and Exxon consultant from 1981 to 1987
Marty Hoffert
Marty Hoffert. Photograph: Zack Wittman/The Guardian
When I started consulting for Exxon, I had already begun to understand that the Earth’s climate would be affected by carbon dioxide. There were only a small number of people in the world who were actively working on this problem because the global warming signal had not yet manifested itself in the data. So I was invited to join a research group at Exxon and one of my conditions to join was that we would publish our scientific research in peer-reviewed journals. It was a bunch of geeks trying to figure out how the planetary atmosphere works.

We were doing very good work at Exxon. We had eight scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals, including a prediction of how much global warming from carbon dioxide buildup would be 40 years later. We made a prediction in 1980 of what the atmospheric warming would be from fossil fuel burning in 2020. We predicted that it would be about one degree celsius. And it is about one degree celsius.

It never actually occurred to me that this was going to become a political problem. I thought: “We’ll do the analyses, we’ll write reports, the politicians of the world will see the reports and they’ll make the appropriate changes and transform our energy system somehow.” I’m a research scientist. In my field, if you discover something and it turns out to be valid, you’re a hero. I didn’t realize how hard it would be to convince people, even when they saw objective evidence of this happening.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 16382
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Mon Jul 26, 2021 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The sign of the double cross. A buggy whip kind of guy.

Quote:
Indiscreet comments made by an Exxon Mobil lobbyist to undercover activists may figure prominently in upcoming congressional hearings about the role of oil companies in the battle against climate change.

Video clips released by the Greenpeace investigation project Unearthed show Keith McCoy, the oil giant's senior director for federal relations, talking frankly about Exxon Mobil's lobbying strategies. Channel 4 from the United Kingdom first reported the comments.

McCoy was tricked by the activists who said they were job recruiters. He talked about working with "shadow groups," supporting a carbon tax that he believes will never happen and influencing senators to weaken climate elements of President Biden's infrastructure plan.

"Joe Manchin, I talk to his office every week," McCoy bragged to the interviewer. He called the Democratic senator from West Virginia a "kingmaker" and discussed how "on the Democrat side we look for the moderates on these issues" in their efforts to stop policies that could hurt the company's business.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Page 8 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group