3 ms·

I hear you, and in terms of the merits of this particular study I'm sure your skepticism is well-grounded; I share it. But, it's also worth considering the pers

I hear you, and in terms of the merits of this particular study I'm sure your skepticism is well-grounded; I share it. But, it's also worth considering the perspective of the "Big Oil" executives. Thought experiment: imagine you're such an exec, and you recognize that the future of your company (in fact, your whole industry), depends on evolving beyond oil, to become an _energy_ company, embracing (and innovating in, and profiting from) renewable sources. What do you do? How do you start? I am NOT repeat NOT an apologist for the selfish idiot criminals (insert unprintables here) who effectively destroy the planet for personal gain. And yes the fossil fuel industry as a whole has a horrible and well-deserved reputation. But some of these entities are going to adapt and change, and for better or worse they're going to play a role in how our species relates to the planet. So I think it's really important to remain skeptical, but without ruling out, out of hand, the possibility that ties to the energy industry are not an automatic disqualifier for real science and progress.

Retric 8y ago
It's a question of scale, the oil industry is vast. Exxon has ~1/4 of a trillion dollars per year in revenue while profits swing they tend to be very good over time. Renewables on the other hand are fractured. Do they go for Wind, Solar, Batteries, Bio fuels, or what? It's not that hard to keep Exxon alive through this transition, but you also need to keep it huge and profitable which is very tricky. IMO, they might be better off going into chemistry or engineering because being an energy company sounds fine there is little connection between renewables and oil. But again how do you keep that kind of scale?
- linkregister 8y ago
  This is indeed part of Exxon's publicly-stated strategy; they recognize that the demand for oil will peak once renewables, distribution, and storage technology are cheaper than the cost of extraction. There are already several solar power plants that were built because the unit economics made sense in those rare, outlier situations. This will become more widespread.

Retric 8y ago

It's a question of scale, the oil industry is vast. Exxon has ~1/4 of a trillion dollars per year in revenue while profits swing they tend to be very good over time. Renewables on the other hand are fractured. Do they go for Wind, Solar, Batteries, Bio fuels, or what? It's not that hard to keep Exxon alive through this transition, but you also need to keep it huge and profitable which is very tricky. IMO, they might be better off going into chemistry or engineering because being an energy company sounds fine there is little connection between renewables and oil. But again how do you keep that kind of scale?

linkregister 8y ago
This is indeed part of Exxon's publicly-stated strategy; they recognize that the demand for oil will peak once renewables, distribution, and storage technology are cheaper than the cost of extraction. There are already several solar power plants that were built because the unit economics made sense in those rare, outlier situations. This will become more widespread.