7 ms·

While our politicians are finger-pointing to save their skins, progress (and capitalism) doesn't stop, it matches on. I was reading that Shell UK is making a c

While our politicians are finger-pointing to save their skins, progress (and capitalism) doesn't stop, it matches on. I was reading that Shell UK is making a change to the greener, which scares me because big oil is NEVER green friendly unless they want something more sinister.

mhh__ 8y ago
Or more realistically, they're hedging their bets: Business's exist to make money not CO2, Green power is becoming increasingly profitable/in demand
NeedMoreTea 8y ago
They're still spending millions lobbying on the wrong side of the argument, so getting greener from a starting point trillions overdrawn. I tend to see any green tinged events as greenwashing. Still, hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised a few times.
reitzensteinm 8y ago
Oil companies aren't evil, they just care about nothing but the bottom line. Once that is served by moving to green energy, they'll simply shift over at whatever speed makes the most business sense. Unless it's a tiny PR stunt, R&D project or mandated by regulation, you should instead take it as a sign that for the first time green energy in a free market is competitive at scale in certain situations, even without accounting for externalities. That's fantastic news.
- haser_au 8y ago
  This.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  Oil companies do not care more about their bottom line than wind or solar does. The green lobby is just as strong if not stronger relative to its age. Solar and wind are neither clean nor cheap, but they do have a lot of policial backing. I know it's not a popular thing to say here it's none the less true.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
    When comparing wind or solar with oil or gas, in what sense is wind or solar not cleaner than oil or gas?
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      i am not comparing them as such i am saying that they arent as green as people think. To actually produce them is one thing, they require huge areas of land to produce, they are unreliable meaningb they still need oil and gas and coal for when they dont work, solar uses rare earth metals, they can only be used for one thing and they currently only produce around 1% of our needs. They are great as supporting sources of energy but they arent actually solutions to our fundamental energy needs. And they arent as cheap as claimed since production, installation and decommissioning normally isnt factored into the cost when you see comparisons. The greentech industry is every bit as bottomline focused as the oil industry and it is so with an inferior product mostly pushed through by political lobbying not on market terms.
- mistrial9 8y ago
  The young'ish CEO of .. Dutch Royal Shell (?) .. one of the majors .. was overtaken by an internal coup and kicked out, for embracing green energy openly.. in the early 2000s. It was quite well documented.
haser_au 8y ago
Shell has a legal obligation to make money for shareholders. Shareholders are divesting from fossil fuel companies because (a) they're too high risk, and (b) shareholders want a greener future. That's all it comes down to. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/28/shell-doubles-green-spending-vows-halve-carbon-footprint https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/28/shell-doubl...
salty_biscuits 8y ago
All the big oil companies did a lot of photovoltaic research in the 70's. I think it might have been exxon who were one of the earliest players. I don't think it was sinister then, just a diversification into "energy" companies, especially with the oil crises going on back then.

mhh__ 8y ago

Or more realistically, they're hedging their bets: Business's exist to make money not CO2, Green power is becoming increasingly profitable/in demand

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

They're still spending millions lobbying on the wrong side of the argument, so getting greener from a starting point trillions overdrawn. I tend to see any green tinged events as greenwashing. Still, hopefully I'll be pleasantly surprised a few times.

reitzensteinm 8y ago

Oil companies aren't evil, they just care about nothing but the bottom line. Once that is served by moving to green energy, they'll simply shift over at whatever speed makes the most business sense. Unless it's a tiny PR stunt, R&D project or mandated by regulation, you should instead take it as a sign that for the first time green energy in a free market is competitive at scale in certain situations, even without accounting for externalities. That's fantastic news.

haser_au 8y ago
This.
ThomPete 8y ago
Oil companies do not care more about their bottom line than wind or solar does. The green lobby is just as strong if not stronger relative to its age. Solar and wind are neither clean nor cheap, but they do have a lot of policial backing. I know it's not a popular thing to say here it's none the less true.
- TheSpiceIsLife 8y ago
  When comparing wind or solar with oil or gas, in what sense is wind or solar not cleaner than oil or gas?
  - ThomPete 8y ago
    i am not comparing them as such i am saying that they arent as green as people think. To actually produce them is one thing, they require huge areas of land to produce, they are unreliable meaningb they still need oil and gas and coal for when they dont work, solar uses rare earth metals, they can only be used for one thing and they currently only produce around 1% of our needs. They are great as supporting sources of energy but they arent actually solutions to our fundamental energy needs. And they arent as cheap as claimed since production, installation and decommissioning normally isnt factored into the cost when you see comparisons. The greentech industry is every bit as bottomline focused as the oil industry and it is so with an inferior product mostly pushed through by political lobbying not on market terms.
mistrial9 8y ago
The young'ish CEO of .. Dutch Royal Shell (?) .. one of the majors .. was overtaken by an internal coup and kicked out, for embracing green energy openly.. in the early 2000s. It was quite well documented.

haser_au 8y ago

Shell has a legal obligation to make money for shareholders. Shareholders are divesting from fossil fuel companies because (a) they're too high risk, and (b) shareholders want a greener future. That's all it comes down to. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/28/shell-doubles-green-spending-vows-halve-carbon-footprint https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/28/shell-doubl...

salty_biscuits 8y ago

All the big oil companies did a lot of photovoltaic research in the 70's. I think it might have been exxon who were one of the earliest players. I don't think it was sinister then, just a diversification into "energy" companies, especially with the oil crises going on back then.