ExxonMobil and the Oil and Gas Sector: Navigating the Challenges of COP28 Climate Deal

The proposed COP28 climate deal emphasizes the urgent need for transitioning away from fossil fuels. However, such proposals face significant scrutiny and opposition. This article explores the stance of ExxonMobil and other oil and gas companies in light of this new climate agenda, contrasting these views with the principles of democracy and the practicalities of fossil fuel use.

The Critique of COP28 and the Phasing Out of Fossil Fuels

The legitimacy of COP28 as a governing body remains questionable, with some arguing that it does not represent a true majority rule, a principle critical to democratic governance. Critics, like opponents of the phasing out of fossil fuels, argue that fossil fuels are not being phased out naturally; rather, this would occur because of their eventual depletion. Therefore, it is essential to consider the reality of current energy supplies and the capabilities of alternative energy sources.

The Finite Nature of Fossil Fuels and Their Resurgence

Fossil fuels are finite, and the argument that they were running out in the 1970s is not invalid. However, significant advancements in exploration and extraction methods, such as fracking, have extended the lifespan of these resources. In the United States, for instance, natural gas has replaced much of the coal, leading to a 40% reduction in CO2 emissions. Furthermore, despite growing environmental concerns, the use of fossil fuels has continued to rise, not decrease, challenging the efficacy of policies aimed at reducing their use.

Investment in Nuclear Energy: A Viable Alternative?

Instead of focusing on renewable energy sources, critics argue that investment should be directed towards nuclear energy, particularly thorium-based reactors. Thorium is a highly abundant and more sustainable fuel source than uranium, with a higher energy yield and less radioactive waste. Countries like Australia and India hold substantial thorium reserves, making nuclear a potentially attractive and practical solution. However, despite the potential benefits, the shift towards nuclear energy faces significant challenges, including public perception and infrastructure barriers.

The Declining Resign of Viable Alternatives

The focus on renewable energy sources, particularly windmills and lithium batteries, diverts attention from more immediate and practical solutions. Wind turbines, with a typical lifespan of only 20 years, require frequent replacement, leading to high maintenance costs and environmental impacts. In contrast, nuclear energy offers a longer-term solution, potentially bridging the energy gap until more sustainable and cost-effective alternatives become available.

The Role of ExxonMobil and the Industry

Companies like ExxonMobil find themselves in a challenging position, forced to navigate the shifting landscape of global energy policy. The industry must balance its need to adapt to changing regulations with the economic realities of ongoing fossil fuel use. Recognizing the declining impact of climate change skepticism, ExxonMobil and other companies may find it necessary to confront the voodoo science of climate change head-on and invest in both renewable and nuclear energy solutions.

Conclusion

The COP28 climate deal and the broader debate around transitioning away from fossil fuels present significant challenges and opportunities for companies like ExxonMobil. While the principles of democracy and practical realities of energy supply and demand must be considered, the industry must also adapt to new regulations and invest in sustainable solutions to meet future energy needs.