From: jo abbess
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, BP
Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your time on the phone earlier this week.

Last year in February, I was part of a small group of students that were grateful to have the benefit of an interview with XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX at BP, then XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

I am taking my research into the energy sector further for my MSc dissertation, and I would be grateful if I could have an interview with somebody in an engineering department who has an overview of the energy sector.

It doesn’t need to be a face to face interview, as I am quite willing to telephone people. It only needs to be 20 minutes in duration.

I have prepared a short list of open questions that I am considering would be suitable for my enquiry into the future of energy resources and technologies (see below).

I hope that you can point me in the direction of somebody within BP who would like to offer their thoughts.

Thank you.

…

Questions with a UK focus

1. What do you think have been the best developments in the energy sector in the last 20 years ?

(What do you think are the most significant developments in the energy sector in the last 20 years ?)

2. What positive or negative changes in energy production and supply will take place over the next 2 decades ?

(What do you think will be the most important developments in the energy sector in the next 20 years ?)

3. Which energy resources and technologies look the most troubled ?

4. Which energy resources and technologies look the most promising ?

5. Does the UK face an energy supply gap ? Can we keep the lights on ?

From: jo abbess
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Date: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

Hi XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,

Thank you for your helpful reply.

What I am trying to achieve is a real conversation with somebody within BP who has a general overview of the energy industry – sadly, the annual Statistical Review and company report do not answer the scoping questions I have.

I am offering an opportunity for BP to voice a vision, on record, of how the company intend to navigate future change, using parameters that are not generally the basis of shareholder reports.

I am sure that somebody in the organisation has a view on the onset of Peak Oil and Peak Natural Gas – from conventional resources, and that there must be aims and objectives for BP to manage this issue.

I am convinced that BP has planned for a range of policy scenarios concerning climate change – both mitigation and adaptation measures.

I am also sure that somebody in BP has a plan for navigating political problems, such as the probability of continued unrest in the Middle East, with the accompanying likelihood of compromised oil and gas production.

In addition, I am sure that somebody from BP can speak on the company’s behalf about how it will deal with the threats of economic turbulence and still be able to meet the needs of shareholders.

Some sample questions that could take in part of this landscape :-

1. Do you think that we are heading for a period of global energy insecurity ? What are the factors that could cause this ? What are the timelines ? Who are the key players ?

2. What is aiding or blocking the transition from fossil fuels to clean energy ? What technologies look promising ? What technologies are stuck in the lab ?

3.. How do you think we will manage the transition to clean energy ? How will the economic actors be able to diversify out of fossil fuels and still retain balance in the world markets – and not disappoint their investors ?

4. Do you think that people generally are aware of the issues of energy security ?

It would be excellent if you could find somebody to speak to these or similar questions in a short interview with me. I can do interviews by telephone at very low cost, and I would e-mail the transcript for verification before using in my research report.

My central question is “are we ready for energy change ?” – major transition in the resourcing and use of energy – and I am seeking a full range of opinion on that question.

If you could point me towards somebody who is willing and able to speak for 20 minutes on the phone on energy security issues, I would be highly grateful.

Thank you.

…

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gt9FazoUMIDxODUKwX2TF5LxndsQ

“Protesters condemn ‘dirty oil’ at World Energy Congress : (AFP) : 14 September 2010 : MONTREAL — Hundreds of protesters demonstrated in the streets of Montreal Sunday, calling for an end to “dirty, risky” oil exploration, ahead of a global gathering of energy experts. A dozen protesters covered in molasses staged a “Black Tide Beach Party,” while dozens of others carried banners that read “Too dirty, too risky, go beyond oil.” A blond baby boy smeared in brown sticky molasses wailed in his activist father’s arms, while protesters used megaphones to slam the provincial Quebec government of Jean Charest for inviting oil companies to the five-day World Energy Congress at the sprawling Palais de Congres. Some 5,000 participants from industry, government and academia, were expected to attend the conference, slated to officially open Sunday evening. The event is expected to tackle global energy issues, such as improving access to energy in the world’s poorer regions and the role of new technologies in ensuring a sustainable energy future. Many protesters directed their anger at BP over a devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico earlier this year. But Julien Vincent, a campaigner for Greenpeace International, said BP was only part of the problem. “British Petroleum is one part of a big industry that’s got an abysmal safety record and an abysmal record in terms of its obligations toward protecting communities,” he told AFP. “You also have oil from Shell dripping out over Nigeria right now. You have oil spills that have taken place in China that have flooded ports,” he added. “The entire industry needs to be told to sit back and listen up.” …”

http://www.wecmontreal2010.ca/en.html

http://www.gobeyondoil.org/about.php

“About Go Beyond Oil : Go Beyond Oil is a call to action. It’s a response to the BP oil spill and the prospect of rising global temperatures. It’s also necessary, if we want to have healthy lives and a healthy planet we’ve got to get ourselves off oil. It’s a journey that’s already started, but we need you to join us if we are going to get the world off oil. The BP spill in the Gulf was a wake up call for many people, now we must take this opportunity to put an end to our oil addiction which is poisoning our oceans, our lands, the air we breathe as well as destroying our climate. This is a massive challenge. Oil is a part of all our lives and the oil industry makes huge profits from our dependency on it. Oil companies are going to extremes and taking ever greater risks to squeeze the planet of its oil all the while they’re blocking the solutions that would free us from fossil fuels. The technologies already exist to wean the world off oil and we all deserve a future free of pollution – it s our choice and we can move beyond oil if we want to. It won’t be easy, but we know what needs to be done – we need to stop risky oil exploration, end subsidies for the oil industry and invest in clean energy. There will be many trials along the way as we remove the barriers to clean energy – that’s why we need your help…”

Got oil in your pension? from Greenpeace UK on Vimeo.

http://www.youandifilms.com/2010/09/crude-2010-oil-painting-protest-over-bp-sponsorship-in-tate-modern-turbine-hall-liberate-tate-calls-for-footprint-of-art-museum-to-be-free-from-big-oil/

http://twitter.com/liberatetate

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2JesScn-l6lM2E2OTU2MGEtZmEzYy00NDZmLWE0YWMtYzY4Zjg5YmUxZTVi&sort=name&layout=list&num=50&pli=1

Al Gore has been telling all the young people, and well, all of us, really, to protest, in public, to make a downright law-unabiding nuisance of ourselves :-

http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/677-e2-wire/114717-al-gore-calls-for-us-protests-on-climate-change-inaction

“Gore calls for major protests on government’s climate change inaction…In a post on his personal blog headlined “The Movement We Need”…”

Well, it won’t work to call people out onto the street. Most people are too busy credit-crunching, wage-slaving or favour-scraping to be able to commit to a short-term, potentially self-defeating public display of annoyance, frustration and shrill demands.

And if people do come out to the big protests, it won’t achieve much. News reports can be swept into the trash. Activists can be swept into holding facilities. Politicians can conveniently ignore anything that isn’t violent.

Drop the loud-hailers and home-made placards, I say, and do something more…focussed.

The Climate Camp want to target the Royal Bank of Scotland for financing Coal power plants and Tar Sands oil projects, which are very bad things to be doing, and smacks of huge corporate irresponsibility, considering the bank is largely owned by the British taxpayer, and I say, if you can’t make the camp (and I can’t for reasons which I shall not go into just now), do something about money in other ways instead.

What’s your money doing ? Which oppressive regimes in oil-rich countries is it supporting ? Which Fossil Fuel companies trashing your Environment do your bank support ? Why not switch your money to an ethical financial organisation ? Why don’t we all try to do this at the same time ? “Crowd-banking” could have an impact, you never know until you try.

Let’s pick, say, Monday 23rd August 2010. And let’s all spend our way out of Climageddon together on that day. Transfer your money to an ethical bank, or pledge to do so. Phone your bank and tell them you’re leaving for a sustainable bank.

Other actions possibly useful :-

1. Refuse to buy Fossil Fuels for a day.

2. Refuse to use any hot water for one day (most hot water is produced by burning Fossil Fuels). It’s summer in the Northern Hemisphere – come on – a cool shower won’t hurt you.

3. Don’t spend any money on anything that had Petroleum-based plastic or Natural Gas-based chemicals in its production – which would rule out 85% of non-food purchases, I reckon.

4. If you’re working for a company or an organisation who have anything to do with the Energy industry, make a point of asking your boss, or their boss, or the Chief Executive or something what the company/organisation intends to do about moving the whole business to Renewable Energy.

5. One short telephone call could have you moving from burning Coal for your home electricity to a Green Energy account.

This is not a riot – but it is an emergency, and the response should match the scale of the problem.

Our Climate – Not for Sale.

Bloody Oil from Felix Gonzales on Vimeo.

Despite the best early morning wide-eyed televised efforts of Carol Browner this week, the BP Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill story just will not die :-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/aug/05/oil-spill-white-house-accused-spin

“Gulf oil spill: White House accused of spinning report : Scientists say it is ‘just not true’ that the vast majority of oil from the BP spill has gone : Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent, guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 August 2010″

Use all the dispersants you want (or are just about legally entitled to), but an ecological catastrophe like this will not go away and die quietly, even though a large number of marine animals will be forced to :-

http://motherjones.com/environment/2010/08/feds-giving-spill-data-to-bp-not-public

http://unearthed.earthjustice.org/blog/2010-august/lets-celebrate-and-mourn-plugging-bps-gulf-oil-spill

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/07/30/30greenwire-oil-spill-dispersants-shifting-ecosystem-impac-95608.html

“…to use dispersants…doesn’t make the oil go away, it just puts it from one part of the ecosystem to another…”

Barack Obama said that things were nearly sorted out :-

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5a1970b4-9fd7-11df-927b-00144feabdc0,dwp_uuid=ed81e81c-0753-11df-a9b7-00144feabdc0.html

“Obama says BP Gulf spill near end : By Anna Fifield in Washington and Sylvia Pfeifer in London : Published: August 4 2010 : President Barack Obama said the “long battle” to combat the Gulf of Mexico disaster had reached a turning point as a new government report showed that the majority of the spilt oil had disappeared. In his most positive statement on the crisis since the accident on April 20 that killed 11 workers, Mr Obama said the battle “is finally close to coming to an end”. His comments came as the British oil company announced it had reached a “significant milestone” in its attempts to seal the leak in the Macondo well by pumping heavy mud into it from the top. A new study, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said the majority of the 4.9m barrels of oil that had spilt from the Macondo well was no longer in the water…”

Carol Browner claimed “good news” this week. She said much of the oil has “disappeared”. No, it hasn’t. It may not show on the satellite monitoring, the surface of the sea may indeed look cleaner, but what counts is what lies beneath :-

http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/deepwater-disaster/index.ssf

And what’s this ? The Gulf of Mexico may actually benefit from this oil spill ? I expect nobody except stockbrokers will believe this yarn :-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1300532/BPs-Gulf-Mexico-oil-spill-lead-increase-fish-stocks.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

“How BP’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill could actually lead to an increase in fish stocks : By MAIL FOREIGN SERVICE : 5th August 2010 : The massive BP oil spill could lead to increased fish stocks and improvements in biodiversity in the Gulf of Mexico, according to marine expert. The White House admitted yesterday that the leak was less catastrophic than previously thought. In a humiliating climbdown, the Obama administration conceded the ‘vast majority’ of the oil that gushed into the ocean from the ruptured well has already gone. The rest, it says, is probably so diluted, it does not appear to pose much of a threat…”

Public Relations Rule Number One : Don’t lie to the public. They won’t forgive you.

I have a pertinent question. Why is it that Barack Obama called the Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill such a tragedy on 14th June 2010 – and then, after BP sells its Colombia operations, and after rumour they may sell their Siberian operations, Barack Obama says the oil spill is not as bad as he thought it was and that it’s nearly all dealt with ? :-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10307782

“14 June 2010 : Obama: Oil spill ‘an environmental 9/11′ : US President Barack Obama has said the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico will have the same impact on the US psyche as 9/11. The disaster will “shape how we think about the environment… for years to come”, he told US website Politico.”…”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/15/obamas-oil-spill-speech-w_n_613642.html

“Obama’s Oil Spill Speech: What Was The Point? : First Posted: 06-15-10″

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-05/bp-russia-talks-stoke-rally-for-tnk-bp-bonds-erasing-loss-since-oil-spill.html

“BP Russia Talks Stoke Rally for TNK-BP Bonds, Erasing Loss Since Oil Spill : By Jason Corcoran and Denis Maternovsky – Aug 5, 2010 : Talks between Russia’s government and BP Plc’s newly appointed Chief Executive Officer Robert Dudley are stoking the best rally in 17 months for bonds of TNK-BP on expectations asset sales will help the Moscow-based affiliate…The worst oil spill in U.S. history has brought Dudley back to Moscow two years after he fled Russia as the chief of TNK-BP, citing “sustained harassment” and visa difficulties. Dudley met yesterday with Igor Sechin, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s deputy for energy. TNK-BP, Russia’s third-largest oil producer accounts for about 25 percent of BP’s output and a fifth of the company’s reserves, and may boost that share as BP sells projects to cover the $32.2 billion charge linked to the leak…Dudley, who succeeds Tony Hayward on Oct. 1, will oversee as much as $30 billion of asset sales…”Maybe in the longer term there will be some new ideas that surface that unite us further,” Sechin said during the meeting with BP’s Dudley and Hayward last night in Moscow….”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TINzvWrtjYI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyutuErxPo8

Carol Browner, Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy in the United States of America, has been all over the Media, announcing the policy to “kill kill kill this” BP nightmare story, telling the world that a turning milestone point has been reached :-

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/PDFs/OilBudget_description_%2083final.pdf

Have they decided that BP have been punished enough now for the Gulf of Mexico oil gusher, and the reputation of the company needs to be rehabilitated sharply in order to protect the Economy ?

I made the mistake of taking in a BBC TV news bulletin on the matter. I heard several talking heads say it’s “good news” that roughly three quarters of the accountable oil from the spill has “disappeared” :-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10870159

Breaking this story is “good news” for the stability of pension funds, maybe. But what is the real extent of the real damage to the real world, the world of oceans and fish and plankton ? Will the world be watching as the researchers scavenge data and clues to the marine ecotastrophe that is still unfolding ?

Barack Obama hopes there’s nothing left to see of this car crash, and that we can all move along. It leaves a number of unanswered questions. Pre-eminent in my mind is the question “how likely is it that another deepwater drilling oil spill could happen ?”

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/BP-Oil-Spill-US-President-Barack-Obama-Says-Gulf-Of-Mexico-Battle-Finally-Coming-To-An-End/Article/201008115676765

I bet Barack Obama is slightly regretting announcing more “unconventional” oil drilling in March, and he’s attempting to patch up his own reputation, possibly why he’s pushing so hard to get this “good news” out now about BP’s clean-up operation :-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APOMoS0s7xI

Of course the White House want to clear the trouble from peoples’ minds and move on to other matters because the administration of the United States of America is peppered with oil-made men (and women). Plus, there’s heaps of fossil fuel lobbyists on every carpet, in every corridor, in every chat, in every consultation :-

At some point this difficult question will have to be answered : if oil spills and other hydrocarbon problems are going to become more frequent in future, as exploration, discovery and production become more and more “unconventional”, how is this going to impact on the profitability of oil and gas companies ?

Will there come a time when “growth” is no longer possible in fossil fuels, as the profit margin between production costs and sales revenues tightens to a thin wafer ?

Who is paying for the BP spill clean-up, by the way ? The American Government are all over it. Has the work been partly paid for by the taxpayers ?

Why not bring in a special new executive at BP’s London Headquarters, maybe ex-CEO of BP, Lord John Browne of Madingley, who was rather green, really, or that other Anthony, the ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair, and make them responsible for expanding an entirely new share offering in Solar Power.

Investors would be encouraged to explicitly finance new solar projects around the world by buying “solar shares” in the company, who make a priority of environmental matters, as we all know.

The British Government could offer extensive tax breaks, declining to tax revenues from solar electricity in the same way that BPs’ Oil and Gas sales are tapped for a percentage slice to help the public purse.

And there you could have it, bish bash bosh.

And while you’re at it, rename the company “Beautiful Photonenergy”.

The world could forget about the Gulf of Mexico plumes and seepages and we could all, together, forge a clean, smooth new Low Carbon, Low Dirt world.

Image Credit : McClatchy

Tough on grime; tough on the causes of grime.

American President Barack Obama declares that as regards environmental pollution, “we shall fight them on the beaches”.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-nation-bp-oil-spill

“Already, this oil spill is the worst environmental disaster America has ever faced. And unlike an earthquake or a hurricane, it’s not a single event that does its damage in a matter of minutes or days. The millions of gallons of oil that have spilled into the Gulf of Mexico are more like an epidemic, one that we will be fighting for months and even years.”

“But make no mistake: We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused. And we will do whatever’s necessary to help the Gulf Coast and its people recover from this tragedy.”

“Tonight I’d like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going forward: what we’re doing to clean up the oil, what we’re doing to help our neighbors in the Gulf, and what we’re doing to make sure that a catastrophe like this never happens again.”

…

“Tomorrow, I will meet with the chairman of BP and inform him that he is to set aside whatever resources are required to compensate the workers and business owners who have been harmed as a result of his company’s recklessness. And this fund will not be controlled by BP. In order to ensure that all legitimate claims are paid out in a fair and timely manner, the account must and will be administered by an independent third party.”

…

“The third part of our response plan is the steps we’re taking to ensure that a disaster like this does not happen again. A few months ago, I approved a proposal to consider new, limited offshore drilling under the assurance that it would be absolutely safe –- that the proper technology would be in place and the necessary precautions would be taken.”

“That obviously was not the case in the Deepwater Horizon rig, and I want to know why. The American people deserve to know why. The families I met with last week who lost their loved ones in the explosion — these families deserve to know why.”

…

“So one of the lessons we’ve learned from this spill is that we need better regulations, better safety standards, and better enforcement when it comes to offshore drilling. But a larger lesson is that no matter how much we improve our regulation of the industry, drilling for oil these days entails greater risk. After all, oil is a finite resource. We consume more than 20 percent of the world’s oil, but have less than 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves. And that’s part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean — because we’re running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water.”

“For decades, we have known the days of cheap and easily accessible oil were numbered. For decades, we’ve talked and talked about the need to end America’s century-long addiction to fossil fuels. And for decades, we have failed to act with the sense of urgency that this challenge requires. Time and again, the path forward has been blocked — not only by oil industry lobbyists, but also by a lack of political courage and candor.”

“The consequences of our inaction are now in plain sight. Countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be right here in America. Each day, we send nearly $1 billion of our wealth to foreign countries for their oil. And today, as we look to the Gulf, we see an entire way of life being threatened by a menacing cloud of black crude.”

“We cannot consign our children to this future. The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now. Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash America’s innovation and seize control of our own destiny.”

…

“All of these approaches have merit, and deserve a fair hearing in the months ahead. But the one approach I will not accept is inaction. The one answer I will not settle for is the idea that this challenge is somehow too big and too difficult to meet. You know, the same thing was said about our ability to produce enough planes and tanks in World War II. The same thing was said about our ability to harness the science and technology to land a man safely on the surface of the moon. And yet, time and again, we have refused to settle for the paltry limits of conventional wisdom. Instead, what has defined us as a nation since our founding is the capacity to shape our destiny -– our determination to fight for the America we want for our children. Even if we’re unsure exactly what that looks like. Even if we don’t yet know precisely how we’re going to get there. We know we’ll get there.”

“It’s a faith in the future that sustains us as a people. It is that same faith that sustains our neighbors in the Gulf right now.”

As Homer Simpson would say if he were a real person : “Whoo !”

Image Credit : Nick Turner : “BP Exec” : Image Owned By : Art Not Oil

Phew ! That’s a relief ! The American President Barack Obama has personally spoken to British Prime Minister David Cameron apparently to reassure him he meant no harm to the reputation of Britain by blaming BP for the Gulf of Mexico oil spill :-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/13/gulf-oil-spill

I should hope not ! BP stopped being “British” Petroleum some time ago. Forty percent of BP’s business is in the United States :-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/jun/10/us-bloodlust-bp-oil-spill

The lack of speed and poor success in trying to cap and capture the undersea gusher from the Deepwater Horizon field has been relayed to our screens and laptops and newspapers in lurid, Jacques Cousteau-like inglory.

Could this have been a cry for help from BP ? A call to the international public purse. Is BP, like the banks at the start of the economic crisis “too big to fail” ? Are BP’s inept efforts to plug the spill a deliberate display of incompetence designed to lay the foundations for putting out the begging bowl for a bailout ?

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/bp-too-big-fail

George Monbiot has theorised that BP should be putting all its profits aside for the eventual necessary decommissioning of the Fossil Fuel industry :-

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2010/06/07/the-money-gusher/

I think that BP might be trying to portray “The Spill” as a justification for backing out of the Petroleum Oil extraction and refining industries (without giving up its unconventional Natural Gas activities), all the while angling for a “stimulus” to do this :-

http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/rushkoff20100611/

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20627641.100-wonderfuel-welcome-to-the-age-of-unconventional-gas.html?full=true

Earlier in the year, Tony Hayward claimed that 2007 was the year for “Peak Demand” for Petroleum Oil. Quite frankly, the man was in denial, and just couldn’t bring himself to mention “Peak Oil”. He has his shareholders to reassure, after all, if he is to keep them.

The deeper and dodgier the wells, to get at increasingly dirtier crude oil, the more likely the projects are to fail. Sub-sea engineering is not proven at such depths, as the Transocean blowout and uncappable plume shows.

Good quality, easily accessible oil is running out :-

http://themoderatevoice.com/75247/bp-too-big-to-fail/

Not even the Arctic licences could resolve this problem, as all the oil in Arctic is either very complicated to get at, or the geological formations of the wells have had their tops “blown” off, by all accounts :-

http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/business/story.html?id=bfda2108-bf06-4a53-9c45-20b5eb36a34a&k=63243

Will Obama and Cameron-Clegg decide that BP needs public support to stay afloat ? So many peoples’ pensions and institutional investments are tied up in BP’s welfare.

Neither the American nor the British administrations have any spare money to play with. Are they going to conclude that BP is too big to carry ?

And will the dividend payouts be halted ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jun/12/oil-spill-bp-may-suspend-dividend

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article7148526.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/pensions/article7148161.ece

Why is BP in such trouble ? Certainly, a fair amount of fudging about the true state of things is partly to blame. Even a fairly shallow analysis reveals disconnects in corporate thinking and action :-

http://www.joabbess.com/2010/05/06/bringing-perspective/

We told them, but they didn’t listen.

“Oil and gas will remain the mainstay of the “Energy mix”. We’ve said that publicly…”

So they’re telling the world what to believe, are they ?

“…The fact is, given that developing countries will develop as rapidly as they can, [and Fossil Fuels are the only option readily available], Fossil Fuels will remain a [large factor in the global economy]. Renewable Energy will probably account for between 5% and 6% by 2030. The real [opening] is for [Natural] Gas, the transition…cleaner burning fuel…new resources…shale gas in the US…”

I posed the question of falling EROEI to the representative of the UK’s largest company formerly known as British Petroleum :-

“About a Century ago for American petroleum, you invested one unit of Energy for every 100 units returned; this has slowly dropped until it’s about 30 units for every unit input. Shale gas is hard to mine. You put more energy in for the same return…”

The BP man did not understand. He thought I meant you put more Energy in overall for the Energy returned, which would be ridiculous. I explained I meant you need to use more Energy to get gas from shale than with “conventional” sources of Natural Gas.

BP Guy got the point, sort of : “The cost of supply is not solely down to a function of the technology. Yes, Energy is used as an input, to make the gas available to the market. Yes, we are going into more challenging technologies. [It's like we assert] if you have an economic price of Carbon all these sorts of issues would then become apparent and Renewable Energy would become more competitive. [Carbon pricing would] help us all make rational decisions…the same argument as [critiquing the exploitation of] oil sands. Let’s say the price of Carbon is universally [applied] – then business will only invest in projects that are economically viable…”

Talk about skirting the issue. The issue is not cost, or even relative cost. The issue is : Fossil Fuels are depleting.

“Unconventional” Fossil Fuels are more energy-intensive to mine and could become unviable under peaking scenarios – especially if there were a Carbon Emissions rationing mechanism – so they should not be relied upon.

In fact, the very fact that the Oil and Gas “Majors” are diving into “unconventional” Fossil Fuels should be the clearest of indications that Fossil Fuels are depleting – past the peak of production, but also past the peak of supply in the Earth’s crust.

All the recent oil and gas wells are really, really deep. They’re scraping the bottom of the geological barrel.

The timeframe for Peak Fossil Fuels could be right upon us, staring us in the face.

We need to have a darn sight more Renewable Energy on-stream before 2030.

Yet BP continue to live in denial.

Instead of calling it for what it is : Fossil Fuel Depletion, the CEO Tony Hayward introduces us to his fantasy narrative of “Peak Demand”, just so the shareholders don’t get scared, I suppose :-

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/04/tony-hayward-bp-interview

“I personally – and BP – have never believed we will see peak oil because of supply. We always believed we would see peak oil because of demand. There will come a time – I believe it is beyond 2020 – when because of the changes in the energy portfolio, because of the drive for energy efficiency, because of the introduction of biofuels, demand for oil will peak.”

Could it be that he’s started this line of argument because the Biofuels projects aren’t working ?

For years the large oil and gas companies have promised us they will do better. BioDiesel didn’t work out, so they’ve been promising us BioTechnology from Genetically Modified bacteria to make “second generation” BioFuels from non-food crops and food crop waste.

This green dream could well have imploded.

All we read in the Press is that the Biofuels projects have a fine and dandy future, but that could just be to keep the Carbon bean counters and the shareholders happy.

These new plants could well be merely showy window-dressing. Nobody can tell us about potential production volumes :-

http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2236895/bp-biofuels-grass