Why It’s Shortsighted to Ask Oil, Gas Firms to Immediately Abandon Fossil Fuels
Speeki founder and CEO Scott Lane recently wrote an op-ed outlining why asking oil and gas firms to abandon fossil fuels immediately is shortsighted. With the transition from fossil fuels to renewables accelerating, fossil fuel firms have been under increasing pressure to move away from extraction and production to reduce their impact on the environment.
After all, fossil fuels like coal, gas, and oil are primarily responsible for the greenhouse gas emissions that have triggered global warming, and replacing them with cleaner alternatives such as solar and wind energy will be key to addressing human-driven climate change.
However, Scott Lane believes that demands for fossil fuel giants to stop producing fossil fuels immediately are naive and shortsighted, a knee-jerk reaction to an intractable and complex issue that ignores the fact that the world is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels.
Getting these companies to move away from fossil fuels will require tact, delicacy, and the patience needed to plan and execute long-term strategies. Lane explains what often happens when fossil fuel companies are given ultimatums to cease production immediately: they walk away.
Last month, for instance, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) told all the gas and oil firms involved in its emission standard to stop all new field developments. Major fossil fuel companies like Shell responded by withdrawing from the initiative, forcing SBTi to announce that it would pause its emission standard for the first time in more than half a decade.
As the dust settled, six years of hard-won progress had been lost, and companies like Shell received major backlash from the sustainability crowd. However, if SBTi had used a more tactful, long-term approach in its request, its emission standard may not have lost major players such as Shell.
Fossil fuel exploration and development represent the core business model for many of these companies, and demanding that they halt new developments is akin to asking Apple to stop selling mobile phones, an incredibly self-destructive move that no rational business would make.
In fact, making such demands often has the opposite effect, causing oil and gas firms to pull out of initiatives such as SBTi’s emission standard. The initiative likely would have had better results if it had pushed for steady progress in green energy production rather than an immediate halt to new oil and gas projects.
This flawed approach is not economically viable, particularly for the businesses that are being asked to abandon their core operations, and it gives them the excuse to walk away from renewable energy initiatives. Instead, Lane explains, climate initiatives and regulators should put more pressure on fossil fuel companies to produce renewable energy using realistic and incremental goals, such as requiring a set amount of solar or wind energy production for every ton of carbon dioxide emitted.
This strategy would not only keep the biggest players at the table but also accelerate meaningful progress toward decarbonization. If policymakers and advocates can balance ambition with pragmatism, they may finally find a way to bring oil and gas giants into the renewables transition instead of driving them out of it.
A balanced approach would, for example, analyze why entities like GEMXX Corp. (OTC: GEMZ) see market opportunities in the oil and gas industry despite the push for renewables, and then devise strategies to gradually interest these firms in developing clean energy projects alongside their fossil fuel operations.
NOTE TO INVESTORS: The latest news and updates relating to GEMXX Corp. (OTC: GEMZ) are available in the company’s newsroom at https://ibn.fm/GEMZ
Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the TinyGems website applicable to all content provided by TinyGems, wherever published or re-published: https://www.TinyGems.net/Disclaimer
Speeki founder and CEO Scott Lane recently wrote an op-ed outlining why asking oil and gas firms to abandon fossil fuels immediately is shortsighted. With the transition from fossil fuels to renewables accelerating, fossil fuel firms have been under increasing pressure to move away from extraction and production to reduce their impact on the environment.
After all, fossil fuels like coal, gas, and oil are primarily responsible for the greenhouse gas emissions that have triggered global warming, and replacing them with cleaner alternatives such as solar and wind energy will be key to addressing human-driven climate change.
However, Scott Lane believes that demands for fossil fuel giants to stop producing fossil fuels immediately are naive and shortsighted, a knee-jerk reaction to an intractable and complex issue that ignores the fact that the world is still heavily reliant on fossil fuels.
Getting these companies to move away from fossil fuels will require tact, delicacy, and the patience needed to plan and execute long-term strategies. Lane explains what often happens when fossil fuel companies are given ultimatums to cease production immediately: they walk away.
Last month, for instance, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) told all the gas and oil firms involved in its emission standard to stop all new field developments. Major fossil fuel companies like Shell responded by withdrawing from the initiative, forcing SBTi to announce that it would pause its emission standard for the first time in more than half a decade.
As the dust settled, six years of hard-won progress had been lost, and companies like Shell received major backlash from the sustainability crowd. However, if SBTi had used a more tactful, long-term approach in its request, its emission standard may not have lost major players such as Shell.
Fossil fuel exploration and development represent the core business model for many of these companies, and demanding that they halt new developments is akin to asking Apple to stop selling mobile phones, an incredibly self-destructive move that no rational business would make.
In fact, making such demands often has the opposite effect, causing oil and gas firms to pull out of initiatives such as SBTi’s emission standard. The initiative likely would have had better results if it had pushed for steady progress in green energy production rather than an immediate halt to new oil and gas projects.
This flawed approach is not economically viable, particularly for the businesses that are being asked to abandon their core operations, and it gives them the excuse to walk away from renewable energy initiatives. Instead, Lane explains, climate initiatives and regulators should put more pressure on fossil fuel companies to produce renewable energy using realistic and incremental goals, such as requiring a set amount of solar or wind energy production for every ton of carbon dioxide emitted.
This strategy would not only keep the biggest players at the table but also accelerate meaningful progress toward decarbonization. If policymakers and advocates can balance ambition with pragmatism, they may finally find a way to bring oil and gas giants into the renewables transition instead of driving them out of it.
A balanced approach would, for example, analyze why entities like GEMXX Corp. (OTC: GEMZ) see market opportunities in the oil and gas industry despite the push for renewables, and then devise strategies to gradually interest these firms in developing clean energy projects alongside their fossil fuel operations.
NOTE TO INVESTORS: The latest news and updates relating to GEMXX Corp. (OTC: GEMZ) are available in the company’s newsroom at https://ibn.fm/GEMZ
Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the TinyGems website applicable to all content provided by TinyGems, wherever published or re-published: https://www.TinyGems.net/Disclaimer
