Hurricane Seasons, Erosion, Rising Seas, Sinking Land Mass

[Cajunrunner]

So you’re okay with subsidies to small startups but prefer them not to be given to big existing companies?

By the way, all of the companies listed are investing in renewable energy and receiving subsidies.

ExxonMobil
ExxonMobil has several significant investments in renewable energy:

Renewable Diesel: ExxonMobil has committed to purchasing up to 5 million barrels per year of renewable diesel from Global Clean Energy’s biorefinery in Bakersfield, California. This project uses the camelina crop, a non-food source, to produce the fuel, significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional diesel​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): ExxonMobil is heavily involved in CCS technology, developing several CCS hubs in Houston and Wyoming, as well as international projects in Scotland, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Hydrogen: ExxonMobil is working on producing low-carbon hydrogen using CCS technology to reduce emissions​ (ExxonMobil)​​ (ExxonMobil)​.
Chevron
Chevron is also investing in renewable energy:

Biofuels: Chevron has invested in several biofuel initiatives, including partnerships with companies like Brightmark to produce renewable natural gas and renewable diesel.
Geothermal Energy: Chevron has a long-standing involvement in geothermal energy, continuing to develop and invest in geothermal projects worldwide.
Hydrogen: Chevron is developing hydrogen projects, exploring hydrogen production and fuel cell technology.
EOG Resources
EOG Resources has been more focused on improving the efficiency of its operations rather than direct investments in renewable energy. However, they have initiatives aimed at reducing emissions:

Emissions Reduction: EOG has focused on reducing methane emissions and improving overall environmental performance through various technological innovations.
Occidental Petroleum (OXY)
Occidental Petroleum has made notable investments in carbon management and renewables:

Carbon Capture: OXY is a leader in direct air capture technology, aiming to remove CO2 directly from the atmosphere and use it for enhanced oil recovery or permanent storage.
Solar Energy: OXY has invested in solar energy projects to power some of its operations, reducing reliance on traditional fossil fuels.
Marathon Petroleum
Marathon Petroleum has also stepped into the renewable fuels sector:

Renewable Diesel: Marathon has converted its Martinez refinery to produce renewable diesel, leveraging feedstocks such as animal fats, soybean oil, and corn oil.
Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF): Marathon is exploring the production of SAF from renewable feedstocks.
Each of these companies is taking steps toward integrating renewable energy into their portfolios, with varying degrees of investment and commitment to different technologies.

1- I never said anything at all about ok with subsidies for one and not for the other. Again, though, the oil & gas companies paying a net negative in taxes are the ones not in business long and don't represent the ones driving the industry. The ones driving the industry, they are paying net positive overall in taxes.

2- You're not telling me anything I don't already know about those companies mentioned above and their "renewable" or "low carbon" arms and business ventures they've established. I am extremely well informed on that end, especially the CCS and emissions reductions technologies. I've discussed those here in the past, and if you're asking my personal opinion, no, I don't believe the government should be shelling out billions in tax dollars for CCS projects, ESPECIALLY the direct air capture stuff that appears to be wastefully inefficient. At least the point-source stuff is direct and efficient from the emitters to the injection site via pipeline, not wasting ungodly vast amounts of water and electricity in the process. However, at the end of the day, government wanted to force industry into these types of projects, so industry successfully lobbied with "Hey, if you want it so bad, then YOU help out".

Sign me up as skeptical.

[fpc4life99]

"Hey, if you want it so bad, then YOU help out".

Fortunately, I am helping out, but probably not in the way you're thinking. My research focuses on a more natural approach to the issues mentioned above.

[Cajunrunner]

Fortunately, I am helping out, but probably not in the way you're thinking. My research focuses on a more natural approach to the issues mentioned above.

I'm more talking about the discussions industry had with the Feds when these mandates were coming down. No so much someone like you helping out.

I'm sure the conversations with the federal government went something like this:

Feds: "You're going to have to start reducing emissions."
Industry: "We've already been working on that reading the tea leaves over the years. In fact, we're actually accomplishing some of that already at facilities like production tank batteries and gas compressor sites, and will continue to make progress."
Feds: "You know that's not going to be enough. There's this sequester technology we've heard about. You need to start doing that with CO2 and help to fight YOUR pollution."
Industry: "Oh yeah, we actually already carry out such operations to increase production in older fields and areas where we've gotten initial production."
Feds: "Well we want you to do purely sequestration and leave it in the ground forever, no oil & gas production."
Industry: "Ok, well...that's very expensive. If we have to deploy hundreds of millions to billions of dollars with no ROI, then we're probably have to divert capital to oil & gas operations, which means lower production numbers in the U.S. That would certainly cause oil prices (and gasoline for your voters) to increase."
Feds: "Ok, we'll give you some money to help with these projects."
Industry: "We'll get started."

My research focuses on a more natural approach to the issues mentioned above.

Research of any and all realistically viable possibilities is a good thing.

[CajunNation]

We should look at the whole story:

Yes, let's look at the whole story. How will AI affect Art? Literature? Music? Manufacturing? How many jobs will it take from regular people?

[fpc4life99]

Yes, let's look at the whole story. How will AI affect Art? Literature? Music? Manufacturing? How many jobs will it take from regular people?

While it's true that AI will significantly impact various fields such as art, literature, music, and manufacturing, and will change the nature of many jobs, look at the broader historical context of technological innovation and those effects on the workforce.

Historical Innovations and Job Transformation
The Industrial Revolution:

The advent of machinery and factory systems in the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

While many manual labor jobs were replaced by machines, this period also led to the creation of new jobs in machine operation, maintenance, and factory management. It spurred massive economic growth and improved standards of living.

The Advent of Computers and Automation:

The introduction of computers in the mid-20th century and subsequent automation of various tasks.

Many clerical and repetitive manual jobs were replaced, but it also led to the creation of entirely new industries, such as information technology, software development, and digital communications. It revolutionized how businesses operate and created numerous high-skill jobs.

The Internet and Digital Revolution:

The rise of the internet in the late 20th century.

Traditional jobs in retail, marketing, and media were transformed. E-commerce, digital marketing, and online content creation emerged as major sectors. The internet created millions of new jobs that didn’t exist before, such as web development, cybersecurity, and social media management.

AI and Job Transformation
AI, like past technological advancements, will change the nature of work and the skills required, but it will also create new opportunities:

Enhanced Creative Tools:

Art, Literature, and Music: AI can serve as a tool to enhance creativity rather than replace it. Artists, writers, and musicians can use AI to generate ideas, automate repetitive tasks, and explore new creative possibilities.

For example, AI can assist in composing music, creating digital art, and writing content, allowing creators to focus on higher-level creativity.

Advanced Manufacturing:

AI can improve efficiency, precision, and safety in manufacturing processes.

While some manufacturing jobs may be automated, new roles in programming, maintaining, and overseeing AI-driven machinery will emerge. AI can also lead to innovations in product development and production techniques.

New Job Creation:

AI Specialists: The development, implementation, and maintenance of AI systems require skilled professionals. This includes AI researchers, data scientists, machine learning engineers, and AI ethics specialists.

AI Integration Roles: Many traditional industries will need professionals who understand how to integrate AI into their existing systems, creating roles such as AI consultants, trainers, and integration specialists.

While AI will indeed transform many job roles and industries, history shows us that technological innovations ultimately lead to the creation of new jobs and industries. By adapting to new technologies and acquiring new skills, the workforce can continue to thrive. The key is to focus on education and training to ensure that people are prepared for the jobs of the future.

AI will bring changes and challenges, but also immense opportunities for growth and innovation, much like past technological revolutions.

[BabbForHeisman]

Shell is also making big investments in CCS.

And in a related story (because Shell Energy is my electricity provider), we’ve got power back at Team Ledet World HQ! Whew.

[Cajunrunner]

Shell is also making big investments in CCS.

And in a related story (because Shell Energy is my electricity provider), we’ve got power back at Team Ledet World HQ! Whew.

First, awesome news.

Second, I do think CCS can work, but can it work in the market without HUGE government support of these per ton tax credits going to either the emitter, which then pays the midstream CO2 handler a fee, or where they all go to the sequesteror?

The technology for point source CCS has been around for decades and done safely by industry. But it’s been done either as a mechanism to push out residue hydrocarbons, or to inject harmful sour gas back into the ground for gas plants and such. The scale of these now proposed projects is MUCH larger than those operations. I don’t doubt these projects can and will (by credible companies like an Exxon, Talos and OXY) be done safely, but viability is a HUGE question.

[BabbForHeisman]

First, awesome news.

Second, I do think CCS can work, but can it work in the market without HUGE government support of these per ton tax credits going to either the emitter, which then pays the midstream CO2 handler a fee, or where they all go to the sequesteror?

The technology for point source CCS has been around for decades and done safely by industry. But it’s been done either as a mechanism to push out residue hydrocarbons, or to inject harmful sour gas back into the ground for gas plants and such. The scale of these now proposed projects is MUCH larger than those operations. I don’t doubt these projects can and will (by credible companies like an Exxon, Talos and OXY) be done safely, but viability is a HUGE question.

Totally agree, CCS doesn’t work without government intervention. The government provides the financial incentive.

Due diligence is being done to evaluate the technical aspects of CCS projects. Class VI permitting, with primacy given to the state of Louisiana a few months ago, will see to that. The DENR is actively seeing to that.

[Cajunrunner]

Totally agree, CCS doesn’t work without government intervention. The government provides the financial incentive.

Due diligence is being done to evaluate the technical aspects of CCS projects. Class VI permitting, with primacy given to the state of Louisiana a few months ago, will see to that. The DENR is actively seeing to that.

Air Products walked their asses into a hornets’ nest, though, doing their project under Maurepas! But…the LA DNR and LA DWF approved the project and granted the sequestration agreement. You have to wonder about the politics played there.

I believe Exxon’s is around Intracoastal City or so? You don’t hear a bunch of outrage about that one, though I think their proposed “storage complex” is under lands (marshlands) they own.

[CajunRed]

1- I never said anything at all about ok with subsidies for one and not for the other. Again, though, the oil & gas companies paying a net negative in taxes are the ones not in business long and don't represent the ones driving the industry. The ones driving the industry, they are paying net positive overall in taxes.

2- You're not telling me anything I don't already know about those companies mentioned above and their "renewable" or "low carbon" arms and business ventures they've established. I am extremely well informed on that end, especially the CCS and emissions reductions technologies. I've discussed those here in the past, and if you're asking my personal opinion, no, I don't believe the government should be shelling out billions in tax dollars for CCS projects, ESPECIALLY the direct air capture stuff that appears to be wastefully inefficient. At least the point-source stuff is direct and efficient from the emitters to the injection site via pipeline, not wasting ungodly vast amounts of water and electricity in the process. However, at the end of the day, government wanted to force industry into these types of projects, so industry successfully lobbied with "Hey, if you want it so bad, then YOU help out".

Sign me up as skeptical.

I’m with you.

PS… I wish I was one of those rich libs that could just “buy” my carbon credits… while owning four mansions, a jet, and a yaucht.