Unintended Comedy In ExxonMobil's Dismissal Of Solar, Wind - Reuters

[hatrack]

EDIT

"The economics of solar and wind energy is why the world's largest publicly traded energy company is not making any bets on the environmentally friendly power sources now, and does not plan to any time soon.

Despite the growing popularity of renewable energy sources -- top competitors like BP and Chevron Corp. dabble in it -- Exxon Mobil Corp. has shied away from investing in solar and wind energy, arguing that the business is viable only with Uncle Sam's help.

Exxon estimates solar and wind energy demand will grow at a 10 percent rate annually over the next 25 years, but only on the back of government subsidies and tax breaks to spur investment in cleaner, environment-friendly energy sources. Strip out the handouts, and investing in wind and solar energy would be nonstarters, the manager of Exxon's energy demand and supply forecasting division told Reuters last week.

"It's an uneconomic niche and our business is not built around the expectation of a bunch of subsidies to make a profit," said Scott Nauman, manager of the economics and energy division at Exxon. "We want a business that is robust on its own merits."

EDIT

Yessirre Bob, no subsidies for rugged ol' ExxonMobil. No way, Jose . . . :eyes:

http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/31033/story.htm

[wabranty]

1. I agree. So let's end corporate welfare. . .

and actually make these companies compete in a true capitalist system. No more oil exploration and drilling subsidies for you!

:spank:

[MADem]

2. To say nothing of allowing them to drill on public land!! n/t

[Inland]

3. So we don't have build military and foreign policy around oil supplies

anymore? No longer have to guard ships to and from Kuwait, or occupy an oil territory?

Great news!

[suziedemocrat]

4. Sounds like GM when they dismissed hybrid cars.

GM now regrets dismissing hybrids. Maybe Exxon will regret dismissing solar and wind. These technologies are getting better and better - it is very risky IMO to dismiss them so easily.

Maybe they think when solar/wind, etc really break through they can play catch up.

check out these blogs: http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/home

http://www.worldchanging.com/

http://www.greencarcongress.com/

[Coastie for Truth]

5. What crude price (and what level of "proven reserves") are they using?

If you take the more pessimistic (or optimistic? I don't which is which) view - renewables don't really begin to pay off until crude passes the $80-$120/bbl mark (depending upon which location you are talking about for which application in which niche).

Besides - in their planning horizon (the career of the youngest VP) - as crude goes up there will be oil sands, shale oil, and Fischer-Tropsch synthetic gasoline.

By the time crude passes the $80-$120/bbl mark, and we have "peaked" oil sands, shale oil, and coal (Fischer-Tropsch synthetic gasoline) and we learn that "abiotic" oil is like "creation science" and that "methane hydrate clathrate" is nothing more then sub-sea, super cooled LNG -- a;; of those guys will be dead.

So, they can take their cavalier attitude..