Fossil Fuel Industry Risks Losing $33 Trillion to Climate Change

[yurbud]

A while back I posted an article that speculated gas prices had dropped because Saudi realized demand for their product has an expiration date.

This analysis seems to confirm that, and it couldn't happen to a more deserving industry.

The fossil fuel industry risks losing $33 trillion in revenue over the next 25 years as global warming may drive companies to leave oil, natural gas and coal in the ground, according to a Barclays Plc energy analyst.

Government regulations and other efforts to cut carbon emissions will inevitably slash demand for fossil fuels, jeopardizing traditional energy producers, Mark Lewis, Barclays’s head of European utilities equity research, said Monday during a panel discussion in New York on financial risks from climate change.

His comments are part of a growing chorus calling for more transparency from oil and gas companies about how their balance sheets may be affected by the global shift away from fossil fuels. As governments adopt stricter environmental policies, there’s increasing risk that companies’ untapped deposits of oil, gas and coal may go unused, turning valuable reserves into stranded assets of questionable value.

“There will be lower demand for fossil fuels in the future, and by definition that means lower prices” Lewis said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-11/fossil-fuel-industry-risks-losing-33-trillion-to-climate-change

[Trajan]

1. Environmental regulations getting you down?

Don't worry, we have this fancy schmancy TPP Trade Bill that'll take care of what ails ya!

[Bill USA]

2. Oil industry has been buying off universities & spreading disinformation re biofuels since ethanol

.. started getting attention as a viable biofuel and substitute for gasoline.


Methanol at MIT: Oil Industry Influence Charged in Project Cancellation

The cancellation of a research project on methanol (methyl alcohol) as a substitute motor fuel for gasoline at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Energy Laboratory offers a case in point. In the opinion of the scientist who initiated and led the project, it was killed because the laboratory yielded to influence from the oil and automobile industry.

Authorities at MIT deny that outside influence had any bearing on the decision, and they
say that the project--which was to involve the testing of a blend of methanol and gasoline
in 200 faculty and student cars--was terminated because it was technically weak and
inappropriate for a university. Yet the attendant circumstances, which include the active
involvement of an Exxon employee as well as the fact that the laboratory had received $1
million in grants from Exxon and Ford, put the termination in an ambiguous, and perhaps
suspicious, light.

The project in question began some 18 months ago at a time of considerable debate over
the feasibility of using methanol in automobiles. Several academic researchers were
touting methanol’s potential, and among them Thomas B. Reed of MIT’s Lincoln
Laboratory was perhaps the most vocal. Spokesmen for several oil and automobile
companies, notably Exxon, Chevron, and General Motors, were contesting the feasibility
of methanol fuels.

Reed, a 49 year old chemist who holds 10 patents and whose specialty is crystal growth
and high temperature processes, had in his spare time experimented extensively with his
own automobiles and those of his colleagues. He found that adding about 10 percent
methanol to a tank of gasoline improved performance, gave better mileage, and reduced
pollutant emissions. Results similar to Reed’s have since been reported by West
Germany’s Volkswagen, generally acknowledged as the leader in methanol research.
In this country, however, oil and automobile companies have continued to report that
methanol-gasoline blends cause drivability problems.
(more)

Big Oil Buys Berkeley is particularly interesting since some of Big Oil's most successful disinformation/fake research on Ethanol has come out of Univ. Calif. Berkeley. To be fair, important legitimate research showing Ethanol's validity as a transportation fuel replacement for gasoline, has also been done at Univ. Calif. Berkeley.(Ethanol can replace gasoline with significant energy savings, comparable impact on greenhouse gases).

Big Oil Buys Berkeley, California's Love Affair with Big Oil, Big Oil Goes to College

Big Oil buys BerkeleyBy Jennifer Washburn
JENNIFER WASHBURN is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the author of "University Inc.: The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education."


BP 'grants' Half a Billion to University of California Berkeley (with strings/chains attached) --
(emphases my own)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-washburn24mar24,0,6286060.story#axzz2w9ccCchr

What's more, BP would set up shop on campus: 50 scientists employed by the company would work on joint projects with academic scientists at Berkeley and the University of Illinois. BP also would set up private labs on these campuses, where all the research would be proprietary and confidential.

~~
~~

The fine print of the plan, which UC made public only after it was leaked, doesn't create much confidence. Californians need to know that their public university is dedicated to pursuing the best science, not just science that generates profits for BP. Unfortunately, the plan indicates that narrow commercial criteria could guide much of the Energy Biosciences Institute's research.


http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-washburn24mar24,0,5211524.story#ixzz2w9fO7EML
[div]

[font size="3"]Normally, even when university research is corporate sponsored, professors alone direct and shape it. Often, funds are assigned and research proposals are accepted through an independent, peer-review process.[font color="red"] In the BP deal, however, the institute — with a director to be "proposed" by BP and other high-level positions to be filled by BP employees or appointees — would play a major role in setting research agendas and controlling purse strings. The plan touts the company's role: BP's "business industry leadership will strongly differentiate the EBI from other primarily academic research enterprises."[/font]

The plan also would hand unusual control to BP in other areas. A bedrock principle of academia is that campus-based research should be published. That's why Berkeley bans classified military research from campus; the open exchange of information is fundamental to the advancement of science and education. But those 50 BP scientists on campus would, according to the plan, have "no obligation to publish."


(more)
[/font]

(more) see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/101688227

[OxQQme]

3. According to TPP

big oil could sue for 'loss of profits' ?

[yurbud]

4. maybe that's why it so urgently needs to be passed. The world will owe them TRILLIONS

for the privilege of having a livable planet.