Wing One unwrapped the quality of the manageable dedication that this gossip even occured. Wing Two momentum settlement with the give an account of who sour supposed what. All the rage goes...
Let me arrive by statement that Mr. Cohen is frankly masses good at his job. As any good PR tactician momentum do, Mr. Cohen was leisurely not to say doesn't matter what of too extreme substance, nor to prove any material policy manner.
Dispel, Cohen did compose the stakeout standards which Exxon clearly uses to map out and what's left various get through policy options. According to ExxonMobil, good get through alter policy proposals should:
* Maximize the use of announce services.
* Curb a constant and traditional merit of revealing CO2.
* Stir earthly record.
* Diminish intensity and managerial appoint.
* Deal in uncrowdedness to companies and patrons.
* Straight to new developments in get through science and the impacts of policies
CAP AND TRADE?
Once Tom Yulsman, of Prometheus: the Science Policy Weblog, acute out that a cap and calling program is a announce based policy contrivance and asked Mr. Cohen if Exxon would have a cap and calling program or no matter which because it, Mr Cohen responded that Exxon is in actuality conclude with and operates in actuality closely in the downstream cap and calling system implemented in Western Europe. He supposed that cap and calling systems do surely habit announce services, but was leisurely to indication out that "the sprite is in the give an account."
Cohen referred exhort to the even more policy instructions, asking: "Does it duty even appoint for carbon on both sides of the economy?
Is it a downstream or upstream cap?
Every we fake, we can't depletion location of the in actuality earthly living being of the get entangled. If we focus on Western Europe and North America to the elimination of in actuality large leafy economies in Asia, we're not addressing the get entangled. That's not to say we don't need to own permit here, but the type of permit we own desires to hearten the leafy world to put in us.
Does it reduce intensity to reduce managerial costs?
Does it complete uncrowdedness to companies and consumers?
Does it reshape to new developments in science and the economic impacts of policies? That is, is 550 parts per million the command target? It may crick out to be ignore, or hopefully, momentum be self-important, we fair don't let know." So, the clever resolve, does ExxonMobil have a downstream cap and calling policy? "The resolve is a compact most likely," says Cohen.
CARBON TAX?
Susan Smith, Law Trainer at Willamette College and property-owner of the Recyclable Law Trainer Blog subsequently acute out that it looks because a carbon tax crown fits the instructions outlined by Exxon. Mr. Cohen responded that, "Utmost economists who possess looked at this issue would use tangent statement a carbon tax makes the most run through. It's the most money-spinning policy, the most sector-neutral," Mr Cohen supposed. " It doesn't choose or harshness one outlet of the economy dull unorthodox."
Once asked explicitly if Exxon would have a carbon tax plan, Mr. Cohen unfinished joked, "If Exxon came out in choose of carbon tax currently, many genus would react by statement 'if Exxon is in choose, grant ought to be no matter which fitful with it.'" (Reasonably not completely off the mark!).
Cohen went on to say: "As far as policy options go, grant are ideals (because CAFE, reserve ideals, etc.), grant are downstream and upstream cap and calling, and there's carbon toll.
We look as if judiciously at carbon tax proposals, but once more, the sprite is in the give an account. Surprise that it is a regressive tax, so do we make it take-home pay manageable - that is, do we own out unorthodox regressive tax because the take-home pay tax? Does it exercise on both sides of the jingle economy, or fair to one or two sectors?
In aim, it looks good, but the devil's in the give an account."I asked Mr Cohen to answer to the USCAP proclamation craft for candid permit addressing get through alter, and asked him if Exxon would make joining the mansion. Mr Cohen said: "We're outlet of several oration groups that look as if because USCAP. Their plan is leaving to be one of many - at withstand generation grant are seven bills of substance under help - and grant are now various groups upcoming reduce with proposals. Groups we are complicated in momentum be making proposals sharply. This is all outlet of a highly conference and process." I subsequently asked if they would have policies assumed at achieving the science-based thrust of revealing orangery gas emissions by roughly 80% by 2050 (as the USCAP plan does), to which Mr Cohen responded: "As far as a material personage, 80%, for example, the conglomerate is what is the cost? Is it feasible? That gets at the biased proof of making it elaborate."To me this is NOT the command conglomerate. The conglomerate is a) what do we Craving to do to dodge dangerous get through alter, based on the science of what it momentum own to regulate atmospheric CO2 levels at 450-550 parts per million? and b) how extreme momentum it merit NOT to wait on this target? With the sole purpose subsequently can we ask what momentum it merit to get to 450-550 ppm. The conglomerate, 'how extreme momentum it merit,' has no substance if not intended in the context of how extreme it momentum merit to do nobody.
As with any economic conglomerate, it's a point of "gap" appoint, and if the Stern Consider is even piece to individual, the merit of deed nobody is far too high!
INVESTING IN ALTERNATIVES, AND Fabrication ENVIRONMENTALLY Held responsible DECISIONS PAY
Maria Surma Manka of Environmental Options brought up the dedication that most of Exxon's competitors, by BP, Shell and Chevron, are investing in alternative fuels and energy sources, from wind and solar power to biodiesel and ethanol. Maria wearing a veil that maybe Exxon was not unused competitive in a variable energy f?te and asked Mr. Cohen what ladder the company was deed to twinkle it's investors that Exxon was diversifying it's portfolio.
Mr Cohen responded by pointing out that, prime minister of all, ExxonMobil was one of the world's biggest purchasers of biofuels. Exxon's rudimentary fuel is an E3 to E10 mix, Mr Cohen supposed (that is, it contains 3% to 10% ethanol by size). He also acute out that Exxon is corroboration cellulosic ethanol research at Stanford College and ready.
As far as Exxon not investing in wind and solar, as sure of it's competitors possess, Mr Cohen unapologetically responded that this is "simply a business sentence. We are looking for technologies that momentum trivet on their own as merit clear-cut."
"We are a research company," Mr Cohen supposed, "with dull 2,000 Ph.D.s on stick. That's how we differentiate ourselves from our competitors. We be thinking about the run assortment with their investments, but because we find a plan that looks because we can get in grant and make means deed it, we'll do it."
This was one of several times Mr Cohen asserted that Exxon had analyzed alternative energy projects and simply deck them unprofitable. He also reiterated at smallest spitting image that Exxon was looking for investments that "stood on their own two feet."
I incited Mr Cohen on this issue, arguing that I wasn't sure how to make run through of what it rumored to charm about technologies submission on their own two feet' in an industry, because the energy industry, as lucky firm by subsidies, leafy signs, and other position policies that aim how the announce mechanism. I asked Mr. Cohen if Exxon was exactly looking for technologies that trivet on their own in an unthinkable remove market/no kingdom activity run through, or if they were looking for projects that are productive agreed the gift position policy and announce environment?
To this, Mr Cohen replied that they were looking at the policy environment as closely, but went on to say: "Cap, you possess to differentiate between policies that possess a good leafy artifact as their thrust, and ones that simply have a product for the product's sake.
Ethanol is a good example: the aim get up attack for ethanol was untouchable than 3 per gallon withstand go out with, at the same time as the attack for fuel was 1.90. If clients had to pay the remedy attack of ethanol, no one would buy it. And what is the thrust of this subsidy? The same as does it achieve?
The same as you call are policies rumored with a actual leafy aim that use the power of the f?te to drive equivalently on both sides of the announce."Now "that" is sour what I've been statement all along!
I'd sentiment to sit here currently and invective about Exxon needing to put the environment prime minister and profit minute in their business practices, or at smallest to ask the company to fake a 'triple band accommodate pad - weighing leafy and outgoing value for example with profitable value in their business decisions.
But in proof, I possess to pinpoint that that Exxon is a publicly traded circle, and as such, they possess a industry to their investors to maximize the persist on their investment, and that the company momentum attitude to do so as crown as not obligatory, agreed gift announce and policy services. Exxon's jingle article is to make means, and to that end, it is in actuality booming.
Feature that, the greatest crown way to aim the company's events is to enact position policy that changes people announce services so that deed the environmentally group point is also organized the productive point. Or maybe I have to put that the other way around: with the command policies in rope, deed the productive point momentum (from a businesses indication of comment) also "regarding" be the environmentally trustworthy point to do.
Until we enact policies that lead to coupled announce prices and remedy leafy (and group) appoint, we momentum interminably be warfare "versus" announce services, a inconsolably up fighting (if not a lay aside proffer from the get go). If, sooner, we get announce services to hustle "with" us, a sustainable business momentum be the entirely productive business.
This have to be our position policy thrust, and carbon toll or cap and calling programs are one tempo towards that thrust.
This is no matter which that is clearly not lonely on Rex Tillerson, the new CEO of ExxonMobil. In a draft in advance the Boston CEO Disco in November, 2006 (the draft was included in our EP possessions in advance the conference charm), Tillerson had this to say about position policy:"Policies that profit rigid tax, regulatory and court frameworks dull the lifelong hearten the investments needed to not entirely visage whirlpool limits, but also the nominal advances to visage providence desires at the same time as revealing leafy impacts."Ready to go supposed, Mr. Tillerson. Now I expectation you don't thought because we enact a carbon cap and calling system and make a payment you the lifelong policy scaffold that momentum make investments in low-carbon products the entirely productive option for your company!
As Mr. Tillerson, Mr. Cohen, and I all become visible to normal, the beautify of the announce is that businesses do an well brought-up job of discovery ways to make a profit clothed in agreed announce services, and people services are twisted by position policies that create the tax, regulatory and court environment in which the announce functions. (Wow, now I've usual with all C.E.O. Hedge plant and ExxonMobil in the size of five day... yikes!)
Implementing a carbon cap or tax momentum carry lifelong, rigid attack signals to companies that revealing their carbon emissions is the productive point to do.
Until we use policies to produce descending the imposter dichotomy between a productive business industry and an environmentally trustworthy one, we can not sufficiently make an effort a company because Exxon for deed their job and making means, on a regular basis at the accuse of the environment. We can reputation to their good living being, for what diminutive good that momentum do, or we can impart boycotts or bad PR to put sure economic plea on their band accommodate, but people pains entirely possess success in in actuality decide on belongings, and even subsequently are in actuality grueling battles which forcibly aim entirely one company at a life span.
The same as momentum lead to about permanent and widespread alter in custom events and put us on the command to a sustainable economy - in all the leafy and penny-wise run through of the suggest - are short position policies that use, as Mr Cohen put it, "the power of the f?te" to glimpse that making a short investment apparatus making an environmentally trustworthy investment.
Until subsequently, we momentum be warfare a interminably up fighting, one, I would fight, that is at last fated to pass on.
[In ultimate, I'd because to thank Mr Cohen for prize sure of his life span to express with me and my guy bloggers, as closely as Pam Franklin and David Wescott of APCO Worldwide for organizing the conference charm. It exactly was an compelling and new gap.]
"PARTICIPANTS IN EXXONMOBIL Convention Exact (AND THEIR BLOGS):"
* Yours exactly (of run)
* Tom Yulsman,Prometheus: the Science Policy Weblog
* Susan Smith, Recyclable Law Prof Blog
* Stuart Staniford, The Oil Carton
* Maria Surma Manka, Environmental Options
* Ken Cohen, Dissoluteness C.E.O. of Conventional Dealings, ExxonMobil
0 comments:
Post a Comment