deal architect

Exxon Mobil in an "energy magic quadrant”

I have spent a lifetime watching new market segments emerge, mature, get disrupted, morph and consolidate. The energy sector is going through a massive disruption and renewal.  If I were building a 'magic quadrant" I would factor wind, solar, tidal, nuclear fusion, oil and gas, hydroelectric, biomass, geothermal and other alternative energy sources. My view is we need all of the above so we don’t have to become dependent on tyrant politicians or businesses. I wrote recently energy independence is as important as a focus on emissions.

And as I have in many tech sectors, I would be listening to pitches and doing a lot of research around each. And sure enough there would be bad-mouthing, with players calling the other evil and worse. My job is to ignore that noise.

I have been talking to a number of oil industry executives and listened to a couple of interviews Darren Woods, Chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil has done recently including one below. It is one of the largest publicly traded international oil and gas companies.

Here are some of his remarks (slightly edited) about his company, his competition and his thoughts on public policy. He is feisty at points, but generally, comes across as a geek and an economist, something I like when I listen to vendor pitches.

• We've been doing this for 100 years. When we first started out, we were basically making kerosene for lighting. When the electric light came on, we were moving into gasoline. We've moved into chemicals. And so, this industry and our company have been evolving since its inception.
• We are a company that knows how to manage and manipulate hydrocarbon molecules. What we're trying to manage with the energy transition, it's essentially a hydrocarbon, CO2 carbon management challenge. And that's right up our alley.
• The more folks we engage trying to solve this (transition to low-carbon) problem, I think the better off the world is going to be. I've seen a big difference just in the last several years with the number of different companies, big thinkers, focused in this space.... I mean, two years ago, it was wind and solar, period. Today, it's wind and solar, and you got carbon capture and hydrogen and biofuels and ammonia.  (Btw, he did not touch on the potential of many other sources I made above. As a CEO, he sees the competitive landscape differently than I do as an analyst)
• Ultimately, I think, by 2040, every vehicle in the world could be electric. And so, you would not have gasoline sales. Oil demand would (still) be what it was back in 2013/2014 time frame. We were pretty successful business in 2013/2014 . So, our view (is EVs are) not going to make or break this business or this industry.
• What's driving growth in demand for oil is chemical products, which play a really important role in people's lives today. The other big driver is industrial fuels, transportation fuels, and so heavy duty.
• Europeans are making a strong case for green hydrogen which is made through electrolysis. Blue hydrogen is developed primarily through methane, and then capturing the CO2 that comes out. The US has abundant methane, we've got abundant places to store CO2. And so, the answer for hydrogen in the US I think, is going to be blue hydrogen. In Europe, they don't have the same abundance of methane, they don't have the same co2 capture capacity. So, electrolysis and green hydrogen makes more sense for them. And so rather than coming out with a dictate that says it's got to be green hydrogen versus blue hydrogen is let the market figure it out.  What we will find as you go around the world, that the natural endowments, the advantages that you see, the technology progress, you see is going to manifest itself differently.
• I think political leaders ought to be focusing on how we get to a solution and working collaboratively. Not only with NGOs, but with businesses that have the experiences and the skills and the understanding to figure out solutions that help meet all of society's needs, not just one aspect.
• Don't incentivize one technology because you think that's a better answer than the other. Put incentives out there for all technologies and let the productive capacity of the market work, let the technologies of companies go to work to solve those problems. We are an advocate for a uniform price on carbon across the economy is because it incentivizes every individual player, irrespective of the industry or in respect of the technology that you support. You put your effort into finding a solution to capture that value, and reduce CO2. It's too complicated, it's too difficult to predict exactly what the solution is going to look like. Instead, we should put the incentives out there and let the market do what the market does.
• We've been doing this for 100 years. In the technology space, people recognize that we're serious, we have capabilities, and we're at the table, trying to bring solutions to that. We have a reputation for doing big projects, at scale, convening industries, bringing together different parts of governments, other commercial enterprises to come up with big picture solutions.
• We could spend forever debating what was said 30 years ago or we can focus on what are we doing today to try to make progress in this very complex space. I'm very proud of what we're doing today. And I think we will make a big difference; we will be an important part of the solution.

The next energy transition

Mankind has been through multiple energy transitions. Our ancestors burned wood, used peat bog and other biofuels. The Romans were particularly ingenious at using water and wind power. Coal fueled the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s. The 1900s belonged to oil and gas especially as humans became much more mobile.

We are in the midst of another major energy transition as we all move to low-carbon futures. To me, the exciting thing is we will likely end up with a cocktail of energy sources – wind, solar, tidal, gas, nuclear fusion, upgraded biofuels, hydroelectric and geothermal combined with storage in the form of hydrogen fuel cells and electric batteries. And I could make that list much longer.

We should be celebrating this coming abundance. Instead, we are vilifying one source or another, using FUD to try and accelerate the transition to our favorite flavor. My projection - there will likely never be a single solution. Different countries will take their own paths. Just look at how they have been evolving in the last few decades, each with their own version of energy independence

• Germany deserves a lot of credit for maturing modern versions of wind and solar (wind mills and photovoltaic cells have been around far longer). And yet the majority of its energy still has come from its coal and from Russian gas. Going forward it will continue with its wind/solar but diversify with LNG logistics and a hydrogen future.
• The US image is dirty – yet between 1990 and 2020 its greenhouse gases stayed steady, even as its GDP went up 5X. The largest single contributor was that many of its utilities switched from coal to much cleaner gas. And that gas had its own remarkable story thanks to entrepreneurs like George Mitchell who contributed to the US version of energy independence
• France gets 2/3rd of its electricity from nuclear power. While much of the world conjures up images of Chernobyl and other disasters, the French reacted to the OPEC oil crisis in the 1970s with the brutally realistic assessment of “No oil, no gas, no coal, no choice” and embraced nuclear and continues with it.
• Norway has the highest per capita adoption of electric vehicles in the world. And these EVs are the “greenest” in the world. Over 90% of its electricity comes from hydroelectric sources. It is a country blessed with plenty of deep valleys and rivers. It is doubly blessed with plenty of North Sea oil and gas which it mostly exports – valued at over half of all of its exports.
• Iceland, Kenya and the Philippines (among others) get much of their energy from geothermal. Factoid – after solar, geothermal is the second most abundant source of energy available to humans.

Update - someone asked me what about the BRICS countries and others like Indonesia and in Africa. They have been trying out their own version of energy independence. Brazil pioneered ethanol from its cane decades ago. China has invested heavily in modern hydroelectric. Their challenge is they are still too heavily dependent on fossil fuels, particularly coal. They will have to innovate their own path to low carbon. They cannot pretend the rest of the world will make up for them. Their emissions more than offset the improvements we are seeing in some of the countries named above.

I have personally been dismayed by the demonizing of the oil and gas sector. In fairness, the industry has done a poor job marketing its contribution to our lives. Did you know over 6,000 items we use every day from lip balm to carpeting get their start in crude oil?

I worked in the oil patch in the 80s in Texas, Saudi, Holland, Bahrain among other places. It is an incredibly complex and brave industry. I say brave because they work in some of the most forsaken, hostile, risky places on earth. And have mind-bogglingly complex protocols for safety on rigs, tankers, refineries etc.

But importantly here’s why we will continue to need that sector to combat climate change. They have some of the only companies in the world that can run multi-billion $ projects, plan 20 years out, have tons of chemists, physicists, quantum computing wizards etc.

I have talked to some oil execs recently and it’s impressive what they are thinking about carbon capture/storage, LNG logistics, green hydrogen, geothermal etc. Low carbon is a definite focus.

The Ukraine crisis has reminded us once again of the essential need for energy independence. It is AND, not OR as we worry about emissions. Vice versa, for the BRICS and many other economies it cannot just be a focus on independence, it has to balance their massive emissions.

Go back to what I said earlier. In no previous transition has mankind had so many choices in energy sources. It’s a reason to celebrate, not bicker. That should be the best middle finger we can show Putin.

Beyond wind turbines and solar panels

Renewables like wind and solar are enjoying their day in the sun, but it’s nice to see more traditional and other energy sources also seeing plenty of innovation. I am a firm believer in a broad portfolio of solutions – a balanced energy strategy leaves you less vulnerable to embargoes and supply chain chaos.

Here are recent examples on New Florence

The new nuclear movement

Enhanced geothermal systems

Pumped storage hydroelectric power

Giant kite as energy for ships

Green methanol

Gravity as energy storage