Print 101 comment(s) - last by PittmanKen18.. on Jul 7 at 12:03 AM

Rex Tillerson, ExxonMobil CEO
He also addressed fears associated with drilling techniques and oil dependency

ExxonMobil's CEO defended oil and gas drilling by saying that climate change is something humans can adapt to.

Rex Tillerson, ExxonMobil CEO, said issues like climate change, energy dependence and oil/gas drilling are blown out of proportion. He blames a lazy press, illiterate public and fear-mongering advocacy groups for the bad light placed on the oil industry.

Climate change is a controversial topic that has been subjected to much debate. Tillerson said that fossil fuels may cause global warming, but argued that humans can easily adapt to the warmer climate. More specifically, he said that humans can adapt to rising sea levels and climate changes because he doubts the validity of climate modeling, which predicts the magnitude of impact associated with climate change.

"We have spent our entire existence adapting," said Tillerson. "We'll adapt. It's an engineering problem and there will be an engineering solution."

Others, however, disagree with Tillerson's assessment. Andrew Weaver, chairman of climate modeling and analysis at Canada's University of Victoria, said that adapting to climate change would be much harder than just preventing it in the first place.

In addition, adapting to climate change could be much more expensive than preventing it. According to Steve Coll, author of "Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power," adapting to climate change would require moving entire cities. A better alternative would be legislation that slows the process of global warming.

An example of such a measure is the proposed fuel standards for 2017-2025, which will require automakers to create vehicles capable of 54.5 MPG by 2025. The effort aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the country's dependency on foreign oil. These standards will cost the auto industry $157.3 billion and add an extra $2,000 to the sticker price of new autos, but it will save consumers $1.7 trillion at the gas pump.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will finalize the fuel efficiency standards by the end of July 2012. Such measures could hit ExxonMobil's wallet with less gas used.

Tillerson also addressed the topic of consequences related to oil/gas drilling techniques, saying that drilling will always present possible risks like spills and accidents. But he mentioned that such risks are manageable and worth the end result, which is the energy provided.

Tillerson also said that drilling in shale formations doesn't pose life-threatening risks to those living nearby. However, drilling mixes millions of gallons of water with sand and chemicals that creates drilling wastewater. If this water is not treated, it can contaminate drinking water through cracked drilling pipes.

Tillerson also mentioned his problem with views on oil dependency. He said that there will always be access to oil, and that it doesn't matter where the U.S. gets oil because it is priced globally. Tillerson added that the U.S. only receiving oil from North America would still increase gas prices in the U.S. because it would cause a "disruption" in the Middle East.

Source: The Hook

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Tillerson makes $25.2 million a year
By boeush on 6/29/2012 8:08:00 PM , Rating: 4
a very specific skill set that very few can adequately supply
Or, very few ever get the opportunity to either attain or (more likely) deploy. Being a manager is not rocket science. Most of the work consists of delegating various tasks to respective specialists.
the money is already there, it is just a question of whether the owners or players get it
Come now, the money could also be distributed to the shareholders, and/or left in the pockets of customers by lowering the profit margins on the product(s). But sticking with your misguided sports metaphor, who are the "professional athletes" in a major corporation like ExxonMobil: the CEO, or the thousands of actual professionals taking care of the company's daily business? What is more valuable and functional (by far): the CEO sans the company, or the company sans the CEO? So, how about paying the CEO less, and the other employees more? But perhaps that would be too much fairness and justice in the eyes of the "free" markets pwned by financial oligarchs...

By mikeyD95125 on 6/29/2012 11:35:30 PM , Rating: 2
Come now, the money could also be distributed to the shareholders, and/or left in the pockets of customers by lowering the profit margins on the product(s).

Ha, yeah lower margins to benefit consumers. I see you won't be applying to be the CEO of Exxon mobile, or any company for that matter.

In my sports salary comparison (which wasn't meant to be entirely analogous) I suppose the people who actually work are the athletes while the investors are the owners. The reality is that both groups are needed to create a successful team (company). The question is how much wealth should go to the owners versus the athletes. This is typically negotiated in terms of how much the team (company) can afford to the players (employees) while still maintaining a good rate of return for the owners (shareholders).

Market forces dictate this (who would have figured)

"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki