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 stm1185 on 6/29/2012 10:17:16 PM , Rating: 1
My idea of freedom is that if ExxonMobil wants this guy as CEO, they were free to pay him what they feel they should. It can be a bad decision it could be a good decision, they are free to make it. And the Shareholders are free to push for change or sell out of the company.

Anyone who thinks a free market would create a Feudal society spends way too much time reading propaganda and never picked up a history book. Feudal Society was based around the Land, called a Fief, which was held by the Nobility, because of the favor of their King. Serfs who lived on a fief were often forced to work for the Lord of that fief.

A free market society would not have lords, or kings, or fiefs. You would have land that would be bought and sold freely by the people for what they decide. A free market worker does so because they are willing to accept the payment offered, not because they are compelled to under the law. That worker might have to accept an offer that is poor due to his/her circumstances but they are free to look for a better one or try and come to a better arrangement.

You are just jealous communist wanting a society that you think you would do better in, but in reality everyone would do worse.

By boeush on 6/30/2012 8:00:45 PM , Rating: 3
Feudal Society was based around the Land, called a Fief, which was held by the Nobility, because of the favor of their King.
Is the supply of high-quality land unlimited or limited (particularly around major metropolises where people tend to congregate)? What happens in a society with exponentially widening income and wealth disparities between the gilded oligarchy and the plebes? The gilded oligarchy eventually winds up owning all of the valuable land, and all of the productive assets. The plebes wind up renting property and buying services from the elite. The owners get ever wealthier. The renters asymptotically approach the status of household slaves. The stable end-state of this evolution is Feudalism by any other name (even if not originally established by a King's edict.)
A free market society would not have lords, or kings, or fiefs.
In the United States, the society was firmly on that exact trajectory during the early 20th century (the so-called Gilded Age.) It was averted by vigorous federal monopoly- and trust-busting efforts, strong organized labor movements, and eventually government-driven wealth redistribution and public utilities/infrastructure investments (the New Deal). For a few decades, America had a growing Middle Class, and prospered. But then economic "liberalization" began, the income/wealth gaps started to blow out, and the middle class started to shrink, even as personal, corporate, and national debts escalated exponentially. That's still going on even today. Left on that trajectory, we'll find ourselves back to the good-old days before long, and beyond.

But not much farther beyond, I suspect. Societies eventually reach a point when the 99% finally realizes it has been transfixed by a fictional "dream" even while being serially raped by the "captains of industry" for decades on end. Then things can turn real ugly, real fast for the financial elites -- even up to the sort of extremes that Russia experienced in the first 2 decades of last century...

Personally, I'd rather not have my country go through such duress. But maybe it's inevitable...

"It's okay. The scenarios aren't that clear. But it's good looking. [Steve Jobs] does good design, and [the iPad] is absolutely a good example of that." -- Bill Gates on the Apple iPad

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