Rex Tillerson, our next Secretary of State
-
As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this.
-
As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this.
As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this.
You think he'll have the backs of energy firms because he's head of an energy company? I can see that.
Meanwhile, how's that swamp-draining, no-special-interests government coming along?
-
Here's something that surprises me - Rex Tillerson is in favour of the Paris climate deal:
“At ExxonMobil, we share the view that the risks of climate change are serious and warrant thoughtful action. Addressing these risks requires broad-based, practical solutions around the world.”
“Importantly, as a result of the Paris agreement, both developed and developing countries are now working together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, while recognizing differing national responsibilities, capacities and circumstances. The best hope for the future is to enable and encourage long-term investments in both proven and new technologies, while supporting effective policies.”
-
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
-
As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this.
You think he'll have the backs of energy firms because he's head of an energy company? I can see that.
Meanwhile, how's that swamp-draining, no-special-interests government coming along?
-
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
-
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
Sigh. Well at least someone gets it
-
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
I would also add that they know they have the right contacts to just avoid compliance altogether
-
Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
To be honest, if the regulations are sound themselves, not being able to comply with them should be a problem. If the only way you can make money is by disregarding environmental consequences, then we don't really want that energy.
-
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
To be honest, if the regulations are sound themselves, not being able to comply with them should be a problem. If the only way you can make money is by disregarding environmental consequences, then we don't really want that energy.
-
To be honest, when all is said and done, energy is energy. Choosing between different 'brands' is meaningless because you just use electricity. Petrol Gas can be a different story of course, better quality is a thing.
-
Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies.
To be honest, if the regulations are sound themselves, not being able to comply with them should be a problem. If the only way you can make money is by disregarding environmental consequences, then we don't really want that energy.
To be honest, if the regulations are sound themselves, not being able to comply with them should be a problem. If the only way you can make money is by disregarding environmental consequences, then we don't really want that energy.
The smaller companies complied with the old regs. If you create new regs that are extremely costly for a company, the bigger guys can soak it up. As for the regs being sound, they are normally a total joke but very expensive jokes.
Example: If you are rich enough, you can just buy carbon credits and keep on doing what you were doing before.
-
That reminds me of something quite dangerous that Trump has said that hasn't been gaining basically any attention anywhere, far as I can see - that for every new regulation, two old regulations must be removed. Which two? Who decides? It's basically just a fuck you to anyone trying to impose new regulations, and that shit plays well with the 'less government is better' folks but sometimes, regulations are needed. Like seatbelts in cars. That's a good thing. But if you had to remove two regulations to impose it?
-
Here's something that surprises me - Rex Tillerson is in favour of the Paris climate deal:
“At ExxonMobil, we share the view that the risks of climate change are serious and warrant thoughtful action. Addressing these risks requires broad-based, practical solutions around the world.”
“Importantly, as a result of the Paris agreement, both developed and developing countries are now working together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, while recognizing differing national responsibilities, capacities and circumstances. The best hope for the future is to enable and encourage long-term investments in both proven and new technologies, while supporting effective policies.”
At least Tillerson is not a fan of Bolton...
Trying to reserve judgement on this nomination, but as CEO he led Exxon in directions at odds with US interests.
Here's something that surprises me - Rex Tillerson is in favour of the Paris climate deal:
Exxon has positioned itself well to thrive no matter which direction the world moves on warming. And arguably their energy sources are more secure if warming is combated.
A few years ago when oil was $100/barrel and fracking was ramping up, they made a huge move to dramatically increase their natural gas holdings. Most are domestic. Stockholders went from delighted to mad when oil and Nat gas prices both subsequently fell dramatically. But as a result they are poised to shift business to Nat Gas for reduced CO2 power generation and diesel engine conversion. Obviously they already have the retail distribution to support the conversion.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login