CEO Chairman David J. O’Reilly speaks

RealClearPolitics - Articles - The New Energy Consensus

Renewable energy is very real. We need it. It will be an essential part of the future I envision. But it's not realistic to suppose that it can replace conventional energy in a timeframe that some suggest.
...
Even with the rapid growth of renewables, experts estimate that over 80 percent of global energy consumed in 2030 will still come from oil, natural gas and coal.
...
One of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere is fossil fuels.

There is no doubt that carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere have increased. And although there is uncertainty about the future impacts on climate, most people agree that it's not a good idea to continue unrestricted hydrocarbon combustion. And I agree.

But how should we reduce emissions in a realistic timeframe given the scale of the energy system and the growing demand?

Once again, many proposals are being discussed.

Some talk about reducing emissions by 20 percent by 2020. It sounds good! 20 by 20! Others talk about reducing emissions by 50, 60 or even 70 percent by 2050.

Even with the best of intentions, it will be challenging. If we were to shutdown the entire global transportation system today - all cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes and ships, we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by about 15 percent! That's one-five percent.

And meaningful reductions will be expensive to achieve.

The International Energy Agency predicts that the real costs to meet greenhouse gas reduction targets will be $45 trillion dollars. That's above and beyond the investments necessary to meet future energy demand. It's a cost every one of us in this room needs to understand. Not just a cost on business, it is a cost on society. One that you and I will pay.