Lessons to Learn From BP’s Latest Misstep

One mile per gallon is the kind of savings that can easily be achieved by changing how you drive. My car has one of does MPG displays and my average can be anywhere from 22 to 27 MPG depending on how I drive. When I first got the car I used to average 23 MPG. I've now learned to drive the car better and get 25 MPG without getting where I'm going any slower.

Well, BP is a business so you can't really fault them for making money. There's nothing environmentally damaging about being profitable.

In fact, if they are as green as their reputation, it should be reassuring that they are also a good business, because it shows that you don't have to ignore the environment to be successful.

sure, BP are the best of a bad bunch of polluters who've known about the consequences of their actions for decades, but have still done very little about it ... they make over $7billion in a QUARTER OF A YEAR from selling dirty and dangerous energy and pledge to spend $8billion on clean and safe energy over a DECADE ... they brand themselves completely on their green credentials ... this is comparable to ford advertising themselves as a company that only sells bicycles! the reality is that there are still a trillion barrels of oil in the ground and if the price of a barrel rises to $100, then there's still $100trillion dollars of oil business still to be done ... and hydrogen isn't going to become a viable power sources for many years yet ... that's a huge white elephant, so don't wait for it to happen ... people - take steps now to make yourselves energy independent now and kiss companies like BP goodbye forever ... take your power away from them

the comment 'theres nothing environmentally damaging about being profitable' is mindless ... profit is the end result of the conversion of natural resources into money ... and from thereon it remains a continuous cycle i.e. the profits are reinvested to convert evenmore natural resources into more profits ... its the biggest problem we face as a planet i.e. too many people consuming too much stuff ... the modern day economic system has an infinite goal i.e. more profits every year for every company ... but it feeds itself from a finite resource i.e. the earth ... the profit motive is the biggest vicious cycle on the planet ... there are only two futures - 1) no future, or hell on earth, which is where we are headed at a hell of a pace .. or - 2) the sustainable future, where we start the transition to a place where we largely become self sufficient, especially from an energy and food perspective, which are, in essence, the same thing .. anyhow, profits are the very result of environmental destruction ... the key is to earn enough profit to sustain you, in a sustainable way ... focus on that

I've got mixed feelings about this whole situation.

BP could easily afford to spend more than $8billion over 10 years on renewables (and likely make a decent return anyway), given their huge profits.

I've seen several reports about the pipeline situation. Some describe the situation as neglect, implying that no inspections were conducted.

What actually happened was that they changed the way they conducted inspections (ultrasound instead of a pig, the latter being better) based on an apparently flawed contention that the oil flowing through the pipes was largely non-corrosive. I would have thought that the chemical engineers at BP would be smart enough to know better. I'd be interested to hear their perspective.

Still, more frequent inspections might have prevented this "crisis", or at least with some workarounds in place until the repairs were made.

I'd like to know what role management had in this situation.

Still, when I have to buy gas, I usually go to BP (none in my area though) or Shell. These two are the lesser of all evils when it comes to large gas retailers.

I'd love to have the cash for the Tesla Motors roadster and be free from oil altogether.

Petroleum companies sell petroleum products because people buy petroleum products; there is an ever-increasing use of these products, whether it's your gas, your tyvek house wrap, new tires for your prius, or your makeup and "vegan leather" handbags. To fault the companies because there is a market for their products is irrisponsible.

Exxon and Texaco are not investing in any kind of renewable energy. The fact that BP and Shell are using their fairly-earned oil profits to launch themselves into other aspects of the energy business is not something that can be taken lightly or dismissed as "greenwashing". 8 billion might seem like a small amount for them to invest in renewables, but 8 billion is a fortune in the rewables business, when turbines only cost about a million bucks a megawatt, and especially when you've already got a stake in a wind turbine manufacturer (like BP has in Clipper).

"All indications are that the corrosion that caused the hole in the transit line was biological in origin, caused by sulfate reducing bacteria inside the pipeline" - Petroleum News. More discussion at The Oil Drum.

Oil prices are up: People will dump their SUV's and get a hybrid. Renewables will be profitable sooner.

So where is the bad news?

Pete, imagine a company that uses all of it's profits to perform research into environmentally friendly areas. In that case, profit would be environmentally positive.

As you stated in your post, it's the reinvestment of profit into production of more products from natural resources that is damaging. The profit per se has no effect on the environment, it is how it is earned or used.

And not everything sold at a profit is made from the resources of the planet -- what about the entire service industry?

Stop Petroleum use now.
It's the only way.
Make them shut down the rest of the pipelines.
Let us go back to living in the dark, and riding horses.

How dare they invest in renewables. That's my flag to wave!!

Shell has a pretty well-deserved bad reputation for its treatment of the Niger delta and the people who live there.

The oil companies are not directly responsible for the high gas prices. The speculative trading and the increased demand are the big culprits.

The oil companies may be making record profits, but if they are not careful they may find themselves in deep trouble.

It only takes a few major break through's by other companies like Tesla, and the desire to change by enough people to change the whole market.

Oil prices are up: People will dump their SUV's and get a hybrid. Renewables will be profitable sooner. So where is the bad news?

Um... it makes countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia very wealthy, for one, and hurts the economy and low income earners very hard.

But you know all that and are just playing silly games.

Um we get a lot of out oil from the America's, IE Canada and Venezuela. I'm looking to get rid of my SUV but not sure it's worth getting a hybrid yet.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0425-21.htm

Peter (I'm Pete) - Answers to your points.

'Imagine a company that uses all of it's profits to perform research into environmentally friendly areas. In that case, profit would be environmentally positive.'

- To a degree. But what counts is the extent it goes to. If it carries doing business as usual, but a little bit better, then it's still causing environmental destruction. 100% sustainability is the goal. Unless it gets there, the profit motive is still, ultimately, environmentally destructive. But some progress is sure better than none. Interface are a good example of a business who have set such a goal. God bless Ray Anderson.

'As you stated in your post, it's the reinvestment of profit into production of more products from natural resources that is damaging. The profit per se has no effect on the environment, it is how it is earned or used.'

- The profit is the end outcome of the business activity. Those dollars in your wallet have been derived from a transaction involving some product or service that has consumed natural resources, so therefore caused environmental destruction along the way. A great acid test is to look at your pay slip at the end of the month and ask yourself what you really did all month to earn that money. What was the true output of that month of your life(?). Time for a reality 'cheque'. ;o)

'And not everything sold at a profit is made from the resources of the planet -- what about the entire service industry?'

- 'The entire service industry' ... hoo-boy! ... nice call ... some service industry players are to be held accountable as much as the worst manufacturers/polluters. They play a key role in helping amplify environmental destruction evenmore. Hell, I used to do it for a living! e.g. banks who are financing the expansion of business that deplete natural resources ... in fact, that goes for any nameless shareholder who invests in a company expecting ever increasing returns. Let's give an example here e.g. Barclays Bank being a major shareholder in ExxonMobil. Any of you who bank with Barclays should switch your account away from them.

The bottom line is that we are on a completely unsustainable trajectory right now ... and it's getting worse, not better ... let's not kid ourselves. Sure, there are some small wins, but we take one step forwards and business as continues taking a thousand. Add to that the 3 billion more people we'll have on the planet by 2050 and it's over.

In 2000 we were already overshooting the earth's biological capacity to sustain the human population by 125%. Since then we've added another half billion mouths.

'Think of the earth as a living organism that is being attacked by billions of bacteria whose numbers double every forty years. Either the host dies, or the parasite dies, or they both die.' Gore Vidal

The host is going to be fine. We parasites need to worry though.

Now, I must get back to burning the tyres in my backyard. ;o)

Enjoyed the exchange. Good luck with your own work.

Pete

The host is going to be fine.

Standard crappy argument.

BP's investment in solar and other renewables is blatent greenwashing. You don't look to the dealer recommend a good drug treatment program. Oil companies are not going to canablize their own bottom lines in attempt to make oil obsolete. Demand for oil is higher when there are no viable alternatives available.

So I suppose it would be better if they didn't try to be green at all huh? What a crap arguement, so what if its greenwashing. And Pete you use resources just living, I mean your taking up all the oxygen. Resources are here to be used, to not use them is stupid.

good old 'anonymous' ... thanks for that ... the host is going to be fine wasn't an arguement, it was a statement ... just as it lived many millions of years before us parasites, it will live for many millions of years beyond us ... its more a question of how long will it remain inhabitable for us parasites ... we need to reframe the debate in their minds that its not so much about saving the planet ('the host'), but that it's now more about saving ourselves before we get too far down consumption and pollution road

and jiltedcitizen, yes, i do use resources just living (although it feels good to be typing this via renewable energy), and yes, my very breath exhales around 5% of CO2 ... but its not so much a case of not using resources that are available ... its about how much of them each of us use ... they are finite, not infinite, such as the pursuit of never ending economic growth, which of course feeds itself from natural resources ... which brings us back to the point that each us needed to become as self sufficient in a sustainable way as possible ... in how we live, how we work and first and foremost, think ... very interested to learn more about your worldview

must get back to the tyres burning in the back yard ... my mcdonalds home delivery by hummer is due soon too ;o)

So you seem to push "green" and sustainable practices, but only when its convenient. I do the same thing. I mean you are typing on a not so green computer. Economics will push towards sustainable practices, when they make financial sense or they realize their is a big enough market out there.

"Economics will push towards sustainable practices, when they make financial sense or they realize their is a big enough market out there."

True, but the problem is not that green practices don't make financial sense or don't have a market, it's because there are so many distortions in the market that the value of many things is not represented.

If we start "internalizing" many costs that are currently "externalized" (ie. environmental costs of a coal power plant) and giving value to our natural capital (a forest is worth something, and not just when the trees are cut down), I think we'll see that green is less expensive than the old way of doing things.

True, but we have a hard time seeing the environmental costs of a coal plant. It's not an immediate cost so easy to ignore. Many green alternatives have a large upfront cost, that's what we base our decisions on. We need to learn how to change that shortsightedness.

Humans aren't parasites. What kind of self-loathing drives someone to believe that kind of thing?

Perhaps the same thing that makes one believe that we can't hurt "the host".

yes jiltedcitizen ... i'll be your pusherman

you've made me think about my computer, thanks for that ... it's powered by renewable energy and is an apple, which i'm pretty happy about as they have an excellent recycling policy and will part exchange your old computer for an upgrade (which i've never done - still using my first one), so rest assured that any waste is minimised

re. the economics ... that starts with you ... once you start seeking out products that are the best choice from a sustainability perspective and deliver the functionality you want, then YOU start shifting the market ... YOU create the market ... make the transition from giving your money to dirty and dangerous products, to clean and safe ones

i always apply 4 criteria before buying anthing:
- do i REALLY need it?
- how long will it last?
- who has made it and how has it been made?
- is it recyclable?

it's great ... i normally end up not buying it ... that gives me more money to spend on gasoline! ;o)

MGR's subsequent point is spot on

I agree, MGR. Both economics and sustainability have to do with the careful use of valuable resources. The problem is that in the current system, prices of natural resources severely underestimate their value. Imagine if every company had to pay directly for recycling and proper disposal of all of their products -- you would certainly see a lot less overpackaging.

Pete, it's true that profit is made by using natural resources in some way. To me the issue is simply the extent to which the natural resources are diminished. Animals and even humans lived for thousands of years on the planet without doing the damage mankind has done since the industrial revolution. I think the problem is the conspicuous consumption of resources and the low value placed on them by the current system, not the motivation brought on by profit.

I'm pretty sure I responded to this. not sure why it didn't show up. But I think I said humans are shortsighted and do not see the long term environmental costs of coal. But they do see the higher cost of being "green" so they choose the lower upfront cost. We need to change that shortsightedness.

'anonymous' ... i didnt say we cant hurt the host ... i said it will be fine/survive ... as for parasites, look it up ... and dont think so highly of yourself ... thats a big part of the problem ... check your relationship with the host if it brings on feelings of self-loathing

moderator - jiltedcitizen mentions that one of his responses hasnt shown up ... neither has one of mine ... let us know if you have any problems here ... thanks

peter - yes, exactly ... we lived here for thousands of years within the limits of nature, but we're now far too plague-like and cancerous in our ways to the planet ... the economic system is always going to place a low value on natural resources for so long as they remain in abundance ... oil is a classic example where we are beginning the journey downwards towards their exhaustion ... and the curve for the price of oil is only going one way, upwards ... water will no doubt follow, but that's already more expensive than oil per litre ... the big problem is that most markets operate through price war e.g. supermarkets ... they screw down their suppliers to deliver their products derived from natural resources at ever lower prices ... this is otherwise known as 'the race to the bottom' ... this is driven by none other than the motivation for profit by those at the top of the food chain ... the sad reality is that something normally has to become scarce/rare before it's true value becomes apparent ... by then, it's normally too late ... the oil companies have done a class act of dragging out the debate over climate change for the last few decades ... they've kept their industry alive for the longest time possible ... and only now are we beginning to see the beginning of a clean energy economy ... but with a trillion barrels of oil left in the ground, they'll drag that out too ... with distractions like the holy grail of the hydrogen economy that will take at least another couple of decades ... creating our own energy should become a DIY task for us all

i said it will be fine/survive

So? Are you some sort of grand seer? No, you're just aping tired talking points.

as for parasites, look it up

Look what up? Your ridiculous characterization of human beings as parasites?

and dont think so highly of yourself

Perhaps the most ironic comment I've seen in weeks. I haven't seen someone so full of themselves in a long time. You act like you're "holding court" and lecturing to everyone with your "boundless wisdom".

check your relationship with the host if it brings on feelings of self-loathing

And now you've confirmed you're a troll. Thank you.

During the conversation, I also mentioned that we were not exactly doing our part to save the Earth by choosing to drive the few miles to school and work. My husband responded with, “Stop saying it’s for the Earth.”

I was a little surprised by his response. I’ve always been more ‘tree hugger’ than him but his comment sounded downright… well… mean! I, naturally, felt the need to defend my statement but again he stopped me and said, “Stop saying we are doing anything to benefit the Earth!”

He then went on to explain that we - we being the environmentalists, etc. - were arrogant for thinking and/or saying we were trying/going to save the Earth. In his opinion, the Earth will be fine. What we are really trying to do is save ourselves. And if we ever get a to a point where we’ve really screwed things up, the Earth will find a way to rid itself of the parasites - the parasites being us.

http://femmebike.com/?m=200602

Man, I hate it when people start to attack each other on these comment things, it really throws whatever was actually important out of the window.

Somebody call someone else a nazi and get over it! :P

Anyways, my dad, up until recently, worked for BP and was really pushing to transfer to a position at their brand spanking new alternative energy division in China. Unfortunately, he didn't get it (he was close though), but we did get to see a glimpse of what BP has planned for the future and it's a lot better than what I've heard of from other oil companies.

To dismiss it as greenwashing seems slightly unfair and wholly unproductive... and an easy way for some "environmentalists" to both simplify the matter and feed their own egos. If the devil shows signs of changing, why can't you work with it?

Ask lots of questions, really get to know what's going on in BP, and if you have something constructive to say, get a lot of people to say it with you.

hey anonymous you nameless individual who has added absolutely nothing to this debate apart from negativity ... a parasite here for sure ... glad to have pushed your buttons ... guess i'll be trolling my way back under my bridge soon ... maybe play with my river turbine ... signing off now so feel free to waste your breath on words i will never see ... and don't forget to take a long hard look at that reality cheque at the end of the month

Trolls don't "push my buttons", "Pete". Yes, I'm so glad you've "added" so much with your "humans are parasites" and the "host will be fine" comments - very insightful for all of us. Very "positive".

signing off now so feel free to waste your breath on words i will never see ... and don't forget to take a long hard look at that reality cheque at the end of the month

Bye, troll.

On this thread we've had "Peter", "Pete", "pete", and "Pieter".

That's a lot of Petes. Or is it petes? Or Peters's? Or Pieters's?

Answer: Doesn't mater.

and quite a few anonymous folk too

you're right though, it doesnt matter

wether we're parasites or trolls, we should stop this nonsense and get back to eating up more natural resources

and if you are a troll, why not crunch on some human bones

god knows there's way too many of them on the planet - behaving like parasites

;o)

"Posted by: doug e fresh"

Gee - a first time poster to Treehugger. What are the chances?

"Signing off now."