How ExxonMobil Is Planning For A Future Of EVs

[@Knoar]

What a long advertisement

[@jefferyjeffery1707]

Yep....!! He completely left out. That governments are also phasing heavy duty transportation fuels out also. And that as solar and wind energy develop. It will also convert water back to Hydrogen!! And that does not need oil at all!! In addition....40% of the corn crop is grown for the energy business... just to be used to make alcohol. Which is then blended with gasoline, to make gasohol!!! And as gasoline engines disappear...40% of the corn crop is not needed!!! And as such....farming is downsized. In which, farming practices itself, also accounts for almost 40% of the world's global warming games. I have a large farm...And am already planning to move away from growing corn. And I also used to work at the corporate level for ExxonMobil...!!!

[@T4KKFI]

I swear i didn't hear MSNBC ask this CEO if he believe in a gloabal climate sustainability. Im just ready for the day everyone has to suffer. I feel the weather GA nowadays and you won't catch me having a heat stroke from wasting energy and talking. I'm a bee as realistic as possible i have umbrellas in this weather seriously. The weather is A1 though I'm not talking out there caught in that sun and it's official black people can get skin burned smfh

[@Thelango99]

@@T4KKFI This is CNBC, not MSNBC. I am inclined to believe Darren would be a part of driving a cost-effective way for arriving at sustainable solutions.

[@jefferyjeffery1707]

@@T4KKFI Yep....👍 Even in the midwest.....its becoming to hot to grow corn. As corn likes mid-80's temp. But pushing into the 90's is not good.

[@Tython_]

😂😂😂😂

[@joejoey7272]

So basically this is a large advertisement for Exxon’s greenwashing campaign

[@james3440]

Your comment without proof is frankly just as bad.

[@TheFlagUnit]

@@james3440 no they actively knew and denied climate change via fossil fuels

[@spiffyh]

We already have a carbon capture system. It is called plants. But what he is talking about is an industrial carbon capture system so that they can extract MORE money from the problem they created in the first place.

[@Patmorgan235Us]

execpt we've dug up/pumped out trillions of tons of carbon out of the ground. it took millions of years for that carbon to be sequestered there. Plants are not sufficient.

[@fritzstauffacher6931]

The problem they created? Lol everything you use is from fossil fuel. We got to work together not point blame on the engineering that fuels the modern world.

[@joejoey7272]

Carbon capture is just greenwashing , it’s a way for these companies to pretend like they are doing something

[@idontcare6662]

The amount of plants we currently have aren't yes, however it is effective and If we built our cities and towns to be more pedestrian friendly and left more nature in urban areas, yea it would make a big difference actually. Among many other things we aren't doing, it's all talking heads and nobody doing.

[@PG-3462]

It's not the problem that THEY created, but that WE created with our lifestyle and behaviors. You can't blame Exxon for producing something we all overconsume on a daily basis.

[@slimjim3229]

Geothermal is the most overlooked option out there. It time it gets more attention. It can help.

[@robitmcclain6107]

DOE is investing in using enhanced geothermal using depleated gas wells.

[@ivywhite9589]

Nuclear power is best, but nukes are used to distract from it.

[@ivywhite9589]

The world has been at war for a long time, WW1 & WW2 is used to distract from that.

[@bellamafiaquackafellarecor7770]

Peanuts compared to potential of nuclear

[@romeou4965]

Planned Bitcoin city in El Salvador is prime example

[@enriqueoliveram]

I used to work for Exxon, now ExxonMobil, since a long time, the company has invested in investigation and new technologies, one of them is MTG, converts methanol into gasoline, methanol used to be produced from natural gas, now is going to be produced using green hydrogen, that means, a way to produce fuels directly from solar and wind energy

[@lesliehatun2044]

Where's the result? Where's the price relief? Since 1979 it all jibberish.

[@sooocheesy]

The (literal) blue collar shirt on this guy tells you right away that this interview was highly curated by their marketing department.

[@TexasRiverRat31254]

My thoughts exactly! Whole thing is promo for BS.

[@paulosgood6876]

I kinda got that vibe.

[@ryanandnatalie1806]

Cynical

[@Ryanlexz]

Just like zelensky propaganda

[@23StudiosSports]

Pretty sure it’s just a field shirt because he probably just walked the refinery….

[@dagarnertn]

You’d almost think they’ve been hoping for the world to move beyond fossil fuels rather than actively fighting against such moves for decades.

[@bjkarana]

How? You can order an EV online right now. Plus, oil and natural gas are used in all kinds of everyday things, from the electricity that powers your computer, to the plastic keys you used to type your comment.

[@trevorssillyplace]

They are probably rock hard thinking about evs. Powergrids will require more fuel to generate electricity taking into account all the power loss in transmission there probably will be more of a demand for oil lol

[@RasakBlood]

@@trevorssillyplace It will be a net loss of oil use. Gas cars are very inefficient. Power plants using gas will still be more efficient and use less gas then now. And this is ignoring the massive growth of solar and wind.

[@trevorssillyplace]

@@RasakBlood less than 5 percent of the powergrid is renewable. Increased power demand from consumers ie charging their evs will increase power demand from the power grid. If you run the numbers of how much gas is required to actually generate the 50kw to charge a tesla and the range it gets including the loss in transmission lines. It comes out to like 10 mpg about a 4th as efficient as a Honda civic. Teslas are sick but at this time ur only saving yourself money not the environment unless ur charging completly off the grid.

[@jpcool95480]

@@trevorssillyplace depends on the country. A quick Wikipedia search says almost 20% of the US electricity produced is renewable. And if you add nuclear that is even more.

[@vonBottorff]

If oil is truly a non-renewable resource then destroying it by burning is insane. We have no viable replacement for hydrocarbon-based plastics and other chemical products. Long-term they're more important than transportation.

[@AnimeBeefRandoms]

Not burning it and leaving it in the ground is not very useful to humans either.

[@Thelango99]

@@AnimeBeefRandoms The user implies prioritizing chemical production over burning for fuel. I agree with this approach more. Oil has so many applications that just burning it is comparatively wasteful.

[@planefan082]

​@@Thelango99 Exactly. Nor is burning it even profitable compared to renewable generation in most places without huge fossil fuel subsidies.

[@Batmangutten]

We have more than enough oil for all the worlds plastics and petrochemicals. This would still be the case if we continued to use oil for energy throughout this century. Also, oil is renewable in the sense that all it would take to make oil is to pull the carbon back out of the air and make oil. The only downside here is that it requires enormous amounts of energy. This wouldn't be practical for energy use and we still have cheaper oil for petrochemicals and plastics which is why we aren't currently doing it. However, in the future with solar getting cheaper and new breakthroughs in fusion and geothermal, (see Quaise, Zap Energy and Helion Energy) we will for all intents and purposes have unlimited energy. Running out of petrochemicals will therefore not be a problem.

[@eazolan]

We don't have a replacement for getting oil out of the ground. But we can get it out of the air.

[@petername2608]

Is this a joke

[@jasonrock5220]

Yes sir, This is the biggest joke perpetrated in American history. It’s called “man-made” global warming. The greatest guilt trip ever that was designed to increase energy costs and make people voluntarily pay more money for less energy.

[@johnthompson7548]

Nice commercial for Exxon

[@Backseatobserver0075]

Somebody needs to tell him it’s going to be much sooner than 2040 , considering some countries car registration last month have been as high as 70% EV .

[@bitcoindaddy1]

Most ppl dont realize the USD is pegged to crude oil (petrodollar), well...if world moving away from crude into EVs. Theres no need for world to hold USDs. Exxon revenue and emmisions is least of US problem

[@spriteNchoke]

Which countries are that? I bet only the rich developed countries. I am from a poor country where rolling blackouts are still a monthly thing. Many poor countries are like this. EVs are not viable in poor countries since no one can afford the charging stations and there are no mechanics or parts to fix the EVs. This is where Exxon will get the demand for its products to make up for the lack of demand in rich countries like the USA.

[@bitcoindaddy1]

@@spriteNchoke poor countries just need to migrate out of dollar debt...and also leap frog tech development if they choose to...developed countries will have harder time because they are source of the problem

[@darinherrick9224]

@@spriteNchoke You have it exactly backwards. Poor countries cannot afford gas but CAN afford solar power and other ways to generate electriity. They will find a way to charge vehicles with local charging solutions rather than imported ones. Since electrics break down less and have less parts that break they cannot afford NOT to transition to electric.

[@darinherrick9224]

They won't be using Teslas and first world charging stations, but it would shock me if the third world doesn't rapidly switch to solar-powered low horsepower electric vehicles of some sort with a dirt-cheap price tag.

[@william53]

Interview much better than CNBC Faber’s Exxon-at-the Crossrodes show. Business exists to fulfill a consumer need. That is what Exxon attempts to do each day - we are blessed to have such a thoughtful business!

[@erikk77]

Yes, the problem is we have too many consumers. Reduce the number of consumers. That will reduce the need more toxic mining and drilling. Stop having kids.

[@tornadosirenwednesday]

Thoughtful business??? EXXON?? LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[@bru512]

Dennis is predicting that ICE vehicles will be sold until 2040? Tony Seba is predicting that this will happen well before 2030. Dennis is hoping to fool people with Hydrogen fuel despite it's huge cost and production of CO2. This interview will not age well.

[@jasonkiminseoul]

ICE cars might be sold only until the 2030s in developed countries(North America, EU, China, Japan, and South Korea) but it will take some time for developing countries to catch up, so I would say 2040 is a realistic forecast.

[@DanA-nl5uo]

With all the hot air he is blowing he should look into wind power he could definitely provide the fuel for a few wind turbines in this interview alone.

[@matthewhenrysmith7498]

Absence of nuclear in this conversation is telling.

[@bellamafiaquackafellarecor7770]

@@IOFLOOD “only good for baseload power” - as if that’s a problem? The problem with wind and solar is that they can’t produce consistent dnergy

[@Son37Lumiere]

Nuclear has always been a dead end for a large number of reasons that always get glossed over and ignored by nuclear advocates.

[@timothydevries383]

He's right. Everyone focuses on personal transport because that's what's easy to understand. In reality personal transport is only about 7% of global CO2 emissions.

[@daydreamer8373]

The thing is EV's are the catalyst for huge changes in how we create, store and use energy. There are massive changes coming, EV's are just the start.

[@mozambique9113]

The evolution of humans mind can make us transport without moving our bodies are more reliable and sustainable.

[@masaharumorimoto4761]

Fantastic interview, really enjoyed this one!!!

[@ryhol5417]

Why are we giving them free advertising and why isn’t this labeled as advertising?

[@realdeal139]

Exxon ceo is a sharp guy.

[@jjerome8867]

What a leader for XOM! Vision plus…

[@ninjaatheist]

When carbon dioxide is stored underground in a process known as geological sequestration, it can find multiple escape pathways due to chemical reactions between carbon dioxide, water, rocks and cement from abandoned wells, according to Penn State researchers.

[@robertlee8805]

Wishing they'd add Biofuels to their mix.

[@rad2gnarly9]

Aw geez too bad more research can't be done

[@ronaldgarrison8478]

It doesn't have to be perfect, nor does it have to be forever. No, that is not a fundamental barrier.

[@robitmcclain6107]

Is it deliberate that he left nuclear and geothermal off his list of technologies?

[@beautifulgirl219]

Yes, because they provide real solutions today. Nuclear alone can solve the global energy need, and should be the largest solution. It takes responsibility for all the "waste" it produces.

[@eric5901]

Why is Buffet buying oil???? Occidental petroleum and Chevron to be specific

[@MrBadbonesaw]

@@beautifulgirl219 It takes over 10 years to get new Nuclear plants built due to all the extra precautions. Meanwhile, China gets 10 built every year. We might as well buy energy off China as well LOL

[@beautifulgirl219]

@@MrBadbonesaw The time issue doesn't change nuclear being our best option, in my opinion. I suspect that with enough motivation we could shorten the time. Small modular reactors and other approaches could help. Where there is a will, there is a way (?).

[@MrBadbonesaw]

@@beautifulgirl219 I am all for nuclear but waiting 10 years like the one in France and costing Billions of dollars hurts the payback period. Without Government assistance, it would probably take an additional 20 years for each nuclear reactor to break even. I do think we should have enough nuclear to run everything we need overnight and then during the day nuclear + solar and Wind could be recharging long-term energy storage like redux flow batteries or electrolysis to produce hydrogen and clean water desalination plants. A nuclear power plant should never have to throttle down less than 75% full power at any time besides maintenance periods. Phase-out coal and phase-out natural gas peaker plants asap.

[@Michael-il5wd]

as batteries get better and cheaper, it will disrupt more than just consumer vehicles. It will change how to drive, fly and sail. I wonder if they've considered this.

[@happyscrub]

Batteries are not going to get cheaper. EV demand and global politics are driving up the the demand for the minerals.

[@dlewis8405]

I wonder if he logs in as Wayne Tracker whenever he needs to discuss climate change internally on the Exxon email system.

[@Ryanlexz]

AOC and Bernie Sanders is having a hard time 😂😂

[@DSS-jj2cw]

I will believe it when i see it.

[@RushingRussianify]

Nice ad CNBC, put a disclosure banner at the bottom next time

[@pargevkarapetyan2251]

Smart guy and thinks telling very logical and offering right solutions . I hope thay truthful and on mission helping fix global worming and carbon emissions problems.

[@logtron]

He's smart and good at talking, but the solutions are all wrong. Those solutions are just in the best interest in extending the usefulness of Exxon's assets as long as possible. Remember that he is the CEO of Exxon, he only cares about profits.

[@ebubeawachie]

@@logtron as he should be 🤷🏾‍♂️

[@Adrian-o9n1y]

ExxonMobil is a great name for a corporation creating clean energy

[@progressreason_1]

Exxon is waking up to reality

[@fleshreap]

ExxonMobil must be paying a ton for all these videos.

[@gopalrathi9810]

Here we go again with propoganda

[@fluxfaze]

Exxon-Mobile. Destroyers of Earth.

[@retirementmillions6533]

Thank you ad

[@Tucanaldeinversiones]

This company will shrink like 30% in the next 10 years

[@rlcsite]

It might not come about soon, but it has to work. Some areas will continue to need fuel for power for a really long time.

[@Gary-ec4lc]

Red Flag 🚩 here

[@pablosel3857]

This company is only focused on oil and gas prices and cares about nothing else. The company is extremely traditional in the way they do things and that's partly because they've never been challenged with trying to find ways to cope with financial struggle. Since all they do is extract crude from the ground and then refine it, and that's how it's always been, they were never pushed into changing their mindset. So if they cannot do simple things like automating easy processes or conducting IT implementations, why should I believe these guys will ever shift their ways of producing? Plus they have a perverse ideology. They see employees as part od the cost equation, so regardless of your merit within the organisation, they will dump you if they have to or simply let you go no questions asked. They do the same with inflation, postponing as much as they can every possible salary adjustment, and with other regulations as well. If a company behaves terrible with its employees, I do not really think this company has any good intentions at all.

[@Ryanlexz]

Using Electric cars ain't gonna solve climate change lmao

[@pablosel3857]

@@Ryanlexz What does that even have to do with what I said? I dont know about that, though, really.

[@Josh-sx7wn]

I think they know something we don’t… like that we are running out of oil

[@RandomUserOnTheInterWebs]

Who exactly doesn't know this?

[@romeou4965]

Smart and fast move by Elon musk

[@Boxagami]

No, that's a total lie they keep telling about running out. Oil fields that ran dry, many filled back up! The rockafellar criminal family coined the term "fossil fuels" to raise the cost. Oil is abiotic and they keep lying about it.

[@Josh-sx7wn]

@@RandomUserOnTheInterWebs people with they head in the sand 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@florantemanuel5000]

One thing not mentioned... there is tech in its infancy called gyrotron millimeter wave drilling which aims to help drill at depths past what mechanical drills can do. That will lead to optimized geothermal systems that could supply electricity to the next generation power grid. I think ExxonMobil will partner with one of the companies developing them and that will be their next carbon free business model

[@aminesaib]

Intersting take.

[@adiposerex5150]

Charging stations will be needed. Some of the gas stations can create those and reduce oil pumps.

[@williamharding9753]

ExxonMobil need to put their profits into building wind and solar farms

[@romeou4965]

But CEO clearly said XOM is not in the power generation industry. Instead they manipulate hydrocarbons.

[@shadfletcher6815]

No they do not.....unlike your suggestions...nuclear makes power 24 hours a day

[@bellamafiaquackafellarecor7770]

Not sure if you’re aware but the wind and sun aren’t always able to be harvested

[@bjkarana]

That's like selling a car which starts 100% of the time (hydrocarbons), for a car that starts 50% of the time (wind and solar). Dumb...

[@tomblandford]

Why would they want to do that? That industry is very competitive and they have no knowledge. And they are not a charity.

[@jamesmaduabuchi6100]

The stock market has been a really tough one this past year, but I watched an interview on CNBC where the anchor kept mentioning " TERESA JENSEN WHITE ". This prompted me to get in touch with her, and from March 2022 till now we have been working together, and I can now boast of $540,000 in my trading portfolio.

[@wilsonjudson1650]

That's right, getting in touch with a consultant during the pandemic was how I was able to scale through the crazy stock downtrend.

[@dorissteve912]

That's massive. Can you please connect me with your personal broker, I would love to work with her

[@jamesmaduabuchi6100]

Like I said previously, her name is TERESA JENSEN WHITE , and you can reach her via her website.

[@jamesmaduabuchi6100]

Just run a search on her name, and you would see all you need.

[@dorissteve912]

thanks for the info . Found her website and it impressive

[@bocanjm215]

I'm glad they're changing their view on green energy. Wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, plastics, etc are all made using oil. Their business isn't going anywhere.

[@buckymoto]

This entire interview was a massive nothing-burger. The CEO basically said they don't want to invest in greener technologies cause they don't see a need to. They think it's more economically viable to recapture carbon emissions, but don't want to commit to doing it because there aren't government incentives or demand. And their estimates that demand will be similar to '13-14 years if ALL EVs are on the road? Their profit margins are MASSIVE from Transportation and Oil Demands from Transportation... they think they're going to maintain those levels by making plastic products? Give me a break. Massive nothing burger of an interview and it boils down to "We're not changing anything."

[@Mistro07]

Go cry about it..EVs have a looooong way to go before they can replace ICE engines..the cars/tech themselves might not, but everything around them (infrastructure, cost, etc.) have a long way to go

[@De-tw7by]

@@Mistro07 it is very easy to replace ICE with EV. Oil companies where fooling us until Tesla and Chinese govt. demonstrated it. World largest population China is already on EV.

[@thomasgibson1028]

Best comment I’ve seen here yet.

[@Son37Lumiere]

@@Mistro07 ICE is out, seems like you and the rest of the oil industry lackeys are the ones crying about it. The infrastructure doesn't need nearly as much upgrading as the pro oil propaganda wants you to believe.

[@Son37Lumiere]

And people are starting to move away from plastic as well as they're realizing it's yet another pollution heavy product of the disgusting oil industry of which only 5% actually gets recycled.

[@MakoKong]

After seeing how greedy they are with what they're doing with gas prices, I'm looking forward to seeing them lose billions when EVs take over.

[@ari_is_faded8611]

You think when gas prices were cheaper by about 3X under Trump the energy companies were any less greedy? Were they not greedy when gas prices were 2.5 a gallon?

[@LordSandwichII]

You think they won't figure out a way to make EVs an advantage for them?

[@Boxagami]

So, you want a fossil fuel built EV car, that's powered by fossil fuels. LMAO You know NOTHING about manufacturing and it's simply NOT GOING TO HAPPEN until the power grid funds trillions in upgrades to charge all these stupid EV's.

[@NHseacoast]

Yah we’re Does the electricity to power these EVS come from? Nuclear!. Probably Wind ? Nope solar ? Doubtful !

[@Son37Lumiere]

@@LordSandwichII Even if they buy power companies and start jacking up the rates you can get your own solar system.

[@melophoga]

Put a mini carbon capture on the front of every vehicle driving on the road and you have a giant capture machine.

[@planefan082]

Powering a carbon capture system with electricity created by burning carbon would be a net increase, no?

[@gigemgreg]

Too energy intensive. Would need EV's with 2x or more battery capacity and then collection system for captured CO2. Not practical.

[@rocking1313]

Great interview - technology agnostic long term stable carbon price seems to be the answer. Govt can increase taxes on all corporates or can do QE to provide economic incentives to all.

[@SaltySparrow]

Yeah and this is why gas companies are cranking up prices. It’s the last gasp of air before they switch over

[@bjkarana]

EVs don't have point source pollution and that is good for local air quality, but people also need to understand that EV manufacture emits a lot more CO2 than making combustion engine vehicles, so the lifetime savings in CO2 (as of 2022) is not substantial. EV carbon footprints will likely improve over time, but the world still needs quite a lot of oil and natural gas to, ironically, enable the transition away from oil and natural gas.

[@TrevorStandley]

I think I saw a calculation for this and it's really not that different. And can be done better than ice cars in many circumstances.

[@MrBadbonesaw]

We should probably be looking to transition to electric mopeds or trikes instead of EV Cars and EV SUVs/Trucks. Less traffic, less wear and tear on roads and same mileage for 1/10 battery size. Not practical for long distances but for 85% of my commuting it would be a good use.

[@TrevorStandley]

@@MrBadbonesaw There are also kids to consider. And the transportation of stuff, so the roads will always have to support cars and trucks.

[@raulsantinolopezrodriguez8349]

Es muy importante que sigan estás empresas gigantes con tanta infraestructura y tecnología, y claro que las fuentes de trabajo que pueden dar. Buena entrevista y gracias. Saludos desde Guadalajara México

[@jimbojimbo6873]

Shut up

[@denningmp37]

Cornblow

[@lancemarshall241]

Are these alternatives in fuels and power feasible for powering transportation and the countries cities?

[@lancemarshall241]

How do you regenerate oil that's been pumped out of the ground?

[@petertatt]

Bio-fuels and carbon capture? Really! So depressing. We will never get to net zero if guys like this get their way.

[@bellamafiaquackafellarecor7770]

How about you actually contribute and explain why you object to either of those

[@lancemarshall241]

Are they interoperable (charging stations vs. cars)?

[@henryshen1156]

We need energy in all forms. Fossil fuel has high energy density. Until we find replacement, we have to rely on this source of energy while building more green energy plants. Instead of blaming the oil company, people should devote their focus on education and be prepared to advance in science and technology. Without people devoting their career in science and technology, Green energy will not come by wishful thinking and bashing oil company.

[@Alexander_MD]

Doesn't help our future when children say they want to be influencers, gamers, or tiktokers lol.

[@MyKarur]

Brilliant. A a very forward thinking plan from Exon Mobil. CEO Woods makes so much sense. Carbon capturing and Hydrogen fuel cells will make a huge sense.Nobody has the expertise to deal with this huge problem with a clear vision and expertise to deal with it.Woods is bang on. Hi technology and plenty of money is required but needs a visionary too.

[@lancemarshall241]

The Las Vegas Strip contains around 16 charging stations; which stations for which vehicle? Are the interoperable?

[@arigutman]

It will be some time until EVs have a full market takeover so XOM will be a valuable stock within my portfolio as it has been.. Even with an EV boom, it just won't happen over night which gives XOM the ability to pivot as needed...

[@ultrastoat3298]

It’s too late

[@MyUniversalUniversity]

A few things. Whatever this guy is saying does not mean that it’s true and does not mean that they are at a point where he’s says they are! The other issue is is that he thinks they are going to be able to work with energy creation. It’s transitioning extremely quick. California had two days in the last month and a half that were 100% renewable, as far as energy for the state. Renewable energy for homes, and companies is going way faster then EV’s. I am skeptical, and I don’t think they are smart enough to believe in 2040 all cars sold may be electric. The last issue of Gas is going to run out at something.

[@williamharding9753]

ExxonMobil will become a shell of the former company in the near future

[@ronbakker1300]

Shell of the former company, that's funny.

[@bbarn3973]

People are hoping Exxon fails.... If exxon breaks even at $41/barrel(and going down) and they are producing 5 mm barrels/day and oil is say $100/barrel. That's 295 mm/day. Exxon pays a dividend of 3.7 bb/quarter. That's 12 days to cover the dividend nut. Exxon and Chevron are proceeding very cautiously. They were both burnt in the past. Oil went below 0/barrel. No congressman rushed to help exxon or chevron but now they cry foul when fortunes have turned. Exxon is a 366 bb company. What would a shell of a company look like? Progressive democrats would have to have complete control and crash the economy as we know it for exxon to be a "shell" of itself. AOC(head of progressive democrats) touts political rhetoric to hold her position but she has very little understanding of actual economics. Her actions illustrate a "good for thee but not for me" entitlement that most politicians enjoy.

[@jasonrock5220]

Funny statement but not true. 10 years from now most people will still be driving gasoline fueled vehicles.

[@ronbakker1300]

@@jasonrock5220 I think until at least 2030 there will be unfulfilled demand for electric vehicles, and that 65% of new cars will be electric, but the will be a very large fleet of ice cars still on the road.

[@marmie3382]

GREAT CEO , A PATRIOT YES

[@johnzhao3086]

I like the snake oil he’s selling. I’m gonna buy some!

[@teyhoonboon5853]

Oil companies should invest more in R & D to produce breakthrough of new energy for multiple usage which can be cost effective and low emmition of CO2 .

[@ryanandnatalie1806]

If that is profitable, someone will do it….no?

[@mozambique9113]

the tire company already made a "lifetime tire" happened many decades ago. but the project was scraped and discontinued. you know why

[@lancemarshall241]

PHYSICS! CHEMISTRY! MATHEMATICS! COMPUTER SCIENCE!

[@lancemarshall241]

What's Exxon's relationship with the EPA, currently?

[@TRUCKERS-REALITY]

This is the reason gas prices are high

[@shiblu6918]

YOU should r&d in Solar, Wind, Wave, geothermal Energy..

[@blackwind743]

Gyrotron (millimeter wave technology) drilled geothermal seems up their alley and might allow us to expand the coverage and scope of geothermal in the energy mix. I imagine they'll let Quaise sort it out first though.

[@blackwind743]

@@MikeKov86 Fossil fuels get 11 million dollars in subsidies per minute. They aren't efficient. Solar is cheaper per kilowatt hour. However, they can't be shut down immediately because a great deal of infrastructure must be replaced this will take money and time but eventually green energy will be better in pretty much every way. There will always be a use for oil though for non-energy purposes.

[@Thelango99]

Of those you listed, Geothermal energy is the only one Exxon can meaningfully contribute to right now. Their drilling tech specifically.

[@blackwind743]

@@MikeKov86 Ok. Enough of the sun's energy is reflected back into space every day to power roughly six thousand of our civilizations. There is no energy shortage. There is only lack of utilization.

[@blackwind743]

​@@MikeKov86 Solar panels last for decades and modern conventional solar panels are not the only option. You can build multiple panels off the energy of one panel so energy is irrelevant. What is more, we have multiple other non-fossil technologies which taken by themselves could provide thousands of times the energy we will need for the next several million years at least. Maybe if you could explain to me why you believe total energy to be a factor you can bring me over to the dark side. Is it C02? Because once you use green energy to make green energy that point is obsolete. Convert me.

[@mikeshafer]

Great, a world with MORE oil-based products. Let's hope the world moves to EVs and away from plastic and towards green hydrogen-powered airplanes and boats.

[@eric5901]

Why is Buffet buying oil???? Occidental petroleum and Chevron to be specific

[@Ryanlexz]

Green powered is a scam

[@dgupta42]

So much fake news in this interview. If you look at the world's total crude and gas production of roughly 100 mboe per year, there is no way the world needs all of that to become plastics in the future. Unless the company is also working on modifying or replacing humans to be made out of plastic, and eat and drink plastic. There is a fundamental reason sane people are skeptical about carbon capture ever scaling up. Why even bother producing and burning petroleum, and then spend even more capital and operating cost to capture emissions? How can that be cheaper than renewable energy that is already cheaper than just the cost of producing expensive oil & gas in the first place? Yes, we need oil & gas during the transition because it will take time to switch. We cannot just shut off the wells today. But the economic logic of the switch will move oil & gas consuming sectors away quickly. Which is why oil & gas is lobbying to stop governments and cities to act on moving away from usage like gas for heating buildings. They know they will not win the case on fair competition basis. We do NOT need to invest in replacing the full capacity of our old fossil fuel energy system. The man is smart enough to know that, but he cannot say it because then his company's future looks like badly burnt toast. Of no value to society or shareholders. Everyone knows the largest use for petroleum is transportation fuels. But, battery to wheels has higher than 85% efficiency already, compared to hardly 25-27% for tank to wheels in a gasoline car. Electricity is easily 3x more efficient in the largest oil & gas consumption market! Another large use for oil & gas is building heat. Electric heat pumps can transfer 3-5 times more heat to the building, compared to burning gas to produce 1x heat. So, you need to produce only 1/3rd to 1/5th of the energy for the same end result. You don't have to believe me. Look at the US Energy consumption charts from Lawrence Livermore National Lab. 67.5% of the energy consumed in the US is just wasted as rejected energy. That is more than two thirds of energy going to waste. Electrification needs to replace only the actually useful 32%! Adding another 10% losses takes it to 35% of today's energy system. That means we need more electricity in the future. But far less total primary energy in our system. But the best moment of this video is around 14 minutes. An Exxon Mobil Chairman & CEO says that they always understood that climate change is man-made and driven by CO2 added to the atmosphere! After claiming for years in the courts and in the public that they never knew. Just Wow!!

[@De-tw7by]

Oil companies fooled the govt and people so long and kept to use kerosene lamp, now everyone realised it's time to switch from kerosene lamp to high effect and zero pollution LED lamp. It is time to dump oil and move to high efficient and less pollutant EV.

[@osoquik4447]

You always hear about electrification this and that but no one speaks on how they will resolve the power generation needs for this type of future. FYI fossil fuels make up the majority of electricity generation in the US. Plenty of “green” examples in Europe and you see the result of going green especially during an energy crisis. Fossil fuels also provide the concept known as heat and power which will require a industrial sectors to completely revamp their process of creating steel, plastics, paint & etc. Easy concept on paper but who’s going foot that bill? Taxpayers, investors, governments?

[@dgupta42]

@@osoquik4447 This interview was about specifics of oil & gas demand in an electric future. Vast majority of oil goes into transportation fuels, as all data clearly shows. That demand will slowly decline over the next 15-20 years, and ExxonMobil and other oil & gas companies are just not prepared for it. The fact that other sectors like industrial manufacturing may continue to need some fossil fuels in 2040 is not disputed by most. It just doesn't do anything to save O&G from the massive demand destruction coming up in sectors like transportation and building heat. I agree that the decline curve will not be smooth, there will be ugly disruptions on the way. That is normal for fossil fuels. O&G markets have always been cyclical and subject to geopolitics. That's now new. Every major price boom leads to a bust and vice versa. Frankly, Putin's war is a gift to O&G companies at the cost of ordinary people. The extra tens of billions of Oil & Gas profits should help fund their move to clean energy. Of course, it may have the exactly opposite effect of lulling these companies into false sense of security.

[@christianduval9067]

I work 10 years with the oil industry in Canada If we all use electrical car...two choice.... 1) Dispose gasoline and dump in the ocean... or 2) Burn gasoline to produce electricity (already exist) The commercial avation and car industry are very tight....each baril of oil produce 15% kerosene (for plane) and 45% is gasoline (by product) the 40% left....diesel, chemical,ect... If we cancel all gasoline.....we have to stop using plane Simple like that

[@MrBadbonesaw]

I am pretty sure they can change the % of each barrel to produce more diesel or kerosene and less gas. This is probably the optimal % for max profit for the company and not a fixed problem.

[@lancemarshall241]

Have you considered entering those markets as an energy conglomerate?

[@lancemarshall241]

Can we reengineer the products of energy consumption into useful products that we can market to industrial and/or consumer users?

[@stevebuss69]

The problem with oil and extraction is not just climate change.

[@glennschaub560]

When did Exxon Mobile get involved with producing electrical power plants ?

[@timogul]

The problem is though "where [Exxon] is today," is where Exxon should have been twenty years ago, and then they would be in an even better place today. Instead, Exxon has always chosen to take the most profitable course, even if it's also the most destructive. Every generation, Exxon will shed crocodile tears about how they are better than they were a generation ago, and how they're "just getting started" at doing the right thing, when everyone was telling them to "just get started" a generation previous to that. When will they ever get out _ahead_ of problems and not cause damage that they need to clean up later? If Exxon had started working toward a carbon neutral future two decades ago, then it would be much less stressful to do it today.

[@rolandotillit2867]

Nonsense. Carbon neutrality is a pipe dream, and Mr. Wood's approach is correct. We can't switch to full electric cars, the grid can't handle it without huge infrastructure expenditures. I respect his solution focused approach instead of preaching pipe dream solutions that will cost just as much and likely deliver less value.

[@timogul]

@@rolandotillit2867 We can't switch 100% to Electric cars _tomorrow_ because we haven't been investing into it, but if we had been investing into it 10-15 years ago, then we would be ready today to do so, and if we invest enough today, then we will be ready for it 5-10 years from now. That's the point, Exxon spent decades doing the worst things possible because it was the most profitable, and now they want brownie points for doing the bare _minimum_ to be "less bad." Exxon has made outrageous profits over the last few years, they should be posting losses. They should be spending more money than they make toward fixing the harm they've caused, to make up for the profits that they'd been making while fighting against the climate change discussion.They did wrong. They owe a debt more than "we'll do slightly less wrong over time, while maintaining high profit margins."

[@rolandotillit2867]

@@timogul I sincerely doubt that.

[@timogul]

@@rolandotillit2867 That's just because you have not done your research. You'll get there eventually, as Exxon did.

[@rolandotillit2867]

@@timogul The only reason Exxon considered it, was because of the useless activists that infiltrated the board. Make no mistake, they are ineffective and have no concrete plans.

[@sepase2676]

EVs are not the future, public transit and high speed trains are.

[@jimbojimbo6873]

Oil and gas should just be bucketed under the wider bucket of energy

[@lancemarshall241]

Are price movements like a roulette wheel as independent events the past not effecting the future? If the do, to what %?

[@gaylemc2692]

Please, tell us how much money you earn? How much stock, dividends, perks and end of the year bonuses.

[@osoquik4447]

You can find that information on sec.gov public information. But don’t be naive and not compare it to the likes of apple and other tech executives

[@TwoLargePizzas]

According to the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), Petroleum is the main source of energy for transportation. In 2021, petroleum products accounted for about *90%* of the total U.S. transportation sector energy use. Biofuels contributed about 6%. Natural gas accounted for about 4%, most of which was used in natural gas pipeline compressors. Electricity use by mass transit systems provided less than 1% of total transportation sector energy use. Even though transportation only accounts for 28% of the total US energy consumption in 2021 and the other 72% goes to electric power, industrial, residential, and commercial, that is still a hefty chunk. You sitting here telling me that by 2040 Exxon is still gonna be alive? Exxon must have transformed into a diff company by then.

[@osoquik4447]

Transportation is dominated by petroleum but industrial and residential/commercial have a more diversified energy mix. By 2050, we may see a petro come down quite a bit however, US producers could simply export any surplus. Globally, petroleum and natural gas consumption has continued to increase while developed nations have undergone a change in theirs.

[@bellamafiaquackafellarecor7770]

Plenty of people will still be driving 15-20 year old gasoline vehicles in 2040. Look around you, I see early 2000s models all the time. And they will be cheap.

[@lancemarshall241]

If they do, to what percent are the events correlated?

[@cluke50]

All these oil companies should be investing in the recharging infrastructure in our country. It’ll be a very long time before we’re completely dependent on electric vehicles, but it would give them another revenue stream besides gas and oil products.

[@Son37Lumiere]

Fk them, the day the oil companies die will be a great day for the planet and everyone living on it.

[@louispatino7964]

Exxon Mobil is at the leading edge of this emerging industry otherwise known as environmental remediation and my hope for them is that they will be able to continue to drive down the price of carbon capture either by the work of their brilliant scientists in their R&D labs or by acquiring new methodologies for increasing efficiency and lowering costs from other companies in this relatively new industry. Collaborative efforts with other companies could be a big help. The Norwegians and the Icelanders are fully developed in this field and are going full speed into implementing scalable CCS units within their nations to reduce atmospheric carbon with very promising results early on, just like ExxonMobil's CCS plant in Houston. Great interview CNBC, good work Darren!

[@williamhoffer9277]

Just remember that it wasn't the head of an oil company that invented the internal combustion engine, or the automobile!

[@gmv0553]

The only reason internal combustion engines were invented was because of the lack of battery technology in the early 1900's. That technology is here today and will improve in the future and there is no better time to start the change today!

[@mozambique9113]

but it takes the head of a company, to make money out of it.💸💲💰

[@kingrichard7935]

75% gas Vehicles 20% Electric vehicle oil is the economics of the world ,

[@alfredobras6043]

Boa tarde, gostaria trabalhar com vosco can i have this opportunity to work with the company?

[@lancemarshall241]

What are the products of biofuel combustion?

[@JasonKing247]

There’s a demand for carbon in the air because the technology hasn’t progressed enough to meet the current demand… is this an argument or a statement on how they’re not helping the situation.

[@Gary-ec4lc]

He Dreaming , bye bye Exxon , it’s all about cost , ev Trucks are far cheaper and more powerful and improving. Get with the program all these renewable issues have been overcome , he simply has not done the numbers….$

[@googlebanmetoomuch2601]

What does he think of government price controls?🤔

[@Mistro07]

He just sells to another country and the one with the controls get screwed

[@Son37Lumiere]

@@Mistro07 Higher prices will incentivize people to move to better alternatives.

[@ebubeawachie]

I like how the seats look deliberately uncomfortable to keep both the interviewer and interviewee on their toes. 😂😂😂

[@lancemarshall241]

How does Exxon determine the demand and supply equations? Will Exxon maximize profits when its marginal revenue equal marginal costs or when it produces the most oil possible?

[@Itsellasky]

Oil Companies don’t like this EV/ Solar wave. Oil industry is shaking in there boots. Car companies are racing to make EVs and they can’t build them fast enough! I feel sorry for all the mechanics, service center employees… EV don’t require service, gas, smog, really anything for the most part.

[@gmv0553]

Shell and BP are moving their business plan toward EVs, solar, and wind as we speak!

[@Itsellasky]

@@gmv0553 they are but before that they had all the power… now they are forced to go with the times

[@edrake1989]

@@Itsellasky Mechanics will still be busy fixing EVs lol

[@greatlakesproductions]

At first sight I thought it was former Australian pm Scott Morrison lol

[@ababycow]

Hitting all those ESG metrics better than Tesla ;)

[@lancemarshall241]

In what state of matter are the products of biofuel consumption?

[@auro1986]

if wsj has apple then cnbc has exxon mobil

[@barbginther2171]

That question is like the tax questions. $15B is a lot of money, but, not compared to what you make.

[@lancemarshall241]

AVIATION, OIL FOR MACHINES INCLUDING ELECTRIC ONES provides a future for oil. However, when all the oil is pumped out of the ground and spewed into the atmosphere will society collapse if and electric based infrastructure is present at that time?