That's great for Exxon but they also say in the article "it will depend on regulatory and policy support for carbon pricing - something the U.S. has not broadly accepted"

And while we're on Exxon, reported in the Guardian "Exxon’s new ‘advanced recycling’ plant raises environmental concerns. Advocates warn plants like the latest addition to the Texas complex generate hazardous pollutants and provide cover for oil giants to produce new plastic products" (Guardian 10/4/23) 

Given that 1.5° is generally considered almost impossible now and that Adani's coal extraction is specifically contributing to the crisis it's hard to understand what the Science Museum think they will achieve. Apart from giving Adani a voice and the illusion of respectability. Sound familiar? The same argument was used when the museum took Shell's money - and guess what? Shell have doubled down on extracting fossil fuels and are about to start on activities in South Africa guaranteed to cause widespread destruction. 

Read about it here

and also have a look at www.fossilfreesciencemuseum.com

Sweden’s AP7 pension fund recently announced it was adding 14 companies to its investment blacklist “for failure to act in line with the Paris Agreement due to large-scale coal operations or oil sands extraction without credible transition plans”.

Adani Enterprises Limited, the Adani Group subsidiary that owns and operates the Carmichael thermal coal mine and rail line in Australia, was one of the companies dumped from AP7’s investment portfolio.

In a damning report looking at the economic, climate and social impacts of Adani’s under-construction Godda coal-burning power station, the Bangladesh Working Group on External Debt, in cooperation with Growthwatch, have called for Adani Power to be tried “for human rights violations and forceful acquisition of land and other natural resources” and the project to be cancelled.

A tip-off received by the StopAdani campaign has named Lockton Companies as Adani Australia’s new insurance broker, appointed on 29 May 2022. I put this information to Lockton and it has not been denied. A report claiming Marsh is no longer acting as the Carmichael mine’s insurance broker adds credibility to claims of Lockton’s involvement. 

So,  are Exxon Mobil  saying the oil and gas that is not subject to Carbon Capture will have a value of $2.5 trillion by 2050. Aren't we supposed to have stopped using it by then?  But hang on - Carbon Capture (the unproven, non-existing at any scale, technology) will be ubitquous enough by 2050 to mean they can carry on business as normal.

 And this is a government giving out new licences to drill for gas in the North Sea (which will do absolutely nothing to enhance our fuel security) and Mr Clark's department is considering whether to give planning consent for a new coal mine (for coal which noone in this country wants)

Approving the mine would be deadly, not just because it would allow 25 years more coal mining in the UK at 9 million tonnes of GHG per year. It would also show UK hypocrisy and give other countries a green light to open new coal mines .

Vanguard Asset Management :  The largest investor in coal at $86b ; 

Standard Chartered Bank :  #1 UK bank for coal plant developers; 

Javelin Global Commodities :  Key trader supporting the west cumbria mine; 

and our government.

“New UK coal extraction is not needed, especially not new consents that would extract coal for decades. Evidence presented to the Public Inquiry on the Cumbria mine showed that it would increase global emissions, exacerbate climate change, and undermine global efforts to phase out coal”. This mine is planned to produce 2.8 million tonnes of metallurgical coal a year that, using the government’s own conversion factors, would emit 8.8 million tonnes of CO₂ per year when used in blast furnaces to make steel. Supporters claim it would “save” GHG emissions by avoiding imports but a) most of it is for export and b) these savings are only 96,000 tonnes a year.  If approved, coal extraction would be permitted until December 2049. Business Energy and industrial Strategy (BEIS ) 

The long and the short of it is that if we're to stand a hope in hell of keeping anywhere near 1.5° (or under 2°) we have to absolutely 100% stop digging up more. fossil fuels and very quickly stop burning the ones we already have. Simple really - but the oil companies either don't believe that, think they can somehow sidestep it or think some technological fix will appear out of nowhere. 

Aramco is the state-owned Saudi Arabian oil and gas company. Aramco is the world’s largest corporate greenhouse gas emitter. It is estimated to be responsible for over 4% of the entire world’s GHG emissions since 1965. Aramco’s 98.5% owner, the Saudi Arabian government, has a long history of fighting efforts to tackle climate change.

The company is led by CEO Amin bin Hasan Al-Nasser and in 2020 Forbes reported its sales at $329.8 billion. In 2019, 1.5% of Aramco was listed on the Saudi Arabian stock exchange, raising $25.6 billion,and valuing the company as worth about $1.7 trillion - the largest company in the world.

It was estimated in 2019 that Saudi Aramco plans to produce and sell the equivalent of 27 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide between 2018 and 2030. This is an enormous amount, equivalent to 4.7% of the total “carbon budget” that the IPCC estimated the entire world had left in 2018 for a 50% chance of meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C goal. According to the IPCC, a 66% chance requires shrinking the global carbon budget by almost 30%.

Read more here

So why did he sign off new oil and gas licences in the North Sea recently? (March '21). 

Read more from Greenpeace here