Saturday, March 18, 2006

News Highlight: Shell CEO, Science is clear we need action now!

Saying science is 'clear,' Shell's chief urges action on emissions

Greenwire, 8 February 2006 - The head of Royal Dutch Shell said the "scientific advice is now clear" that human activities are causing climate change, calling for less carbon-intensive ways to use traditional energy rather than aggressive moves toward alternatives.

"Most scientists agree that carbon emissions, human-produced carbon emissions, impact climate change," Jeroen van der Veer said. "Of course, there are uncertainties.

But I think the risk to delay action is too great." Speaking at the Cambridge Energy Research Associates conference here, Van der Veer called for capturing carbon from fossil energies, adding that in the medium term this is cheaper, more convenient and flexible than alternative energies.

He said the priority should be on capturing carbon from power plants, noting a typical 1 gigawatt coal plant in China produces as much CO2 yearly as 1.5 million cars. Van der Veer said Shell is working on technologies for combining coal gasification with sequestration, and also said the company is exploring capturing carbon from Canadian tar sands operations for sequestration or use in enhanced oil recovery.(more...)Later, Van der Veer said the scientific debate may not be to a "very final conclusion" but said governments are increasingly realizing the need to address the carbon issue and that industry must "face the reality" of this view. "In most countries in the world, politicians of nearly all political parties are convinced that they should do something to reduce CO2. You better face the reality of that perception," Van der Veer said, adding the industry should find ways to capitalize on it.

Van der Veer stressed that the company supports and is exploring alternative energy sources but cast this as a longer-term goal. Elsewhere, he said the world is not nearing "peak oil," especially when unconventional sources are taken into account, adding the border between conventional and unconventional oil and gas sources -- which include oil sands, heavy oils and others -- is starting to "blur." The company is already developing oil sands in Canada and is experimenting with a shale oil development technique in Colorado.

Postscript: Climate Change, BusinessA, NewsA

Climate Change Action

Home furl google deliciousdel.icio.usnetvouz newsvine diggDigg This!reddit spurl Technorati

Enter your Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz

3 Comments:

At 9:33 PM, Blogger HL said...

This statement is basically right on the mark, but it will never happen until there is a carbon tax to commodify the carbon dioxide. GCM and caps are little more than a intellectual exercise to make people believe something useful is being done. Looks good on paper.

 
At 1:08 AM, Blogger rygnn2@voteswagon.com said...

We need action. There is no reason for Gas to be as high as it is. America has one of its biggest stockpiles of reserve petroleum in history, hybrids vehicles are now flooding the roads, and the cost of a barrel of oil has dropped steadily in the past two weeks. When you add all of these issues up something does not seem right with the cost of a gallon of gas. I think our politicians need to be more involved, and we need investigations. Why should big oil companies drill us again?
Raymond B
www.voteswagon.com

 
At 6:10 AM, Blogger brutus_lives said...

i think shell can do more than just capture co2. it can certainly pour some of its resources towards establishing carbon sinks and supporting alternative fuel use!

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home