“Until we know the path and what is going to be required and what the solutions are, it’s hard to know,” he mentioned. “What we can do is commit to figure that out, and once we find the answers you would see us begin to commit and actually be on the path toward net zero.”
While Exxon is investing in power effectivity initiatives, biofuels and hydrogen, Mr. Woods expressed specific enthusiasm for his company’s 20 carbon seize and storage initiatives. While the know-how has but to change into broadly deployed as a result of it is extremely costly, Mr. Woods and Exxon scientists argue that it might play an essential function in decreasing emissions from cement and metal manufacturing and different industrial processes that can’t simply run on renewable power.
“Carbon capture and storage is going to be needed,” he mentioned.
He even instructed that “there is certainly the potential” that Exxon’s carbon seize and storage program might match neatly with Mr. Biden’s insurance policies and targets.
“Policy support and the right regulatory framework to support these investments are needed and are going to be important,” Mr. Woods mentioned. “We want to engage with them in that conversation. You are going to need permitting for investments. You are going to need pipeline systems, legislation, and regulatory reform and legal frameworks for storing CO2.”
Mr. Biden has expressed assist for carbon seize and sequestration. It is one environmental coverage that would acquire the backing of congressional Republicans, though many liberal Democrats will not be eager on it as a result of they see it as prolonging the use of fossil fuels.
Many local weather scientists are deeply skeptical that the know-how might be deployed on the scale wanted to make an enormous dent in emissions. Some power executives share that skepticism.
Charif Souki, the chief chairman of Tellurian, a liquefied pure fuel company, mentioned carbon seize was one of many doubtlessly promising applied sciences to fight local weather change. But he added, “There is no efficient way to do it on the scale that is necessary to accommodate what we need to do.”