1 of 5/ Scope 3, as currently defined, is a societal cop-out
This is the 4th note in my series on how the oil & gas sector should think about energy transition resilience. The punch-line: Scope 3, as currently defined, is a societal cop-out on dealing with carbon emissions.
This is the 4th note in my series on how the oil & gas sector should think about energy transition resilience. The punch-line: Scope 3, as currently defined, is a societal cop-out on dealing with carbon emissions.
2/ The idea that energy supply, which is essential to modern human life and has contributed to big gains in life expectancy, poverty reduction, and environmental benefits, should have its negative externality (CO2) treated like any other consumer product issue is absurd.
3/ If de-linking oil D from GDP is the key to address CO2 w/o succumbing to Malthusian pessimism, #1 thing we could do (though won’t) is Ban SUVs (i.e., reform CAFE), the lack of which will be THE reason oil D will continue to grow through 2030 and badly miss NZ0 goals.
4/ The efficiency piece of net zero for crude oil is currently on-track to fail by 80%-90% through 2030 though I’d guess well beyond that as well. EVs are coming, but the impact on actual oil demand absent the fuel economy piece is post 2030, at earliest.
5/ The alternate way to motivate oil demand efficiency gains is a major oil price spike…I am mercifully no longer a publishing Street analyst and do not publicly forecast oil prices. Reforming CAFE seems like the healthier and more sustainable option.
PS/ Full note here:
arjunmurti.substack.com/p/scope-3-as-c…
arjunmurti.substack.com/p/scope-3-as-c…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
