Connect with us

opinion

Why do big oil companies invest in green energy?

Major oil companies are reevaluating their investments in clean energy, balancing core fossil fuel focuses with emerging technologies. Despite pressure for sustainability, full reinvention into clean energy remains unlikely due to operational and market complexities.

Published

on

big oil
A flare burns natural gas at an oil well on Aug. 26, 2021, in Watford City, N.D. AP Photo/Matthew Brown

Why do big oil companies invest in green energy?

Michael Oxman, Georgia Institute of Technology

Some major oil companies such as Shell and BP that once were touted as leading the way in clean energy investments are now pulling back from those projects to refocus on oil and gas production. Others, such as Exxon Mobil and Chevron, have concentrated on oil and gas but announced recent investments in carbon capture projects, as well as in lithium and graphite production for electric vehicle batteries.

National oil companies have also been investing in renewable energy. For example, Saudi Aramco has invested in clean energy while at the same time asserting that it’s unrealistic to phase out oil and gas entirely.

But the larger question is why oil companies would invest in clean energy at all, especially at a time when many federal clean energy incentives are being eliminated and climate science is being dismantled, at least in the United States.

Some answers depend on whom you ask. More traditional petroleum industry followers would urge the companies to keep focused on their core fossil fuel businesses to meet growing energy demand and corresponding near-term shareholder returns. Other shareholders and stakeholders concerned about sustainability and the climate – including an increasing number of companies with sustainability goals – would likely point out the business opportunities for clean energy to meet global needs.

Other answers depend on the particular company itself. Very small producers have different business plans than very large private and public companies. Geography and regional policies can also play a key role. And government-owned companies such as Saudi Aramco, Gazprom and the China National Petroleum Corp. control the majority of the world’s oil and gas resources with revenues that support their national economies.

Despite the relatively modest scale of investment in clean energy by oil and gas companies so far, there are several business reasons oil companies would increase their investments in clean energy over time.

The oil and gas industry has provided energy that has helped create much of modern society and technology, though those advances have also come with significant environmental and social costs. My own experience in the oil industry gave me insight into how at least some of these companies try to reconcile this tension and to make strategic portfolio decisions regarding what “green” technologies to invest in. Now the managing director and a professor of the practice at the Ray C. Anderson Center for Sustainable Business at Georgia Tech, I seek ways to eliminate the boundaries and identify mutually reinforcing innovations among business interests and environmental concerns.

People march holding signs objecting to fossil fuels.
Protesters call for companies and international organizations to reduce their spending on fossil fuels. Kent Nishimura/Getty Images

Diversification and financial drivers

Just like financial advisers tell you to diversify your 401(k) investments, companies do so to weather different kinds of volatility, from commodity prices to political instability. Oil and gas markets are notoriously cyclical, so investments in clean energy can hedge against these shifts for companies and investors alike.

Clean energy can also provide opportunities for new revenue. Many customers want to buy clean energy, and oil companies want to be positioned to cash in as this transition occurs. By developing employees’ expertise and investing in emerging technologies, they can be ready for commercial opportunities in biofuels, renewable natural gas, hydrogen and other pathways that may overlap with their existing, core business competencies.

Fossil fuel companies have also found what other companies have: Clean energy can reduce costs. Some oil companies not only invest in energy efficiency for their buildings but use solar or wind to power their wells. And adding renewable energy to their activities can also lower the cost of investing in these companies.

Public pressure

All companies, including those in oil and gas, are under growing pressure to address climate change, from the public, from other companies with whom they do business and from government regulators – at least outside the U.S. For example, campaigns seeking to reduce investment in fossil fuels are increasing along with climate-related lawsuits. Government policies focused on both mitigating carbon emissions and enhancing energy independence are also making headway in some locations.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

In response, many oil companies are reducing their own operational emissions and setting targets to offset or eliminate emissions from products that they sell – though many observers question the viability of these commitments. Other companies are investing in emerging technologies such as hydrogen and methods to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere

Some companies, such as BP and Equinor, have previously even gone so far as rebranding themselves and acquiring clean energy businesses. But those efforts have also been criticized as “greenwashing,” taking actions for public relations value rather than real results.

A net containing fish is pulled aboard a fishing vessel.
Fishing, like energy production, does not have to be done in ways that damage the environment. Thomas Barwick/DigitalVision via Getty Images

How far can this go?

It is even possible for a fossil fuel company to reinvent itself as a clean energy operation. Denmark’s Orsted – formerly known as Danish Oil and Natural Gas – transitioned from fossil fuels to become a global leader in offshore wind. The company, whose majority owner is the Danish government, made the shift, however, with the help of significant public and political support.

But most large oil companies aren’t likely to completely reinvent themselves anytime soon. Making that change requires leadership, investor pressure, customer demand and shifts in government policy, such as putting a price or tax on carbon emissions.

To show students in my sustainability classes how companies’ choices affect both the environment and the industry as a whole, I use the MIT Fishbanks simulation. Students run fictional fishing companies competing for profit. Even when they know the fish population is finite, they overfish, leading to the collapse of the fishery and its businesses. Short-term profits cause long-term disaster for the fishery and the businesses that depend on it.

The metaphor for oil and gas is clear: As fossil fuels continue to be extracted and burned, they release planet-warming emissions, harming the planet as a whole. They also pose substantial business risks to the oil and gas industry itself.

Yet students in a recent class showed me that a more collective way of thinking may be possible. Teams voluntarily reduced their fishing levels to preserve long-term business and environmental sustainability, and they even cooperated with their competitors. They did so without in-game regulatory threats, shareholder or customer complaints, or lawsuits.

Their shared understanding that the future of their own fishing companies was at stake makes me hopeful that this type of leadership may take hold in real companies and the energy system as a whole. But the question remains about how fast that change can happen, amid the accelerating global demand for more energy along with the increasing urgency and severity of climate change and its effects.

Michael Oxman, Professor of the Practice of Sustainable Business, Georgia Institute of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

The science section of our news blog STM Daily News provides readers with captivating and up-to-date information on the latest scientific discoveries, breakthroughs, and innovations across various fields. We offer engaging and accessible content, ensuring that readers with different levels of scientific knowledge can stay informed. Whether it’s exploring advancements in medicine, astronomy, technology, or environmental sciences, our science section strives to shed light on the intriguing world of scientific exploration and its profound impact on our daily lives. From thought-provoking articles to informative interviews with experts in the field, STM Daily News Science offers a harmonious blend of factual reporting, analysis, and exploration, making it a go-to source for science enthusiasts and curious minds alike. https://stmdailynews.com/category/science/

Author

Want more stories 👋
“Your morning jolt of Inspiring & Interesting Stories!”

Sign up to receive awesome articles directly to your inbox.

STM Coffee Newsletter 1

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement SodaStream USA, inc
Click to comment
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Blog

Why the chemtrail conspiracy theory lingers and grows – and why Tucker Carlson is talking about it

The chemtrail conspiracy theory has surged despite being thoroughly debunked. Learn why people believe contrails are chemical weapons, how Tucker Carlson amplified the theory, and what psychology reveals about conspiracy thinking and our need for control.

Published

on

Why the chemtrail conspiracy theory lingers and grows – and why Tucker Carlson is talking about it
Contrails have a simple explanation, but not everyone wants to believe it. AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

Why the chemtrail conspiracy theory lingers and grows – and why Tucker Carlson is talking about it

Calum Lister Matheson, University of Pittsburgh Everyone has looked up at the clouds and seen faces, animals, objects. Human brains are hardwired for this kind of whimsy. But some people – perhaps a surprising number – look to the sky and see government plots and wicked deeds written there. Conspiracy theorists say that contrails – long streaks of condensation left by aircraft – are actually chemtrails, clouds of chemical or biological agents dumped on the unsuspecting public for nefarious purposes. Different motives are ascribed, from weather control to mass poisoning. The chemtrails theory has circulated since 1996, when conspiracy theorists misinterpreted a U.S. Air Force research paper about weather modification, a valid topic of research. Social media and conservative news outlets have since magnified the conspiracy theory. One recent study notes that X, formerly Twitter, is a particularly active node of this “broad online community of conspiracy.” I’m a communications researcher who studies conspiracy theories. The thoroughly debunked chemtrails theory provides a textbook example of how conspiracy theories work.

Boosted into the stratosphere

Conservative pundit Tucker Carlson, whose podcast averages over a million viewers per episode, recently interviewed Dane Wigington, a longtime opponent of what he calls “geoengineering.” While the interview has been extensively discredited and mocked in other media coverage, it is only one example of the spike in chemtrail belief. Although chemtrail belief spans the political spectrum, it is particularly evident in Republican circles. U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has professed his support for the theory. U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia has written legislation to ban chemical weather control, and many state legislatures have done the same. Online influencers with millions of followers have promoted what was once a fringe theory to a large audience. It finds a ready audience among climate change deniers and anti-deep state agitators who fear government mind control.

Heads I win, tails you lose

Although research on weather modification is real, the overwhelming majority of qualified experts deny that the chemtrail theory has any solid basis in fact. For example, geoengineering researcher David Keith’s lab posted a blunt statement on its website. A wealth of other resources exist online, and many of their conclusions are posted at contrailscience.com. But even without a deep dive into the science, the chemtrail theory has glaring logical problems. Two of them are falsifiability and parsimony.
The philosopher Karl Popper explains that unless your conjecture can be proved false, it lies outside the realm of science.
According to psychologist Rob Brotherton, conspiracy theories have a classic “heads I win, tails you lose” structure. Conspiracy theorists say that chemtrails are part of a nefarious government plot, but its existence has been covered up by the same villains. If there was any evidence that weather modification was actually happening, that would support the theory, but any evidence denying chemtrails also supports the theory – specifically, the part that alleges a cover-up. People who subscribe to the conspiracy theory consider anyone who confirms it to be a brave whistleblower and anyone who denies it to be foolish, evil or paid off. Therefore, no amount of information could even hypothetically disprove it for true believers. This denial makes the theory nonfalsifiable, meaning it’s impossible to disprove. By contrast, good theories are not false, but they must also be constructed in such a way that if they were false, evidence could show that. Nonfalsifiable theories are inherently suspect because they exist in a closed loop of self-confirmation. In practice, theories are not usually declared “false” based on a single test but are taken more or less seriously based on the preponderance of good evidence and scientific consensus. This approach is important because conspiracy theories and disinformation often claim to falsify mainstream theories, or at least exploit a poor understanding of what certainty means in scientific methods. Like most conspiracy theories, the chemtrail story tends not to meet the criteria of parsimony, also known as Occam’s razor, which suggests that the more suppositions a theory requires to be true, the less likely it actually is. While not perfect, this concept can be an important way to think about probability when it comes to conspiracy theories. Is it more likely that the government is covering up a massive weather program, mind-control program or both that involve thousands or millions of silent, complicit agents, from the local weather reporter to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, or that we’re seeing ice crystals from plane engines? Of course, calling something a “conspiracy theory” does not automatically invalidate it. After all, real conspiracies do exist. But it’s important to remember scientist and science communicator Carl Sagan’s adage that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” In the case of chemtrails, the evidence just isn’t there.
Scientists explain how humans are susceptible to believing conspiracy theories.

Psychology of conspiracy theory belief

If the evidence against it is so powerful and the logic is so weak, why do people believe the chemtrail conspiracy theory? As I have argued in my new book, “Post-Weird: Fragmentation, Community, and the Decline of the Mainstream,” conspiracy theorists create bonds with each other through shared practices of interpreting the world, seeing every detail and scrap of evidence as unshakable signs of a larger, hidden meaning. Uncertainty, ambiguity and chaos can be overwhelming. Conspiracy theories are symptoms, ad hoc attempts to deal with the anxiety caused by feelings of powerlessness in a chaotic and complicated world where awful things like tornadoes, hurricanes and wildfires can happen seemingly at random for reasons that even well-informed people struggle to understand. When people feel overwhelmed and helpless, they create fantasies that give an illusion of mastery and control. Although there are liberal chemtrail believers, aversion to uncertainty might explain why the theory has become so popular with Carlson’s audience: Researchers have long argued that authoritarian, right-wing beliefs have a similar underlying structure. On some level, chemtrail theorists would rather be targets of an evil conspiracy than face the limits of their knowledge and power, even though conspiracy beliefs are not completely satisfying. Sigmund Freud described a fort-da (“gone-here”) game played by his grandson where he threw away a toy and dragged it back on a string, something Freud interpreted as a simulation of control when the child had none. Conspiracy theories may serve a similar purpose, allowing their believers to feel that the world isn’t really random and that they, the ones who see through the charade, really have some control over it. The grander the conspiracy, the more brilliant and heroic the conspiracy theorists must be. Conspiracies are dramatic and exciting, with clear lines of good and evil, whereas real life is boring and sometimes scary. The chemtrail theory is ultimately prideful. It’s a way for theorists to feel powerful and smart when they face things beyond their comprehension and control. Conspiracy theories come and go, but responding to them in the long term means finding better ways to embrace uncertainty, ambiguity and our own limits alongside a new embrace of the tools we do have: logic, evidence and even humility. Calum Lister Matheson, Associate Professor of Communication, University of Pittsburgh This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter.  https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

opinion

Chasing Virality: When Seeking Fame Becomes Reckless

Chasing Virality: A commentary on the rising dangers of chasing viral fame, examining the DoorDash TikTok incident and the LA freeway music-video stunt. Explore how reckless social-media behavior leads to legal trouble, public backlash, and real-world harm.

Published

on

Last Updated on December 1, 2025 by Daily News Staff

Chasing Virality: When Seeking Fame Becomes Reckless

Chasing Virality: When Seeking Fame Becomes Reckless

In the age of social media, the pursuit of viral content has become a dangerous obsession for some. Every day, people are willing to put themselves — and others — at risk for a fleeting moment of fame. Two recent incidents illustrate the consequences of prioritizing virality over common sense, ethics, and safety.

 

Listen to the podcast

Stopping Freeway Traffic for a Music Video

In Los Angeles, Eduardo Erik Martínez allegedly shut down a portion of the 110 Freeway during rush hour to film a music video. Authorities say he orchestrated the blockade with several vehicles, allowing him to shoot scenes that included cars performing donuts around him. The stunt caused massive traffic delays and could have easily led to serious injuries. Martínez faces multiple felony charges and, if convicted, could spend years behind bars.

This incident highlights the dangerous lengths some will go to for online recognition. The pursuit of a viral “moment” turned an ordinary freeway into a public hazard, endangering countless drivers and commuters.

The DoorDash TikTok Controversy

Meanwhile, in Oswego, New York, a DoorDash driver, Olivia Henderson, posted videos of a partially nude, unconscious man in his home on TikTok, claiming she was sexually assaulted. Investigations revealed that she entered the home when delivery instructions only required leaving food at the door. Police said there was no evidence supporting assault claims against the man. Henderson has been charged with unlawful surveillance and dissemination of an unlawful surveillance image.

This case underscores how the desire for viral attention can blur the lines between victimhood and exploitation. Henderson’s videos — whether intentionally or not — transformed a personal encounter into a public spectacle, bringing legal consequences and ethical scrutiny.

AdobeStock 165595224

The Cost of Chasing Virality

Both incidents share a common thread: reckless pursuit of attention can lead to serious real-world consequences. Viral fame may feel like a shortcut to recognition, but the fallout can include:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

Legal consequences, including criminal charges Public backlash and reputational damage Harm to innocent bystanders Emotional and ethical repercussions

The internet rewards shock, spectacle, and risk-taking — but those rewards are often short-lived, while the consequences can last a lifetime.

AdobeStock 521959309

Reflection

We live in a culture where being seen online can feel more valuable than acting responsibly. But as these cases show, seeking viral moments without considering the risks to yourself or others is a dangerous gamble. Fame achieved through recklessness is rarely worth the cost, and sometimes, a few seconds of content can lead to years of regret.

STM Daily News is a vibrant news blog dedicated to sharing the brighter side of human experiences. Emphasizing positive, uplifting stories, the site focuses on delivering inspiring, informative, and well-researched content. With a commitment to accurate, fair, and responsible journalism, STM Daily News aims to foster a community of readers passionate about positive change and engaged in meaningful conversations. Join the movement and explore stories that celebrate the positive impacts shaping our world.

https://stmdailynews.com/

STM Daily News is a multifaceted podcast that explores a wide range of topics, from life and consumer issues to the latest in food and beverage trends. Our discussions dive into the realms of science, covering everything from space and Earth to nature, artificial intelligence, and astronomy. We also celebrate the amateur sports scene, highlighting local athletes and events, including our special segment on senior Pickleball, where we report on the latest happenings in this exciting community. With our diverse content, STM Daily News aims to inform, entertain, and engage listeners, providing a comprehensive look at the issues that matter most in our daily lives. https://stories-this-moment.castos.com/


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Blog

Tyreek Hill and the Miami-Dade Police Incident: What Really Happened and Where the Case Stands Now

Get the full timeline of the Tyreek Hill police incident in Miami, why the traffic stop sparked outrage, and what the investigation shows so far.

Published

on

Tyreek Hill Police Incident Explained: Timeline, Outcomes, and What’s Next

police officer on police bike, motorcycle

In September 2024, Miami Dolphins star Tyreek Hill found himself at the center of a controversy that spread across social media, sparked national debate, and triggered an internal investigation inside the Miami-Dade Police Department (MDPD). More than a year later, many fans still wonder what actually happened that day — and whether Hill ever moved forward with legal action. Here’s a clear breakdown of the incident and the current status of the case.

The Traffic Stop That Sparked Outrage

On the morning of September 8, 2024 — just hours before the Dolphins’ season opener — Hill was pulled over near Hard Rock Stadium for alleged careless driving and a seat-belt violation. What followed was a violent escalation that shocked fans and critics alike.

Body-cam and bystander video footage released shortly after the incident showed officers pulling Hill from his vehicle, forcing him to the ground, placing a knee on his back, and handcuffing him. Hill later said he complied with commands and didn’t understand why the encounter became so aggressive.

The videos went viral almost instantly, raising widespread concerns about excessive force, bias in traffic stops, and how police interact with high-profile Black athletes.

A Police Officer With a History of Complaints

The MDPD later identified the officer who forcibly removed Hill from the vehicle as Danny Torres — a 27-year veteran of the department. Records revealed Torres had a long disciplinary history, including multiple suspensions for issues such as improper procedures, force violations, discourtesy, and body-camera failures.

Following public backlash, MDPD placed Torres on administrative duty pending an internal-affairs investigation. As of the latest updates, the department has not released final findings or announced disciplinary action beyond that initial administrative reassignment.

Traffic Citations Dismissed — But Not Because Hill Was Innocent or Guilty

In November 2024, Hill’s traffic tickets were officially dismissed — not because the court ruled in Hill’s favor, but because the officers who issued the citations didn’t show up in court. Without the officers present to testify, the judge dropped the case due to “lack of prosecution.”

The dismissal frustrated Hill’s legal team, who argued it showed a lack of accountability within the department. The MDPD later stated that an officer’s absence from court “does not indicate the citation lacked merit.”

Did Tyreek Hill Sue the Miami-Dade Police Department?

Short answer: No — at least not yet, and not publicly.

Hill’s legal team has repeatedly said they were exploring “every legal remedy,” including a potential civil-rights lawsuit (often filed federally under Section 1983). But after extensive research through public court records and news archives, there is no evidence that Hill has filed a federal or state civil lawsuit against MDPD or any of its officers.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

If a lawsuit had been filed, it likely would have generated major media coverage — especially given Hill’s profile and the viral nature of the incident. Instead, all reporting continues to describe Hill’s legal posture as “considering,” “evaluating,” or “preparing,” not filing.

Why the Case Remains Unresolved

Several factors may explain why the legal process remains in limbo:

Internal affairs reviews take time — and MDPD has not publicly concluded its investigation. Hill’s legal team may be waiting for the department’s findings before proceeding. Negotiations or private discussions between attorneys and the county may be occurring behind the scenes. A lawsuit could still be filed at any time if Hill’s team decides to move forward.

Without public filings, official disciplinary announcements, or new footage, the case remains in a holding pattern.

The Bigger Picture

The Tyreek Hill incident resurfaces bigger questions about policing, transparency, and accountability. The videos of Hill’s detainment reignited debates familiar to many Americans: When does a routine traffic stop become unnecessarily violent? Why aren’t officers held accountable when they fail to appear in court? And how do prior disciplinary issues go unaddressed for years?

While Hill returned to the field that same day — even mocking the handcuffs in a now-famous touchdown celebration — the impact of the incident still lingers in Miami and the NFL community.

What to Watch For Next

Here’s what could happen going forward:

MDPD may eventually release the internal-affairs findings. The county could impose discipline or policy changes based on the investigation. Hill’s legal team may file a civil-rights lawsuit. The case could appear in federal or state court if filings become public.

Until then, the situation remains officially unresolved, with more questions than answers.

For more information on the Tyreek Hill incident, see the following sources:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

 


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Trending

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x