The Energy Mix

Top Menu

  • About
  • Latest Digest/Archive
  • Partners
  • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Contact

Main Menu

  • News Archive by Category
    • Climate & Society
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • Carbon-Free Transition
      • Climate Action/”Blockadia”
      • Climate Denial & Greenwashing
      • Climate Policy/Meetings/Negotiations
      • Culture, Curiosities, & Humour
      • Demographics
      • Energy Politics
      • Energy Subsidies
      • Energy/Carbon Pricing & Economics
      • Finance & Investment
      • First Peoples
      • Insurance & Liability
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Jobs & Training
      • Legal & Regulatory
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
      • Methane
      • Travel, Leisure & Recreation
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought, Famine & Wildfires
      • Food Security
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Human Rights & Migration
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • International Security & War
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
      • Soil & Natural Sequestration
      • Water
    • Demand & Distribution
      • Air & Marine
      • Auto & Alternative Vehicles
      • Batteries/Storage
      • Buildings
      • Cities
      • Electricity Grid
      • Energy Access & Equity
      • Off-Grid
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
      • Supply Chains & Consumption
      • Transit
      • Walking & Biking
    • Jurisdictions
      • Africa
      • Arctic & Antarctica
      • Asia
      • Australia
      • Brazil
      • Canada
      • China
      • Europe
      • India
      • International
      • Mexico, Caribbean & Latin America
      • Middle East
      • Oceans
      • Small Island States
      • South & Central America
      • Sub-National Governments
      • United States
    • Non-Renewable Energy
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Coal
      • Nuclear
      • Oil & Gas
      • Pipelines/Rail Transport
      • Shale & Fracking
      • Tar Sands/Oil Sands
    • Opinion & Analysis
    • Renewable Energy
      • Bioenergy
      • Demand & Efficiency
      • General Renewables
      • Geothermal
      • Hydrogen
      • Hydropower
      • Research & Development
      • Solar
      • Wave & Tidal
      • Wind
  • Special Reports
    • Alberta’s Bitumen Pipe Dream
    • Canada’s Drive to Net Zero
    • Carbon Farming
    • City and Sub-National Action
    • Drawdown
    • Drive to 1.5
    • 26-Week Climate Transition Program for Canada
    • America’s Electoral Climate 2020
    • Canada’s Climate Change Election 2019
    • The Energy Mix Yearbook 2018
      • Climate Extremes
      • Fossils Go For Broke
      • Renewables (R)Evolution
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Canada’s Contradiction
      • COP24
      • Pipeline Politics
      • Jobs and Just Transition
      • Cities and Sub-Nationals
      • Finance and Divestment
      • Climate Litigation
  • Webinars & Podcasts
  • About
  • Latest Digest/Archive
  • Partners
  • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
  • Donate

logo

  • News Archive by Category
    • Climate & Society
      • Carbon Levels & Measurement
      • Carbon-Free Transition
      • Climate Action/”Blockadia”
      • Climate Denial & Greenwashing
      • Climate Policy/Meetings/Negotiations
      • Culture, Curiosities, & Humour
      • Demographics
      • Energy Politics
      • Energy Subsidies
      • Energy/Carbon Pricing & Economics
      • Finance & Investment
      • First Peoples
      • Insurance & Liability
      • International Agencies & Studies
      • Jobs & Training
      • Legal & Regulatory
      • Media, Messaging, & Public Opinion
      • Methane
      • Travel, Leisure & Recreation
    • Climate Impacts & Adaptation
      • Biodiversity & Habitat
      • Drought, Famine & Wildfires
      • Food Security
      • Forests & Deforestation
      • Health & Safety
      • Heat & Temperature
      • Human Rights & Migration
      • Ice Loss & Sea Level Rise
      • International Security & War
      • Severe Storms & Flooding
      • Soil & Natural Sequestration
      • Water
    • Demand & Distribution
      • Air & Marine
      • Auto & Alternative Vehicles
      • Batteries/Storage
      • Buildings
      • Cities
      • Electricity Grid
      • Energy Access & Equity
      • Off-Grid
      • Petrochemicals & Plastics
      • Supply Chains & Consumption
      • Transit
      • Walking & Biking
    • Jurisdictions
      • Africa
      • Arctic & Antarctica
      • Asia
      • Australia
      • Brazil
      • Canada
      • China
      • Europe
      • India
      • International
      • Mexico, Caribbean & Latin America
      • Middle East
      • Oceans
      • Small Island States
      • South & Central America
      • Sub-National Governments
      • United States
    • Non-Renewable Energy
      • CCS & Negative Emissions
      • Coal
      • Nuclear
      • Oil & Gas
      • Pipelines/Rail Transport
      • Shale & Fracking
      • Tar Sands/Oil Sands
    • Opinion & Analysis
    • Renewable Energy
      • Bioenergy
      • Demand & Efficiency
      • General Renewables
      • Geothermal
      • Hydrogen
      • Hydropower
      • Research & Development
      • Solar
      • Wave & Tidal
      • Wind
  • Special Reports
    • Alberta’s Bitumen Pipe Dream
    • Canada’s Drive to Net Zero
    • Carbon Farming
    • City and Sub-National Action
    • Drawdown
    • Drive to 1.5
    • 26-Week Climate Transition Program for Canada
    • America’s Electoral Climate 2020
    • Canada’s Climate Change Election 2019
    • The Energy Mix Yearbook 2018
      • Climate Extremes
      • Fossils Go For Broke
      • Renewables (R)Evolution
      • Electric Vehicles
      • Canada’s Contradiction
      • COP24
      • Pipeline Politics
      • Jobs and Just Transition
      • Cities and Sub-Nationals
      • Finance and Divestment
      • Climate Litigation
  • Webinars & Podcasts
Advanced Search
Carbon Levels & MeasurementCarbon-Free TransitionClimate & SocietyFinance & InvestmentNon-Renewable EnergyOil & Gas
Home›Climate & Society›Carbon Levels & Measurement›Exxon Faces ‘Frustrated Investors’ After First-Ever Financial Loss

Exxon Faces ‘Frustrated Investors’ After First-Ever Financial Loss

February 3, 2021
February 3, 2021
 
Primary Author Compiled by The Energy Mix staff
287
3
Share:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  Print This Story
ExxonMobil/Wikimedia Commons

Colossal fossil ExxonMobil declared an annual financial loss yesterday for the first time ever, capping a year in which it had to borrow money and sell off assets to manage a US$15.2-billion payout to its shareholders.

“Exxon now faces growing challenges from frustrated investors, who are pressuring the company to shake up its board and change its strategy, arguing that the company needs to shift its business model to thrive in a rapidly evolving energy market,” the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis reports. “[Tuesday’s] results could add to the urgency of their calls.”

Like this story? Subscribe to The Energy Mix and never miss an edition of our free e-digest.

SUBSCRIBE

Exxon cut its capital investment on exploration and development projects by about 29% last year, IEEFA says, but still spent $2.6 billion more on that activity than it could recover from operations. “While these results were disappointing to some, they were not actually outliers,” adds analyst Clark Williams-Derry. “ExxonMobil has paid more to shareholders than it generated in free cash flows for 12 of the last 15 years. And its free cash flows have generally trended downwards for more than a decade.”

The latter half of 2020 was not kind to the fossil behemoth that famously predicted four years ago that oil, natural gas, and coal would still supply 77% of the world’s energy needs in 2040, with wind, solar, and biofuels providing just 4%. The continuing dose of reality the industry faced last year prompted Exxon to rip up its $30-billion development plan in August, write off $20 billion in stranded assets toward the end of the year, fire 14,000 staff in November while claiming the fossil industry’s business fundamentals were still strong, and face fierce pushback for a vague attempt at a climate plan that made no commitment to actual emission reductions.

On the contrary, Exxon projected a 17% greenhouse gas emissions increase over the next five years, before disclosing last month that Scope 3 emissions pushed its total carbon pollution to 730 million tonnes in 2019.

“Exxon plans to up its production by one million barrels per day over the next five years,” Andrew Grant, Carbon Tracker’s head of oil, gas, and mining research, told Grist in December, after the company released its climate plan. “Reducing a minority of its life cycle emissions by a small sliver is the thinnest of fig leaves for a big increase in overall emissions and a bet on continued business as usual.”

Meanwhile, Exxon was unceremoniously dropped from the benchmark S&P 500 stock index last August, then put on notice by the Standard & Poors ratings agency last week that it could soon face a ratings downgrade, primarily due to competition from renewables. [Memo to Exxon: S&P probably expects renewables to supply more than 4% of global energy demand well before 2040.—Ed.]

Exxon’s performance had IEEFA warning a couple of weeks ago that the company will have to change direction in order to thrive. “By virtually every measure, the global oil and gas industry had a dreadful 2020,” wrote Williams-Derry and Director of Financial Analysis Tom Sanzillo. “But for ExxonMobil, this was simply the continuation of a trend. During the tenure of CEO Darren Woods, the company’s stock has fallen faster and further than other oil and gas majors, destroying tens of billions of dollars of shareholder value.”

For most of the fossil industry, “last year’s torrent of bad news has now eased a bit,” Sanzillo and Williams-Derry added. “The industry is by no means thriving, yet rising oil prices should prevent a repeat of last year’s abysmal performance.”

But with a number of other colossal fossils at least trying to envision a transition off oil and gas, the two authors say Exxon looks likely to keep fighting the trend.

“Based on recent statements, ExxonMobil’s corporate leaders will likely treat this upturn as a vindication of their business strategy,” they write. “For decades, that strategy has hinged on a singular view of oil’s trajectory in the global economy: Consumption would rise in lockstep with economic growth. Pinched by rising demand and limited supplies, prices would rise—and companies able to discover and develop oil and gas reserves would eventually generate ample returns.”

None of which amounts to sound analysis, after a decade that “proved that this view of oil markets is outdated. Economic growth now requires less oil. Reserves have grown more abundant. Prices have trended downward. A host of competitors and external forces—including ever-cheaper renewables, rising efficiency, plastics recycling, preference for clean energy, growing cooperation on Paris Agreement goals, and a sophisticated global climate movement—are realigning energy markets by eroding oil and gas demand. Combined, these forces undermine both growth assumptions and long-term profits for the oil and gas sector.”

IEEFA has more on the fierce headwinds Exxon will face if it tries to sustain the assumptions and practices that brought it to this week’s financial statement.

On Sunday, meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal reported that Woods and his counterpart at Chevron, Mike Wirth, opened negotiations early last year to explore the possibility of merging their companies. While the talks were eventually called off, “such consequential discussions are indicative of the pressure the energy sector’s most dominant companies faced as COVID-19 took hold and crude prices plunged,” The Guardian says. The talks “were serious enough for legal documents involving certain aspects of the merger discussions to be drafted, one of the sources told Reuters.”

With market capitalization of $190 billion for Exxon and $164 billion for Chevron, “such a deal would reunite the two largest descendants of John D Rockefeller’s Standard Oil monopoly, which was broken up by U.S. regulators in 1911, and reshape the oil industry,” The Guardian adds, citing the Journal.

At a glance, the two companies have a lot in common. They were both cited in last week’s Standard & Poors notice about a possible ratings upgrade, and they’re similarly dismissive about the transition to carbon-free energy. And Wirth “tried to push back on the doom and gloom during an earnings call Friday,” Politico Morning Energy reported yesterday, saying Chevron “would not make large investments in renewable energy production because it wasn’t the company’s area of expertise—instead it would focus on carbon capture technology,” just like Exxon.

Tagsbyline-internal
Share:
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  Print This Story

Find more stories about
Carbon Levels & MeasurementCarbon-Free TransitionClimate & SocietyFinance & InvestmentNon-Renewable EnergyOil & Gas

    3 comments

    1. Deborah Cady 7 February, 2021 at 02:31 Reply

      Both Chevron and ExxonMobil should gradually transition to green energy exploration and development. I think oil will always be needed as long as plastics are valued, so oil will have a market into the future.

      • Mitchell Beer 7 February, 2021 at 23:43 Reply

        Thanks, Deborah. For more on plastics, have a look at our archive — there are some big problems the fossil industry is nowhere close to solving.

    2. Exxon Faces ‘Frustrated Investors’ After First-Ever Financial Loss – The Energy Mix – RGRichardson Interactive 12 February, 2021 at 09:09 Reply

      […] Source: Exxon Faces ‘Frustrated Investors’ After First-Ever Financial Loss – The Energy Mix […]

    Leave a reply Cancel reply

    Recent Posts

    • Alberta Calls for $30-Billion Carbon Capture Subsidy in Upcoming Federal Budget
      Alberta Calls for $30-Billion Carbon Capture Subsidy in Upcoming Federal Budget
      March 10, 2021
    • Panicky Messaging on Line 5 Closure Threat Masks Real Issues with Pipeline, Oil by Rail
      Panicky Messaging on Line 5 Closure Threat Masks Real Issues with Pipeline, Oil by Rail
      March 10, 2021
    • Experts Brace for Disaster as Canada, U.S. Increase Oil-by-Rail Shipments
      Experts Brace for Disaster as Canada, U.S. Increase Oil-by-Rail Shipments
      March 10, 2021
    • Quebec LNG Megaproject Will Drive Up Power Rates with $310M Revenue Hit, Analysis Finds
      Quebec LNG Megaproject Will Drive Up Power Rates with $310M Revenue Hit, Analysis Finds
      March 10, 2021
    • Sketchy Carbon Accounting Turns Net-Zero Targets into ‘Weapons-Grade Greenwash’, Scientist Warns
      Sketchy Carbon Accounting Turns Net-Zero Targets into ‘Weapons-Grade Greenwash’, Scientist Warns
      March 10, 2021

    News Feed

    Top News

    • Study Probes Northern Permafrost Loss at 1.5°, 2.0°C Average Warming
      March 9, 2021
    • China Plans Online Carbon Trading Market by Mid-Year
      March 9, 2021

    Read More

    Carbon-Free Transition

    • Electric Motorbikes Fuel Carbon-Free Future for East Africa
      March 9, 2021
    • Volatile Market, Competing Automakers Drive Down Tesla’s Share Price
      March 9, 2021

    Read More

    Canada

    • Yukon Energy Turns to First Nation as Site for Territory’s Biggest Grid Battery
      March 9, 2021
    • Northeastern B.C. First Nation Gets Oilfield Services Training
      March 9, 2021

    Read More

    U.S.

    • Second-Biggest U.S. Coal Mine Heads Toward Closure
      March 9, 2021
    • U.S. Legislator to Target Big Oil for Oversight
      March 9, 2021

    Read More

    International

    • China Plans Online Carbon Trading Market by Mid-Year
      March 9, 2021
    • Pacific Islands Unveil Faster Shift to Renewables
      March 9, 2021

    Read More

    • About the Energy Mix
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy and Copyright
    Copyright 2020 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.