NationStates Jolt Archive

Chevron Oil announced that it would donate 12 million dollars to Georgia Tech for research into alternative fuels. Further, Chevron announced that it would spend around $400 million dollars on it's own research into alternative fuel technology.

Shame on them! They should be doing something useful with those profits!

Anyway, for the few of you that read, here's the link to the Atlanta paper,
http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2006/06/12/daily25.html

Chevron Oil announced that it would donate 12 million dollars to Georgia Tech for research into alternative fuels. Further, Chevron announced that it would spend around $400 million dollars on it's own research into alternative fuel technology.

Shame on them! They should be doing something useful with those profits!

Anyway, for the few of you that read, here's the link to the Atlanta paper,
http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2006/06/12/daily25.html
Yeah. I tire of the Big Oil conspiracy people. The fact that Chevron is doing this says something to me.

We're staring to run out of oil. They know it. They are reaching for survival strategies in a post-oil world.

I'm not sure I get it.
Are you trying to make out like they're being altruistic or something?

As PsychoticDan said, they're just looking after their own behinds here. 400 million on their own research initiatives is just doing business.

12 million to Georgia Tech will get them first crack at anything innovative that comes out of there for a long time, to say nothing of the tax write-off this year.

As PsychoticDan said, they're just looking after their own behinds here. 400 million on their own research initiatives is just doing business.

Well, yeah. But then, providing oil to the worlds population and automobiles was "just doing business" too. Don't knock it!

Now Chevron's got my attention...though I've been advocating that "Big Oil" goes into this research for a little while now

I'm not sure I get it.
Are you trying to make out like they're being altruistic or something?

As PsychoticDan said, they're just looking after their own behinds here. 400 million on their own research initiatives is just doing business.

12 million to Georgia Tech will get them first crack at anything innovative that comes out of there for a long time, to say nothing of the tax write-off this year.
Yeah? So? :confused:

I'm not sure I get it.
Are you trying to make out like they're being altruistic or something?

As PsychoticDan said, they're just looking after their own behinds here. 400 million on their own research initiatives is just doing business.

12 million to Georgia Tech will get them first crack at anything innovative that comes out of there for a long time, to say nothing of the tax write-off this year.
You're the first. The point is that this is what profits are for. Investing in the future of the company. They also pay shareholders, but that also pays returns into the future. This is exactly the reason that there should be confiscation of profits by the government in the form of windfall profit taxes. That is a sure way to make sure that none of this privately-funded research is ever done.

There is no longer such a thing as an oil company - but there are energy companies. Norsk Hydro is an excellent example of this trend. If there's an energy yield at a profit with a reasonable payback time, they'll do it, even if it means harnessing the power of love to generate electricity.

dunno who these "chevron" are, seing as im british and we get Shell and BP here, but, like most htings in the uk, they are probably owned by chevron or some other massive US company...

anyhow, shell have been doing some constructive research into alternitive oil, even if it is just to cover their hides.

Good to hear. 12 million sure sounds like a lot.

I have a few questions:

How much profit is Chevron making per quarter (or per year, whateva)?

How much in subsidies has the govt. given to oil companies (and Chevron in particular) for more oil exploration?

How much has the govt. given towards alternative fuel research?

Considering we already have many new alternative fuel/energy technologies that can be exploited now and have vast potential for improvement, I wonder, are they asking for research to be done in any certain field or are they leaving that up to the school?

How much money has been put into alternative fuel research so far in the US (in total, by all donating parties)?

Is 12 million really very much money when looking at the big picture?

Good to hear. 12 million sure sounds like a lot.

I have a few questions:

How much profit is Chevron making per quarter (or per year, whateva)?

How much in subsidies has the govt. given to oil companies (and Chevron in particular) for more oil exploration?

How much has the govt. given towards alternative fuel research?

Considering we already have many new alternative fuel/energy technologies that can be exploited now and have vast potential for improvement, I wonder, are they asking for research to be done in any certain field or are they leaving that up to the school?

How much money has been put into alternative fuel research so far?

Is 12 million really very much money when looking at the big picture?
I'll bet you can find answers to all those questions.

Is 12 million really very much money when looking at the big picture?
Last year, Chevron made a $14.1bn profit, or to put it another way, $12m is what the company makes while you get one night of sleep.

Its share of world oil operations is on the order of one or two percent.

I should add that the oil majors are only the tip of the iceberg - don't forget the generation, infrastructure and service company sector. The traditional oil companies are primary energy producers, but as with farming, that's not where most of the money is.

I should add that the oil majors are only the tip of the iceberg - don't forget the generation, infrastructure and service company sector. The traditional oil companies are primary energy producers, but as with farming, that's not where most of the money is.
Well, all we have to do is stop using oil.

Well, all we have to do is stop using oil.
:D

Yeah, and we can get rid of poverty and war, and live in a balance with Nature, and have a cashless economy where people trade and are all equal.

Chevron Oil announced that it would donate 12 million dollars to Georgia Tech for research into alternative fuels. Further, Chevron announced that it would spend around $400 million dollars on it's own research into alternative fuel technology.

Shame on them! They should be doing something useful with those profits!

Anyway, for the few of you that read, here's the link to the Atlanta paper,
http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/stories/2006/06/12/daily25.html

I don't get it. What's wrong with putting $412,000 into alternative fuels?

Last year, Chevron made a $14.1bn profit, or to put it another way, $12m is what the company makes while you get one night of sleep.

Its share of world oil operations is on the order of one or two percent.
Look at it from the other direction, though. Twelve million dollars is a heck of a big grant to a university. Chevron can get plenty of bang for the buck when you have a few PhD candidates working on the research for $12,000 per year.

And who says this is the only grant that they made this year? The Atlanta Biz Journal doesn't care much about what Cal-Tech or UT do.

:D

Yeah, and we can get rid of poverty and war, and live in a balance with Nature, and have a cashless economy where people trade and are all equal.
And we can live in harmony with nature and birds will fly up to you and tie ribbons in yoru hair and chipmunks will play in our fields, ohh... man!

Zipidee do da, zipidee ay! My oh my oh what a wonderful day! :p

Would someone explain to me what they're doing that is "wrong"? As an Economics major I think it's great. Wealth is a beautiful thing, subjective of course, but beautiful.

Myrmidonisia -

So since you know soooo much ... what sort of "useful" things should they be doing? Who decides what's "useful"? You? I think not.:rolleyes:

It's not the government's business to "Fund" Research it should be a private matter left to the private companies.

:D

Yeah, and we can get rid of poverty and war, and live in a balance with Nature, and have a cashless economy where people trade and are all equal.

Don't forget the chocolate rivers, where children danced with gumdrop smiles.

Would someone explain to me what they're doing that is "wrong"? As an Economics major I think it's great. Wealth is a beautiful thing, subjective of course, but beautiful.

Myrmidonisia -

So since you know soooo much ... what sort of "useful" things should they be doing? Who decides what's "useful"? You? I think not.:rolleyes:

It's not the government's business to "Fund" Research it should be a private matter left to the private companies.
Myrmidonisia was being sarcastic.

Look at it from the other direction, though. Twelve million dollars is a heck of a big grant to a university. Chevron can get plenty of bang for the buck when you have a few PhD candidates working on the research for $12,000 per year.

And who says this is the only grant that they made this year? The Atlanta Biz Journal doesn't care much about what Cal-Tech or UT do.
Look at it from yet another direction though. The endless share buybacks.

I think it's fair to say that the energy companies are now investing a lot in R&D out of self-interest, but most of it is going where most energy industry innovation takes place - back into the industry itself, not academia. And the majority of their financial resources are managed anyway, spinning around an electronic casino.

It's just one of those things, a positive step on the one hand, a tiny one on the other, and the motivation puts a positive or negative spin on the whole thing depending on your politics. It's complicated like that. I doubt anyone can really point at a single story and correctly say "That's great news!" It may be neutral, or good or bad, it may not even be significant.

Don't forget the chocolate rivers, where children danced with gumdrop smiles.
http://70.86.201.113/imageserv2/stilltemporary/PBF032BCSuicideTrain.jpg

Look at it from yet another direction though. The endless share buybacks.

I think it's fair to say that the energy companies are now investing a lot in R&D out of self-interest, but most of it is going where most energy industry innovation takes place - back into the industry itself, not academia. And the majority of their financial resources are managed anyway, spinning around an electronic casino.

It's just one of those things, a positive step on the one hand, a tiny one on the other, and the motivation puts a positive or negative spin on the whole thing depending on your politics. It's complicated like that. I doubt anyone can really point at a single story and correctly say "That's great news!" It may be neutral, or good or bad, it may not even be significant.

I guess no one noticed that Exxon bought out uranium mines, uranium processing companies, etc., in the 1970s. Or bought solar cell companies like Solarex.

When the oil runs out, they'll trot something out and charge us for it.

I guess no one noticed that Exxon bought out uranium mines, uranium processing companies, etc., in the 1970s. Or bought solar cell companies like Solarex.

When the oil runs out, they'll trot something out and charge us for it.
Yeah, except it won't be as good as the original. I think the future represents a huge step backwards as far as energy supply reliability is concerned, but without a corresponding reduction in sector profitability.

Yeah, except it won't be as good as the original. I think the future represents a huge step backwards as far as energy supply reliability is concerned, but without a corresponding reduction in sector profitability.
In other words, we make do with less while the same company makes the same money.

In other words, we make do with less while the same company makes the same money.
Precisely.

It is a well-established phenomenon that choking back supply of a commodity increases profitability to a certain maximum, beyond which the function falls as you are simply not shifting enough product even at extortionate prices.

We have developed financial regulatory mechanisms to moderate the scope for playing the markets that way. But when geology and geopolitics do it on your behalf and you get to profit while technically being innocent of any wrongdoing... yeah, that's just one of the injustices the modern world serves up. It will be the story of our times.

Would someone explain to me what they're doing that is "wrong"? As an Economics major I think it's great. Wealth is a beautiful thing, subjective of course, but beautiful.

Myrmidonisia -

So since you know soooo much ... what sort of "useful" things should they be doing? Who decides what's "useful"? You? I think not.:rolleyes:

It's not the government's business to "Fund" Research it should be a private matter left to the private companies.
One thing you need to learn while you're still young is not to jump to conclusions. It's more fun, of course, but usually one ends up looking foolish. Not Foolish, of course.