http://blogs.abcnews.com/moneybeat/

Exxon’s Profits and the Lack of Renewable Investment

July 31, 2008 10:18 AM

ABC News’s Bianna Golodryga reports: As the rest of the nation's  
economy grapples with record oil and gas prices, deep in the heart of  
Texas, things look pretty good -- and Texans can thank ExxonMobil for  
that. This morning, the world's largest oil company reported revenues  
of $138 billion for the second quarter of 2008. Believe it or not, the  
record profits of $11.6 billion, or $2.27 a share, were smaller than  
the $2.52 a share Wall Street had expected. Still, the company's  
profit topped its previous record of $10.9 billion during the first  
three months of the year.

For big oil, 2008 has been a very good year. How good? Well, it's even  
better than last year, when the combined sales of the top five oil  
companies added up to $1.5 trillion -- that's greater than the GDP of  
Canada.

Nm_exxon_080730_main Since then, the price of crude has soared by as  
much as 50 percent while the price of natural gas has also taken off.  
And though oil has had a significant drop from its high of above $140  
a barrel for the second quarter, the benefits of high oil are clearly  
noted in balance sheets of the world's largest oil companies.

Exxon's earnings come on the heels of stellar earnings from  
ConocoPhillips, which reported a $5.4 billion net income for the  
quarter; BP, which posted net profits of $9.47 billion for the  
quarter; and Shell, which reported $11.6 billion earlier this morning.

Those kind of figures have sparked calls for alternatives to foreign  
oil now more than ever.

The calls for change are coming from big players from former oilmen  
like T. Boone Pickens to the oil companies themselves, which have  
invested in a media blitz highlighting their support for alternative  
energy sources.

But are they putting their money where their mouth is?

We crunched the numbers with Bernie Picchi, oil analyst at Wall Street  
Access, who said "They are probably spending more on their advertising  
than the actual research itself."

To be fair, Exxon has publicly said that it is not in the renewable  
energy business, but rather focused on oil and gas. So it should be no  
surprise that out of the five largest oil companies, Exxon spent just  
1 percent of its $41 billion in profits last year on alternative  
energy sources.

But none of the others fared much better.

For its part, Shell also invested just 1 percent of its $32 billion in  
profits last year on alternative energy exploration.

While both Chevron and ConocoPhilips invested only 1.3 percent of  
their profits on research, the company that invested the most in  
alternatives -- BP -- after profiting $21 billion, just $600 million  
or 2.9 percent was spent on research.

All in all, between the five companies, $2 billion was set aside for  
alternative energy research.

Picchi goes thru the numbers.

"This is the largest industry in the world with the exclusion of the  
financial service industry. It’s a very large amount of money. The  
after-tax earnings of these companies was around $125 billion. You get  
the idea that $2 billion, although an enormous amount of money to you  
and me, is truly just several drops in the bucket for the industry."

But don’t let the numbers fool you: all is not so great for big oil  
either. Contrary to popular belief, Exxon is also feeling the heat of  
record high oil prices. The company, which only produces 3 percent of  
the world's oil, doesn't produce enough to meet its own refining  
demands. And because of that, it too has to shell out big dough to pay  
for crude at present-day prices.

And as the run-up in gas prices at the pump has led to a decline in  
demand for gas the past few months, Exxon and the rest of the industry  
are facing an uphill battle to raise wholesale and retail prices fast  
enough to break even with record oil prices and refining costs.

Which leads to the bigger question: why is oil so expensive today?  
Supply/demand, manipulation, or policy?
According to one of the country's most prominent oil analysts,  
Oppenheimer's Fadel Gheit, the later two explanations are the main  
factors. According to a new book “The Oil Card” by Jim Norman, by  
allowing financial players to dominate oil trading without regulations  
while keeping margin requirement at a low of 5 percent, compared with  
50 percent on stocks, the U.S. government is engineering the rise in  
oil prices to slow down China's economic growth, which is the most  
formidable global challenge, not Iran, or terrorism. It is modern  
economic warfare.

In fact, many industry experts are expecting the sharp increase in  
demand for oil from China to decline after the Olympics. China, like  
other emerging markets, subsidizes its oil, thus making it more  
affordable for citizens to buy gas. And with an estimated 1,000 new  
drivers hitting the road in China every day, one can imagine how much  
money China's government shells out for subsidies. As global economic  
growth slows, many don't expect China will be able to support those  
subsidies for long.

Gheit also believes that the current price of oil is just not  
sustainable for the long term. “Oil companies are making record  
profits because of the inflated oil and gas prices, which I believe  
are not supported by market fundamentals. After all there are no  
shortages despite all predictions of potential disruptions, which have  
not materialized. The oil markets are rigged since government actions,  
or inaction, affect supply and demand. Access to resources, taxes,  
subsidies, product specifications, and other regulation allow other  
participants to push oil price up or down.”

As for exploration in alternative energy sources, politicians have  
been hammering Exxon for what they say is too much emphasis on stock  
buyback policies, but Exxon and industry experts note that the  
company's main obligation is to it's shareholders, many of which are  
large pension and mutual funds.

Picchi adds that the oil companies "Have a responsibility to the  
owners to split the balance between growth and profitability. And  
growth without profits its a hard bargain for the owners of the  
company. What they have really done is respond to the owners  
requirement for the best possible return on their investment as owners."

Common belief within the industry is that oil companies won't have  
incentive to change their policies until Washington changes its  
policies. "In fairness to the industry, there really is no policy  
right now in the U.S. or for that matter Western Europe that would  
really help the companies to direct them to spend their money in these  
non-carbon fuels," Picchi goes on to say.

As for current solutions coming out of Washington, most oil experts  
believe it would take many years before any substantial relief from  
ANWAR drilling (which presidential hopeful John McCain supports) would  
be felt, while a windfall profits tax (supported by Senator Obama)  
would be more of a hindrance to further exploration and research than  
it would be a solution to the problem. Exxon claims that it is  
spending more of its capital on exploration, and notes that its tax  
rate has gone up from 44 percent to 49 percent.

Make no mistake about it, oil companies are gushing in dough. But when  
you look that their profit margins, they are actually lower than  
Microsoft’s, Google’s or IBM. And no one is suggesting a windfall tax  
for them.

So what does Picchi see as legitimate criticism for big oil? "Think a  
fair criticism is this industry has not been spending enough over the  
years on exploration an production. Total cash flow, only about half  
of it is going into traditional capital spending and roughly another  
20 percent or so is going into share repurchases, the rest in  
dividends to the owners of the companies”
Politicians have been hammering Exxon for what they say is too much  
emphasis on stock buyback policies, but Exxon and industry experts  
note that the company's main obligation is to its shareholders, many  
of which are large pension and mutual funds a wide spectrum of  
Americans depend on.

And so the debate continues...

July 31, 2008=

------------------------------------

Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/

Please let us stay on topic and be civil. 

OM
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to