Do big oil profits reduce global warming?

Question

Ridiculous question right?

But we do know that high gasoline prices cause people to drive less and buy more fuel efficient cars.

Therefore, high prices are good for global warming?

Maybe we can convince Al Gore to use less?

Answer 1

No--that's a "let them eat cake" idea that people in a bad economy with inflation and high gas prices can suddenly afford to by another, more expensive hybrid car.  Higher gas prices just causes people to have less to eat have to foreclose on their homes, and other basic sacrifices to their quality of life.  They still have to work and they still need gas--whether directly to get to work, or indirectly with the food and basic necessities that they need to buy (goods that require fuel to be transported); or for most, both.  

Answer 2

Fat chance. Al Gore just bought a 100' house boat.

Yea, sure sounds like he is worried about CO2 emissions.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gore-hits-t...

Answer 3

Yeah, so it can be said "Global Warming Liberals want high energy costs".

They want poor people to choose between eating and getting to work.

Answer 4

Hmmm... four quite different questions so four quite different answers:

1) Big oil PROFITS do not reduce global warming (they would probably increase it as those making the profits try to encourage greater use). Big oil PRICES will reduce global warming as it encourages reduction in use and/or alternate sources.

2) No; it's not a ridiculous question!

3) Yes, high prices are good for global warming. Of course, GW should not be the only criteria here - black-and-white solutions won't help anyone - but certainly higher oil prices will focus peoples minds a bit more on energy conservation which is good for many reasons (including GW)

4) No idea. I don't see the relevance of one man and/or his consumption to this issue: We are all responsible for oil consumption thus it is up to all of us to do what we can individually to conserve. Looking all around ourselves to find the one person or one country that isn't doing as much and then matching our efforts to theirs is a lose-lose situation.

Answer 5

Yeah I think so.........

Answer 6

first off, there is no such thing as BIG OIL.  Do you realize Exxon controls less than 1% of all the oil?

As for profits, again exxon makes less profit than google or Yahoo.

Answer 7

It's not the profits, it's the price that matters. But yes, if people use less fossil fuels it will contribute less to global warming. Coal is much more important than petroleum, though.

Answer 8

First off oil company profits have been huge recently. Huge. If you doubt it then look it up. So the question is what will they do with all this money?  Build solar or wind installations?  Be serious.  They'll plow some of those fat profits into lobbying congress to get what they want which is expansion of their corporate empire.  More drilling.  What does that mean to the environment? Not good. Of course higher fuel costs result in consumers consuming less but this is I think an irrelevant issue with regard to oil company profits. Higher fuel costs are a result of higher crude oil prices not the result of higher profits for Exxon.  

Answer 9

So it's a good thing that gas prices are high? It's good that the middle class is being choked by these prices? It is acceptable because it will help us avert a 1 degree change in 50 years? Yeah, that makes sense.

The American people will not stand for this c**p much longer and politicians will have to start working for us again and not in the name of some "feel good" self righteous cause.

Does it not make sense to use domestic oil, coal, wind, solar, etc, so we can stop sending billions of dollars to govts that despise us?

Politicians need to get their heads out of their collective a$$e$ and come up with a sensible energy plan that gets us on track toward new forms of energy, while using what we have here already.

Answer 10

it reduces ur bran cells >:[

Answer 11

Much warming could still come from coal, rice-field methane, cows, etc.  

There is also the horrible possibility that a catastrophe point is reached at which methane hydrates (locked in arctic tundra) begin to destabilize.

Answer 12

Yes, I'd say that sums up the whole Republican philosophy in a nutshell.  In their opinion there's no need to look for alternative energy sources because the problem will go away when we're all bankrupt and no one can afford to drive a car any more.

Answer 13

"Yes, I'd say that sums up the whole Republican philosophy in a nutshell. In their opinion there's no need to look for alternative energy sources because the problem will go away when we're all bankrupt and no one can afford to drive a car any more."

I think concernedcitizen belongs in a nutshell.

Answer 14

The problem is that the oil companies havnt raised prices in accordance with supply and demand, demand has hardly fallen, yet gas prices are still up, they raised gas prices to make larger profits and drive up the equilibrium. During the transition to more efficient vehicles, they make the largest profits by having subsidiary companies involved in being the source of fuel for these next generation vehicles, but also maintain prices as high as possible to maximize profits on oil while they still can, surely they wouldnt want to miss out on making an extra penny while still driving up the equilibrium which wont matter to the future consumer because cars will require less fossil fuel. So no, there is no intention on the part of the oil companies to give a d**n about global warming, not everyone can afford new fuel efficient vehicles, and even then why spend 30,000 on a new car simply because the oil companies want to maximize profits while hardly affecting demand enough to really make any difference on carbon emissions. Maybe we can convince politics to start regulating corporations, instead of harassing Gore, its not like hes the only one doing it. You can only change global warming by directly hurting oil coporations, it will never happen because money is power, and they have it all.

Answer 15

Ridiculous answer; aren't people predisposed to drive more with fuel efficient cars?

Answer 16

I think your right that higher prices reduce energy consumption to some extent.  Big oil has been making record profits recently because of the sudden jump, but not long ago (~4-5 yrs), gasoline was $0.79 per gallon in Oklahoma and oil was ~$20 per barrel.  The companies took a beating then and were not  looking for more oil, laying off workers and just trying to survive.

Hopefully, now they will invest in equipment, upgrades,  and diversify into more different types of energy - some of which may help reduce global warming and pollution.  They can maybe get on the front end of the change in the energy paradigm and not be in a bad economic situation if 1) oil prices fall, 2) regulations further limit the amount of pollution they are allowed to emit or 3) they have pollution credits to sell.  They can become energy supply companies instead of just oil companies. Then they would not be obstructing action on one of the potentially most serious problems faced by our species.

The high prices we have now would have to continue for decades to put a dent in global warming, and much of society can't absorb such costs. I don't see these extreme prices going on for years and years.  The demand would drop so much, the supply would increase and the prices fall dramatically. These prices are a real incentive to make better use of under-used resources, and make their use more and more economical.  Wind, solar, tidal, geothermal are good examples.  Nuclear  is resurrected and solving the waste problem would help greatly.  Electric and hybrid car technology is no longer a silly dream and hydrogen fuel cells and looking better and better, but still years away in the US (although I think China make some hydrogen fuel cell generators for emergency electricity generation).