Business

Partly Sunny with Showers 10° London Hi 14°C / Lo 9°C

Oil giant Exxon sees the future – and it is green algae

By Stephen Foley in New York

The oil giant that environmentalists love to hate, ExxonMobil, which for years denied the existence of man-made climate change, is sensationally "going green" in a very literal sense – investing $600m (£369m) in algae.

The company says it believes it can make a new kind of fuel for cars and aircraft, one that can be produced in its existing refineries and will not require modification of vehicles' engines.

At the heart of the project is Craig Venter, the scientist best known for his private-sector effort to sequence the human genome, and his latest company, Synthetic Genomics.

Exxon is putting $300m into its own research and at least as much again into Synthetic Genomic's efforts to build a lab and, ultimately, large-scale production facilities. Both sides were enthusiastic but cautious announcing the partnership yesterday. "We need to be realistic," said Emil Jacobs, vice-president of research at Exxon. "This is not going to be easy, and there are no guarantees of success."

Spending on the algae fuels project will require only a fraction of Exxon's annual capital budgets of $25bn to $30bn, but it will be the world's largest biofuels development project of its kind, Mr Venter said.

Environmentalists are keen on algae as a fuel source because, unlike many ethanol products, it is not taking up land, water and crops that might otherwise be given over to the production of food.

ExxonMobil has come under pressure from shareholders – including descendants of its founder, John D Rockefeller – to diversify from fossil fuels, though management insists oil and gas will continue to be the dominant sources of fuel for decades to come.

BP already has a partnership with Synthetic Genomics. Royal Dutch Shell, which is second to ExxonMobil in global refining capacity, announced plans in December for an algae project in Hawaii.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

more pie in the sky
[info]someofusknow wrote:
Wednesday, 15 July 2009 at 12:32 am (UTC)
It does not need $300 million of research funding to confirm the EROEI, energy return on energy invested, is abysmal, and that present economic arrangements will no longer fucntion when the depletion of conventional oil reaches a critical level.... probably within three years
Algae
[info]ironspiderzero wrote:
Wednesday, 15 July 2009 at 06:30 am (UTC)
Does this mark a real shift in thought, if not direction, for the fuel industry? Well, if they want to keep the profits rolling in they need to do something.

We should've hit peak oil production within ten years, possibly as little as five, then demand will begin to outpace production and cost will rise dramatically. So an initiative, wherever it starts and whomever is behind it, should be welcomed... if cautiously.
Re: Algae
[info]sdchamp wrote:
Wednesday, 15 July 2009 at 10:06 pm (UTC)
Unfortunately, Exxon have not suddenly had an environmental epiphany. Algae farming holds immense potential for the production of all kinds of essential extracts, for human and animal feed, nutritional and medical extracts etc. all of which will be essential to suporting life in a collapsing ecosystem with degraded lnadscapes and fished-out acidic seas. Algae can produce up to 80 times the growth per unit area of almost any other form of 'vegetation' and of course it photosynthesizes, so it will actually remove CO2 from the atmosphere and it can be grown on degraded land, even in coastal waters, so it need not displace agriculture, forest or wildlife habitat. But no, Exxon has to go after biofuels, just like the rest of the oil majors and the airlines like Beardie's. The REAL SCARY THING is that they don't want to use one of the thousands of naturally occuring species, oh no, they want a super GM variety that will out-compete natural forms and grow it in huge OPEN PONDS in Hawaii and other similar locations. It is hard to image a greater level of environmental ignorance, hubris and sheer disdain for what remains of this planet's ecosystems than what they are proposing. The ultimate insult, I suppose, from the one of the world's greatest and most avaricious despoilers.

SDChamp.
Sensationally?!
[info]globalnomad73 wrote:
Wednesday, 15 July 2009 at 08:09 am (UTC)
Since when does The Independent use such language?! Yes, 369mn USD is nice money, but small fry for ExxonMobile (profit - yes, profit, not turnover - for 2008 was $45.2 billion). I bet this 369mn is less than their PR budget. Don't get me wrong, I wish all were going green - for the sake of our survival on this planet - but let's not have such behemoths pull the wool over our eyes and think that we can now relax as 'even Exxon has seen the light'. In peace
Follow the money
[info]junkkmale wrote:
Wednesday, 15 July 2009 at 08:51 am (UTC)
Doesn't make it right of course, but in matters green, when you are trying to track the future, it is often worth following the money. And it is interesting where multi-billion oil companies are going into, and avoiding/getting out of. Oddly, there is often a slight disconnect with political directions. I wonder why?
Second biggest
[info]kjell_landsverk wrote:
Friday, 11 September 2009 at 10:29 pm (UTC)
Exxon Mobil is the world's second biggest company 2009.
Biggest company
[info]kjell_landsverk wrote:
Saturday, 12 September 2009 at 03:42 pm (UTC)
Exxon Mobil is the world's second biggest company 2009.