An Actionable Path for Oil and Gas in the Fight Against Climate Change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Special Section: The Value and Future of Petroleum Engineering Global climate concerns, amplified in the public consciousness by a steady stream of violent weather events such as hurricanes and California wildfires, are generating a new set of realities for the energy industry. The oil and gas upstream sector, accounting for approximately 60% of current world energy needs, faces existential threats to its market share—where inaction and/or insistence on marginal improvisations on past practices do not offer constructive and, ultimately, impactful solutions that the industry is most capable of delivering. Central to the issues at hand are questions that demand unambiguous answers: What should be ambitious yet achievable goals for the upstream industry over the short and long term (e.g., by the year 2050) and what specific programs in the spirit of an Apollo project for oil and gas should be envisioned? The often-cited argument that upstream companies are “extractors and not emitters,” and thus its responsibility in climate matters confined only to the extraction process, is shortsighted and dilutes steps that could be taken to maintain the industry’s leading role and capacity in providing the world’s energy supplies. Net GHG Emissions As a basic premise, it is the net emissions of all greenhouse gases (GHG), not just CO2, that drive climate change. Hence, the upstream industry’s overriding goal should be reduction and eventual elimination of net GHG emissions. Here the key operative words are “net GHG emissions,” a distinction worth highlighting. This opens up numerous GHG management options, including CO2 capture and storage (CCS), utilization, and removal (CDR) pathways such as afforestation, reforestation, and bio-energy with CCS. This diverse portfolio enhances the ability of both market forces and new technologies to produce evergreen solutions for reducing net GHG emissions. Equally flawed as the “upstream are only extractors” notion is the idea that the oil and gas industry should be accepting a carbon-free world energy model fueled 100% by renewable energy sources. While renewables are an important part of the solution in addressing climate change, they are nowhere nearly capable of replacing what oil and gas offers in support of the modern lifestyle. Substantive life-style sacrifices, however, are unlikely at a global scale and so should not constitute the underlying assumption for an ecofriendly energy future. As a further tenet for clean energy, electric vehicles, power grids (currently 85% fueled by fossil and nuclear), and battery manufacturing plants should also be judged on net emission standards. There are no silver bullets in the fight against climate change. We need every bullet in our arsenal. Eliminating certain solution pathways, such as nuclear or fossil fuels, just makes a difficult task much more difficult and expensive. By the same token, the prospect of oil and gas playing an active role will only enhance the odds of achieving the ultimate goal—to have a positive, substantive impact on climate change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".