Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Exxon’s $100m Algae Investment Falls Flat
OilPrice.com ^ | May 28, 2013 | Jen Alic

Posted on 05/30/2013 11:20:15 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer

Exxon Mobil Corp. (NYSE: XOM) is cutting its losses on algae biofuels after investing over $100 million only to find that it couldn’t achieve commercial viability.

Earlier this week, Exxon announced that while it wasn’t throwing in the towel, it would be forced to restructure its algae research with partner California-based Synthetic Genomics Inc (SGI).

(Excerpt) Read more at oilprice.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: algae; biofuels; energy; exxon; oil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

1 posted on 05/30/2013 11:20:15 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Tax loss. Good stuff to lose money on.


2 posted on 05/30/2013 11:22:08 PM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Good thing it was only other people’s money that they lost.


3 posted on 05/30/2013 11:22:57 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Gee... they could have invested that $100 million in drilling for oil and made a killing.


4 posted on 05/30/2013 11:24:11 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (The monsters are due on Maple Street)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer
They should fire the accountant that said it was profitable, but my suspicions say they gambled on some big government low-interest green money that never materialized.
5 posted on 05/30/2013 11:24:35 PM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Exxon can throw 100m around like it’s pennies. A billion to them it about a dollar to you. Yet, they’ll still rat out all they can for IT. Kinda amazing how they operate. Nickel and dime here and there.


6 posted on 05/30/2013 11:25:02 PM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Doesn’t the FedGov kick in money on this? They may not have lost nearly as much.


7 posted on 05/30/2013 11:25:05 PM PDT by F15Eagle (1Jn4:15;5:4-5,11-13;Mt27:50-54;Mk15:33-34;Jn3:17-18,6:69,11:25,14:6,20:31;Ro10:8-11;1Tm2:5-6;Ti3:4-7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

If that surprises anyone here, they need to turn in their Freeper posting privileges.


8 posted on 05/30/2013 11:26:35 PM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers

You can’t imagine how tiny Exxon considers 100m. 100b? Maybe they might care. But even then that’s tiny.


9 posted on 05/30/2013 11:27:59 PM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

It was not going to work without a copious water supply. Those H’s have to come from somewhere when making hydrocarbons. An efficient algae that would grow in sea water would have been a major coup here. I don’t think it ever happened.


10 posted on 05/30/2013 11:30:01 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Whatever promise that God has made, in Jesus it is yes. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

I could have told them algae wasn’t going to work, and saved them the 100 million.


11 posted on 05/30/2013 11:31:51 PM PDT by eddie willers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: eddie willers

True, fracking and deep water will supply more than we can use in the next 1000 years probably.

But, you have a lot of high paid people that’ll need to move onto other areas once this algae goofiness fails.

They move people around all the time at the higher levels. That’s just how the slimey oil industry works.


12 posted on 05/30/2013 11:37:10 PM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

100M is chump change that benefits them and liberals politically


13 posted on 05/30/2013 11:39:31 PM PDT by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Carbon credits never took flight and that made pond scum just pond scum.


14 posted on 05/30/2013 11:44:47 PM PDT by Irenic (The pencil sharpener and Elmer's glue is put away-- we've lost the red wheel barrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

If they had hired me, I could have helped them lose only $90 million.


15 posted on 05/31/2013 12:08:20 AM PDT by Cowboy Bob (Democrats: Robbing Peter to buy Paul's vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar

Wasn’t the US Navy involved in this algae based BS also?


16 posted on 05/31/2013 12:43:14 AM PDT by Roccus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Roccus
Wasn’t the US Navy involved in this algae based BS also? Yes. The US Navy contracted for several hundred million dollars worth of algae-based diesel and/or fuel oil.

But their deal wasn't with Exxon -- it was with an Obama donor in the bio-fuel business.

17 posted on 05/31/2013 12:48:20 AM PDT by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE --)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer
I guess a swimming pool that turns green can no longer be considered an asset.
18 posted on 05/31/2013 12:54:21 AM PDT by count-your-change (you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Silly Roccus. I should have known better.


19 posted on 05/31/2013 1:43:33 AM PDT by Roccus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

So you buy into the, “Big Oil Obscene Profits”, chant of the liberals? Have you ever looked at the Net Margin on oil versus McDonalds, Apple, etc? Big numbers do not equal big profits.


20 posted on 05/31/2013 1:46:01 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

You pay the price at the pump. I’m just saying that’s how it is. We’re all screwed.


21 posted on 05/31/2013 1:55:31 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

The oil companies are a very small part of the price at the pump. Government induced supply limits, taxes, and regulations are the biggest part of the problem. I hate the price too but I don’t blame the producers.


22 posted on 05/31/2013 2:13:37 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

They are a part, but in the 90’s we were at this level of oil price and 80 cents a gallon.

And that was with Clinton.

There’s just no justification for the gas prices now, it’s all gouging.


23 posted on 05/31/2013 2:19:54 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

It’s a shame your car doesn’t run on crude oil. I knew the gouging angle was coming. No reason to continue this debate since you believe oil companies should deliver the product for free. If you buy a cup of coffee today, that is where you’re being gouged by the producer. Oil drives the economy and the biggest taker is GOVERMENT.


24 posted on 05/31/2013 2:28:13 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

I worked in downstream at exxon, nuff said. I know how they feel about that entire system. The government taxes aren’t even the tiniest bit of how the think.


25 posted on 05/31/2013 2:30:59 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

I am a product manager for a large commercial telecom/data equipment provider. Example: I can buy a widget for $100.00 from a manufacturer but due to loaded costs I have to sell it for $350.00 to make a 10% gross, not net, profit. That 10% gross is dependent on a high volume of widgets sold. The telecom technician “downstream” with great wages and benefits package thinks exactly like you do. I am sure glad the downstreamers don’t run the show. Nuff said.


26 posted on 05/31/2013 2:47:28 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

Indeed, and that’s why gas is 3.50-4 vs 1.50-2 as it should be.


27 posted on 05/31/2013 2:50:37 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

In your world the gasoline pump sits on the crude oil well head that magically appeared there and produces 3 grades of product. No drilling, no refining, no transportation, no taxes or regulations, no shareholders. You really learned a lot working downstream.

Have a great day I have to go get dressed for work making obscene profits and sticking it to the little guy.


28 posted on 05/31/2013 3:02:28 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Conspiracy Guy

You have no clue about how things work or what I said, have fun.


29 posted on 05/31/2013 3:04:15 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar

It’s not the accountant, but the engineers who said it would work. Regardless, they took a risk that didn’t pan out, big deal. I like it, it shows that business are willing to take a risk only to “see if something works”. I remember the R&D tax credit - it encouraged companies to spend money to make money. Good capitalist ideas that were taken way when then libtards took over.


30 posted on 05/31/2013 3:58:16 AM PDT by Cyclone59 (Obama is like Ron Burgundy - he will read ANYTHING that is on the teleprompter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

I guess I need to work downstream. You’ve said nothing but gas is high because Exxon is evil. I understand what you said but it has no bearing on the subject. Capitalism sux in your world.


31 posted on 05/31/2013 4:24:08 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2

Last 3 years XOM spent an average of $32 billion in CapEx and averaged $28 billion in Free Cash Flow. This $100 million is not even a rounding error.


32 posted on 05/31/2013 4:31:30 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002; Conspiracy Guy

Monty,
Your memory needs a little update. Oil was about $30 a barrel all through the Clinton years. Here’s a chart:
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=historical+world+oil+price+chart&qs=n&form=QBIR&pq=historical+world+oil+price+chart&sc=0-0&sp=-1&sk=#view=detail&id=F5196AB68A6453B1D2FFF0989E3D02790966316B&selectedIndex=3


33 posted on 05/31/2013 4:32:18 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Disappointing. I love diesel motors, was hoping this algae stuff would work. Much smarter than turning our food into biofuel. I’ve owned a good bit of XOM stock for years. Pays dividends and rises predictably with the price of oil.


34 posted on 05/31/2013 4:36:36 AM PDT by IamConservative (The soul of my lifes journey is Liberty!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: norwaypinesavage

Monty said $.80/gal which is close to $30/ barrel. What he doesn’t understand is that is the price at the source not the price at the pump. He has worked down stream though. I got to run and get financial advice from my financial advisor’s barber. Later.


35 posted on 05/31/2013 5:24:11 AM PDT by Conspiracy Guy (I voted Republican, no Conservative was on the ballot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002
They are a part, but in the 90’s we were at this level of oil price and 80 cents a gallon.

BS. At that time, the price of oil never reached half of today's price.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

While gasoline prices were not that low.

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

36 posted on 05/31/2013 5:52:26 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Monty22002

The oil prices of the 90’s wasn’t anywhere near where it is today.

The last half of the 90’s the OFF Program and the smuggling of Iraqi oil drove the price so low it caused a worldwide recession.

I had an oil lease, I was selling oil at the time and there was times I only got $12-$15 per barrel and that was because I waited for the price to go up to sell.

Hip waders aren’t high enough for your BS.


37 posted on 05/31/2013 6:30:15 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I had a lease and was selling oil the last half of the 90’s.
The only reason the price of oil was as high as it was (now there’s a joke for you) the gatherers weren’t buying oil unless it met a very specific set of requirements.

In 1999 a lot of independent operators couldn’t sell their oil at any price.

Others were selling as low as $7.


38 posted on 05/31/2013 6:47:05 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
they could have invested that $100 million in drilling for oil and made a killing.

Except it wasn't an investment, it was either a bribe or protection money.

Partnered with "California-based SGI"?

I bet you anything that if you looked into SGI, you would find a money-laundering operation for OFA, or the Tides Foundation, or some similar Marxist organization.

At $100 million, Exxon probably got off cheap.

39 posted on 05/31/2013 6:50:40 AM PDT by Jim Noble (When strong, avoid them. Attack their weaknesses. Emerge to their surprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350
Others were selling as low as $7.

Even less than that in some places. Hard to believe how some kept in business.

Look at Average price Dec 1998 - Jan 1999:

Alaska North Slope First Purchase Price
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=F005071__3&f=M

40 posted on 05/31/2013 6:58:40 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
It was not going to work without a copious water supply.

That seems to be common sense, yet there is an algae "farm" or whatever they call it, doing research not far from me...in the desert, where temperatures any day now will be over a hundred for the rest of the summer. Where water is from deep wells with rapid evaporation on the surface. Hubby and I have zero knowledge of the research or much knowledge of algae other than cleaning it out of livestock drinkers but it just seems odd that there would be an algae farm in the desert.

41 posted on 05/31/2013 7:00:01 AM PDT by Tammy8 (~Secure the border and deport all illegals- do it now! ~ Support our Troops!~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8
Many of these are closed systems that don't allow water evaporation to escape. The continuous sun light can become more important.


42 posted on 05/31/2013 7:04:57 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Here in SE Texas a lot of independent operators on the domes run the cold gun-barrel separators.

The truck would show up to pick up a load, drop the thief and check the oil, oil wouldn’t meet specs, and the truck drove off without a load.

If the operator wanted to sell his oil he would first have to run it through a hot separator.

There were operators that offered the gathers their oil for $5, but they wouldn’t take it for that price without running it through a hot separator first.

A lot of people didn’t make it, myself included, there just wasn’t any money coming in to improve the production and it was costing more to produce from stripper wells than you were getting out of it.


43 posted on 05/31/2013 7:19:45 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

On the west coast, the prices were further driven low by a ban on the exports. When it was finally lifted, less than 5% of the Alaskan oil was exported for a few years before it stopped.

The ability to export actually helps stabilize the market including investments for future production. I wish those fighting the LNG exports could understand that.


44 posted on 05/31/2013 7:31:55 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

I’ll bet they did the algae experiment for PR, knowing it wouldn’t work.

Honestly, I don’t know why they would even try; because of their success, Exxon will always be THE top target of capitalism-haters, no matter how much good they do.


45 posted on 05/31/2013 7:49:56 AM PDT by pax_et_bonum (Never Forget the Seals of Extortion 17 - and God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

The recession Bush inherited from Clinton was an orchestrated recession created by driving the price of oil so low the oil companies stopped spending, the oil producing countries were running out of money, royalty checks to property owners dried up, it was a complete domino effect. It wasn’t just this county, it was a worldwide recession.

Consumers in this country without a rat’s ass of sense thought low prices were great, not having the slightest clue how much the oil industry contributed to the worldwide economy.


46 posted on 05/31/2013 7:53:09 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

You could insert the word “quietly” into any sentence in the article. We won’t see this information in any MSM story.


47 posted on 05/31/2013 7:55:24 AM PDT by denydenydeny (Admiration of absolute government is proportionate to the contempt one has for others.-Tocqueville)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Nice of you to use charts where the vertical axis is an order of magnitude greater on one to try to prove a point.


48 posted on 05/31/2013 10:28:27 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

$12-15 are about what it’s worth. Everything else is slush.


49 posted on 05/31/2013 10:30:15 AM PDT by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: All


Less Than $1.5k To Go!!
Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


50 posted on 05/31/2013 10:32:00 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson