Because he doesn't hit em with the GOTCHA! moment, drop the mic and then end the interview, leap up and give the victory pose. Like many do. He stays engaged with them and when he does catch them out, he LETS THEM ANSWER, and LISTENS to what they are saying. THATS what he brings that the rest of us have lost - the ability to maintain and continue a conversation even on difficult topics, and MOVE IT FORWARD so EVERYONE can go there.
That’s the face you make when you realize that the person in front of you has absolutely no qualms about lying to your fucking face; starting with, the very first words that come out of their mouth.
Glad to hear it called out. I am tired of the scarecrow props set up by people like this to pretend they are not responsible for their own initiatives.
Have you ever been in the board of anything? Getting a 4 person board to agree on anything that's not entirely beneficial to them is nearly impossible. Getting the board of a multinational to agree to do something that doesn't benefit them all while keeping your job there is going to take years
@@androkguz Yes, I have been on a board in the past. Having different opinions from other board members doesn't make me less responsible for actions of the board.
@@kevinkottom1526 You don't understand what a "board" is. It's literally a company version of a senate. They agree on nothing and will resolve nothing whatsoever in the end run.
Such loads of horseshit. The fossil fuel industry created API and other lobbying arms of their work using these complex structures to run these mind tricks and use loopholes to literally disenfranchise Americans and keep the world reliant on fossil fuels. Disgusting.
"the best solution will be implemented and critical changes wlll certainly occur in, at least 25 years, or well after my retirement": said every CEO of a polluting industry
1.4 Billion people in Africa they can see American lifestyle on their cellphones. Africa wants Electricity Air travel air conditioners Refrigerators and better modern homes. Africans want cars and trucks. It is so ridiculous that we in the first world want to keep the third world only getting power from windmills and solar panels. The third world cares very little about climatic change Climate change worries are for rich people. Everyone else has to put food on their tables
John Stewart made 16 million dollars in one year he is filthy rich. He owns at least two properties A 12 acre farm and a 45 acre farm. He shelters abused animals. The wonder what his carbon footprint amounts to with his great wealth. So many climate change enthusiast fly round the world in plains and own multiple vehicles and houses. The same for most of the climate scientist I bet a lot of them live near beaches. I’m sure a lot of them fly on vacations. Their money is not where their mouths are neither is their carbon footprint
How did a comedian become the most powerful journalist we have. Thanks for tackling the most critical issues of our country and asking hard hitting questions to the very people who they need to be posed to
@@newagain9964 That fact that you opened with "Bruh" tells me everything I need to know about your exceedingly limited intellect and the futility of engaging with you any further.
Daggumit Jon Stewart!! You and your team are absolutely freaking brilliant! You are seriously bringing truth and legitimacy back to journalism- having THE discussions with THE people, asking the important questions AND giving the needed pushback to hold them accountable??! Awesome work- especially highlighting the ranking of power and the ability to change the industry. Just brilliant. Thank you.
@bertybrecht Would like to see any other person here get a CEO of one of the largest O&G companies in the world to admit that the world will be warmer by 1.5ºC in 25 years and that we need to do something about it.
@@tkd2703 yeah i dont like his thinking of going right to the brink and then hopefully getting it down in the second half of the century. Sounds like a recipe to fail but that amount of acknowledgement is not to go unnoticed. We need to keep up pressure and not let them trickle improve the systems. We need swift, effective change to make sure we can even make the current deadlines.
IKR!! Every time I watch one of his videos I'm amazed at his grasp of the subject matter. From testifying in Congress for the 911 sickness hero's to being tough on a petroleum executive and everything in between.
@nbomber8830And scripted for sure. He doesn't challenge the CEO at the end when his offered solution is "give big oil more money and we will fix it", everything leading up to that is just to build credibility for that line so it can be delivered quickly and then it ends. Then you hear a proposal to give big oil more money in the future and go oh yeah maybe I'll vote for that. That's the sole purpose of this interview, and why the Shell CEO agreed to do it.
Bad Hobbyhorse: Putin's people took hyper- sensitivity to Western Energy Prices to heart - when considering to Invade. A Win/Win from their calc, at the outset. ... Especially, when "U.S." re- leased our Strategic Oil Reserve for non-Strategic purposes, without making a dent in the price of gasoline, at the pump, and, Strategically, leaving U.S., the World, and, now, ultimately, has Ukraine most Vulnerable. ... Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! SMH
Props to Jon for having zen-levels of self-control, there is no way I would have been able to sit through that load of horse manure without bursting out in laughter and walking off.
I've really missed Jon Stewart on the Daily Show but this kind of in-depth, super-journalistic interviewing is Jon's God-given purpose in our lives now and the more serious Jon Stewart can really open hearts and especially minds to thinking more critically and honestly about the real issues.
John Stewart you are THE Man. Just subbed. I worked in the oil and gas industry for years. You are exactly 100% spot on. Thank you for doing this show and keep on rocking my friend.
@@kennyandrade267 Incorrect. The price of a barrel of crude makes up only 54% of the total cost of the final product. Refining, distribution and marketing make up 35% which the oil companies have direct control over and the last 11% are taxes. Furthermore, oil companies also control the price we pay at the pump by dictating how much they are producing. They could be producing a lot more oil(remember we are energy independent now) which would lower the price but instead they listen to their shareholders that want stock buybacks. They would rather have the oil companies spend large sums of money to get dividends back then produce more gas to help the American people. These are the real facts. Do your homework.
@@ericdoheny9108 Knowing more then you doesn’t mean I know anything special at all. In fact it appears to be quite easy if you can’t understand my previous post!
@@Wolf462 dude above you just said- GLOBALLY traded commodity but then you spout that “they control the price by how much they produce.” Who is “they”?
@@Wolf462 Only the supermajors (and not all of them) are vertically integrated, the vast majority of oil companies sell to the pipeline and have no influence or value add once the fluid leaves the well. Pipeline (aka distribution) constraints are the major driver on American oil price, not rig count. And we are consistently prevented from building new pipelines and / or new refineries by the government. Oil companies are also strapped with huge amounts of debt from the last attempt to reduce prices and compete in volumes, leading to about 110 oil companies going bankrupt EVERY YEAR trying to do exactly what you describe. I think you need to do YOUR research. People see commodities going to the moon and assume that oil companies are minting gold bars all the time. Generally, when the price goes up they are spending everything trying to stop the bleeding from previous debt just to stay alive.
His entire job is to make it seem like this all has to happen later. He's making it sound like we all have to wait 'a few more years'. This agenda isn't about doing things the right way - it's about delaying the eventual loss of profits. That's it.
"it's about delaying the eventual loss of profits. That's it." Damn straight. They pretty much say it out loud as well, when they say they can't do stuff quickly it's because they need time to align their resources so that their investors don't get angry by losses. They CAN fix things now, but not without angering the people who matter..... And make no mistake, no one but the rich matter. Not even slightly.
That's a nice sentiment but it's hardly objective or big-picture. You know what industries depend on fossil fuels? Medical, healthcare, mass transit, food. If the plug was pulled on this, and don't get me wrong, I agree that oil money is bood money, it would completely destroy modern civilization. It is an extremely complex problem. Certainly more can and should be done, but there are so many black and white ignorant potshots in these comments. Oil money is only blood money because of the profit mongers that run the industry. What we really need is not so much a complete exit from fuel but a full-force revolution in accountability and corruption. This would solve many, many problems, without disrupting the systems that the global population depends on.
Dudes like this sleep at night by telling themselves “I didn’t create this mess and it’s too hard to fix it.” Morality aside, you can never expect any CEO of a for-profit company to actively work against their own bottom line.
True, he’s like the CEO of a mercenary company. He doesn’t want the way he runs his company to kill TONS of people, but it’s kinda unavoidable if he wants to profit.
@@crayoneatinggo0n477 What's your point? He isn't an oil tycoon, fossil fuels don't last forever and get more expensive every day, and his industries can feasibly be powered by renewables. Hence, there is a motive for profit in the near future when renewables become more efficient and cheaper than fossil fuels. He isn't going against his bottom line, he's trying to influence politics to further it, that's just capitalism 101.
The largest companies in each “sector” already have the solutions. They bought any and all patents for any idea that would have crushed their market, and market share. The solutions are in the patent offices.
"Can we trust fossil fuel companies?" The framing of that question is so telling. The power is in their hands, and we are having to trust and hope that they do the right thing. It shouldn't be a question of trust, it should be a question of compliance. And unless the right thing aligns with increasing their profits, then no they won't do the right thing.
Exactly. We're talking about sociopaths/psychopaths/narcissists whose decisions are dictated solely by their unfathomable greed. The kind of people who would sneak into your house at night and murder you in your sleep, process your carcass to extract everything of value from it and then shamelessly sell those resources back to your surviving family the next morning if they thought they could get away with it and make a profit. The kind of people who have the very dubious honor of belonging to that category of people who could make the world a slightly better place for everyone else simply by killing themselves. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we have to drag some of the worst offenders kicking and screaming from their ivory towers to make an example of them - french style - before things change.
There is no solution the fossil fuel industry can offer. The solution is to stop using fossil fuels. We need to stop looking to them for the answer as they do not have it and never will. There is nothing to trust, they do not have the solution. The only answer is to cut demand for their products and hurt their industry. And their job is to stop this from happening, or adjust to the falling demand as best as they can. The question of trusting the fossil fuel industry is totally irrelevant to anything. The question is do we trust ourselves to cut demand for their products no matter what they try and do to stop us.
It's hard to decide which is MOST infuriating: "My company wants change" from someone hiding behind (and part of) an organization lobbying unceasingly for the status quo. "Hydrogen is the future" from a leader in an industry that has been actively stomping that research to death since the 80s. "Activists have the most power" from one of the most powerful men in the world.
Oh it's the third one for me, makes my blood boil when the rich people with all the power insinuate that regular working class people aren't doing enough
@@codybennett244 Its a DC/Wall St bubble mindset. Thats why they think paying workers $15/hr is amazing when inflation has hit over 8%, and the actual amount for min wage to keep up with productivity should be like $25/hr
@@lowonplotproductions3283 he's not wrong on that front--a 1.5C rise by 2040-2050 is essentially baked into the cake at this point. Of course, he and every old white guy in similar roles are culpable, as they've relentlessly lobbied, sued, and delayed to avoid spending a cent on alternative energy sources.
So in the end his argument basically boils down to "I understand that you dont trust us on this right now, but when this is all over and its all too late, you will trust us, just trust us." What a beautifully useless answer.
He's right that trust has to be earned though, and it seems like he understands why activists are fighting the oil industry. That answer is basically the only answer he CAN give. We can't tell whether the underlying intention is for good or bad, though looking at history, it certainly points to the latter.
"Oh and when we disclose record profits for fiscal year 2022, please remember that had nothing to do with all of this! I swear!" "James, call my helicopter and ready the first yacht! I shall sail it to my second, larger and more impressive yacht!"
After it's the situation becomes a life or death scenario we'll clean the planet up, we promise. 1.5 degrees by the end of the century? What is he stuck in 2002? Reality: We are currently on track for a rise of between 6.3° and 13.3°F, with a high probability of an increase of 9.4°F by 2100, because current climate models STILL don't factor in melting permafrost and other positive feedback loops.
"Honesty and trust are not simply matters of character and morality; they’re crucial for efficient human interaction and a smoothly working economy." - Walter E. Williams
I was surprised when I saw " interview w/CEO of Shell." I thought NAH! No Way! Impressed that he actually sat down, and to see Jon Stewart be himself. A very good exchanges as much h as could be expected. We were able to see the issue and problem In The Flesh. Not characterized in conversations as "the industry", the "companies,"etc. As it was clearly demonstrated, articulated, and pointed out, the industry, the board, is "you" Mr. CEO.
I have zero faith in the government to do anything about climate change. I have zero faith in the criminal justice system. I have zero faith in the financial sector. This country is so broken.
It's not the country. It's humanity. Don't act like this shit isn't going on everywhere else as well. We're all chasing our prosperity and damn who comes along after we're done.
@@todo9633 The rest of the world didn't spend 20 years in Afghanistan spending trillions, killings millions and accomplishing nothing but bringing war and misery to countless numbers. America has no health care, the educational system sucks, The way we treat our most vulnerable is a testament to how broken America is. Clean our own house first!
Planet, not country. The same problems exist in governments across the globe to some extent or another. Just watch The Juice Media for the Australian version of corporate capture by big oil. The governments could be fixed, or at least well patched. For profit corporations not so much. I will never understand how the same people complaining about the gov't being corrupted by corporations somehow trust the corporations to become the defacto gov't through massive deregulation.
The CEO is quite adept at double talk and question dodging, while Jon Stewart is talented at not drinking the koolaid, rephrasing an evaded question to prove a little deeper, and recognizing when pushing further would end the interview. Truly brilliant! Also, I hope that people at the high levels realize that wealth won't be particularly meaningful if they effectively doom the planet within my lifetime.
Thank you Jon for showing that it is possible to keep calm in front of someone who's just there to lie to the detriment of human existence. Like Noam Chomsky said: "The word 'evil' doesn't even begin to describe what they're doing." But not sure what the point is because we've been hearing them lie for profit since the 1950's
Jon Stewart I just wanted to say thank you for your using the power of your personal name and reputation to bring these people to the stage to account for their business, their politics, and their actions today and their policies tomorrow. What you do when you are In Front of a microphone or camera, online or on television makes a difference- it impacts the debate. It’s great to see you in a media role. Keep it up!
You are incredibly good at this. Your skills and grace at interviewing are so needed. Thank you Jon. This clip flooded me with tremendous sadness, a deeply rooted grief that raised hopelessness yet again. Believe it or not that is a good thing. More of that facing into reality, our predicament, is actually needed. Thanks again for bringing up and discussing the real issues.
Why did it fill you with sadness and hopelessness? Was it because the CEO basically said he and the other CEOs don't have any answers and are just hoping and waiting for solutions, too? Yeah, if we don't think systemically it can be pretty depressing. I recommend a look at Zeitgeist: Moving Forward or "A Viable Society" by Peter Joseph. Or look into One Small Town Contributionism with Michael Tellinger. If you understand that train of thought you can be filled with some hope again because community becomes the answer as it should have always been.
It's called being a Dutch business man: Look up the VOC - it tells you why this is. Our entire economic culture is based on economic survival. The Netherlands basically invented the modern use of the stock exchange. I've been in a lot of business meetings with foreigners, and we always go in open minded and respectful. But if there's no profit in it - no cigar. We're not friends, it's pure business. Then again: I honestly don't think he's that big of an evil idiot as people make him out to be. A lack of moral and ethics in your business has a financial implication these days - and Oil companies know this. Shell is actually one of the more progressive ones, believe it or not.
@@spacegerrit9499Those CEOs are psychopaths. No one could ever become a CEO of a large corporation without being a psychopath. They wake up every day thinking of how they can maximize profits and human welfare and lives are not any part of their decision making. Only psychopaths could make the decisions these CEOs make. Prisons are full of psychopaths but it would be rare to find worse human beings. Oil & gas company CEOs are the worst. But all CEOs are psychopathic. Look at Gates, Cook, Musk and Zukleburg. They are all extreme psychopaths. They hurt people every day.
This is a wonderful interview, Jon stewart asking the hard questions without being too accusatory, and the shell CEO yes, giving answers we don't want to hear but at least giving us an understanding of what's going on. Neither trying to get each other to "turn" to the other side but both trying to understand. And both taking inputs and suggestions from either side. I love that when Jon says "you've fought against the mandates" Ben goes "No we haven't" and ben clarifies API has, He admits yes. not another denial, He gave a but... and Jon laughs as it, and he just takes it as it is. As Both Jon and Ben said at the end, there's no way to really trust them accept based on their actions, But still as far as interviews goes. This has been one of the best and most enjoyable i've seen in ages. Neither side preventing the other from giving their message, regardless of how much or little they agree with each other.
@@-Big_Big It is incredible how many times CEOs of multibillion dollar companies get away with saying "well we cant do anything about this" or "we didnt know anything about it". Oh how I wish I could be paid millions each year to stand in front of people and tell them how incapable I am and how incapable my company is. Best job in the fucking world.
As Stewart noted, Ben Van Buerden is on the API Advisory Board, the API Stewart correctly pointed out that has unrelentingly fought and lobbied against any government regulations on the fossil fuel industry, even state regulations, and certainly had a hand in suppressing any research or government investment in renewables. To label this an honest conversation between two guys just laying out the hard facts isn't really indicative of what happened. The Shell CEO was trying to be deceptive and roundabout in his answers from the opening question.
Back in the 1980's when I was in university and studying PR, my professors taught me that once public opinion reached a certain level (negatively or positively) it was impossible to reverse. Almost 40 years after 3 Mile Island Nuclear energy is still a touchy subject and nuclear power plants are more often shut down than built. The Fossil Fuel industry has proven my professors wrong by spending tons of money, gaslighting, and bullshitting. They are in a better position now to continue business as usual than they were in the late 90s early 2000s.
Your professors weren't wrong, like you said, the fossil industry has spent crazy amounts of money so that publc opinion doesn't reach that level. Have you seen the amount of regular people defending the oil industry? Any facebook forum will show you. Yes, it is moving in the right direction but at a snail's pace.
Jon should run for president. He is the only one I know of, who could win over both parties and cut through all the BS from all sides. Jon can change the direction of where we are heading right now.
Jon dominates these interviews where normally these powerful individuals would write the script. It’s honestly masterful from the standpoint of the power dynamic.
Yeah, when he says "It's complicated.", I was like... "We've known about this for AT LEAST 30 years now, and we've only deliberately INCREASED oil production and usage in that time, instead of lifting a single finger to start scaling it down and make some level of meaningful effort to transition to renewables." It's not complicated. Profit and bad habits have simply motivated us to ignore the problem.
He is outright lying. Sociopaths/psychopaths are good at that. If Shell really cared about any of this, they would be investing most of their R&D budget on renewables. Not only would it make sense from a long term business perspective, it would also be ethical and responsible. Instead, only 1.5% of Shell's R&D budget goes to renewables. The rest goes to more fossil fuel technologies. Also let's not forget that they lied about the effects of greenhouse gases. They knew in the 80's what is going on. Not only did they do nothing, they made things worse.
His argument was its too hard and complex and we need everyone on board. My brother in christ everyone is onbard he is the one lobbying governments to remain this way.
... commodies are literally priced by buyers and sellers... and the only buyers and sellers are.... oil companies. my god. imagine dick riding a billionaire thats literally k!lling you. wow. wow. wooooow!!!
"Honesty and trust are not simply matters of character and morality; they’re crucial for efficient human interaction and a smoothly working economy." - Walter E. Williams
And this is why totalitarian societies like Russia, China, North Korea, and the Islamic Ummah all fail in the long run. In these societies, lying, cheating, bribery, distrust and suspicion are all normalized behaviors. - W.D.
That is literally one of the 1st lessons taught to every child on the planet. Which is what to this day blows my mind about maga people. Following a pathological liar? How is this a thing?
Like Jon very much, great guy and part of a rare breed of public personality that combines decency, self referential humor and concern towards other then self
Strip the fossil fuel subsidies for just 4 years [one election cycle] and give it to wind solar and wave, I'm sick of Trillion Dollar companies arguing about cost effectiveness. Everybody needs energy, why is something everybody needs a for profit exercise?
But they sell food for profit? Food companies make money. You need food, I think. What's the difference? Not to mention... Stopping oil subsidies for 4 years and you assume they can build enough solar/wind + infrastructure to replace the energy that was displaced? I don't know what world you people live in... but it must be REALLY colorful with rainbows and unicorns everywhere.
@@garymcmillan6943 I mean...food is a whole other can of worms if you really wanna get into that be my guest. But as far as I'm concerned, any industry that collapses if we remove their government subsidies doesn't sound like an industry that deserves to be independent in the first place. I mean, think about what's happening right? You're paying through taxes for oil companies to create and distribute oil, and you're paying to use the oil at a consumer level. How is that not a fucking scam?
@@z-beeblebrox well, in Gary’s defense, he has a very weak imagination. His main argument was “I can’t imagine the stuff you’re talking about”. So it’s kind ableist to critique his views that come from such a teeny tiny weakling lil imagination..
Luckily, although waaaay later than it should have happened, the big oil companies are seeing that their current business model is not sustainable and are finally putting their resources into greener energy. It's still just as motivated by money and power, but the planet will benefit more going in that direction.
@@reverendspooty Shell, primarily a fossil fuel company, is already installing Hydrogen filling stations as they position themselves for the future. (My Twitter page under the same name as this comment has years worth of just some of what this world is doing with Hydrogen and Hydrogen technologies). But then again, in like Michigan for example: they are moving towards battery powered electric vehicles, electricity that is still generated by fossil fuels.
You see what they're doing right now and it's disgusting. They're holding the poorest Americans hostage with sky-high gas prices and using that as leverage for reduced government regulations and increased subsidies
this man is on par with the worst cartel and mob bosses out there for damage to the planet and society (arguably worse)..but we'll never treat him like that
The answer to every episode can be boiled down to one simple exchange: "We don't agree with everything the IPA says" "Hang on, aren't you on their board of directors?" "Well, yes"
Nice that Shell is finally getting into this (interviews) now that they have their "eco" initiatives. However, it's also refreshing to hear an actual interview rather than "journalists" trying to get sound bytes out of the interview instead of looking for answers.
"Trust will be regained by proof of change" 1 minute early: "We just started looking at this problem sector to sector 2 years ago and don't have a plan" "Activist are the problem" "API fights change needed... I am on the board of API" It's fascinating to get an inside look at the people managing the oil companies. I don't think he is seems evil but he also seems very practiced at defending his shareholders and position in the company. He is a business man first, concerned citizen second (if at all.) I think the shareholders of oil companies do not want to make the changes needed because it is gambling with their profits. They may never take ownership needed until there are people outside their doors with torches and pitchforks.
Absolutely do not be fooled by the act. This guy is on the board of API. Completely evil. How do you think conmen relieve their victims of their valuables? By seeming nice. Go watch the oil companies video by climate town to learn what you need to know about how api is war profiteering as we speak.
Or their companies are forcefully taken from them for gross mismanagement and nationalized under the right of Imminent Domain for the good of the country and ALL humanity.
Oh he's evil. He knows exactly what he's doing. The only reason they're coming out now is that they know it's inevitable and they can't put off change any longer. That and green energy is the new mo' money. They're not going to change without it being profitable. Period.
The question we need to answer is, at what point is a profit margin unethical? There is a degree of profit that exploits the necessity of commerce, we just need to figure out where that number is.
Putting a ceiling on capitalism? Hahahaha good one...don't get me wrong I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's never going to happen lol we'll solve that problem right after we solve the human condition
Surely any profit margin in the fossil fuel industry is unethical? I know it's somewhat idealistic to think that. But right down to the micro scale, surely no drop of burning oil was ever good for the planet and thus good for humanity?
@@Palemagpie I disagree. At the earliest stages, when fossil energy was state of the art and driving society towards innovation, they were a net positive. After the advent of cleaner energy, that positive started shrinking. And, I believe, we are well past the point where it became a negative.
@@LucianCanad the fact that petroleum scientists have been warning their own industry about climate change for over half a century proves we are well past that net positive. I agree it was an important step for humanity, we have just lacked the collective intelligence to move past it. We are at a point where humans need to realize we choose the next evolutionary advancement for our species. This is the sign of a truly intelligent race. Until we decide to follow that self evident truth, I stand by my belief that intelligence is a myth.
Just think about the life track of someone who becomes the CEO of Shell. This man has risen the ranks and been completely enveloped in the oil industry's collective consciousness for probably his entire career. When you are that enmeshed you will eat, sleep, and breathe the industry/company line. At that level, your views on things are distorted by your bubble. You drink your own kool-aid, so to speak. I think that in order to meet the challenge of climate change we need to recognize that we are dealing with not only the machiavellian-ism of industry, but the idea that some, like this man, are distorted by the pressure of their own viewpoint. This man cannot see the forest for the trees and we must show him that we have solutions to our problems. We need only for people like him to join us to be a part of the solution or be pushed aside.
I have some pretty strong doubts that most of these CEO/corporate types actually believe their own PR-nonsense. For the most part, you don't get into those positions by being overly ignorant or stupid. You "know" what you're getting in to, and in those positions you know better than most exactly what's wrong with what you're doing, what the company is doing, etc... It's all about the money and the power that goes with it. If suddenly tomorrow someone figured out a way to make "green" energy in a way that cost less and could be sold for more than the equivalent fossil fuels, absolutely ALL the fossil fuel guys would turn on a dime and be the biggest fu@$ing green energy advocates you've ever seen in your life. Dave Chapelle did a bit that has relevance to this in one of his older shows. Something like "I've done commercials for Coke and Pepsi, and surprise, I can't even tell you the difference! All I know is, Pepsi paid me most recently, so it tastes better"
You are being far, far too charitable, Nick. Not a bad trait to be charitable, of course, but in this specific case, it does far more harm than good to everyone involved -- which is everyone on the planet. At a certain point and in certain positions of great responsibility, ignorance, especially of the willful kind, must be treated as malice.
Jon, I'm honestly putting your name in the (other) option on the voting ballot. Thank you for being real and truthful, un compromised. Im not great with words. Thank you.
@@whysocurious7366 plenty of places where there is more freedom to vote. Like if you are a dem in a really blue area. Would be lovely if ranked choice were the norm.
This whole episode should be free to watch (and share) for everyone. It's too important to be locked behind a paywall. Also the "Sack Up + Go Solar" ad made me laugh ... hard!
I love the point that fossil fuel companies need to be given ownership of future energy profits to incentivize them to bother transitioning away from their current modis operandi. "Sure, we're destroying the planet, but what's in it for US to clean up??"
@@richarddixon6352 To be fair, I get where they're coming from. Oil companies are being told to cut their own throats, essentially. I doubt anyone would argue that a cleaner environment is a bad thing, but the personal cost to those benefiting from the status quo cannot be ignored.
Jon Stewart is a national treasure. The rationale these oil companies take is absurd. It’s like if Blockbuster had so much power they stayed in business by squeezing out and preventing streaming services and forcing us to rent DVDs forever.
Awesome to have John Stewart back and being himself, keeping it real and asking tough questions. He's not ot a puppet like everyone else who sold out that he has worked with in the past on Comedy Central👍👍👍💯
Don't be fooled. You don't become the CEO of Shell without the ability to be well spoken on the issues. They will actively fight to continue destroying the planet as long as there is a single dollar in it for them.
Energy companies should be the ones paying for the whole climate change and what's needed ti fix it. They failed to take the problem seriously and to develop alternatives, while filling up their pockets. The should now be hold accountable and those pockets emptied to fix the problem they generated.
@@JimzAuto while coming up with your joke you might have not noticed: "They failed to take the problem seriously and to develop alternatives, while filling up their pockets." They already have plenty of the money generations gave them. Unfortunately the biggest shortcoming of the "consumers vote with their wallet" idea is that they lack most of the data to make a fully informed decision. We just see the product and the price tag. Been part of a society comes with an intrinsic agreement: everybody should take care of that society within what they do. A small little detail subtly hidden by some less than wise selfish philosophies. Human impact on the planet is not a recent breaking news, it's a discourse going back to the end of the '800s. Some players preferred not give a fuck about it, mudding the water and spreading false propaganda, because that was more profitable. At the same time they failed society not upholding their part and failing to actually invest and develop feasible alternatives to fossile fuels, as well as actively going against those trying to develop them. Going as far as to even suck up funds that society devoted to find those alternatives. We already handed over our wallets, now we're paying with our life and hypothecate the lifes of future humans. When I say "They should now be hold accountable and those pockets emptied to fix the problem they generated." I'm talking about the actual people that pocked those profits and subsidies, getting uber rich while shitting on the only planet that can support human life, as far as we know. The future is gone in silly mantions, yatches and other superflouse stuff. You can have a great and confortable life even if you don't have houses and toys requiring the GDP of a small country to maintain. It's called: accountability. And no, Musk will not save us all with Mars, because even if it was hypothetically possible to terraform Mars (and the scientists verdict is still incomplete on that), the timeframe requirements are so long that we'll be far gone before that happens.
@@un_lucio i made no joke. Corporations don’t pay taxes/penalties- their customers do. Taxes for fuel are higher than corporate profits- look it up. Government needs to be shrunk.
"Well I'm not completely familiar with API" "Aren't you on their board?" Calling bullshit right in his face. This is why I love John Stewart. And the way he kept saying "need to" and "should do" was irritating. It wasn't "we ARE trying" "we ARE doing". They talk about the issue but have begun absolutely no mitigation.
Ever seen their plan to cut emissions by half by 2030? It's morbidly hilarious. Like 1% next year, another percent the year after that and in 2029 virtually all the cutting still has to happen. It's pretty much the same with all those net-zero by 2050 BS plans you keep hearing about.
To stop internal combustion engine vehicle production you need to have an alternative that is economically compelling. What about a electric car that doesn't drive itself, is not connected to the internet, lasts for 800,000 miles, and costs $25000. Use profits from fossil fuel production to create charging station infrastructure. Back up wind and solar with L.F.T.R. Thorium powered nuclear reactors creating a reliable electric grid. Implementing these ideas would result in dramatically reducing CO2 emissions and would collapse the oil market around the world. Oil exploration, drilling, pipelines, and fracking would cease to be economically viable. The evil oil empires would also go away.
100% the EV-industry is kinda shafting the non-tech people. Of course it's cool with all those features but the majority of car drivers wants a car that goes from A-B and isn't too difficult to maintain. I want those coold doodads and would love a car with the same functions as a Tesla but my dad doesn't get it.
@@DaveDDD Yes oil is a raw material for many essential products. If we stop burning gasoline and diesel the existing proven reserves should last for decades.
@@elefnishikot I’m not disagreeing that the use of fossil fuels for energy can (and must) be drastically reduced, just saying that the idea that we still wouldn’t drill or have a use for petroleum products isn’t completely true. In 2017, about 13% of fossil fuels consumed in the US were for non-combustion purposes. Hydrocarbons are incredibly useful beyond their use in the energy sector. I don’t know about having decades of reserves, but either way, we can drastically cut down our reliance on fossil fuels if we switch to greener energy.
That was a good discussion John and I think your guest, while a cog in that wheel, was at least reasonable enough to see the situation and propose a way through things. they know what they are doing and how to fix it. But those pesky shareholders and profits get in the way.
Jon, we will be forever in debt for your ability to bring light to the dark! May not seem like much but you can’t fix a problem if you don’t know it exists. Thank you for what you do ✊
I appreciate Jon's approach of sticking with the question of why things can't be better from a straightforward moral point of view but I really feel like he discounts how insanely hard some of these problems are to fix. You can't say something like "well why can't all the oil companies act better?" and then be upset when you don't get a straight answer because there isn't any straight answer! There's an enormous, complex answer that's only partially understood and trying to explain that complexity is not necessarily dodging the question.
The issue is that companies have been playing up that complexity rather than working through it for years. Lots of problems are complex, that doesn't mean they're not solvable. WW2 was a lot of moving parts, it was still done and over with in 6 years. Going to the moon was complex, yet it took less than a decade to figure out once they got going. Human ingenuity matched with a desire to get things done can get a LOT done in a pretty short period of time. There are plenty of smart people in the energy industry - it's a matter of the commitment to making things better in a tangible timeline that works that seems to be missing or at least has been missing for quite a while. The CEO here makes some good points (like carbon-based energy is not going the way of the dodo, but it will lessen). But saying the problem is hard is a bit of a throwaway line when the industry is actively works to stop things that might lessen the problem. Another good example is cancer. Cancer is infinitely (or near-infinitely) complex (like most living things) but there are tens of thousands of researchers working on and finding tangible solutions to that problem every day. Literally every year new treatments and new therapies are being investigated or brought to market. Cancer is a problem 100x more complex than the energy industry but that doesn't stop tangible progress from being made.
@@stevenbrock528 Yes, there are tens of thousands of researchers working on finding solutions for cancer and have been for decades - and they still haven't found blanket cure. And that research is by and large funded through government grants and is conducted by physicians, biologists, and clinicians. It's not conducted by chemo drug manufacturers, at their own expense. By the same token, it's not the responsibility of the fossil fuel industries to expend their own resources and funding to research how to make themselves obsolete.
@@stevenbrock528 I'm not saying companies should get away with publicly arguing that its complicated while privately fighting incremental progress. I'm saying we should admit its complicated as a baseline, admit that the solution will also be complicated, and then get further into the details and figure out what real progress looks like. Jon doesn't tell his audience that its complicated and, as a result, most people just see this as simplistic moral issue. My frustration is that progressives often demand that things get better and undermine the actual slow, boring, incremental progress that's being made; you can't watch this episode and understand "what the problem is" because Jon just reduces the problem into a "you should be better" argument. Jon could discuss the role of government R&D funding, he could discuss the climate provisions in build back better, he could ask the CEO about how the fossil fuel industry can transition towards more climate friendly production or otherwise how the industry's interests can be brought in line with global climate priorities, he could discuss new energy sources like nuclear or geothermal, he could discuss tax code, financial incentives for clean energy investment, or any number of actual policies that could communicate to the audience that this is a complicated issues with difficult but real solutions.
@@royalewithcheese17 I believe that the only way any fossil fuel company could be made to make progress on the issue is if it was nationalized, with the employees becoming public servants. Leaving them as private entities just creates far too much corruption, grift, and just plain laziness because they, as separate authoritarian entities from the democratic government, are well-motivated to subvert that democratic government. Hence, lobbying and bribery abounds.
Honest, but still full of shit. His final message was that of a lying beau who, after being caught cheating a hundred times, says, "I know I can't ask you to trust me, but if you stay with me I will show you that I can change!" Anyone with half a brain knows he won't. The form of capitalism that international corporations function under is one in which it's impossible to push through any resolution that doesn't increase profits at any expense. Any CEO who tries to do differently will be immediately dethroned by their company's board.
A question that wasn't asked here that I would have liked to have heard a response to is, "what is the fuel companies plan for when they are held liable to for environmental disasters or property loss due to climate change?"
Why should they?Why not charging you for all the useless shit you bought that was produced with oil!All the plastic shit you bought tvs furniture paint construction materials!Why not charging you for your overheated or cooled oversized apartement?Stupid fingerpointing but wanting the american lifestyle!You wamt to save the planet?So only a bicycle for you and a 150sqft apartement if your single!
To be fair, This interview was a waste of time. It was clear right away that this CEO will go on as always no matter what will be discussed in the interview. Big companies and politicians are all the same - staying in power until the end at all costs for the rest of us.
Incredible how Jon convinces these people to even sit down for an interview.
Their arrogance compells them.
Because he doesn't hit em with the GOTCHA! moment, drop the mic and then end the interview, leap up and give the victory pose. Like many do.
He stays engaged with them and when he does catch them out, he LETS THEM ANSWER, and LISTENS to what they are saying.
THATS what he brings that the rest of us have lost - the ability to maintain and continue a conversation even on difficult topics, and MOVE IT FORWARD so EVERYONE can go there.
He does conduct himself with a Judge Judy kind of vibe.
@@HillslamsMirror well put
because they don't care. nothing will harm them. there is no reason for them to refuse. that s how protected those asshole are.
His face after the, "Aren't you on their board?" was PRICELESS
And Jon's laugh at him was equally genuine and ssrcastic.
That made me laugh so hard, the guy didn't know how to react 😂🤣😂🤣😂
K, I was listening. NOW I'm sitting up to watch this; thx much for commenting!
I can assure you he’s lobbying reaaaaallly hard against API’s policies on their board. Pinky promise.
That’s the face you make when you realize that the person in front of you has absolutely no qualms about lying to your fucking face; starting with, the very first words that come out of their mouth.
"But aren't you on their board?" Gold, Absolute gold. Even the Shell CEO laughed on that!!
Glad to hear it called out. I am tired of the scarecrow props set up by people like this to pretend they are not responsible for their own initiatives.
0:52
Have you ever been in the board of anything?
Getting a 4 person board to agree on anything that's not entirely beneficial to them is nearly impossible. Getting the board of a multinational to agree to do something that doesn't benefit them all while keeping your job there is going to take years
@@androkguz Yes, I have been on a board in the past. Having different opinions from other board members doesn't make me less responsible for actions of the board.
@@conorjames7307 I beg to differ. Unless you think that Bernie Sanders is just as responsible as all the other senators for what the government does.
"We don't agree with them on everything"
" Aren't you on their board"
"Well... Yes"
"The industry has fought the mandates."
"No, we haven't."
"The API has."
"Yeah."
The look on Jon's face was priceless. Like... wtf
How teh fck you gonna not agree with someone when you ARE that someone....
@@kevinkottom1526 You don't understand what a "board" is. It's literally a company version of a senate. They agree on nothing and will resolve nothing whatsoever in the end run.
Such loads of horseshit. The fossil fuel industry created API and other lobbying arms of their work using these complex structures to run these mind tricks and use loopholes to literally disenfranchise Americans and keep the world reliant on fossil fuels. Disgusting.
"the best solution will be implemented and critical changes wlll certainly occur in, at least 25 years, or well after my retirement": said every CEO of a polluting industry
The same with the climate goals of most politicians.
No kidding. Funny how the problem is always too big and complex for anyone in power to do something about it right now.
1.4 Billion people in Africa
they can see American lifestyle on their cellphones. Africa wants Electricity Air travel air conditioners Refrigerators and better modern homes. Africans want cars and trucks.
It is so ridiculous that we in the first world want to keep the third world only getting power from windmills and solar panels. The third world cares very little about climatic change
Climate change worries are for rich people. Everyone else has to put food on their tables
John Stewart made 16 million dollars in one year he is filthy rich.
He owns at least two properties
A 12 acre farm and a 45 acre farm. He shelters abused animals. The wonder what his carbon footprint amounts to with his great wealth.
So many climate change enthusiast fly round the world in plains and own multiple vehicles and houses.
The same for most of the climate scientist I bet a lot of them live near beaches. I’m sure a lot of them fly on vacations.
Their money is not where their mouths are neither is their carbon footprint
@@michaelreynolds8204 He seems far more than an enthusiast. @@michaelreynolds8204
How did a comedian become the most powerful journalist we have. Thanks for tackling the most critical issues of our country and asking hard hitting questions to the very people who they need to be posed to
Love Jon's interview style. Cuts through the bullshit, suffer no fools, tolerates no deception.
The man is an international treasure..
He’s a lightweight. Why else would the elite talk to him?
@@newagain9964 A lightweight? As opposed to whom, exactly? You have no idea what you're talking about.
International?
@@SilentBob731 Bruh. since when is John Stewart a subject matter expert of anything? Except sucking up to his “left” leaning guests?
@@newagain9964 That fact that you opened with "Bruh" tells me everything I need to know about your exceedingly limited intellect and the futility of engaging with you any further.
Daggumit Jon Stewart!! You and your team are absolutely freaking brilliant! You are seriously bringing truth and legitimacy back to journalism- having THE discussions with THE people, asking the important questions AND giving the needed pushback to hold them accountable??! Awesome work- especially highlighting the ranking of power and the ability to change the industry. Just brilliant. Thank you.
This series has turned out to be a real gem, it’s Stewart’s best work IMO.
Not really, just another talking head. Zero effectiveness. Just verbal Masturbation.
@bertybrecht Would like to see any other person here get a CEO of one of the largest O&G companies in the world to admit that the world will be warmer by 1.5ºC in 25 years and that we need to do something about it.
@@tkd2703 yeah i dont like his thinking of going right to the brink and then hopefully getting it down in the second half of the century. Sounds like a recipe to fail but that amount of acknowledgement is not to go unnoticed. We need to keep up pressure and not let them trickle improve the systems. We need swift, effective change to make sure we can even make the current deadlines.
IKR!!
Every time I watch one of his videos I'm amazed at his grasp of the subject matter. From testifying in Congress for the 911 sickness hero's to being tough on a petroleum executive and everything in between.
2:51 is such a crazy dissection and rebuttal. I don't know how Jon can think that sharply so quickly; this entire interview is ruthless
While i do agree with you that john is quick as hell, i am pretty sure that this interview is cut
@nbomber8830And scripted for sure. He doesn't challenge the CEO at the end when his offered solution is "give big oil more money and we will fix it", everything leading up to that is just to build credibility for that line so it can be delivered quickly and then it ends. Then you hear a proposal to give big oil more money in the future and go oh yeah maybe I'll vote for that. That's the sole purpose of this interview, and why the Shell CEO agreed to do it.
People should know better than to play word games with Jon Stewart. He enjoys nothing more than calling bullshit on bullshit.
And still they keep coming and keep piling on ... on bullshit mountain™.
America is the manufacture, distribution, reinforcement and prolification of bullshit. ~Carlin
That's why we ain't some meagre _shithole_
Bad Hobbyhorse: Putin's people took hyper-
sensitivity to Western Energy Prices to heart -
when considering to Invade. A Win/Win from their
calc, at the outset. ... Especially, when "U.S." re-
leased our Strategic Oil Reserve for non-Strategic
purposes, without making a dent in the price of
gasoline, at the pump, and, Strategically, leaving
U.S., the World, and, now, ultimately, has Ukraine
most Vulnerable. ... Stupid! Stupid! Stupid! SMH
Oh yeah
Props to Jon for having zen-levels of self-control, there is no way I would have been able to sit through that load of horse manure without bursting out in laughter and walking off.
All those moments of zen in the Daily Show prepared him for situations like these 😂
lol. He DID burst out laughing at a couple points!
i concur
Shit I burst out laughing when it cut to the other guys face and he's just head down. Smiling like a freaking demon
He’s way smarter than Stewart. Not sure what you’re talking about specifically…
I've really missed Jon Stewart on the Daily Show but this kind of in-depth, super-journalistic interviewing is Jon's God-given purpose in our lives now and the more serious Jon Stewart can really open hearts and especially minds to thinking more critically and honestly about the real issues.
He’s coming back soon!! 👀👀
You are in luck since he’s back. And o god, did we miss good ol Jon
@@Relixxz Yeah, I watched… I couldn't miss it 😆
John Stewart you are THE Man. Just subbed. I worked in the oil and gas industry for years. You are exactly 100% spot on. Thank you for doing this show and keep on rocking my friend.
@@kennyandrade267 Incorrect. The price of a barrel of crude makes up only 54% of the total cost of the final product. Refining, distribution and marketing make up 35% which the oil companies have direct control over and the last 11% are taxes.
Furthermore, oil companies also control the price we pay at the pump by dictating how much they are producing. They could be producing a lot more oil(remember we are energy independent now) which would lower the price but instead they listen to their shareholders that want stock buybacks. They would rather have the oil companies spend large sums of money to get dividends back then produce more gas to help the American people. These are the real facts. Do your homework.
@@Wolf462 i drilled billions of dollars worth of oil - stop acting like you know something special lmao
@@ericdoheny9108 Knowing more then you doesn’t mean I know anything special at all. In fact it appears to be quite easy if you can’t understand my previous post!
@@Wolf462 dude above you just said- GLOBALLY traded commodity but then you spout that “they control the price by how much they produce.” Who is “they”?
@@Wolf462 Only the supermajors (and not all of them) are vertically integrated, the vast majority of oil companies sell to the pipeline and have no influence or value add once the fluid leaves the well. Pipeline (aka distribution) constraints are the major driver on American oil price, not rig count. And we are consistently prevented from building new pipelines and / or new refineries by the government. Oil companies are also strapped with huge amounts of debt from the last attempt to reduce prices and compete in volumes, leading to about 110 oil companies going bankrupt EVERY YEAR trying to do exactly what you describe. I think you need to do YOUR research. People see commodities going to the moon and assume that oil companies are minting gold bars all the time. Generally, when the price goes up they are spending everything trying to stop the bleeding from previous debt just to stay alive.
His entire job is to make it seem like this all has to happen later. He's making it sound like we all have to wait 'a few more years'.
This agenda isn't about doing things the right way - it's about delaying the eventual loss of profits. That's it.
"it's about delaying the eventual loss of profits. That's it."
Damn straight. They pretty much say it out loud as well, when they say they can't do stuff quickly it's because they need time to align their resources so that their investors don't get angry by losses. They CAN fix things now, but not without angering the people who matter..... And make no mistake, no one but the rich matter. Not even slightly.
Delay, deny, and hope they die.
That's a nice sentiment but it's hardly objective or big-picture. You know what industries depend on fossil fuels? Medical, healthcare, mass transit, food. If the plug was pulled on this, and don't get me wrong, I agree that oil money is bood money, it would completely destroy modern civilization. It is an extremely complex problem. Certainly more can and should be done, but there are so many black and white ignorant potshots in these comments. Oil money is only blood money because of the profit mongers that run the industry. What we really need is not so much a complete exit from fuel but a full-force revolution in accountability and corruption. This would solve many, many problems, without disrupting the systems that the global population depends on.
@@kylezo Sure, but those industries wouldn't need to rely on it so much if we had started off a little stronger 30 years ago.
@@kylezo Oil is finite; we need to get rid of it, anyway.
this is one of the better interviews hes done with people. they both talk so well and the guy does genuinely seem to know how to speak with a point
The problem is he doesn't mean a word of it.
@@DrMattHH at the end of the day is was just a whole lot of deflection and no self accountability or guts
Dudes like this sleep at night by telling themselves “I didn’t create this mess and it’s too hard to fix it.” Morality aside, you can never expect any CEO of a for-profit company to actively work against their own bottom line.
True, he’s like the CEO of a mercenary company. He doesn’t want the way he runs his company to kill TONS of people, but it’s kinda unavoidable if he wants to profit.
Musk is by trying to force more oil independency in the US...
@@crayoneatinggo0n477 What's your point? He isn't an oil tycoon, fossil fuels don't last forever and get more expensive every day, and his industries can feasibly be powered by renewables. Hence, there is a motive for profit in the near future when renewables become more efficient and cheaper than fossil fuels. He isn't going against his bottom line, he's trying to influence politics to further it, that's just capitalism 101.
@@AsobiMedio you're right him urging the US government to produce more oil for gas doesn't go against his electric cars in the slightest....
The largest companies in each “sector” already have the solutions. They bought any and all patents for any idea that would have crushed their market, and market share. The solutions are in the patent offices.
"Can we trust fossil fuel companies?"
The framing of that question is so telling. The power is in their hands, and we are having to trust and hope that they do the right thing. It shouldn't be a question of trust, it should be a question of compliance.
And unless the right thing aligns with increasing their profits, then no they won't do the right thing.
Too true
Exactly. We're talking about sociopaths/psychopaths/narcissists whose decisions are dictated solely by their unfathomable greed. The kind of people who would sneak into your house at night and murder you in your sleep, process your carcass to extract everything of value from it and then shamelessly sell those resources back to your surviving family the next morning if they thought they could get away with it and make a profit. The kind of people who have the very dubious honor of belonging to that category of people who could make the world a slightly better place for everyone else simply by killing themselves.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we have to drag some of the worst offenders kicking and screaming from their ivory towers to make an example of them - french style - before things change.
In that mindset, profit is the right thing. They will continue to do their right thing until the end of times.
@@HideousConformity well said.
There is no solution the fossil fuel industry can offer. The solution is to stop using fossil fuels. We need to stop looking to them for the answer as they do not have it and never will.
There is nothing to trust, they do not have the solution.
The only answer is to cut demand for their products and hurt their industry. And their job is to stop this from happening, or adjust to the falling demand as best as they can.
The question of trusting the fossil fuel industry is totally irrelevant to anything. The question is do we trust ourselves to cut demand for their products no matter what they try and do to stop us.
It's hard to decide which is MOST infuriating:
"My company wants change" from someone hiding behind (and part of) an organization lobbying unceasingly for the status quo.
"Hydrogen is the future" from a leader in an industry that has been actively stomping that research to death since the 80s.
"Activists have the most power" from one of the most powerful men in the world.
Oh it's the third one for me, makes my blood boil when the rich people with all the power insinuate that regular working class people aren't doing enough
Bump.
@@codybennett244 Its a DC/Wall St bubble mindset. Thats why they think paying workers $15/hr is amazing when inflation has hit over 8%, and the actual amount for min wage to keep up with productivity should be like $25/hr
For me, this was the head-exploding moment: "we will go past 1.5° by 2050, THEN we will have to work on getting it below 1.5 by 2100"
@@lowonplotproductions3283 he's not wrong on that front--a 1.5C rise by 2040-2050 is essentially baked into the cake at this point. Of course, he and every old white guy in similar roles are culpable, as they've relentlessly lobbied, sued, and delayed to avoid spending a cent on alternative energy sources.
So in the end his argument basically boils down to "I understand that you dont trust us on this right now, but when this is all over and its all too late, you will trust us, just trust us."
What a beautifully useless answer.
He's right that trust has to be earned though, and it seems like he understands why activists are fighting the oil industry. That answer is basically the only answer he CAN give. We can't tell whether the underlying intention is for good or bad, though looking at history, it certainly points to the latter.
"Oh and when we disclose record profits for fiscal year 2022, please remember that had nothing to do with all of this! I swear!"
"James, call my helicopter and ready the first yacht! I shall sail it to my second, larger and more impressive yacht!"
"when this is all over" you mean civilization?
After it's the situation becomes a life or death scenario we'll clean the planet up, we promise.
1.5 degrees by the end of the century? What is he stuck in 2002? Reality: We are currently on track for a rise of between 6.3° and 13.3°F, with a high probability of an increase of 9.4°F by 2100, because current climate models STILL don't factor in melting permafrost and other positive feedback loops.
"Honesty and trust are not simply matters of character and morality; they’re crucial for efficient human interaction and a smoothly working economy." - Walter E. Williams
Jon @1:02 "aren't u on their board"
The sly smile he gives after saying that is _pure gold_
I’m honestly surprised that he even did an interview with Jon lol
They are great at P.R. B.S.
I'm glad so many of these ghouls have forgotten who Jon is, or else they'd be running for the hills any time he sends an interview request
Yea this want nowhere, everybody already know gas and oil companies especially CEOs are full of shit.
I was surprised when I saw " interview w/CEO of Shell." I thought NAH! No Way! Impressed that he actually sat down, and to see Jon Stewart be himself. A very good exchanges as much h as could be expected. We were able to see the issue and problem In The Flesh.
Not characterized in conversations as "the industry", the "companies,"etc. As it was clearly demonstrated, articulated, and pointed out, the industry, the board, is "you" Mr. CEO.
@@lip124 Not just full of shit but corrupt to their souls.
I have zero faith in the government to do anything about climate change. I have zero faith in the criminal justice system. I have zero faith in the financial sector. This country is so broken.
well, look at the bright side. mcdonalds, discount cigarette shops, liquor stores, and pawn shops are plentiful. so, hurray?
It's not broken at all. The rich are getting richer and more powerful, it's working as it was designed to work.
It's not the country. It's humanity. Don't act like this shit isn't going on everywhere else as well. We're all chasing our prosperity and damn who comes along after we're done.
@@todo9633 The rest of the world didn't spend 20 years in Afghanistan spending trillions, killings millions and accomplishing nothing but bringing war and misery to countless numbers. America has no health care, the educational system sucks, The way we treat our most vulnerable is a testament to how broken America is. Clean our own house first!
Planet, not country.
The same problems exist in governments across the globe to some extent or another.
Just watch The Juice Media for the Australian version of corporate capture by big oil.
The governments could be fixed, or at least well patched. For profit corporations not so much.
I will never understand how the same people complaining about the gov't being corrupted by corporations somehow trust the corporations to become the defacto gov't through massive deregulation.
Man, Jon, you are truly brilliant & gifted. What a wonderful interview with the Shell guy. You are a master.
The CEO is quite adept at double talk and question dodging, while Jon Stewart is talented at not drinking the koolaid, rephrasing an evaded question to prove a little deeper, and recognizing when pushing further would end the interview. Truly brilliant!
Also, I hope that people at the high levels realize that wealth won't be particularly meaningful if they effectively doom the planet within my lifetime.
I don't think the high levels necessarily plan to stick around for that part. This planet might be fucked but...
They'll be on Mars.
they dont give a shit, because either A) they will be dead before it happens, or B) they will be rich enough that it wont effect them.
@@sueyourself5413 it would cost more and be harder to teraform Mars than just fix our current planet.
@@Eric-cj8sb You don't need to tell me that, but it does seem to be what they're doing.
Thank you Jon for showing that it is possible to keep calm in front of someone who's just there to lie to the detriment of human existence. Like Noam Chomsky said: "The word 'evil' doesn't even begin to describe what they're doing."
But not sure what the point is because we've been hearing them lie for profit since the 1950's
Jon Stewart I just wanted to say thank you for your using the power of your personal name and reputation to bring these people to the stage to account for their business, their politics, and their actions today and their policies tomorrow. What you do when you are In Front of a microphone or camera, online or on television makes a difference- it impacts the debate. It’s great to see you in a media role. Keep it up!
It's so refreshing to have Jon Stewart back. He doesn't blindly accept BS and is quick to point out when someone is attempting to gaslight him
Back at The Daily Show now, too!
You are incredibly good at this. Your skills and grace at interviewing are so needed. Thank you Jon. This clip flooded me with tremendous sadness, a deeply rooted grief that raised hopelessness yet again. Believe it or not that is a good thing. More of that facing into reality, our predicament, is actually needed. Thanks again for bringing up and discussing the real issues.
Hang in there.
Why did it fill you with sadness and hopelessness? Was it because the CEO basically said he and the other CEOs don't have any answers and are just hoping and waiting for solutions, too? Yeah, if we don't think systemically it can be pretty depressing.
I recommend a look at Zeitgeist: Moving Forward or "A Viable Society" by Peter Joseph. Or look into One Small Town Contributionism with Michael Tellinger. If you understand that train of thought you can be filled with some hope again because community becomes the answer as it should have always been.
This Shell CEO is very convincing and comes across as respectful but make no mistake: he's as ruthless and cruel as they get.
It's called being a Dutch business man: Look up the VOC - it tells you why this is. Our entire economic culture is based on economic survival. The Netherlands basically invented the modern use of the stock exchange.
I've been in a lot of business meetings with foreigners, and we always go in open minded and respectful. But if there's no profit in it - no cigar. We're not friends, it's pure business.
Then again: I honestly don't think he's that big of an evil idiot as people make him out to be. A lack of moral and ethics in your business has a financial implication these days - and Oil companies know this. Shell is actually one of the more progressive ones, believe it or not.
@@spacegerrit9499Those CEOs are psychopaths. No one could ever become a CEO of a large corporation without being a psychopath. They wake up every day thinking of how they can maximize profits and human welfare and lives are not any part of their decision making. Only psychopaths could make the decisions these CEOs make.
Prisons are full of psychopaths but it would be rare to find worse human beings. Oil & gas company CEOs are the worst. But all CEOs are psychopathic. Look at Gates, Cook, Musk and Zukleburg. They are all extreme psychopaths. They hurt people every day.
How could I forget. I’m 19, it’s my future and the future of my unborn children that these CEO’s are selling for a yacht.
all I hear is "we won't do it unless forced, and we'll fight like bloody hell for every penny"
And they want us to “force” them, getting our heads cracked open by militarized police and ruin our homes and families by being thrown in jail.
Clearly time for guillotines.
This is a wonderful interview, Jon stewart asking the hard questions without being too accusatory, and the shell CEO yes, giving answers we don't want to hear but at least giving us an understanding of what's going on. Neither trying to get each other to "turn" to the other side but both trying to understand. And both taking inputs and suggestions from either side. I love that when Jon says "you've fought against the mandates" Ben goes "No we haven't" and ben clarifies API has, He admits yes. not another denial, He gave a but... and Jon laughs as it, and he just takes it as it is. As Both Jon and Ben said at the end, there's no way to really trust them accept based on their actions, But still as far as interviews goes. This has been one of the best and most enjoyable i've seen in ages. Neither side preventing the other from giving their message, regardless of how much or little they agree with each other.
Wonderfully put! These are the kind of conversations that will actually get us somewhere.
well he was lying his ass off and deflecting, but sure. very civil about it
@@-Big_Big It is incredible how many times CEOs of multibillion dollar companies get away with saying "well we cant do anything about this" or "we didnt know anything about it". Oh how I wish I could be paid millions each year to stand in front of people and tell them how incapable I am and how incapable my company is. Best job in the fucking world.
As Stewart noted, Ben Van Buerden is on the API Advisory Board, the API Stewart correctly pointed out that has unrelentingly fought and lobbied against any government regulations on the fossil fuel industry, even state regulations, and certainly had a hand in suppressing any research or government investment in renewables. To label this an honest conversation between two guys just laying out the hard facts isn't really indicative of what happened. The Shell CEO was trying to be deceptive and roundabout in his answers from the opening question.
John: "Trust is at an all time low."
Shell CEO: "You shouldn't trust us."
Interview ends.
Trust no one
Oh how I have been waiting for John to return to this type of journalism. I love his understanding of the subject he is interviewing.
@@kennyandrade267 They control production which has a direct impact on the price it is traded at.
Back in the 1980's when I was in university and studying PR, my professors taught me that once public opinion reached a certain level (negatively or positively) it was impossible to reverse. Almost 40 years after 3 Mile Island Nuclear energy is still a touchy subject and nuclear power plants are more often shut down than built. The Fossil Fuel industry has proven my professors wrong by spending tons of money, gaslighting, and bullshitting. They are in a better position now to continue business as usual than they were in the late 90s early 2000s.
Unless you believe this comment section is full of the enlightened minority I dont think those professors got proved wrong.
Your professors weren't wrong, like you said, the fossil industry has spent crazy amounts of money so that publc opinion doesn't reach that level. Have you seen the amount of regular people defending the oil industry? Any facebook forum will show you. Yes, it is moving in the right direction but at a snail's pace.
Jon should run for president. He is the only one I know of, who could win over both parties and cut through all the BS from all sides. Jon can change the direction of where we are heading right now.
Jon dominates these interviews where normally these powerful individuals would write the script. It’s honestly masterful from the standpoint of the power dynamic.
They usually go on places like Fox and have a guest contrary to their opinion that the host will assist them in drowning out.
"But aren't you on the board?" PRICELESS! Doing the background research pays off.. Great line. Thank you!
Anyone who has been around geology, like all oil men, would have known about climate change in 1978. Nineteen-fucking-seventy-eight.
Yeah, when he says "It's complicated.", I was like... "We've known about this for AT LEAST 30 years now, and we've only deliberately INCREASED oil production and usage in that time, instead of lifting a single finger to start scaling it down and make some level of meaningful effort to transition to renewables." It's not complicated. Profit and bad habits have simply motivated us to ignore the problem.
The First warnings came from the Science community in 1946.
Oil wants us to pay them to change. They (this guy) are extorting the country
I hazard to guess there are a lot more bean counters than geologist in the oil business.
We came close to actual global action during Reagan, and the US backed out. Sununu especially played a large part in this and I hope he rots for it.
Big respect for this guy. He didn’t dodge too hard and actually had an open conversation. The look of shame helped his case too. 🤘🏻
He is outright lying. Sociopaths/psychopaths are good at that. If Shell really cared about any of this, they would be investing most of their R&D budget on renewables. Not only would it make sense from a long term business perspective, it would also be ethical and responsible. Instead, only 1.5% of Shell's R&D budget goes to renewables. The rest goes to more fossil fuel technologies. Also let's not forget that they lied about the effects of greenhouse gases. They knew in the 80's what is going on. Not only did they do nothing, they made things worse.
big respect for ben van beurden? he is sa+an.
His argument was its too hard and complex and we need everyone on board. My brother in christ everyone is onbard he is the one lobbying governments to remain this way.
I am impressed that Shell CEO was willing to talk to you this frankly! Love having Jon back!!!
"I don't agree with them about everything" ..."Aren't you on their BOARD?!?"--- this sums up corporate America 1000%. Thanks Jon. Great stuff.
Dialog is the start of understanding and change. Thanks for both for taking the first step.
Jon is so good at sticking it to his interviewee without crossing the line. Master at his craft.
But how do you define that “[red ]line”, though?
This is why I love Jon Stewart. He keeps the people who he interviews on topic. Keep doing great things! You and your staff are phenomenal!
I'm glad i stumbled on this channel. I used to watch the John Stewart as a teen. He's even better now.
As an activist for years now ... thank you Jon for framing this interview this way.
What did you ever do as an activist?
...
commodies are literally priced by buyers and sellers...
and the only buyers and sellers are....
oil companies.
my god.
imagine dick riding a billionaire thats literally k!lling you. wow. wow. wooooow!!!
Could you please try to breathe, and make your point more patiently - Mr @@kennyandrade267?
"Honesty and trust are not simply matters of character and morality; they’re crucial for efficient human interaction and a smoothly working economy." - Walter E. Williams
And this is why totalitarian societies like Russia, China, North Korea, and the Islamic Ummah all fail in the long run. In these societies, lying, cheating, bribery, distrust and suspicion are all normalized behaviors. - W.D.
That is literally one of the 1st lessons taught to every child on the planet.
Which is what to this day blows my mind about maga people.
Following a pathological liar? How is this a thing?
Like Jon very much, great guy and part of a rare breed of public personality that combines decency, self referential humor and concern towards other then self
Strip the fossil fuel subsidies for just 4 years [one election cycle] and give it to wind solar and wave, I'm sick of Trillion Dollar companies arguing about cost effectiveness.
Everybody needs energy, why is something everybody needs a for profit exercise?
Because we haven’t nationalized big oil, yet
@@whysocurious7366 Or rather, we haven't nationalized their power structure and revenue. But we sure as hell have nationalized their income
But they sell food for profit? Food companies make money. You need food, I think. What's the difference? Not to mention... Stopping oil subsidies for 4 years and you assume they can build enough solar/wind + infrastructure to replace the energy that was displaced? I don't know what world you people live in... but it must be REALLY colorful with rainbows and unicorns everywhere.
@@garymcmillan6943 I mean...food is a whole other can of worms if you really wanna get into that be my guest. But as far as I'm concerned, any industry that collapses if we remove their government subsidies doesn't sound like an industry that deserves to be independent in the first place. I mean, think about what's happening right? You're paying through taxes for oil companies to create and distribute oil, and you're paying to use the oil at a consumer level. How is that not a fucking scam?
@@z-beeblebrox well, in Gary’s defense, he has a very weak imagination. His main argument was “I can’t imagine the stuff you’re talking about”. So it’s kind ableist to critique his views that come from such a teeny tiny weakling lil imagination..
“Forgive the pun, ‘Gaslit’ “ is totally forgiven. That was perfect.
Pretty wholesome ending honestly
Its such a good first step that Jon is using his voice to ask questions, start converstions and hear the other side. Love you, Jon.
Jon should have taken over Tim Russert's job on Meet the Press. Nobody calls out BS like Jon Stewart 👍
You think a mainstream channel like that would have let Jon do half of the stuff he's put out the last 6 months?
Jon doesn’t toe the line. There’s no way propaganda outlets like mainstream network news would give him a platform
Indeed
They would never hire Stewart to do that show lmao! But it would be awesome! Chuck Todd sucks ass. I wish they’d replace him.
@Daniel Drader Chuck Todd is a complete enabler (and sometimes endorser) of existing corruption.
2:49 There are very few people who can say "and why is that?" like Jon..
"Aren't you on the board?" Corporate media would have just let that tidbit of info slide.
Summed up this pos with that little nugget
100%
Perhaps, but let's not forget the show is owned by Apple, so still corporate just a different company from traditional media.
"Can We Trust Fossil Fuel Companies?", Absolutely not. They are in it for the money and for the power that money brings.
Alternatively, they're in it for the power and the money that power brings.
@@AWSVids Agreed. Corrupt politicians writing corrupt laws that only really benefit the few.
Luckily, although waaaay later than it should have happened, the big oil companies are seeing that their current business model is not sustainable and are finally putting their resources into greener energy. It's still just as motivated by money and power, but the planet will benefit more going in that direction.
@@reverendspooty Shell, primarily a fossil fuel company, is already installing Hydrogen filling stations as they position themselves for the future. (My Twitter page under the same name as this comment has years worth of just some of what this world is doing with Hydrogen and Hydrogen technologies).
But then again, in like Michigan for example: they are moving towards battery powered electric vehicles, electricity that is still generated by fossil fuels.
You see what they're doing right now and it's disgusting. They're holding the poorest Americans hostage with sky-high gas prices and using that as leverage for reduced government regulations and increased subsidies
Amazes me that these interviewees are willing to have these discussions that seem to be incriminating these industries
@@kennyandrade267 I am not sure any of us average people know how these cycles happen, but it seems it doesn't happen by chance.
What an incredibly charming and unassuming face to the monster eating our future. Got to love media training.
Looks like any other ghoul to me.
this man is on par with the worst cartel and mob bosses out there for damage to the planet and society (arguably worse)..but we'll never treat him like that
The answer to every episode can be boiled down to one simple exchange:
"We don't agree with everything the IPA says"
"Hang on, aren't you on their board of directors?"
"Well, yes"
Imagine the main stream media (tv ) asking those questions? Ooft!
I love John Stewart. Gods bless this guy. ❤
Nice that Shell is finally getting into this (interviews) now that they have their "eco" initiatives. However, it's also refreshing to hear an actual interview rather than "journalists" trying to get sound bytes out of the interview instead of looking for answers.
"Trust will be regained by proof of change"
1 minute early:
"We just started looking at this problem sector to sector 2 years ago and don't have a plan"
"Activist are the problem"
"API fights change needed... I am on the board of API"
It's fascinating to get an inside look at the people managing the oil companies. I don't think he is seems evil but he also seems very practiced at defending his shareholders and position in the company. He is a business man first, concerned citizen second (if at all.)
I think the shareholders of oil companies do not want to make the changes needed because it is gambling with their profits. They may never take ownership needed until there are people outside their doors with torches and pitchforks.
Absolutely do not be fooled by the act. This guy is on the board of API. Completely evil. How do you think conmen relieve their victims of their valuables? By seeming nice. Go watch the oil companies video by climate town to learn what you need to know about how api is war profiteering as we speak.
That last part.
Or their companies are forcefully taken from them for gross mismanagement and nationalized under the right of Imminent Domain for the good of the country and ALL humanity.
@@bigdickpornsuperstar Nationalization of key sectors such as energy is a net-positive in my book.
Oh he's evil. He knows exactly what he's doing. The only reason they're coming out now is that they know it's inevitable and they can't put off change any longer. That and green energy is the new mo' money. They're not going to change without it being profitable. Period.
This was a very productive conversation.
The question we need to answer is, at what point is a profit margin unethical? There is a degree of profit that exploits the necessity of commerce, we just need to figure out where that number is.
Putting a ceiling on capitalism? Hahahaha good one...don't get me wrong I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's never going to happen lol we'll solve that problem right after we solve the human condition
The profit motive is an inherently corrupting force when applied on any kind of large scale.
Surely any profit margin in the fossil fuel industry is unethical?
I know it's somewhat idealistic to think that. But right down to the micro scale, surely no drop of burning oil was ever good for the planet and thus good for humanity?
@@Palemagpie I disagree. At the earliest stages, when fossil energy was state of the art and driving society towards innovation, they were a net positive. After the advent of cleaner energy, that positive started shrinking. And, I believe, we are well past the point where it became a negative.
@@LucianCanad the fact that petroleum scientists have been warning their own industry about climate change for over half a century proves we are well past that net positive. I agree it was an important step for humanity, we have just lacked the collective intelligence to move past it. We are at a point where humans need to realize we choose the next evolutionary advancement for our species. This is the sign of a truly intelligent race. Until we decide to follow that self evident truth, I stand by my belief that intelligence is a myth.
"Aren't you on the board?" That pretty much sums up the problem.
Oh man, grew up on Jon Stewart in the daily show and still love the guy
Just think about the life track of someone who becomes the CEO of Shell. This man has risen the ranks and been completely enveloped in the oil industry's collective consciousness for probably his entire career. When you are that enmeshed you will eat, sleep, and breathe the industry/company line. At that level, your views on things are distorted by your bubble. You drink your own kool-aid, so to speak. I think that in order to meet the challenge of climate change we need to recognize that we are dealing with not only the machiavellian-ism of industry, but the idea that some, like this man, are distorted by the pressure of their own viewpoint. This man cannot see the forest for the trees and we must show him that we have solutions to our problems. We need only for people like him to join us to be a part of the solution or be pushed aside.
Bump.
I have some pretty strong doubts that most of these CEO/corporate types actually believe their own PR-nonsense. For the most part, you don't get into those positions by being overly ignorant or stupid. You "know" what you're getting in to, and in those positions you know better than most exactly what's wrong with what you're doing, what the company is doing, etc... It's all about the money and the power that goes with it. If suddenly tomorrow someone figured out a way to make "green" energy in a way that cost less and could be sold for more than the equivalent fossil fuels, absolutely ALL the fossil fuel guys would turn on a dime and be the biggest fu@$ing green energy advocates you've ever seen in your life.
Dave Chapelle did a bit that has relevance to this in one of his older shows. Something like "I've done commercials for Coke and Pepsi, and surprise, I can't even tell you the difference! All I know is, Pepsi paid me most recently, so it tastes better"
So pushed aside. Got it.
The lack of self awareness displayed by this comment is interesting
You are being far, far too charitable, Nick. Not a bad trait to be charitable, of course, but in this specific case, it does far more harm than good to everyone involved -- which is everyone on the planet.
At a certain point and in certain positions of great responsibility, ignorance, especially of the willful kind, must be treated as malice.
Jon, I'm honestly putting your name in the (other) option on the voting ballot. Thank you for being real and truthful, un compromised. Im not great with words. Thank you.
Jon would be very disappointed if you didn’t vote for whoever is most likely to win against republican fascism, jsyk :p
@@whysocurious7366 plenty of places where there is more freedom to vote. Like if you are a dem in a really blue area. Would be lovely if ranked choice were the norm.
@@MotherOfOwlbears true, but Jon doesn’t have high odds of winning any elections as he is not campaigning at all.
These interviews should be a Netflix series or something.
Everyone needs to know...
This whole episode should be free to watch (and share) for everyone. It's too important to be locked behind a paywall.
Also the "Sack Up + Go Solar" ad made me laugh ... hard!
No paywall here…odd that!
@@rhondanewell8558 I mean the complete episode on AppleTV+.
“Biofuels cost 3x as much as petroleum” but gas just doubled and is still going up so were closing that gap real quick. Just saying
It was pretty much BS to begin with. There are many ways to produce biofuel some fairly cheap. He just picked the most expensive one.
Steam was cheap before gasoline vehicles were invented! Why not go back to using water?
@@larrybarnhouse9989 You need fuel to create steam (wood, coal, oil)
No, no, no. He means it costs THEM 3x as much. He doesn't care what it costs us.
We need a president like Jon
I love the point that fossil fuel companies need to be given ownership of future energy profits to incentivize them to bother transitioning away from their current modis operandi. "Sure, we're destroying the planet, but what's in it for US to clean up??"
I mean having the entire planet as your hostage is one hell of a lever when it comes to negotiations.
Have you gotten off fossil fuels or just gum flapping
@@richarddixon6352 Not driving electric yet, so I guess I'm just gum flapping! Thanks for setting me straight.
@@RogueBagel exactly it’s religious nonsense. Do something. Expecting oil companies to is comical.
@@richarddixon6352 To be fair, I get where they're coming from. Oil companies are being told to cut their own throats, essentially. I doubt anyone would argue that a cleaner environment is a bad thing, but the personal cost to those benefiting from the status quo cannot be ignored.
Jon Stewart is a national treasure.
The rationale these oil companies take is absurd. It’s like if Blockbuster had so much power they stayed in business by squeezing out and preventing streaming services and forcing us to rent DVDs forever.
I mean that is kinda what tech companys now do. when they get big enough they just buy the competition.
It's all about respect. You can ask hard questions but still be respectfull
It’s very telling that in all these interviews, when Jon asks serious questions, the executive is always trying to avoid eye contact.
“Aren’t you on their board?” Hahahaha love you John
Kudos for staying so calm facing so much hypocrisy from Mr Shell...
Awesome to have John Stewart back and being himself, keeping it real and asking tough questions. He's not ot a puppet like everyone else who sold out that he has worked with in the past on Comedy Central👍👍👍💯
Yes Jon go after these people. I absolutely love watching you make these people squirm. You're so great at it.
This has been the only interviewee where I felt like there was some actual traction there and a possible common ground to move forward.
Don't be fooled. You don't become the CEO of Shell without the ability to be well spoken on the issues. They will actively fight to continue destroying the planet as long as there is a single dollar in it for them.
It's wonderful to watch an interviewer who recognizes a liar and calls him out to his face.
Energy companies should be the ones paying for the whole climate change and what's needed ti fix it.
They failed to take the problem seriously and to develop alternatives, while filling up their pockets.
The should now be hold accountable and those pockets emptied to fix the problem they generated.
Who pays the energy companies? Hint- look in a mirror. So let’s make ‘them’ pay for it- hand over your wallet :)
@@JimzAuto while coming up with your joke you might have not noticed:
"They failed to take the problem seriously and to develop alternatives, while filling up their pockets."
They already have plenty of the money generations gave them. Unfortunately the biggest shortcoming of the "consumers vote with their wallet" idea is that they lack most of the data to make a fully informed decision. We just see the product and the price tag.
Been part of a society comes with an intrinsic agreement: everybody should take care of that society within what they do. A small little detail subtly hidden by some less than wise selfish philosophies.
Human impact on the planet is not a recent breaking news, it's a discourse going back to the end of the '800s.
Some players preferred not give a fuck about it, mudding the water and spreading false propaganda, because that was more profitable.
At the same time they failed society not upholding their part and failing to actually invest and develop feasible alternatives to fossile fuels, as well as actively going against those trying to develop them. Going as far as to even suck up funds that society devoted to find those alternatives.
We already handed over our wallets, now we're paying with our life and hypothecate the lifes of future humans.
When I say "They should now be hold accountable and those pockets emptied to fix the problem they generated." I'm talking about the actual people that pocked those profits and subsidies, getting uber rich while shitting on the only planet that can support human life, as far as we know. The future is gone in silly mantions, yatches and other superflouse stuff. You can have a great and confortable life even if you don't have houses and toys requiring the GDP of a small country to maintain.
It's called: accountability.
And no, Musk will not save us all with Mars, because even if it was hypothetically possible to terraform Mars (and the scientists verdict is still incomplete on that), the timeframe requirements are so long that we'll be far gone before that happens.
@@un_lucio i made no joke. Corporations don’t pay taxes/penalties- their customers do. Taxes for fuel are higher than corporate profits- look it up. Government needs to be shrunk.
That was excellent.
The balls on both those guys, one to ask hard hitting questions & the other to act like he's not the one blocking the transition.
The concept is too foreign for an industry to change its self on a moral basis. Change can only happen when the demand changes.
Love you Jon, thanks for trying.
"Well I'm not completely familiar with API" "Aren't you on their board?"
Calling bullshit right in his face. This is why I love John Stewart.
And the way he kept saying "need to" and "should do" was irritating. It wasn't "we ARE trying" "we ARE doing". They talk about the issue but have begun absolutely no mitigation.
Ever seen their plan to cut emissions by half by 2030? It's morbidly hilarious. Like 1% next year, another percent the year after that and in 2029 virtually all the cutting still has to happen. It's pretty much the same with all those net-zero by 2050 BS plans you keep hearing about.
To stop internal combustion engine vehicle production you need to have an alternative that is economically compelling. What about a electric car that doesn't drive itself, is not connected to the internet, lasts for 800,000 miles, and costs $25000. Use profits from fossil fuel production to create charging station infrastructure. Back up wind and solar with L.F.T.R. Thorium powered nuclear reactors creating a reliable electric grid. Implementing these ideas would result in dramatically reducing CO2 emissions and would collapse the oil market around the world. Oil exploration, drilling, pipelines, and fracking would cease to be economically viable. The evil oil empires would also go away.
Hydrocarbons are needed for much more than just transportation and energy.
100% the EV-industry is kinda shafting the non-tech people. Of course it's cool with all those features but the majority of car drivers wants a car that goes from A-B and isn't too difficult to maintain. I want those coold doodads and would love a car with the same functions as a Tesla but my dad doesn't get it.
@@DaveDDD Yes oil is a raw material for many essential products. If we stop burning gasoline and diesel the existing proven reserves should last for decades.
and that's exactly why that won't be happening
@@elefnishikot I’m not disagreeing that the use of fossil fuels for energy can (and must) be drastically reduced, just saying that the idea that we still wouldn’t drill or have a use for petroleum products isn’t completely true. In 2017, about 13% of fossil fuels consumed in the US were for non-combustion purposes. Hydrocarbons are incredibly useful beyond their use in the energy sector. I don’t know about having decades of reserves, but either way, we can drastically cut down our reliance on fossil fuels if we switch to greener energy.
What a brilliant interview
That was a good discussion John and I think your guest, while a cog in that wheel, was at least reasonable enough to see the situation and propose a way through things. they know what they are doing and how to fix it. But those pesky shareholders and profits get in the way.
Jon, we will be forever in debt for your ability to bring light to the dark! May not seem like much but you can’t fix a problem if you don’t know it exists. Thank you for what you do ✊
“Aren’t you on the board?””…yes” that damn smirk is so satisfying.🤣🤣🤣
I appreciate Jon's approach of sticking with the question of why things can't be better from a straightforward moral point of view but I really feel like he discounts how insanely hard some of these problems are to fix. You can't say something like "well why can't all the oil companies act better?" and then be upset when you don't get a straight answer because there isn't any straight answer! There's an enormous, complex answer that's only partially understood and trying to explain that complexity is not necessarily dodging the question.
The issue is that companies have been playing up that complexity rather than working through it for years. Lots of problems are complex, that doesn't mean they're not solvable. WW2 was a lot of moving parts, it was still done and over with in 6 years. Going to the moon was complex, yet it took less than a decade to figure out once they got going. Human ingenuity matched with a desire to get things done can get a LOT done in a pretty short period of time. There are plenty of smart people in the energy industry - it's a matter of the commitment to making things better in a tangible timeline that works that seems to be missing or at least has been missing for quite a while.
The CEO here makes some good points (like carbon-based energy is not going the way of the dodo, but it will lessen). But saying the problem is hard is a bit of a throwaway line when the industry is actively works to stop things that might lessen the problem.
Another good example is cancer. Cancer is infinitely (or near-infinitely) complex (like most living things) but there are tens of thousands of researchers working on and finding tangible solutions to that problem every day. Literally every year new treatments and new therapies are being investigated or brought to market. Cancer is a problem 100x more complex than the energy industry but that doesn't stop tangible progress from being made.
Seems like trying to sound intelligent while making excuses not to address a problem.
@@stevenbrock528 Yes, there are tens of thousands of researchers working on finding solutions for cancer and have been for decades - and they still haven't found blanket cure. And that research is by and large funded through government grants and is conducted by physicians, biologists, and clinicians. It's not conducted by chemo drug manufacturers, at their own expense. By the same token, it's not the responsibility of the fossil fuel industries to expend their own resources and funding to research how to make themselves obsolete.
@@stevenbrock528 I'm not saying companies should get away with publicly arguing that its complicated while privately fighting incremental progress. I'm saying we should admit its complicated as a baseline, admit that the solution will also be complicated, and then get further into the details and figure out what real progress looks like. Jon doesn't tell his audience that its complicated and, as a result, most people just see this as simplistic moral issue. My frustration is that progressives often demand that things get better and undermine the actual slow, boring, incremental progress that's being made; you can't watch this episode and understand "what the problem is" because Jon just reduces the problem into a "you should be better" argument.
Jon could discuss the role of government R&D funding, he could discuss the climate provisions in build back better, he could ask the CEO about how the fossil fuel industry can transition towards more climate friendly production or otherwise how the industry's interests can be brought in line with global climate priorities, he could discuss new energy sources like nuclear or geothermal, he could discuss tax code, financial incentives for clean energy investment, or any number of actual policies that could communicate to the audience that this is a complicated issues with difficult but real solutions.
@@royalewithcheese17 I believe that the only way any fossil fuel company could be made to make progress on the issue is if it was nationalized, with the employees becoming public servants. Leaving them as private entities just creates far too much corruption, grift, and just plain laziness because they, as separate authoritarian entities from the democratic government, are well-motivated to subvert that democratic government. Hence, lobbying and bribery abounds.
A surprisingly honest take from the Shell CEO. Love these interviews
Now the former Shell CEO. He left at the end of 2022.
Honest, but still full of shit. His final message was that of a lying beau who, after being caught cheating a hundred times, says, "I know I can't ask you to trust me, but if you stay with me I will show you that I can change!" Anyone with half a brain knows he won't. The form of capitalism that international corporations function under is one in which it's impossible to push through any resolution that doesn't increase profits at any expense. Any CEO who tries to do differently will be immediately dethroned by their company's board.
It *sounds* honest. It is not actually honest.
Jon Stewart 2024✌🏼
A question that wasn't asked here that I would have liked to have heard a response to is, "what is the fuel companies plan for when they are held liable to for environmental disasters or property loss due to climate change?"
Why should they?Why not charging you for all the useless shit you bought that was produced with oil!All the plastic shit you bought tvs furniture paint construction materials!Why not charging you for your overheated or cooled oversized apartement?Stupid fingerpointing but wanting the american lifestyle!You wamt to save the planet?So only a bicycle for you and a 150sqft apartement if your single!
To be fair, This interview was a waste of time. It was clear right away that this CEO will go on as always no matter what will be discussed in the interview. Big companies and politicians are all the same - staying in power until the end at all costs for the rest of us.
That pause at 2:52 is so loUD. Speaks more volumes than him giving an immediate response back to Jon
The way Jon just laughs in his face is exactly what I would have done