A good or bad move ?
32 replies (most recent on top)
@ Mbyo
100% true!
You can pick out all of the "Doers and Knowers" on this subject.
All of the OMLP's, Aspire, Quality, and Human Resource people said,
"Absolutely a great move"
Everyone saying its bad are the money makers at work. So next time you see a manager out on the floor with the hourly guys, or the ones not agreeing with everyone in the board room all of the time.
You should thank them for making enough of a difference to support all of you alls families.
I'll start by saying "Your welcome"
Not just good but a great move!
So, carbon capture? Well, renewable energy sources are now cost competitive with fossil fuels, and since we all decided to let the market be the driving force for our transition to a low carbon economy, cost is king.
Fossil fuels are not going to benefit from a whole bunch of additional costs. I should imagine that drilling holes for carbon disposal will nearly match the costs of fuel production. And additional plant or consumable will be a significant increase in facility CAPEX and maintenance costs.
Maybe there will be government subsidies- I doubt they’ll make a difference. Maybe it’ll make sense to retrofit some power plants. Whatever. You are simply not going to see the volume of uptake required to ever make a return on investment.
Oil refining companies understand this - they are outfitting their plants to switch production from 50% fuels to 50% feedstock for plastics over the next 10 years.
Buying a capture carbon company is a bad idea. Investing in a company that is pinning its hopes on carbon capture is a bad idea.
"Law of Conservation of Energy"
Baker is opening itself to a hughe liability here. To everyone how said "good idea", I commend you for thinking outside of the box and not accepting the world as it is. That is a good way of thinking that leads innovation. But i'm guessing your also against fracking, am i right? Ground water polution and all that? Where do you think Baker intends to put the CO2 that they capture from petro chemical plants? That's correct, in the ground. Old empty ground wells. CO2 also needs to be compressed to liquify. This means they will be burning carbon to liquify carbon to stick into the ground. Eventually there will be another dust bowl and Texas will have to lift its ban on water wells. Last thing we need is liquified C02 transorming as it rushes up through the geographic formations. Don't get me wrong fracking is bad, but this is worste!
Bill Gates is dumping billions on transforming C02 into combustible fuels and concrete substitue. Here is the catch with both. To bond C02 back into a fuel takes an imense amount of energy. And to make the the concrete per 1 ton of C02 you are required to use 25 tons of water.
C02 isn't good but for one thing in todays business. Scrubbing rock in old oil wells which makes recovering oil less abbrassive to the environment and doesn't require you to frack the geo formation.
i do believe we should do something about factory immesions, but safe storage is key.
I'm from Louisiana and I was a gun hoe oil field hand, and degreed engineer with ideals.
I remembered what i learned and grew the F up.
Stop believing in people that have never come through for anyone but themselvses. Ole Italy is just playing politician.
And
now
you're
mad
because
i was
a prick
at the end and you read the whole thing.
I didn't say i wasn't childish.
What I don't understand is a pure O & G equipment and services company can't get it's standard manufacturing costs in line and improve quality but has actually done the reverse over the last decade, which should be the "core" to be worked on, but now we can't do that "too hard" but wait....trust us and we now will transform the core to "technology" that's new frontier.....ground breaking.....PR for sure....share price rising over the few weeks.....funny what you can promise now for 20 years down the road and NOT deliver...by then another "frontier" to chase...(FRONTIER meaning...the extreme limit of understanding or achievement in a particular area), WTF can't even get the basics right now!
Absolutely a good move!
A bad move.
A good move..
We don’t have a carbon problem the world is the greenest it’s ever been and the plains are now wooded. What we have is a salt problem to work on California.
3C is hardly a real company, more like a start-up with an idea. They have 4 employees. That's not an exaggeration, they literally have 4 employees. This is a PR move dressed up as a strategy. And now we have 3C and C3.ai - that won't be confusing at all
Waste of money. Just plant a few more trees.
Publicity stunt attempt to drive up stock prices so the $14,000,000 per year man and his cronies can get richer.
No money to support an ongoing DS business, or make it more profitable, but millions $$$ to buy another company? Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm.
Absolutely good move. We need to transform ourselves as a green company to be successful with the new US administration. The far sightedness of our leadership is commendable.
Carbon capture will NOT be good enough for the far left environmentalists. They are intent on stopping all fossil fuels. This attempt to appease them will fail.
Fairy tale feel good purchase to entice the tree huggers.
This is strategically a good move with a line of sight towards green world. Good decision by the executives.
Baker: let’s purchase up for carbon capture, we have growing business in industrial markets - refineries. We see big growth.
Shell: yeah we’re shutting down some refineries.
Baker: ...
Shiny new game piece for the boys to play
"'The Baker Hughes Game" with.
'The Baker Hughes Game with
Anyone with half a brain can see why GE bought baker.
To the comment below from Post ID: @2axm+17KYipEB
Actually no manager or leader in this company should aspire to be another "Jeff Immelt". Immelt bought into companies and businesses that GE didn't understand, like Oil and Gas for one. And Immelt also effectively destroyed a blue-chip company, in GE itself. So, please no "Jeff Immelt" wanna-be's" in Baker! However, sadly you are probably correct.
Complete waste of $$$$$$
Everything we touch seemingly turns to sh–. We'll sell it off for a 50% loss in a few years
It is comical how GE like this purchase is. Of course, the folks in charge at Baker Hughes are Jeff Immelt wannabes. Always trying to be something they are not and won’t ever be. This purchase is so shortsighted and will ultimately be proven to be a financial loss for Baker.
If it doesnt workout, statoil (i mean equitable norway) will find something for us to do so we can pay back the debt we incurred for purchasing this norwegian gem.
Hopefully not another Salof or chevrontexaco gasification. History will repeat itself!!
Will Copilot be kneeded ?
A shocking waste of money.
Good move for Baker. Bad move for 3C.
good move
I don't even know what carbon capture means.
Will just mean lots more poor souls that are layed off by HR.