US President Donald Trump on Friday (Jan 9) met with top American oil executives, urging them to pour money into Venezuela's vast oil reserves, pitching the country as 'open for business' after the dramatic capture of president Nicolas Maduro. However, the response from the industry was cautious at best, with one top executive commenting that Venezuela was "uninvestable".<h2>Was a deal reached?</h2>After the vital meeting, Trump claimed that big oil companies were prepared to invest "at least 100 Billion Dollars" though he offered no details. However, reports suggest otherwise. Despite Trump's assurance that companies will have "total security," his pitch was met with scepticism.&nbsp;Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-deal-with-us-directly-trump-in-meeting-with-oil-executives-claims-us-not-venezuela-will-make-decisions-on-caracas-vast-reserves-1768010458229">Trump tells oil executives US will make decisions on Venezuela's vast reserves</a>According to AFP, Darren Woods, the chief executive of ExxonMobil, bluntly questioned the premise. "We've had our assets seized there twice," he said. "And so, you can imagine, to re-enter a third time would require some pretty significant changes.""If we look at the legal and commercial constructs and frameworks in place today in Venezuela -- today, it's uninvestable," he added.Trump argued that foreign firms had been exposed and unprotected under Maduro’s rule, but claimed that had now changed. "Now you have total security," he told the room. "It's a whole different Venezuela". He insisted that oil companies would "deal with us directly."<h2>Who was in attendance?</h2>Alongside Trump, in attendance were Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. They met with executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Shell, Valero, Marathon, Trafigura, Vitol Americas and Repsol, among others.A ConocoPhillips spokesperson said CEO Ryan Lance welcomed discussions about making Venezuela "investment ready," but stopped short of any commitments.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-lost-a-major-trade-deal-because-of-no-call-from-modi-says-trump-aide-lutnick-1767944914723">India lost a major trade deal with US because of ‘no call from Modi’, says Trump aide Lutnick</a>Energy analysts also warned that Venezuela's headline reserves, estimated at around 300 billion barrels, do not translate into quick or profitable production. Years of neglect, crumbling infrastructure, heavy crude that is costly to extract and lingering political risk all pose serious obstacles."There's lots of talk about the size of the reserves -- 300 billion barrels of proved reserves -- but what's often missing from the conversation is how realistic it is for those to be economically extracted," said Rich Collett White of Carbon Tracker.Following the talks, even Trump's Energy Secretary Chris Wright conceded that rebuilding Venezuela's oil sector would "take time," despite earlier saying Washington could control it "indefinitely".

Donald Trump claimed oil giants were ready to invest $100 billion in Venezuela after Maduro’s capture. However, oil executives pushed back, saying the country was “uninvestable” despite US assurances. All you need to know.

US President Donald Trump on Friday (Jan 9) met with top American oil executives, urging them to pour money into Venezuela's vast oil reserves, pitching the country as 'open for business' after the dramatic capture of president Nicolas Maduro. However, the response from the industry was cautious at best, with one top executive commenting that Venezuela was "uninvestable". Was a deal reached? After the vital meeting, Trump claimed that big oil companies were prepared to invest "at least 100 Billion Dollars" though he offered no details. However, reports suggest otherwise. Despite Trump's assurance that companies will have "total security," his pitch was met with scepticism. Also read | Trump tells oil executives US will make decisions on Venezuela's vast reserves According to AFP, Darren Woods, the chief executive of ExxonMobil, bluntly questioned the premise. "We've had our assets seized there twice," he said. "And so, you can imagine, to re-enter a third time would require some pretty significant changes." "If we look at the legal and commercial constructs and frameworks in place today in Venezuela -- today, it's uninvestable," he added. Trump argued that foreign firms had been exposed and unprotected under Maduro’s rule, but claimed that had now changed. "Now you have total security," he told the room. "It's a whole different Venezuela". He insisted that oil companies would "deal with us directly." Who was in attendance? Alongside Trump, in attendance were Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. They met with executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Shell, Valero, Marathon, Trafigura, Vitol Americas and Repsol, among others. A ConocoPhillips spokesperson said CEO Ryan Lance welcomed discussions about making Venezuela "investment ready," but stopped short of any commitments. Also read | India lost a major trade deal with US because of ‘no call from Modi’, says Trump aide Lutnick Energy analysts also warned that Venezuela's headline reserves, estimated at around 300 billion barrels, do not translate into quick or profitable production. Years of neglect, crumbling infrastructure, heavy crude that is costly to extract and lingering political risk all pose serious obstacles. "There's lots of talk about the size of the reserves -- 300 billion barrels of proved reserves -- but what's often missing from the conversation is how realistic it is for those to be economically extracted," said Rich Collett White of Carbon Tracker. Following the talks, even Trump's Energy Secretary Chris Wright conceded that rebuilding Venezuela's oil sector would "take time," despite earlier saying Washington could control it "indefinitely".

Donald Trump claimed oil giants were ready to invest $100 billion in Venezuela after Maduro’s capture. However, oil executives pushed back, saying the country was “uninvestable” despite US assurances. All you need to know.

Trump says Venezuela 'open for business,' but big oil isn't convinced; 'Uninvestable' says Exxon

US President Donald Trump on Friday (Jan 9) urged top American oil executives to pour money into Venezuela's vast oil reserves, pitching the country as 'open for business' after the dramatic capture of former president Nicolas Maduro. The response from the industry, however, was cautious at best.<h2>'Deal with us directly'</h2>Speaking at the White House, Trump told executives that the United States, not Caracas, would decide which companies are allowed to operate in Venezuela. "We're going to be making the decision as to which oil companies are going to go in," he said. "(We're) going to cut a deal with the companies".In attendance were Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, alongside executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Shell, Valero, Marathon, Trafigura, Vitol Americas and Repsol.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-lost-a-major-trade-deal-because-of-no-call-from-modi-says-trump-aide-lutnick-1767944914723">India lost a major trade deal with US because of ‘no call from Modi’, says Trump aide Lutnick</a>Trump argued that foreign firms had been exposed and unprotected under Maduro’s rule, but claimed that had now changed. "Now you have total security," he told the room. "It's a whole different Venezuela". He insisted that oil companies would "deal with us directly," making it clear that Washington intends to position itself as the gatekeeper to Venezuela's oil wealth, sidelining the oil-rich but cash-starved nation from decisions about exploiting its own resources.<h2>How receptive were the oil executives?</h2>Reports suggest that Trump's pitch was met with scepticism. According to AFP, Darren Woods, the chief executive of ExxonMobil, bluntly questioned the premise. "We've had our assets seized there twice," he said. "And so, you can imagine, to re-enter a third time would require some pretty significant changes."Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-we-are-gonna-start-now-hitting-land-donald-trump-says-us-will-launch-land-strikes-against-drug-cartels-1767929603922">'We are gonna start now hitting land': Donald Trump says US will launch strikes against drug cartels | Watch</a>"If we look at the legal and commercial constructs and frameworks in place today in Venezuela -- today, it's uninvestable," he added.&nbsp;The meeting came less than a week after US forces captured Maduro, an operation Trump has openly linked to control over Venezuela's oil.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Donald Trump urged US oil giants to invest in Venezuela after Maduro’s capture, promising security and saying Washington will decide who drills. Here's what he said.

US President Donald Trump on Friday (Jan 9) urged top American oil executives to pour money into Venezuela's vast oil reserves, pitching the country as 'open for business' after the dramatic capture of former president Nicolas Maduro. The response from the industry, however, was cautious at best. 'Deal with us directly' Speaking at the White House, Trump told executives that the United States, not Caracas, would decide which companies are allowed to operate in Venezuela. "We're going to be making the decision as to which oil companies are going to go in," he said. "(We're) going to cut a deal with the companies". In attendance were Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Energy Secretary Chris Wright, alongside executives from Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Halliburton, Shell, Valero, Marathon, Trafigura, Vitol Americas and Repsol. Also read | India lost a major trade deal with US because of ‘no call from Modi’, says Trump aide Lutnick Trump argued that foreign firms had been exposed and unprotected under Maduro’s rule, but claimed that had now changed. "Now you have total security," he told the room. "It's a whole different Venezuela". He insisted that oil companies would "deal with us directly," making it clear that Washington intends to position itself as the gatekeeper to Venezuela's oil wealth, sidelining the oil-rich but cash-starved nation from decisions about exploiting its own resources. How receptive were the oil executives? Reports suggest that Trump's pitch was met with scepticism. According to AFP, Darren Woods, the chief executive of ExxonMobil, bluntly questioned the premise. "We've had our assets seized there twice," he said. "And so, you can imagine, to re-enter a third time would require some pretty significant changes." Also read | 'We are gonna start now hitting land': Donald Trump says US will launch strikes against drug cartels | Watch "If we look at the legal and commercial constructs and frameworks in place today in Venezuela -- today, it's uninvestable," he added. The meeting came less than a week after US forces captured Maduro, an operation Trump has openly linked to control over Venezuela's oil.

Donald Trump urged US oil giants to invest in Venezuela after Maduro’s capture, promising security and saying Washington will decide who drills. Here's what he said.

'Deal with us directly': Trump tells oil executives US, not Venezuela, will make decisions on Caracas' vast reserves

Recent years have seen major oil companies making big climate pledges. However, a new report from Oil Change International suggests these are nothing but empty promises.&nbsp;

The report examined climate plans from the eight largest US and European-based oil and gas producers and found that none of them were in line with limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.&nbsp;

<h2>Which companies did the report evaluate?</h2>

BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies are the companies.

For its report, Oil Change International assessed the companies' plans on 10 criteria. It found that all eight big oil companies ranked as "grossly insufficient" or "insufficient" on nearly all criteria, reports The Guardian.&nbsp;

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/climate-change-isnt-real-ron-desantis-erases-mentions-of-climate-change-from-florida-law-721915">'Climate change isn't real': Ron DeSantis erases mentions of climate change from Florida law</a>

US firms Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and ExxonMobil were the "worst of the worst" and ranked "grossly insufficient" on all 10 of the criteria.&nbsp;

In a statement, Allie Rosenbluth, US programme manager at Oil Change International, said, "American fossil-fuel corporations are the worst of the worst."

The report has been endorsed by over 100 climate groups internationally and marks the fourth annual "Big Oil Reality Check" from Oil Change International.

<h2>Increasing global warming</h2>

In a statement, David Tong, co-author of the analysis, and global industry campaign manager at Oil Change International, said: "There is no evidence that big oil and gas companies are acting seriously to be part of the energy transition."

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/have-we-already-lost-the-battle-april-continues-damning-11-month-trend-emerges-as-hottest-since-1940-719261">Have we 'already lost climate battle'?: April continues damning 11-month trend, emerges as hottest since 1940</a>

What more? The report also found that instead of limiting global warming, these companies' current oil and gas extraction plans could actually lead to more than 2.4°C of global temperature rise.

As per the report, the eight oil companies alone are on track to use 30 per cent&nbsp;of the world's remaining global carbon budget — to keep the global average temperature rise to 1.5C.

The report criticised the companies for their lack of ambition to curb fossil fuel exploration and production. None have plans to stop fossil fuel exploration or halt new extraction projects. In fact, six of the eight companies have explicit goals to increase oil and gas production.

Additionally, the report found that the companies' methods to curb greenhouse gas emissions lack integrity. None set comprehensive targets to rapidly and consistently curb emissions, and all plan to rely on methods like carbon capture and storage, which do not yet exist at scale, and carbon offsetting.

All eight firms also failed to "meet basic criteria for just transition plans for workers and communities where they operate," and none met "basic" human rights criteria.

(With inputs from agencies)

Recent years have seen major oil companies making big climate pledges. However, a new report from Oil Change International suggests these are nothing but empty promises.

Recent years have seen major oil companies making big climate pledges. However, a new report from Oil Change International suggests these are nothing but empty promises. The report examined climate plans from the eight largest US and European-based oil and gas producers and found that none of them were in line with limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Which companies did the report evaluate? BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Eni, Equinor, ExxonMobil, Shell, and TotalEnergies are the companies. For its report, Oil Change International assessed the companies' plans on 10 criteria. It found that all eight big oil companies ranked as "grossly insufficient" or "insufficient" on nearly all criteria, reports The Guardian. Also read | 'Climate change isn't real': Ron DeSantis erases mentions of climate change from Florida law US firms Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and ExxonMobil were the "worst of the worst" and ranked "grossly insufficient" on all 10 of the criteria. In a statement, Allie Rosenbluth, US programme manager at Oil Change International, said, "American fossil-fuel corporations are the worst of the worst." The report has been endorsed by over 100 climate groups internationally and marks the fourth annual "Big Oil Reality Check" from Oil Change International. Increasing global warming In a statement, David Tong, co-author of the analysis, and global industry campaign manager at Oil Change International, said: "There is no evidence that big oil and gas companies are acting seriously to be part of the energy transition." Also read | Have we 'already lost climate battle'?: April continues damning 11-month trend, emerges as hottest since 1940 What more? The report also found that instead of limiting global warming, these companies' current oil and gas extraction plans could actually lead to more than 2.4°C of global temperature rise. As per the report, the eight oil companies alone are on track to use 30 per cent of the world's remaining global carbon budget — to keep the global average temperature rise to 1.5C. The report criticised the companies for their lack of ambition to curb fossil fuel exploration and production. None have plans to stop fossil fuel exploration or halt new extraction projects. In fact, six of the eight companies have explicit goals to increase oil and gas production. Additionally, the report found that the companies' methods to curb greenhouse gas emissions lack integrity. None set comprehensive targets to rapidly and consistently curb emissions, and all plan to rely on methods like carbon capture and storage, which do not yet exist at scale, and carbon offsetting. All eight firms also failed to "meet basic criteria for just transition plans for workers and communities where they operate," and none met "basic" human rights criteria. (With inputs from agencies)

‘Reality Check’: Damning report finds big oil firms’ climate plans could increase global warming by 2.4°C

big-oil

Big Oil, News on Big Oil, stories on Big Oil, articles on Big Oil, Big Oil stories at Wion, Big Oil news, Big Oil latest news