BP needs to do better – we require more than vague words about ‘reinvention’ to stop the climate crisis

Any major company, particularly one involved in the oil industry, looking to make changes for the sake of the environment should be applauded. We are facing a climate crisis that needs urgent action.

What we don’t need is companies or governments making the type of vague promises that have been a staple for the last decade or longer. As any number of scientists and activist groups have made clear – a lack of action in the short term will have dire consequences.

It is a shame for BP then that they have fallen into the latter camp with its plan to become a net-zero company by 2050 or sooner, no matter how much spin the company’s CEO Bernard Looney tried to put on the announcement on Wednesday. “The world’s carbon budget is finite and running out fast; we need a rapid transition to net zero,” said Looney. “It will require nothing short of reimagining energy as we know it.”

That “reimagining” was mostly left to the imagination of those attending the announcement, with little detail being put forward about what BP will do. That is promised at an investment meeting in September. Ambition is great, but on a matter of such importance would it not be better to talk about some concrete action that has already been taken, or can be taken within weeks?

But Looney was clear that this is all about the journey. “Today is about a vision, a direction of travel,” he told his audience. “I appreciate you want to see more than a vision. We don’t have that for you today, but we will in September. The direction is set. We are heading to net zero. There is no turning back.”

BP will invest less in oil and gas and more in low-carbon businesses “over time”. No timescale has yet been established for the move and the company will still be involved in oil and gas in 2050. However, there is a promise that that will be offset. BP will even see its production of fossil fuels actually increase over the next decade, while aiming to reduce the carbon intensity of the energy it supplies.

Schemes such as tree planting are popular, but there is still little idea about how BP will achieve its aims. Detractors in the environmental field have denounced the plan as something that is simply not achievable. Time will tell, but vagueness is not a great start.

Looney is likely to be chief executive for a number of years. But even with a long stay, this project will involve a number of his successors. Whatever the words are now, there is no guarantee that circumstances or new leadership will not seek to alter the plan. If this new direction involves little work now, and in turn loading up the 2030s and 2040s with more of the burden, that is just not good enough.

If Looney is serious, and he was at pains to point out he was, then a full plan needs to shared publicly now. If the one unveiled to investors in September is detailed and significant then I will take my hat off to him. However, at the moment it is all words that we have heard from numerous other companies and government bodies a number of times before.

Looney has said he is aware there are risks: “We want a rapid transition... A transition that is delayed, and then suddenly is a right-angle change that disrupts the world, would be destructive to our company.”

“We’re starting with a destination. The details will come,” he added.

Yes, risks will be present when modifying a company of this size, indeed such a structural overhaul may yet prove impossible. But we need details sooner, not later.