Richard, not to single out BP, but historically there has been no industry in the world better than oil & gas at categorically lying to increase profits.

"BP will always be known for the catastrophic oil spill the company caused in the Gulf of Mexico. British Petroleum's decisions undeniably altered the way the public views MNC's [multi-national corporations] and their capacity to maximize profits at other environmental and social costs.

"One of the main response strategies BP put into place was releasing a controversial chemical called Corexit. This worked as an oil dispersant and was sprayed on the surface of the Gulf in massive amounts. This chemical works by sinking the oil and spreading it throughout the water column and into the sediment.

"Corexit was previously banned in Britain and Sweden for its toxicity, making its vast usage questionable to many people (Fox, 2012). Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology found that this chemical actually intensifies the toxicity of the oil (Petillo, 2012, pg. 2). In April 2010, reports indicated that BP oil bought approximately a third of the world's supply of Corexit. By May, the EPA called for a decrease in its usage and a halt on its surface usage.

"Subsequently, the toxicity further harms aquatic organisms and has essentially destroyed habitats for fish species, devastating shoreline fishing communities (Fox, 2012). Productive and healthy ecosystems within the Gulf of Mexico were essentially lost, and those who depended on these natural resources had also lost their livelihood for the time being. In total, 1.84 million gallons of this oil dispersant were spread by spray being released by planes flying over the gulf (Petillo, 2012, pg. 5).

"Corexit sank the oil; however, this method did not truly solve the massive problem, but rather hid it from view."

Broken Promises: Globalization and BP Oil

BP's bright-green "commitment to energy transition", distributed by PR firm Wood-Mackenzie, confirms stakeholders' belief BP will continue to say and do whatever it takes, at whatever cost to the environment and local populations around the world that depend on it to survive, to increase profits.

I do share Bob's skepticism about how earnest the shift to clean energy is for BP, but I'm open to being proven wrong here! And hey, if the motivation is long-term profits, then long-term that will be the play one way or the other. The reasoning behind the shift isn't as important as the results-- so show me the results