Exxon Chief Goes on the Offensive as Wall Street Sours on ESG

(Bloomberg) — After coming under attack from both environmentalists and investors in the first half of his seven-year tenure at the helm of Exxon Mobil Corp., Darren Woods is on the offensive.

Most Read from Bloomberg

Already this year, Woods filed an arbitration case against Chevron Corp. for attempting to buy into Exxon’s massive offshore oil project in Guyana and a lawsuit against investors demanding that his company cut emissions. Just months earlier, he agreed to a $60 billion takeover that would make Exxon the biggest US shale producer.

Woods is also becoming much more strident about climate goals in speeches and interviews, arguing that fossil fuels will still be needed for years to come to meet energy demand and the world is not on a path to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 because people are unwilling to pay for cleaner alternatives.

The message may be controversial, but it’s resonating on Wall Street, where “ESG” is fast becoming a loathed moniker as ambitious environmental, social and governance pledges are rubbing against the need for secure and affordable energy. Exxon is up 89%, more than four times that of the S&P 500, since losing a climate-fueled proxy battle with Engine No. 1. in 2021.

It’s a remarkable turnaround from the pandemic era, when Exxon posted its biggest-ever loss, employees were leaving in droves and the shareholder rebellion forced Woods to replace a quarter of his board. Exxon’s revival is emblematic of a resurgent American oil industry, which is now pumping 40% more crude each day than Saudi Arabia, forcing OPEC and its allies to retreat.

“It wasn’t that long ago it looked like taking the green approach was what the industry needed to attract capital,” said Jeff Wyll, a senior analyst at Neuberger Berman, which manages about $440 billion. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine “flipped the switch and energy security became more important. Exxon benefited because they never stepped back from their traditional business.”

Story continues

When Woods takes center stage at the CERAWeek by S&P Global energy conference in Houston this week, he’s likely to double down on his long-held view that fossil fuels will be in demand for decades to come and that governments and consumers — rather than just Big Oil — will need to pay for any meaningful transition to greener energy.

For those who see Exxon and Big Oil as responsible for decades of delay and misinformation about climate change, it’s an unpopular argument. But it’s one made from a position of increasing financial strength.

Exxon paid out $32 billion in dividends and buybacks in 2023, the fourth-highest in the S&P 500, and is pledging more this year. Its pending $60 billion acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources Co. will make it the country’s dominant producer of shale oil, putting it at the top of the industry largely responsible for OPEC+ losing market share to the US.

Exxon also operates one of the world’s fastest-growing major oil developments in Guyana, the biggest crude discovery in a decade, and recently completed a raft of refinery and petrochemical expansions.

Its supermajor rivals are now racing to catch up.

Chevron agreed to buy Hess Corp. for $53 billion, in large part to gain a 30% stake in Exxon’s Guyana project. But Exxon claims the deal “attempted to circumvent” a contract that gives it right of first refusal over the stake, and is taking the dispute to arbitration at the International Chamber of Commerce in Paris.

Shell Plc and BP Plc, meanwhile, are now switching more of their investment dollars back toward oil and gas under new CEOs after their stocks slumped following a pivot toward renewables.

The European supermajors’ struggles demonstrate the perils of replacing high, steady cash flows from fossil fuels with low-margin renewables, according to Greg Buckley, a portfolio manager at Adams Funds who helps manage about $3.5 billion including Exxon shares.

“ESG was popular but I think that return on capital is more popular at the end of the day,” he said. Shell and BP “found out the hard way.”

The shift away from ESG terminology is a recognition that the energy transition will be complex and won’t unfold the same way in every part of the globe, Dan Yergin, the vice chairman of S&P Global, which organizes the CERAWeek conference, said in an interview. Conflicts around the world, including in the Middle East and Ukraine, have underscored the need for reliable energy supply, while investors remain focused on returns, he said.

“The energy companies have demonstrated a discipline in their capital investment and have been responsive to investors,” Yergin said. “You can see that in their spending and that’s refurbished the social contract between the companies and investors.”

Woods is also learning from his own experience with activist shareholders. In January, the company filed a lawsuit against US and Dutch climate investors who buy stock to push for lower…