Will the real oil industry please stand up

Six years ago, Norway’s state oil company Statoil announced it would change its name to Equinor. Statoil said at the time that the new name “supports the company’s strategy and development as a broad energy company.”

The name change news made a splash because it turned out Statoil had had to buy the name from a vet practice in Oslo — a vet practice specialising in horses. Not one of the greatest moments for the marketing industry, I’m sure. Or Statoil.

Then, three years later, French Total said it would change its name to TotalEnergies. It motivated the decision by saying that “to contribute to the sustainable development of the planet facing the climate challenge, we are moving forward, together, towards new energies.”

The name change wave, started by BP in 2000 when it tried to convince everyone BP no longer stands for British Petroleum but for Beyond Petroleum spread to other companies as well and those that already had “energy” instead of “oil” in their names probably sighed with relief that they’ll save a few million from rebranding.

But name changes are not the only thing oil companies have been doing as they attempted to join the zeitgeist and convince everyone they’re totally all in on the energy transition.

Baker Hughes started referring to itself as a technology company that is totally not only servicing the oil and gas industry (true, but so what?). So did other oilfield service majors.

They started investing in non-oil related sectors and hyping them as enthusiastically as so-called green investors and Brussels. The oil industry began a quest to reinvent itself… while continuing to be the oil industry.

I watched most of these developments with amusement and some disgust but last month I came across an Exxon report dubbed Advancing Climate Solutions. In it, the oil supermajor referred to itself as a technology company. I had enough. It was time for a rant.