Tyler Oderkirk's Blog

The newest issue of Wired just showed up at my house. On the back cover is an advertisement for BMW. This is what it says (emphasis mine)

“Our next-generation, hydrogen-powered vehicle is every bit BMW, but it has something more. Or less, actually. It produces near zero emissions. Which means the exhause produces water vapor, not carbon dioxide. So it reduces pollution and greenhouse gases and lessens our dependence on imported oil. Of course, with a powerful 12-cylinder engine and a top speed well over 130 mph, it’s a BMW in every way. And further proof that as a independent company, we make sure leading-edge ideas live on to become Ultimate Driving Machines.”

Inside the magazine’s shrink wrap, attached to the same back cover, is another ad in the form of a promotional DVD from from Shell Oil. It’s a 9 minute PR video called “Eureka” – the full version of the Shell-engineer-gets-inspired-by-son’s-milkshake advertisement that you’ve probably seen all over cable TV for the past month. Shell is taking the same approach as BP and launching a huge PR campaign to engender public support for claimed dedication to renewable energy and the environment.

What’s interesting to me is that these two big companies look like they’ve both chosen to market very different messages to the same Wired readership:

• BMW is saying: “We know that you want fast, powerful cars but that you don’t like relying on foreign countries for a dirty way to power them”
• Shell is saying: “You can feel good about using oil because we’re using creative methods to make sure none goes to waste”

Enough marketing analysis. The tree-hugging skeptic in me wants to get to some numbers…

According to NYT article entitled “Exxon and Shell Report Record Profits for 2006“, Royal Dutch Shell netted 25.44 billion USD in income in 2006. A group called Friends of the Earth claim that in 2005, Shell spent a meager 1.1% of their capital investment funds on renewables. Wikipedia indicates the same was true in 2006.