ExxonMobil (NYSE: XOM), one of the world’s largest oil and gas producers, is once again in the public eye. Last week brought big news for the oil major. There was a new gas find offshore in the Mediterranean. Moreover, a key legal ruling was issued regarding old refinery pollution in Texas. Adding to the headlines, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also proposed key carbon storage permits for the company’s growing low-carbon ventures.
These events show how ExxonMobil balances new energy projects with scrutiny over its environmental record. The gas company is feeling pressure from climate change demands. Its actions reveal both the opportunities and the challenges it faces in the evolving energy landscape.
Cyprus Gas Discovery Strengthens Global Portfolio
The first big development came from the Eastern Mediterranean. On July 7, ExxonMobil and QatarEnergy announced they had found a large natural gas reservoir off the coast of Cyprus. The find, located at the Pegasus-1 well in Block 10, revealed more than 350 meters of gas-bearing rock at a depth of about 1.9 kilometers.
This is the second major find for ExxonMobil in Cypriot waters, following the Glaucus-1 discovery in 2019. These discoveries are big wins for Europe. The region wants to find new natural gas sources and lessen its reliance on Russian energy.
The Eastern Mediterranean is becoming a key energy hub. Pegasus-1 adds important reserves to ExxonMobil’s global gas portfolio. It could help boost liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. This would supply cleaner fuels in areas trying to move away from coal.
Pollution Comes at a Price: Baytown Fine Stands After Supreme Court Snub
The same day ExxonMobil celebrated its discovery off Cyprus, it also faced a legal setback at home. The U.S. Supreme Court chose not to review a lower court’s decision. That ruling upheld a $14.25 million civil penalty for long-term air pollution violations at the Baytown refinery complex in Texas.
Environment Texas and the Sierra Club filed a case against the company. They claimed it broke the Clean Air Act by releasing harmful pollutants like nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide for years. These emissions can contribute to respiratory issues, smog, and other environmental harm.
This decision ends a decade-long legal battle and marks one of the largest citizen-led environmental fines under the said law. It also highlights growing public and legal accountability for emissions from major energy facilities.
EPA Backs Exxon’s Texas Carbon Storage Ambitions
Amid legal challenges, ExxonMobil continues to invest in low-carbon technology. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed three Class VI carbon storage permits for ExxonMobil’s Low Carbon Solutions Onshore Storage LLC. This move could shape the company’s future in climate solutions in Jefferson County, Texas.
These permits back ExxonMobil’s “Rose” project seen in the map above. It’s a carbon capture and storage (CCS) site. The project aims to inject up to 5 million metric tons of CO₂ each year into deep underground rock formations.
The EPA’s proposal opens a 30-day public comment period, with a virtual hearing scheduled for July 31, 2025. EPA officials say early reviews show the project won’t risk underground drinking water. If approved, this would allow ExxonMobil to store CO₂ emissions from clean hydrogen and ammonia plants.
This CCS effort is part of a larger federal shift to expand carbon storage across the country. The EPA is also working to give permitting power to the Texas Railroad Commission. This puts Texas alongside states like Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming. These states aim to speed up approvals for carbon storage projects.
CCS is vital for hard-to-decarbonize sectors like steel and cement. According to a DNV report, global CCS investment could reach $80 billion by 2030, enabling the capture of 270 million tons of CO₂ per year—a major tool in the climate transition.
Global CCS capacity is set to grow from 50 to over 550 million tonnes of CO₂ annually by 2030, says DNV. That’s equal to 6% of current energy-related emissions. North America and Europe will lead, backed by climate policies and funding. The U.S. offers $85/ton tax credits, while the EU supports CCS via its Innovation Fund and North Sea projects.
By investing in CCS, ExxonMobil aims to position itself as a leader in technologies that can reduce industrial emissions—key to meeting its long-term climate targets.
ExxonMobil’s Climate Strategy: Progress and Pressure
These three developments—exploration success, legal accountability, and carbon storage expansion—reflect ExxonMobil’s evolving role in the energy transition.
The oil major is advancing its climate strategy. The goal is to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from its operated assets (Scope 1 and 2) by 2050. The company has laid out interim goals to cut upstream emissions intensity by 40–50%, methane by 70–80%, and flaring by 60–70% by 2030, based on 2016 levels.
In the Permian Basin, ExxonMobil targets net-zero emissions from its unconventional operations by 2030. The company has installed more than 6,000 low-emission pneumatic devices. It has also eliminated routine flaring, added electric compressors, and started using wind-sourced electricity.
ExxonMobil’s Low Carbon Solutions division will invest more than $20 billion by 2027. This funding will support technologies such as carbon capture, clean hydrogen, and biofuels. This includes the $5 billion acquisition of Denbury Inc., adding to its CO₂ pipeline and storage network.
ExxonMobil has captured over 120 million metric tons of CO₂. Right now, it captures about 9 million tons each year. This makes the company a leader in industrial carbon capture worldwide. Projects like the Baytown low-carbon hydrogen facility aim to capture 7 million metric tons of CO₂ annually.
The company also plans to produce 1 billion cubic feet per day of hydrogen and 1 million metric tons of ammonia using CO₂ capture technologies. Globally, ExxonMobil is involved in CCS and hydrogen projects in Europe, the U.S., and the Middle East.
In summary, here’s the company’s climate targets:
- Cut Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity from its oil and gas production by 40% to 50% by 2030 (vs. 2016 levels).
- Achieve net-zero emissions from its operated assets (Scope 1 and 2) by 2050.
- Invest $20 billion through 2027 in low-carbon projects globally.
Despite progress on Scope 1 and 2 goals, ExxonMobil has not set targets for Scope 3 emissions, which account for customer use of its products. This remains a point of pressure from environmental groups and ESG investors.
ExxonMobil focuses on exploration and production. But it is also creating a new strategy to tackle emissions. This shift helps meet rules and investor expectations.
Can ExxonMobil Stay on Track Toward Net Zero?
ExxonMobil had a week of mixed headlines. This shows the clash between old fossil fuel practices and the needs of a climate-aware future. The company is working to expand its carbon capture efforts and find new gas sources.
This reveals its plans for two things: keeping energy supplies strong now and creating lower-carbon resources for the future.
With this, ExxonMobil’s future will likely hinge on three key factors: growth, environmental responsibility, and investor pressure. As regulations tighten and clean energy competition rises, finding the right balance will be crucial.
- INTERESTING READ: Big Oil’s Showdown: How Shell, Chevron & ExxonMobil Balance Big Profits with Net Zero?
The post ExxonMobil’s (XOM Stock) Wild Ride: Gas Discovery, $14M Pollution Fine, and Carbon Storage Push appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Most businesses that decide to act on their net-zero targets reach the same point of friction. Buying carbon credits has meant tracking down brokers, sitting through sales calls, and requesting a quote just to learn a price, sometimes with limited proof of what you are buying.
The earnings calls that quietly reframed climate from sustainability question to operating risk.
Three earnings calls in the last 18 months tell the story without any help from a press release.
Hershey, May 2024: cocoa price exposure compresses margin, and the company attributes part of the cost shock to West African weather. Olam, July 2024: coffee climate exposure quantified in the annual report. JBS, January 2025: supply chain climate disclosures expanded materially in response to investor pressure and regulatory expectation. None of these companies issued the announcement as climate news. They issued it as financial news. The climate-linked supply chain risk did not arrive with a sustainability framing; it arrived as a P&L line.
You are probably reading this article because you suspect the same thing is happening to your business. This piece walks through what is showing up on which earnings calls, how procurement and finance leaders are quantifying the exposure, and what serious corporates are doing about it before the regulator asks.
Where climate risk has already appeared in earnings
The pattern is consistent across resource-intensive sectors. A weather event compresses supply, the price spikes, the cost flows through the income statement, and the analyst on the call asks whether the event is anomalous or structural. Increasingly, the honest answer is the second one.
Cocoa is the cleanest example. The 2023 to 2024 West African harvest fell sharply on the back of erratic rainfall and disease. Cocoa futures more than tripled. Companies with concentrated West African sourcing absorbed the cost; companies with diversified sourcing absorbed less. The exposure was not climate as ESG topic. It was climate as cost of goods.
Coffee follows the same pattern. Brazilian and Vietnamese harvests have moved on weather more sharply across the last several seasons. Roasters with long-tenor supplier relationships and origin diversification have managed the volatility; roasters with spot-market exposure have not. Wheat, sugar, palm oil, beef: the same dynamic in different commodities, a pattern the IPCC AR6 Working Group II report projects will intensify across agricultural systems through mid-century.
What this means: climate risk is no longer a footnote in the 10-K. It is a line item the CFO has to explain on the call.
The three commodity exposures that hit margin first
For most companies with material Scope 3 exposure, three exposures dominate the near-term P&L risk.
- Concentrated single-origin sourcing in a climate-vulnerable region. If your tier-one supply for any material commodity sits in one geography, you have a concentration risk that climate amplifies. Diversification across origins is the obvious hedge, but it takes years to build and requires relationships you cannot acquire by tender.
- Supplier financial fragility under climate stress. Smallholder farmers, who supply a large share of the global cocoa, coffee, and palm oil market, do not carry the balance sheets to absorb yield shocks. When yields collapse, they exit. When they exit, your supply base shrinks, and the surviving suppliers raise prices. The risk is structural, not cyclical.
- Logistics and storage exposure to extreme weather. Hurricane disruptions to Gulf shipping, drought-driven Panama Canal restrictions, flooding in European inland waterways: each of these has moved input costs in the last three years, a pattern documented in Munich Re’s natural catastrophe data. The exposure shows up as a one-quarter event in the financial press but accumulates over time on the cost line.
TCFD and ISSB disclosure changes
The disclosure architecture has now caught up with the risk. The Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, whose recommendations are now embedded in the ISSB’s IFRS S2 climate standard, requires companies to disclose climate-related risks across physical and transition categories, with quantification where possible.
For physical risk specifically (the climate-linked supply chain risk you are reading about), the disclosure must address both acute exposures (extreme weather events) and chronic exposures (gradual changes in temperature, precipitation, and growing seasons). The disclosure must address the time horizon over which the risk is material, the parts of the value chain exposed, and the financial impact under different scenarios.
The CSRD imposes similar requirements under European law, with double materiality (both financial and impact materiality) embedded in the assessment. The practical effect: your auditors and your investor relations team now need a defensible answer to the climate-linked supply chain risk question, and the answer needs to be quantified.
What procurement and finance can do now
Three actions matter near-term.
Map your exposure. Most companies do not have a clear view of which tier-one and tier-two suppliers sit in which climate-vulnerable geographies. Without the map, you cannot quantify the risk, and without the quantification, you cannot disclose it credibly. The map is the foundation, and World Resources Institute climate risk research provides useful public tooling to start.
Diversify and deepen, in that order. Diversification across origins reduces concentration risk, but the deeper move is to invest in the resilience of the suppliers you already have. Regenerative practices, agroforestry, soil health interventions: these reduce yield volatility under climate stress and protect your input cost trajectory.
Embed the climate spend inside procurement, not outside it. Treating climate risk as a sustainability cost line subordinates it to the ESG budget. Treating it as a procurement and resilience investment puts it in the budget that matters, which is the cost-of-goods budget that the CFO defends quarterly.
Nature-based supply chain investments are the asset class designed for exactly this purpose. They sit inside the value chain, they reduce climate-linked supply risk, they generate verifiable Scope 3 reductions, and they produce the documentation an auditor and a regulator can both test.
If you are quantifying climate-linked supply chain risk in advance of the next earnings cycle or the next disclosure period, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you map your exposure and structure a Dual-Value Model response that addresses reduction, resilience, and disclosure-readiness in a single program. Schedule a consultation.
More and more small and medium-sized businesses are hearing the same question from their larger customers: What is your carbon footprint? That question now travels down entire supply chains, and it arrives next to tender requirements, certification criteria, and rising customer expectations.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits