I saw yet another advertisement from an oil company, Chevron, that doesn't even focus entirely on oil. It seemed like yet another attempt from an oil company to show how it is jumping on the alternative energy wave. Yet, as I lost some of my skepticism with the Shell ad I read the other day, I thought that this ad will at least grab attention and may genuinely boost the public's awareness that fossil fuels cannot be the sole energy provider in the future. The ad is several pages long, with the first page being all royal blue, except for two sentences: "World energy demand could more than double in the next 50 years. So where would we get the energy everyone needs?" The ad then discusses biodiesel, with Chevron "investing millions to help build one of the first large-scale biodiesel plants in the world." The ad also discusses geothermal reservoirs, which could meet the electricity needs of almost 10% of the planet. The difficulty is that "only one in five exploratory wells [yields] viable energy that can be tapped." Further, the ad discusses hydrogen, which (while currently expensive) could "cut the U.S. demand for oil over the next 40 years." All of these energy sources hold promise and this ad should help all who advocate alternative energy to put the naysayers at bay. After all, the oil companies even admit the potential of these sources.

On the flip side, the ad still talked about accessing heavy hydrocarbons from oil sands in Canada. Chevron has spent almost $2 billion on this, which sounds like a lot more than its alternative energy investing. One other fossil fuel source discussed is diesel produced from natural gas, which is supposedly "ultra-clean." Chevron is investing in a 34,000 barrel per day gas to liquids facility that will eventually produce this new diesel fuel. I still feel that the balance is definitely tipped in favor of using fossil fuels as much as possible, even if they are incredibly difficult to access, like the hydrocarbon extraction sounds. I also didn't care for the way these two non-alternative energy concepts were sandwiched between the truly alternative energy concepts--i.e. those that are actually renewable. Ads like this are why many people think "clean coal," for instance, is alternative energy. These concepts may be alternative to traditional fossil fuel use, but they are still produced with fossil fuels. If companies like Chevron want to show how we need a mix of energy sources, then that's fine. However, I think they should differentiate between renewable resources and those that are not.