Emily Cunningham

Hi Paul, we're committed to tackling the dual challenge & are in action across the businesses pursuing low carbon opportunities. Renewables are extremely important, but currently can't provide the energy needed to meet growing demand.

This will take time & investment - & we are investing heavily. Have a look at our Advancing Low Carbon programme to see the 50+ low carbon technologies & businesses we're investing in this year alone http://on.bp.com/ALC 

BP says it "will take time & investment" to move toward renewable energy. This is dangerous and misguided. Why? – Physics has already set the timeline for us. We're out of time. – Climate delaying is the new climate denying. If we go at BP's pace we'll face catastrophic warming

Not sure it’s misguided It’s just a fact. And it’s not BPs pace it’s societal. Sadly we are not going to wean the huge population growth off hydrocarbons anytime soon. That growth needs cheap reliable sources of energy.

If we don't do this, we will put hundreds of millions of lives at risk (possibly more), unravel our institutions and economy. We could also set off tipping points causing irreversible warming. Many futures are still open to us at this point, based on our actions & decisions now.

Emily Ironically the current set up underpins the economy & is saving millions of lives. Solutions to a lower carbon future need to address short term economic impacts & the benefit hydrocarbons brings to developing countries. If not we are whistling in the wind.

Have you seen what the World Bank (a conservative body itself) says about this?https://twitter.com/emahlee/status/1162661680527990794 …

Yip I’m sure that is the case and that’s why this is difficult. It’s about transitioning energy supply that allow us to be able to deal with the immediate needs of the worlds population and position ourselves for a low carbon future.