BP attacked over "oil at any cost" strategy

Greenpeace has claimed that BP is using recent market volatility as an excuse to refocus its carbon intensive activities

Environmental groups have today criticised BP for failing to back-up its sustainability rhetoric with concrete action, arguing the company continues to be wedded to the fate of oil reserves.

The energy giant announced results this week that missed analysts' forecasts and showed a 24 per cent drop in profits during its last quarter as a result of the recent collapse in oil prices.

Green groups immediately seized on the poor performance as further evidence of the company's failure to deliver on environmentally-friendly rhetoric.

In a statement, Greenpeace accused BP of continuing to invest money in marketing its green credentials while simultaneously cutting investment and jobs in its alternative energy division.

"Despite axing staff and pulling investment from the division, BP has continued to spend heavily on a worldwide advertising campaign which gives the false impression that alternative energy represents a core part of the company's business," the statement said.

Greenpeace chief climate advisor Charlie Kronick added that the company's much-trumpeted alternative energy division "has been left to wither on the vine despite the urgency of climate change".

Despite announcing record profits in 2008, BP's Q4 results were affected by the fall in oil prices. Environmental campaigners argued the end of year dip was evidence of the company's vulnerability to oil price fluctuations, which would continue to impact BP as long as it continues with an "oil at any cost" strategy.

But despite the recent turbulence, BP chief executive Tony Hayward said the company was continuing to cut costs in a effort to become more efficient to tough economic conditions. "At BP we have been managing volatility for 100 year s, in good times and bad," he said. "The next year or two will be challenging, but we are well-placed to meet that challenge."

However, Greenpeace said that BP was using the volatility as an excuse to refocus its carbon intensive activities, claiming that the company diverted 93 per cent of its 2008 capital expenditure towards oil and gas extraction, compared with just 1.3 per cent on solar energy, 2.6 per cent on wind and a similar amount on biofuels.

London-based environmental group Platform also accused BP of letting down its investors by failing to embrace fundamental changes in the political, environmental and regulatory climate.

"The company is wedded to a 20th century business model which is simply not flexible enough to cope with the twin challenges of global climate change and increasingly remote oil reserves," said James Marriott, partner of Platform. " Shareholder returns are bound to fall as the political, environmental and regulatory climate changes dramatically over the next few years."