Shell make a press ad that claims their Canadian oil sand extraction operation was sustainable. While the majorty of us ignore this because when the words “Canadian+oil+sand+extraction+operation” appear, our brains shut down, the World Wildlife Fund in the UK looked into the claim and decided it was “bullwash” or “greenshit,” as I call it. More importantly the Advertising Standards Authority agreed with them. Keen to remind us that the WWF is there for the environment, not just pandas, the charity has taken a huge screen at Waterloo to run a 20” ad telling commuters how Shell tried to pull the wool over their eyes. It’s a good reminder to us all that the WWF exists and isn’t in fact the World Wrestling Foundation. I have it on good authority that HSBC has just made a donation of $33m to the charity to support environmental projects over the next five years, so this is a serious contender for your attention. Shell agrees that to meet vast energy requirements it had to look beyond normal sources of oil and gas, and that includes unconventional rescources , such as oil sands. But because Shell had not provided evidence that it was “effectively” managing carbon emissions from its oil sands projects “in order to limit climate change”, the ASA deemed that the ad was misleading.

Keeping up with those turning a profit in trying times, and with the price of fuel right now, its no huge surprise to learn the oil companies have been raking it in – and how: Greenpeace favourite Exxon Mobil made profits of £11.68bn between April and June, breaking its own record for the highest quarterly profit by a US company. Amazingly the profits disappointed the their investors, who thought that if crude oil prices were double, so should the profits be compared to last year. Ah, oil investors. What lovely people. The figures took into account a $290m fine for the Exxon Valdez oil spill disaster. Given the size of their quarterly profits, “fine” is no doubt the word they had in mind too – the original penalty for the Alaskan spill was $2.5bn. See, its not what you know… Over at Shell the champagne was flowing too with £4bn to play with. And in the UK, BP came in with £4.3bn – or £555 per second. At the start of the week, BP got the green light to embark on one of Angola’s largest oil and gas investments, worth $10 billion.

Oil is nearly $140 a barrel. By the time I reach the 3rd green this morning it may be more than that. Why is it so expensive right now? Here’s what you tell ‘em when you go for your job at Exxon Mobil (and ask for healthcare - £11bn quarterly profits, they can afford it): The dollar is weaker than a plot line in 2 Pints of Lager, so people don’t want to invest in the money markets. Instead they invest in oil which, as it’s traded in dollars, was cheap to buy. Some traders (market speculators) bet huge sums on the predicted price of oil. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy: if someone will bet their house on you taking your shirt off, you suddenly wake up and find you are taking your shirt off. Well, that’s what happened to me. But US regulators are right now investigating some traders for “market manipulation” of the oil price. Shocking isn’t it. Global supplies of oil can’t keep up with demand, and if you need something desperately, you’ll pay a little extra for it. Since 2005 oil demand has risen by 3m barrels a day (mainly from the USA). It is expected to rise to 32m barrels a day over the next 20 years (blame China). Much oil comes from shaky areas of the world. If the entire world’s oil came from Peterborough, we can assume supply would be consistent. It doesn’t. It comes from South America, Russia, the Middle East – areas where as much as 68% of the populations are drunk or clinically insane. So now you know. Join Boris on his bike, or pour it over your face like Harvey Dent while you still have the chance. The choice is yours. The future is in our hands, and our hands have covered in oil. I drink your milkshake!

A prime case of when business and politics collide: French energy giant Total had been planning to develop the huge South Pars gas field in Iran, but good-looking boss Christophe de Margerie says this will not now go ahead because it is politically too risky –  a huge blow to the Iranian energy industry. The decision is no-doubt linked to the fact Iran test-fired a series of missiles amid weeks of rising tensions with Israel and the US over its nuclear ambitions. De Margerie’s comments seem to be as much about brand building:  “Today we would be taking too much political risk to invest in Iran because people will say: ‘Total will do anything for money’.” Total was the last major Western energy group to have seriously considered investing in the country’s huge gas reserves, and was one of the few companies in the world with the technology to do it. Be honest, no matter what the pay was, would go and work there if ordered?

Fuel accounts for one third of an airline’s costs and with oil hitting $130 a barrel, the majority of airlines are unprofitable – BA and Virgin increased fuel surcharges this week just to cover costs. It is felt that the current situation is more of a threat to the industry’s survival than post 9-11 (or “the horsemen of the apocalypse” as the head of the International Air Transport Association dramatically called them!) No wonder that the boss of OneWorld Alliance, that includes BA and Qantas, has said that larger carriers will consider the use of charging passengers for add-ons just like budget airlines do. I love the rumours that one airline is actually trying to find ways to make economy class more uncomfortable. Why? Business class is any airlines’ best cash cow. As the credit crunch bites, more business folk are deciding to fly economy. This airline is doing it’s utmost to make sure those travellers never do so again, but revert back to turning left when they board the aircraft! Who can it ba…I mean be!