The government proposed that the oil fund sell its shares in oil exploration and development companies, but retained its stake in oil giant such as Exxon, Shell and BP.
Read more: The government believes that the Oil Fund should sell some of the oil shares
Greenpeace believes that the sale of only a small share of oil will slightly reduce Norway's susceptibility to a possible sustained decline in oil prices.
The environmental organization also challenges the argument of the Minister of Finance that the Oil Fund should be the owner of large, integrated oil companies with diversified activities, because they contribute to the global energy transformation.
– All indications are that almost all of the growth of the listed infrastructure for renewable energy in the next ten years will be driven by companies that noRenewable energy is the main activity, said Finance Minister Siv Jensen (Frp) at a press conference last week.
"It's an increase that the fund should be able to take part in," said Jensen.
Greenpeace does not see Jensen's argument, because large companies will continue to have most of their fossil energy activities for a long time.
– It seems completely pointless to keep large oil companies in the portfolio. There are no indications that they are great winners in renewal efforts, at least in the coming years, says Greenpeace spokesman Martin Norman, to E24.
The oil fund had 150 shares in oil companies that will have to be sold when Storting knocks on the government's request. This includes USD 17 billion, including more than USD 4 billion in EEA and Indian Reliance resources.
Read more: These billions of products must be sold by the Norwegian Oil Fund
– Less than two percent
Oil analyst Jørgen Bruaset from Nordea Markets claims that several oil giants are investing in renewable energy, but for most it is a very small part of the investment.
– On average, less than two percent of the total investment of large oil companies is spent on renewable energy, says Bruaset to E24.
– If you look at Danish Ørsted, they have ceased all activities related to fossil fuels in a few years and invest almost 100% of renewable energy. For companies like Equinor, this is not a realistic ambition, but it shows that some organizations have already shown great resistance, he says.
According to Brusett, large international oil concerns have a business model that allows them to change the energy mix in production in a more renewable direction than companies in the upstream sector.
– But historically there is a large correlation between oil prices and value creation in these companies, And it will probably be in the near future, he says.
Adds a mix
Large European oil concerns, such as Shell, Total, BP and Equinor, have invested significantly more in renewable energy in recent years, while American oil concerns have little interest in implementing this direction. In the US, energy companies in particular switch to renewable energy.
Earlier, the previous changes in the oil industry, such as the BP Beyond Petroleum campaign and the earlier concentration of Statoil on land wind power in Norway, have ended. However, according to today's analysts from Wood Mackenzie, today's technological developments indicate that the industry treats it more seriously than in previous rounds.
Read more: – Energy conversion is currently the hottest topic in the industry
– Everything is possible right away
Greenpeace believes that the government combines arguments, and the announcement announced last week neither makes Norway less vulnerable to falling oil prices nor contributes to the restructuring needed in the energy sector around the world.
– They talk about everything at once. The management of Norges Bank advised on the diversification of Norway through the sale of oil shares, and Siv Jensen claims that he follows this advice by selling 20 percent of this sector, says Norman.
"And then he says oil concerns will participate in the development of renewable energy, but according to her own report from McKinsey, most of the growth will take place in non-listed companies and in the energy sector," says Norman.
He believes that the oil fund, instead of waiting for investments from companies such as Exxon and Shell, should obtain direct ownership of renewable energy infrastructure, such as offshore wind farms.
"The government should have allowed the oil fund to enter unlisted infrastructure a long time ago," says Norges Bank for over ten years.
Read more: Infrastructure plans for the oil fund: wind and sun in the USA and Europe
They contain Exxon
Bruaset thinks it is interesting that the Oil Fund must get rid of shares in the Swedish Lundin Petroleum, but not in the American Exxon. Lundin is active on the Norwegian shelf and has the Johan Sverdrup field as a key asset with very low emissions per barrel produced.
"At the same time, Exxon is on the list even though the company said last week it would double its US shale production by 2024. Production in the US has three times more emissions per barrel than the Norwegian shelf," says Bruaset.
– How does the market perceive the oil fund to sell these shares?
"The discussion concerns whether this grip makes sense and if it has the effect that one hopes for, but such a thematic change occurs in the oil fund, which does not surprise me," says Bruaset.
– The Petroleum Fund is for many reference points inside appropriate management, we saw in discussions about everything weapon for coal. They become a reference point, which is noted on the international arena, due to the size of the fund. It is not inconceivable that it can open the discussion among others institutionshe says.