“I do believe in 2 degrees, but I do not believe I can do it on my own”. The words that Shell’s chief executive Ben van Beurden used at Tuesday’s annual shareholder meeting mirror the company’s ‘could do, won’t do’ attitude to limiting global warming.
Shell’s chairman Charles Holliday described their management of the energy transition after the Paris climate change conference as “so far so good” despite a page one disclaimer in their latest report saying they have no plans to use their pathway to net zero in their next 10-20 year investment horizon.
As van Beurden said in response to a shareholder question: “My expectation that oil will be phased out in 2070 is actually quite arbitrary” going on to say oil and gas could still be relevant until 2100.
“It is time that Shell be held accountable for the damages it has done on our communities and environment,” says Monique Verdin, an indigenous resident of the Louisiana coast and member-elect of the United Houma Nation Council.
Verdin has travelled to the Netherlands to speak out on behalf of the coastal community against Shell’s offshore drilling at the oil giant’s annual general meeting (AGM) today.
The AGM comes less than two weeks after Shell spilled more than 88,000 gallons of oil from a group of four underwater oil wells located some 97 miles south of Port Fourchon in Louisiana and creating a 13 mile-wide slick on the water’s surface.
Yorkshire district Ryedale will be “devastated” and “changed forever,” campaigners warned Monday evening, after county councillors gave the go-ahead for the first fracking tests in the UK in five years.
North Yorkshire County Council on 23 May approved Third Energy’s plans to frack for shale gas at its existing well in Kirby Misperton, known as KM8, following two days of deliberations and representations.
The decision rides roughshod over a litany of concerns about gas leaks and safety breaches, as well thousands of objections.
Next week will see three oil giants answer to their shareholders at their Annual General Meetings. And while Chevron and Exxon will likely feel the heat from the recent climate denial investigations, Shell has been quietly trying to lay the foundation to show its taking climate change seriously. But just how committed is Shell to the Paris climate targets? Juliet Phillips, campaign manager at responsible investment charity ShareAction, takes a look.
In the lead up to Shell's annual general shareholder meeting tomorrow, the oil major quietly slipped out a new report entitled ‘A better life with a healthy planet’ two weeks ago, laying down a potential pathway for limiting temperature rises to under 2°C.
Within this unprecedented report, Shell seemed to describe a future where its current business model would be irrelevant – albeit it on an uncertain deadline.
There is an “irreversible decline” of coal power across the G7 countries, with the US and UK leading the way, finds new research by the non-profit environmental organisation E3G.
E3G’s scorecard looks at the progress made on phasing out coal since the Paris climate conference and shows that an additional 40GW of existing coal plants have been marked for retirement over the coming years.
Topping the G7 list was the US, which has now retired more than 100GW of coal plant capacity. Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also laid out proposals for a transition away from coal with pledged policy support to those impacted in the traditional coal producing regions.
By Andrew King, climate extremes research fellow at the University of Melbourne, and Ed Hawkins, associate professor of climate science at the University of Reading.
We’re not even halfway through the year but already you may have heard talk of 2016 being the hottest on record. But how can scientists be so sure we’re going to beat the previous record, set just last year?
Even before the end of 2015, the UK Met Office was forecasting with 95% confidence that 2016 would beat the record. Since then, that confidence has grown still further, as record after record has tumbled. April 2016broke the record for the hottest April after we had experienced the hottest February and March on record already this year.
Will vegans save the world? Reading comments under climate change articles or watching the film Cowspiracy make it seem they’re the only ones who can. Cowspiracy boldly claims veganism is “the only way to sustainably and ethically live on this planet.” But, as with most issues, it’s complicated.
It’s true, though, that the environment and climate would benefit substantially if more people gave up or at least cut down on meat and animal products, especially in over-consuming Western societies. Animal agriculture produces huge amounts of greenhouse gas emissions, consumes massive volumes of water and causes a lot of pollution.
But getting a handle on the extent of environmental harm, as well as the differences between various agricultural methods and types of livestock, and balancing that with possible benefits of animal consumption and agriculture isn’t simple.
When is it OK to invite a known climate science denialist with extremist views onto your show – especially if that show happens to be part of the corporate outreach for one of the world’s most recognisable brands?
Well, firstly, you’d want to know something about climate change, or have an actual expert or two on hand.
If that person has a record of being wrong, then it might also be a good idea to point out to your listeners that most of the statements by your guest could be wrong, irrelevant or confused.
Alternatively, get a proper expert on the show and ignore the pleas of the fringe calling for “balance”. Failure to do this could risk confusing your listeners and exposing them to misinformation.
Unfortunately, this is not a hypothetical situation. As I’ve written on The Guardian, this week global brand Virgin Group — home to some 60 companies with annual revenue of about $24 billion — released its latest Virgin podcast.