Shell’s Uriah Heep

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

By Paul Homewood

h/t Patsy Lacey

From the headline, you might have thought that Shell had grown some balls. Unfortunately, as Jillian Ambrose reports, it is mostly the same old:

Royal Dutch Shell has convincingly defeated a climate activist uprising after facing down one of its most bitter stand-offs with shareholders over its climate goals.

Around 94pc of shareholders voted down a special resolution calling for the oil giant to set and publish annual targets to reduce carbon emissions at its AGM in the Hague on Tuesday. The board also survived a vote on executive pay which was backed by 93pc of shareholders.

But anger over the group’s focus on fossil fuels dominated the meeting, underlining the mounting pressure facing oil majors to address public concern.

Shell boss Ben Van Beurden used much of his opening address to assure shareholders that it is taking action to reduce its carbon intensity.

“I thought I’d better address these issues upfront,” he said. Mr Van Beurden and Shell’s chairman Charles Holliday then went on to field a deluge of shareholder questions over the role the company will play in adhering to the Paris Climate agreement.

“I would like to stress that we get it. We understand what needs to happen. We understand the role we need to play,” Mr Van Beurden said.

Mr Holliday added that the board will be taking account of fresh forecasts which predict a boom in electric vehicles that threatens to throw oil demand projections into disarray and leave high-cost oil assets stranded.

Mr Van Beurden pledged to slash carbon intensity in half by 2025 by increasing its offerings of lower carbon fuels. In addition, half its retail profits will come from “anything but fuel” as Shell transforms its service stations to become "retail destinations".

He also outlined plans to pursue advanced biofuels, hydrogen fuels as well as opportunities in renewable power and electric vehicle charging.

But he was clear that Shell would not pursue low carbon projects which “do not closely fit” with its core competencies.

“I hope you respect and understand that every part of the economy needs to play to its strengths,” he said.

Instead he called on Governments to push for clear carbon pricing policies and support for carbon capture and storage technologies, which can dramatically reduce carbon emissions from thermal power plants.

Shell’s 2016 takeover of liquefied natural gas (LNG) leader BG Group is part of its strategy to shift away from oil towards gas, which has roughly half the carbon intensity.

The embattled oil boss rubbished shareholder concern that renewable energy sources may “leapfrog” gas in the transition to a low carbon power system.

He said gas will still be used “decades in the future”. Demand for gas is increasing at double the rate of oil , and demand for LNG is growing at double the rate of pipeline gas, he said.

“The energy system by the end of the century will still need gas,” he said.

http://ift.tt/2qSbN8B

Instead of all of this apologetic, Uriah Heep nonsense, why did not Van Beurden point out that:

Fossil fuels have been responsible for a transformation in living standards, pulling whole populations out of grinding poverty.
Developing countries now want access to the same advantages that the West has had.
North Sea oil has generated hundreds of billions in revenue for the government.
Vehicle duty in Britain collects close to another £30bn annually.
Whatever effect oil has had on global climate has without doubt been a beneficial one.
Shell itself only accounts for a small proportion of oil production, less than 2% of global output.
World production of oil is dominated by the US, Russia and Middle East, which account for 58%. It is ridiculous to think that Shell can have any measurable effect on CO2 emissions, and even less so on climate.
If Shell, along with the likes of BP, were to stop all further exploration and wind down existing fields, the price of oil would quickly spike, leading to worldwide economic recession.
Worse still, if such a strategy was widely adopted, it would not take long for whole economies to collapse, making the Great Depression of the 1930s look like a tea party.

In a way, I can understand why oil companies feel brow beaten, attacked on all sides by corrupt climate scientists, the green blob, anti capitalists, big government and the hangers on in the media.

But if companies like Shell can’t stand up for themselves and the rest of us, who will?