Shell’s sustainability policies are covered in the thinnest of green varnish, says environmental group Milieudefensie’s Geert Ritsema in the Volkskrant

Shell is a modern, green company which is working tirelessly at finding ways of reducing energy consumption. It’s the image it likes to project. In reality the only thing Shell is best at is causing climate change, for instance by extracting oil from tar sands, burning up unwanted natural gas in Nigeria and simply putting a stop to any investments in solar and wind energy.
Recently this newspaper published a photograph of the annual eco marathon organised by Shell where students are challenged to design environmentally friendly vehicles. The one that runs the most kilometres on one litre of fuel wins. This activity fits in with the publicity offensive the company relentlessly keeps up to show the world it cares about lowering energy consumption and the amount of green house gasses.
Varnish
On closer scrutiny Shell’s sustainability policies are seen to be covered in a very thin layer of green varnish. Underneath that layer is a company which knowingly contributes more and more to worldwide climate change and has all but stopped investing in climate friendly energy sources. ‘Shell’s Big Dirty Secret’, a report published last year by several environmental organisations, spells it out even more clearly: Shell, thanks to its tar sands exploitation, is on its way to become the worst offender among international oil companies where climate damage is concerned.
Lately Shell has been concentrating completely on short term profit making activities such as oil and gas exploitation which are leading up to an environmental disaster of huge proportions in the long term. Ceo Peter Voser announced that his company will concentrate on growth in the fossil fuel market until after 2050. It’s as if the climate change discussion has nevr happened and fossil fuels will last forever.
Ordinary citizens, authorities and companies are becoming increasingly aware of the need to halt climate change. Shell on the other hand seems to be eager to warm up the planet beyond the two degree critical hike as soon as possible.
Gas torches
The most telling symbols of Shell’s reluctance to really do something about climate change are the enormous gas torches that are burning day and night in Nigeria. They are burning off unwanted natural gas found during the oil exploitation process which could be used to good purpose in a country where the majority of households have no source of energy at all. These torches belch out a huge amount of CO2, the equivalent of half the number of all Dutch cars on a daily basis. They also pollute the surrounding villages with large amounts of toxic particles.
If Shell wants to anybody to listen to what it might have to say about climate change in future it would be a clear gesture of good will to stop burning off gas in Nigeria. It will then have take its civic responsibility in other ways as well. A company strategy only concerned with short term profit and not at all with important issues such as climate change is anything but a modern company.
For the first time discontented shareholders are expected to criticize the company’s climate policy during Shell’s next shareholder meeting in May. It could be the moment for a complete environmental policy turn around.

This is an unofficial translation