• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
Celebrating our 1,000th edition. The climate news you need
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  FEATURED
BREAKING: UN Nature Summit, the ‘Paris Conference for Biodiversity’, Moves to Montreal in December June 19, 2022
‘LET’S SUE BIG OIL’: Legal Team Launches Class Action Campaign for B.C. Municipalities June 17, 2022
‘It Could Have Been Any of Us’, Colleague Says, After Brazil Confirms Murders of Bruno Pereira, Dom Phillips June 17, 2022
Infrastructure Gap a ‘Life and Death’ Matter as Northern Canada Warms June 17, 2022
Ban Fossil Fuel Ads Like Tobacco Promos, Doctors Urge Ottawa June 10, 2022
Next
Prev
Home Climate & Society Climate Denial & Greenwashing

In Depth: Departing Consultant Contrasts Shell’s Safety Commitment with ‘Complete Greenwash’ on Climate

May 27, 2022
Reading time: 6 minutes
Primary Author: Mitchell Beer @mitchellbeer

Catherine Hammond/wikimedia commons

Catherine Hammond/wikimedia commons

20
SHARES
 

The senior safety consultant whose high-profile resignation from Shell spotlighted the company’s “extreme harms” to the environment is drawing a sharp contrast between the colossal fossil’s enduring interest in safer work processes and its failure to deliver on its highly-touted emissions reduction plan.

“They’re not joining the dots,” Caroline Dennett, director of Bristol, England-based CLOUT Ltd., told The Energy Mix earlier this week. “There’s a complete greenwash of their net-zero target. It’s not real at all. You can’t have a net-zero target and still look for new extraction licences—even the International Energy Agency says that can’t happen anymore.”

Earlier this week, Dennett severed her decade-long working relationship with Shell with an open letter to its executives and 1,400 employees, accompanied by a video posted on LinkedIn, the Guardian reports. She accused the beleaguered company, which lost a major court challenge last year in the Netherlands and more recently faced investor scrutiny over its low climate ambition and CEO Ben van Beurden’s £13.5-million pay packet, of showing “disregard for climate change risks”, “operating beyond the design limits of our planetary systems”, and “not putting environmental safety before production”.

She urged other fossil industry employees to “walk away while there’s still time.”

In response, the company reaffirmed its commitment to its 2050 target and said it had devoted billions of dollars and thousands of staff to the effort.

But Dennett contrasted Shell’s climate performance, or lack thereof, with the commitment she often saw from management and field staff when she first signed on to assess the company’s safety in the wake of BP’s Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2011. The work began with an employee survey on safety processes and culture and continued until two months ago and encompassed Shell facilities from Canada to Nigeria, where staff “played a big part in the survey design”.

Decision-makers at Shell bought into that work “100%”, Dennett told The Mix, even if the anonymous feedback wasn’t always what they expected. “The results were always… very uncomfortable for front-line leaders and managers, because perception is a strange thing,” she recalled. “You think you’re doing a great job as a safety leader, and then you find out the message only gets half-way down the pipe.”

But with the evidence in hand, she said Shell generally got serious about the “top three or four things that drive all safety culture,” even if budgets didn’t always match up with the work to be done. “I’d have to say that most of the time, there were actions taken on the back of this.”

That was a far cry from the lack of follow-through on Shell’s loud promises to bring its greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050.

“A safe transition is one thing,” Dennett said, given that the taps won’t be turned off on oil and gas production overnight. “But to pretend you’ve got a net-zero target and then continue the new licence applications is not [preparing for a transition].”

As for the billions Shell claims to be investing in renewable energy, “they’re just buying up this portfolio of small renewables companies,” she said. “They’ve got a green portfolio, but that’s not investment. Investment is research and development, building infrastructure, retraining your staff to operate that infrastructure, and buying up a couple of battery storage manufacturers.”

That disconnect was a big part of what motivated Dennett to cut ties with the company.

“Shell are powerful. They have financial capital. They have technological capital. And they have human capital,” she said. “They are uniquely placed to move into a rapid renewables future. They have everything they need to do that, including reskilling their personnel. Half of them wouldn’t even have to reskill—if you work offshore and you have the opportunity to build wind turbines, you need the same engineering and operational skills. So it’s deeply disillusioning that a company that was once so visionary and innovative cannot see beyond the next barrel of oil.”

That’s ultimately because “they haven’t worked out how they can monetize renewables,” she added. “There just isn’t the profit in renewables that there is in oil and gas,” and “they’re just so driven by capital gain that they don’t see beyond that.”

But those profits depend on the lavish financial support fossil companies receive from governments and pension funds in Britain, Canada, and elsewhere.

“Anybody would be profitable if they were sitting on massive subsidies and had money coming in from people’s savings and pension funds,” she said. :If you take that away, how viable is that business today? It wouldn’t be very viable, and that could push them into either shutting down or making the transition.”

Dennett said one of the best indicators of the low priority Shell attaches to climate and carbon came from the half-million words of open feedback her surveys generated over a 10-year assignment that spanned 65 production sites and about 20,000 employees and contractors.

“I heard some conversations in this feedback around localized pollution and spills, mostly in Nigeria,” she said. “But I barely heard climate change mentioned,” except for one manager who mentioned the net-zero target in passing when he introduced her as a workshop speaker.

Dennett wasn’t inclined to blame front-line staff for the disconnect.

“We know how culture works,” she said. “If the operational leaders aren’t talking about climate change, the people on the front line aren’t going to talk about it, either. And that just says to me that the conversation isn’t happening. It’s happening in the marketing department, but not on the front line. Someone asked me if I would really expect the manager of an oil rig to talk to their people about it, and I said yes, actually: If that were the message from the top, they’d be saying, ‘don’t worry, guys, because you’ve got job security here. When we retrain you to build and maintain infrastructure for renewables, you’ve got a job for life.’”

In her former work for Shell, she added, “the safety messages came through. If they were really treating this as an emergency, they would be adding it to their mix. Why would it not be [a commitment to] no harm to people, no leaks, and working towards a safer world? It’s not difficult, is it?”

Dennett confirmed a report by Climate Home News that the timing of her resignation was driven in part by an Extinction Rebellion protest at Shell headquarters in April, where protesters entered the foyer, glued themselves to the nearest surface, and called for insiders to blow the whistle on the company’s climate performance. Dennett lives in a coastal community facing sea level rise, flooding, and wildfires, had already been active in climate advocacy, and “I was already saying I can’t do this any longer,” she told The Mix. “I’d been telling people that I was living a double life.”

So her hope was to tell a story that compared and contrasted Shell’s safety activities with its failure to confront its massive climate footprint.

“In their safety ambition, the language in the industry is all about risk mitigation and assessment, not pushing equipment beyond its design limit,” she said. “If we used that language and reflected it back at them, I think it would resonate with people at Shell and in the industry.”



in Climate Action / "Blockadia", Climate Denial & Greenwashing, Climate News Network, Community Climate Finance, Ending Emissions, Energy Politics, Energy Subsidies, Finance & Investment, Health & Safety, Jobs & Training, Oil & Gas, UK & Europe

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Jason Woodhead/Flickr
Pipelines / Rail Transport

Trans Mountain Pipeline On Track to Lose $600 Million, Parliamentary Budget Officer Finds

June 24, 2022
288
Ben_Kerckx/Pixabay
Petrochemicals & Plastics

Plastics Cited as ‘Fossil Industry’s Plan B’ as Guilbeault Announces Partial Ban

June 24, 2022
171
TAFE SA TONSLEY/Flickr
International Agencies & Studies

Clean Energy Investment to Exceed $1.4T This Year, Still Falls Short of Climate Goals: IEA

June 24, 2022
80

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Jason Woodhead/Flickr

Trans Mountain Pipeline On Track to Lose $600 Million, Parliamentary Budget Officer Finds

June 24, 2022
288
Ben_Kerckx/Pixabay

Plastics Cited as ‘Fossil Industry’s Plan B’ as Guilbeault Announces Partial Ban

June 24, 2022
171
zephylwer0/pixabay

North American Steel, Aluminium Giants Lumber Toward Green Transition

June 24, 2022
147
Nemaska Lithium/Facebook

Critical Minerals, Hydrogen Lead Ottawa’s Low-Carbon Industry Strategy

June 24, 2022
74
/PxFul

Canadian Farmers Offer Ottawa a Roadmap to Cut Agriculture Emissions

June 24, 2022
83
Bruce Reeve/Flickr

Opinion: Ontario’s New ‘Carbon Tax’ Looks Like the One Doug Ford Fought

June 7, 2022
1.5k

Recent Posts

Erik Whalen/wikimedia commons

Yellowstone Park Reopens, But Flood Recovery Could Take Years, Cost Billions

June 24, 2022
60
TAFE SA TONSLEY/Flickr

Clean Energy Investment to Exceed $1.4T This Year, Still Falls Short of Climate Goals: IEA

June 24, 2022
80
Cjp24/Wikimedia Commons

UK Green Shift Won’t Repeat Job Destruction of Deindustrialization, Report Finds

June 24, 2022
29
Pavlofox/Pixabay

Millions Face Famine as Climate Disasters, Ukraine War Slash Food Supplies

June 24, 2022
38
Chris Lim/Wikimedia Commons

China Has 9 Times the Wind, Solar Potential It Needs for Carbon Neutrality

June 24, 2022
54
willenhallwench / Pixabay

PG&E Risks Greenwashing with Definition of ‘Scope 4’ Emissions

June 24, 2022
44
Next Post
Brian Robert Marshall/Geograph

Canada  Can Hit 100% Zero-Emission Electricity by 2035 Without Nuclear, CCS, Report Finds

The Energy Mix

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Navigate Site

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Follow Us

No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}