Talking about going green, Shell has definitely been a logo omnipresent in Copenhagen Climate Summit, even a sponsor to research for the ‘Countdown to Copenhagen’. The message that is being conveyed by shell is a green one but it is a false image.
Lately advertisement about Shell going for low-carbon technologies such as bio-fuels and carbon-capture is making sensation. Their image is more than a subconscious message keeping Shell at the heart of energy efficient efforts for reducing carbon dioxide emission.
Shell in 2008 accomplished two large wind energy projects producing 550 MW. Yet, According to a retired Chief executive Jeroen Van der, a sum of $1.7 billion has been invested in renewable energy such as solar, wind and bio-fuels in the recent 5 years. However, the investment portfolio is limited according to him and might not be much brighter in the future as he says ‘“I don’t expect them to grow much more at Shell from here”
Yet, oil companies such as shell with a relatively positive image appear to end-up fairly low in the world’s top 10 list of environmentally sustainable oil/gas companies. Management & Excellence, a Madrid-based environmental auditing company classifies shells as being below average.
In the list of Top-10 environmental sustainable Oil/Gas Companies 2009, BP is first followed by Petrobras, Total, Chevron, ENI, ExxonMobil and below average in seventh position Shell with only 51 percent compliance to performances. The analysis is done according to 198 specific criteria and BP’s ranking first with 77 percent and Exxon Mobil sixth with 62 percent.
Shell has constantly been falling down in ranks from being 4th to 7th in only a few years. Just below, Chinese and Russian companies are catching-up and soon running-ahead. Companies previously unknown for being environmentally precautionary such as Petrochina, Sinopec (China), Gazprom and Monolith (Russia) may now overtake Shell.
Peter Voser, Actual Chief Executive of Shell, claimed that the company has become 8 % more energy efficient than it had been in 2001. It is a progress yet relatively a poor advancement in comparison to other oil and gas companies.
It is fact that Shell is spending millions in trying to encourage and make alternative energy a success yet it ends up lowly ranked. It appears that BP is taking renewable energy seriously. However, Shaun Wiggins a spokesman of Shell defended their ranking, by saying that they favor other environmental audits instead of Management & Excellence.
Taking a snap view on Shell’s websites, they can be viewed as highly environmentally friendly companies. Going to the other side, Shell is considered as the most intensive carbon oil company. In the June Reports “Shell’s Big Dirty Secret” was published by Friend of the Earth.
Shell has in recent years come up with a many revolutionary ideas. In 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio, plantation of trees was being proposed. In 1997, Shell made it official that they were going to invest $500 million in Solar. In 2002, The World Summit in Johannesburg they proposed to invest in solar installation for developing countries. These are proposals that are still under sea level and might never be fished up.
Yes, 1.7 billion has been invested in alternative energy. These investments can be considered as being related to the core objective of the businesses such as bio-fuels and not really intended for environmental causes.
1. Guardian.co.uk – Shell’s Promise of a bright future turns out be yet another false dawn.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.