Independent news, investigations and information about Shell plc, with free access to our extensive, continuously updated historical archive spanning decades.
“Continued investment in companies like Shell or Eni simply means that the Norwegian pension fund is investing in a dirty business and looking for more dirty money,”… By Balazs Koranyi
OSLO (Reuters) – Norway has ordered a review of its $790 billion wealth fund, one of the world’s biggest investors whose largesse helps underpin Norway’s generous social benefits, responding to concerns that the fund is unwieldy and its returns too low.
The government also in a regular review of the fund’s investment ethics ordered it to sell stakes in several companies due to ethical issues and expressed concern over investments in oil companies Royal Dutch Shell and Eni .
But it stopped short of saying the latter stakes should be sold.
The fund, whose wealth stems from taxes on Norway’s offshore oil industry, is so big it holds 1 percent of global stocks. But having grown rapidly in recent years, it now faces criticism that it is too big, unresponsive and mostly tracks its specially designed benchmark – based on measures for different parts of its portfolio – and generates only modest returns.
The outgoing centre-left government has therefore asked an expert panel of university professors and financial experts to review the fund’s activities, examine how it could improve returns and to what extent it can increase risk.
The fund has outperformed its benchmark over the past 10 years, but its annual net real return of 3.61 percent is below the government’s 4 percent target. Critics say given its current setup, the 4 percent target is not viable.
Propping up returns is vital as the budget relies on the fund for some of its spending, including on schools and on its generous health and social benefits, and lower returns may force it to dip into the principal instead of using just the returns.
A new Conservative-led government, set to take power on Wednesday after winning elections in September, has also promised to examine the fund, arguing that changes, which could include its break up, could improve its efficiency.
Meanwhile the ministry has barred the fund from investing in WTK Holdings Berhad , Ta Ann Holdings Berhad , Zijin Mining Group <601899.SS> and Volcan Compania Minera because their activities pose a “risk of severe environmental damage.”
It also put India’s Zuari Agro Chemicals Ltd on the banned list due to child labour concerns.
WATCH LIST
But contrary to the recommendation of its Ethics Council, the government did not place Royal Dutch Shell and Eni on its watch list for possible exclusion and instead asked the fund to place a greater emphasis on scrutinizing their activities in the Niger Delta.
“The Ministry of Finance has decided to ask Norges Bank (which manages the fund) to include oil spills and the environmental conditions in the Niger Delta in its ownership efforts for a period of between five and 10 years,” the ministry said.
Shell, the fund’s second-biggest holding as of June 30 and worth some $4.8 billion, said it would continue to engage with socially responsible investors to discuss its business. ENI did not respond to an email seeking comment.
The decision to not exclude Shell and Eni drew immediate criticism, including from the winner of a top Norwegian human rights award.
“Continued investment in companies like Shell or Eni simply means that the Norwegian pension fund is investing in a dirty business and looking for more dirty money,” said Nigeria’s Nnimmo Bassey, winner of the 2012 Rafto Prize.
“They are funding environmental devastation and destruction of livelihoods,” said Bassey, who is a senior member of the environmental group Friends of the Earth International.
The fund usually sells its stakes in companies before the government makes its exclusion decision public.
It often excludes companies and has dozens of tobacco and weapons makers on its veto list. Some of the world’s biggest miners, such as Rio Tinto and Barrick Gold , are banned because the government considers they have badly damaged the environment.
The government also asked the fund to raise issues about mining-related environmental damage with AngloGold Ashanti , but has not excluded the firm from its investment list, despite such a recommendation from the Ethics Council.
“We do have an ongoing dialogue with these companies and we’ve had for a long time, over the past two years … and they’ve showed good results,” oil fund spokesman Thomas Sevang said. “We think that exercising our ownership rights is creating positive change.”
Besides Shell, the companies involved could either not be reached for comment or did not comment. (Additional reporting by Alister Doyle; Editing by David Goodman and David Holmes)
Posted in: Business Principles, Corruption, Environment, Human Rights, Nigeria, Oil, Oil Spill, Reuters, Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Tagged: Niger Delta · Nigeria · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc
Sir Henri Deterding, the controversial and outspoken founder of Royal Dutch Shell, now haunts the website. Wise to all the knowledge of Shell, and its shellanigans, he delivers informative and satirical insight to anything about Shell. He's a grumpy old sod, so you'll have to excuse his bluntness.
Click the big chat-bubble (bottom-right of the website) to ask Sir Henri a question. Enjoy!





The worst ever
I used shell broadband. It was by far the worst broadband provider ever! The internet did not work most days. I had their super fast broadband and it dropped out constantly. Watching a movie was awful with the constant buffering. Customer support was super slow. Now their going to charge me for the useless router which I have sent back.
Date of experience: 21 November 2023
The worst ever
I used shell broadband. It was by far the worst broadband provider ever! The internet did not work most days. I had their super fast broadband and it dropped out constantly. Watching a movie was awful with the constant buffering. Customer support was super slow. Now their going to charge me for the useless router which I have sent back.
Date of experience: 21 November 2023
Broadband Service is Appalling
I ordered shell energy broadband on nov 2. I was promised connection the following week. They initiated the direct debit. I called the following week and was told router would arrive on 13 and service would go live on 17. No further email or communication until 20 when I was told service would start on 30th. Spent 10 minutes waiting on phone line and spoke to a polite assistant who was absolutely useless in solving my problem. Avoid this unprofessional and chaotic… Read more
30 November 2023: Posted by John Donovan
The content below is sourced from current verifiable customer reviews of Shell Energy published on Trustpilot.
Extremely slow broadband for 10 months, not fixed. I have had slow broadband well below the guaranteed speed for 10 months and Shell Energy have not been able to fix it. They have tried sending about 4 or 5 engineers but have not fixed the problem. Gurps, who I have been dealing with most recently, has been friendly and polite, alth… Read more

See our link list of over 500 articles by the FT, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Bloomberg, Forbes, Dow Jones Newswires, New York Times, CNBC etc, plus UK House of Commons Select Committee Hansard records, information on U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission website etc. all containing references to our Shell focussed websites, or our website founders Alfred and John Donovan. Includes TV documentary features in English and German, newspaper and magazine articles, radio interviews, newsletters etc. Plus academic papers, Stratfor intelligence reports and UK, U.S. and Australian state/parliamentary publications, also citing our Shell websites. Click on this link to see the entire list, all in date order with a link to an index of over 100 books also containing references to our non-profit websites and/or our activities.

John Donovan, the website owner


This is not a Shell website. The nature of this platform should be evident from the content presented here and on our related Shell-focused websites, including shellnazihistory.com. For more details, please refer to the Disclaimer link at the top of this page. Shell does not endorse or approve of this website.
Our platform operates as a non-commercial, advert-free, and subscription-free space. We do not solicit or accept donations and aim to provide information to our readers free of charge. The Shell logo image with white text used on this website is in the public domain due to expired copyright and anonymous authorship. It can be found on WIKIMEDIA COMMONS. Use this link for Shell’s own website.
Our content, including images and features like the Sheldon chatbot, incorporates information generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and various other technological means. We may also draw from sources such as Wikipedia and other published materials. Please note that some content may include satirical adaptations or elements of gossip, rumors, or exaggeration to engage and entertain our audience.
We strive to maintain factual accuracy and encourage readers to notify us promptly if any factual inaccuracies are found, so we can address and rectify them swiftly. Readers are advised to verify all information independently for accuracy and completeness. Any actions taken based on the content provided on our platform are at your own risk.


© 2026 Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com | Powered by WordPress
A WordPress theme by Ravi Varma