Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

Shell’s Climate Pledge Pivot: A Masterclass in Greenwashing and Shady Business Tactics

Shell’s actions demonstrate a clear disregard for the planet and its future, all in the name of maximizing short-term profits.

Posted by John Donovan July 17, 2023

Shell has left climate experts fuming with its latest admission, as the company backtracks on its 2050 net-zero pledge to prioritize shareholder returns and production. This move has sparked outrage and accusations of greenwashing, as Shell continues to profit from dirty energy while pretending to be a friend to the planet. The company’s actions are seen as pure climate vandalism, with critics highlighting the glaring gap between Shell’s rhetoric and its actual business practices.

Shell’s recent announcement of its new strategy, presented by CEO Wael Sawan, has set alarm bells ringing among climate experts. Despite its previous commitment to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, Shell has now taken a U-turn, revealing plans to prioritize shareholder returns and production over renewable investments. This decision has drawn widespread criticism and accusations of shady business tactics.

The company’s claim that it will maintain stable oil production levels until 2030 is dubious at best, as it conveniently ignores the fact that selling its interest in the Permian Basin oilfield allowed it to meet its production reduction goals. Shell’s $40 billion investment in oil and gas production over the next 13 years further demonstrates its lack of genuine commitment to clean energy.

Environmentalists and shareholders alike are appalled by Shell’s blatant disregard for the urgent need to transition away from fossil fuels. Mark van Baal, founder of Follow This, a shareholder advocacy group, points out the hypocrisy of Shell’s money-driven approach, stating, “The fact that they are making so much money right now is not helping.” It is clear that Shell’s primary concern is maximizing profits, regardless of the environmental consequences.

Critics argue that Shell’s latest strategy is nothing more than greenwashing – a tactic used by companies to deceive the public into believing they are environmentally friendly while continuing to harm the planet. By scaling back on its climate pledges, Shell is undermining real progress in the fight against climate change and misleading customers into supporting a company that is actively contributing to the problem.

Shell’s shift in focus from renewables to fossil fuels is a step backwards that fails to address the reasons for its undervaluation. This strategy may temporarily boost shareholder returns, but the initial excitement will soon fade, and the stock price will return to its lacklustre state. The lack of a comprehensive plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 further exposes Shell’s empty promises.

CEO Sawan’s approach is reminiscent of the old ways, favouring consensus-based decision-making over bold action. This return to the “polder model” – a Dutch method of compromise – reflects Shell’s attempt to balance the interests of various stakeholders. However, this approach falls short of addressing the urgent need for immediate and decisive action to combat climate change.

Shell’s identity crisis is evident in its attempt to satisfy shareholders while claiming to be environmentally conscious. By trying to please everyone, Shell is pleasing no one. The company’s reluctance to fully commit to a clean energy transition puts its future prospects in doubt. Other oil and gas companies, like TotalEnergies, have embraced diversification and taken decisive steps toward becoming multi-energy companies, leaving Shell lagging behind.

In conclusion, Shell’s climate pledge pivot is a masterclass in greenwashing and shady business tactics. The company’s hollow promises and lack of genuine commitment to renewable energy have left experts and environmentalists frustrated and disappointed. Shell’s actions demonstrate a clear disregard for the planet and its future, all in the name of maximizing short-term profits.

Right of Reply: Shell is invited to point out any factual inaccuracies and provide closing comments for publication in this article on an unedited basis.

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Comments are closed.