Shell’s Climate Crimes: Because Nothing Says ‘Green Future’ Like 700 New Oil Fields

Where BlackRock backs black gold and Shell defends the indefensible

It’s hard not to marvel at the consistency of Shell—an oil giant so committed to profit that not even the planet’s impending collapse can distract it. Hot on the (carbon) heels of its courtroom wrangles, Shell is now facing yet another lawsuit from Dutch climate group Milieudefensie. Why? Because Shell’s idea of a “transition” plan looks suspiciously like business as usual—only with more oil, more gas, and a side of PR greenwash.

Milieudefensie, the Dutch arm of Friends of the Earth, has written a polite little note (read: legal warning) to Shell pointing out that their continued investment in new oil and gas fields might slightly breach their legal duty of care under Dutch law. How dare these climate killjoys interrupt Shell’s sacred quest for shareholder value—BlackRock is watching, after all!

The group isn’t pulling punches: Shell, it argues, is actively sabotaging global efforts to curb emissions by charging full speed into the fossil future. Shell, of course, responded with the usual word salad: “Milieudefensie’s objective won’t advance the energy transition,” claimed a Shell spokesperson, as if the real barrier to saving the planet isn’t Shell’s own ravenous drilling programme, but those pesky environmentalists with their annoying facts.

“We Simply Cannot Sit Back…”

Milieudefensie’s director, Donald Pols, offered a more grounded perspective:

“At a time in which the climate crisis continues to rage on because of the actions of companies such as Shell, every new oil or gas field is simply one too many.”

Can someone get this man a megaphone? Because Shell seems to have stuffed its ears with hundred-dollar bills. The company is reportedly planning new fossil fuel investments until at least 2040. If irony burned as well as gas, Shell’s sustainability presentations could fuel the grid.

Shell’s Favourite Number: 700 (New Oil Fields)

According to Milieudefensie and Global Witness, Shell has no fewer than 700 oil and gas fields in the pipeline. Since May 2021, the company has approved 32 new fossil projects with the potential to emit 972 million tons of CO₂—almost enough to personally roast the polar bears.

Shell might argue that it’s all for energy security. But when you’re still investing heavily in long-term fossil infrastructure in 2025, it becomes clear that “net zero” is less a goal and more of a punchline.

“The climate crisis is essentially a fossil fuels crisis,” Milieudefensie wrote in its letter. “Shell and other fossil fuel companies are still actively undermining the clean energy transition by lobbying for and investing in long-term fossil fuel dependence.”

You don’t say.

Shell’s Legal Tango

This is not Shell’s first time in court. A 2021 Dutch ruling ordered Shell to reduce emissions, but the company, ever slippery, appealed. The appeals court said Shell must reduce emissions—just not by any specific percentage. You could almost hear the champagne corks pop at Shell HQ.

Now Milieudefensie is back, filing again—because unlike Shell’s ethics, their commitment hasn’t expired.

Shell insists it hasn’t been sued yet, and it’s all about “collaboration.” Translation: “Please stop asking awkward questions while we drill through the Arctic.”

The spokesperson added:

“As the world continues to use oil and gas… the transition needs collaboration between governments, businesses and consumers.”

Ah yes, the sacred trinity of delay tactics. Meanwhile, investors like BlackRock smile politely and nod—because, well, returns.

Footnote in Fossil Hypocrisy

If Shell’s moral compass seems erratic, remember it recently sued Greenpeace for a cool $2.1 million after activists peacefully boarded an oil rig. Apparently, boarding a platform is worse than torching the planet.

And let’s not forget ClientEarth, whose lawsuit against Shell’s board of directors was quashed last year. The UK High Court said the case had “no real prospect of success.” Perhaps because in Britain, making obscene profits off ecological collapse is still considered good business.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. Graphic credits to royaldutchshellplc.com in collaboration with AI and John Donovan.

This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, shellnews.net, and shellwikipedia.com, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.