Shell to Trump: Don’t Smash the Turbines — We’re Busy Burning Gas

Shell’s top U.S. executive has done the unthinkable: publicly critiqued a White House that is (mostly) friendly to oil and gas. In an interview flagged by Reuters, Colette Hirstius, President of Shell USA, warned that the Trump administration’s decision to halt fully permitted offshore wind projects is “very damaging” to investment. She added: “I think uncertainty in the regulatory environment is very damaging. However far the pendulum swings one way, its likely that its going to swing just as far the other way.” And, crucially: “I certainly would like to see those projects that have been permitted in the past continue to be developed.” 

Let’s translate: Shell loves policy certainty—especially when it locks in LNG and oil profits. But if the pendulum suddenly smashes wind, the same pendulum could later smack hydrocarbons. That’s not climate leadership; that’s volatility management.

What changed (and why Shell cares)

• $679 million yanked from 12 offshore wind projects (Aug 29): The administration rescinded federal funding, kneecapping momentum in a sector that was central to Biden-era energy plans. (Reuters)

• Work-stop orders & whiplash: Even developers like Ørsted have had to navigate stop–start directives; one order was later lifted, and Ørsted now says Revolution Wind is back on track for H2 2026, while Sunrise Wind targets H2 2027—a poster case for policy whiplash. (Reuters)

Meanwhile, back at Shell HQ…

Shell’s message in 2025 has been unmistakable: double down on LNG while quietly trimming the green shoots. CEO Wael Sawan: LNG will be Shell’s “top contribution” to the energy industry over the next decade, with demand seen up 60% by 2040. Reuters

And the company just confirmed a $600 million impairment for scrapping its high-profile Rotterdam biofuels plant—bringing total hits on that venture to about $1.4 billion. Reuters

So yes, Shell is upset about halted wind projects; but Shell also cut a major green project and pivoted toward gas. That’s not hypocrisy—just the standard “all of the above” strategy where “above” mainly means hydrocarbons.

The Atlantic Shores plot twist

Before applauding Shell’s newfound love of wind certainty, remember Atlantic Shores in New Jersey. Shell exited the project earlier this year, taking nearly a $1 billion write-off, even as the JV said it would press on. The FT has noted this, and trade press plus Reuters have documented the withdrawal and impairments.

WTF Shell?

Shell wants stable rules so:

• LNG expansions can hum along,

• Wind doesn’t get kneecapped today (in case gas gets kneecapped tomorrow), and

• The company doesn’t keep eating hundred-million-dollar impairments when the policy winds shift.

It’s not hard to see why BlackRock and Vanguard—among Shell’s biggest shareholders—are watching. If the “E” in ESG is wobbling, the “G” (governance amid policy chaos) should keep them up at night.

The receipts (key quotes and facts)

• “Very damaging” to investment; “uncertainty … is very damaging”; “I certainly would like to see those projects … continue to be developed.” — Colette Hirstius to the FT, via Reuters. 

• $679m pulled from wind-related projects (Aug. 29). 

• Ørsted’s U.S. projects resuming after stop-start orders—uncertainty writ large. 

• Shell: LNG is the top contribution for the next decade. 

• Shell: $600m hit tied to scrapped Rotterdam biofuels plant. 

• Shell’s Atlantic Shores exit and ~$1bn write-off. 

Disclaimer

Warning: satire ahead. The criticisms are pointed, the humour intentional, and the facts stubbornly real. Quotes are reproduced word-for-word from trusted sources. As for authorship—John Donovan and AI both claim credit, but the jury’s still out on who was really in charge.

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.