Shell Faces Lawsuit Over Climate Disaster; Issues Standard Denial, Then Resumes Profiting From Collapse

By Shell News Article Generator | December 11, 2025

“It’s not our typhoon. We just warmed the planet it formed on.”

Shell’s Christmas Gift to the Philippines: Typhoon, Then a Shrug

 

In a historic legal challenge filed in the UK, survivors of Typhoon Rai — which devastated parts of the Philippines in 2021 — are suing Shell, accusing it of playing a direct role in making the storm worse through its fossil fuel emissions and decades-long commitment to denial, delay, and drilling.

Shell’s response? A firm, well-lubricated “Not it!”

“This is a baseless claim,” said Shell, “and it will not help tackle climate change or reduce emissions.”

Because apparently, the only way to fix climate change is to keep letting Shell emit — but politely.

---

 

🏝️ “We Held Hands in the Water” — Shell Held the Gas Tap

 

Trixy Elle, one of 103 Filipino plaintiffs in the case, told the BBC she nearly drowned with her family as they clung to each other in chest-high waves.

Meanwhile, Shell clung to its carbon budget and executive bonuses. Same survival instincts — different outcomes.

The claim, filed in UK court (Shell’s legal homeland), seeks damages under Philippine law, arguing that Shell is responsible for 2% of all historic global CO₂. If you’re wondering, that’s more than most entire countries — but less than Shell’s public relations output.

---

 

🧑‍⚖️ The Shell Defense Protocol (v2025):

 

1. Deny unique knowledge: “We didn’t uniquely know fossil fuels caused warming. Everyone knew. We just didn’t stop.”

2. Deflect accountability: “How dare you link one storm to our entire 100-year emissions record!”

3. Point at science: “There’s science? Ah, yes, we funded some of it back in the 80s — then buried it.”

4. Say it won’t help: “Litigation doesn’t reduce emissions. Buying carbon offsets from a fictional forest in the Amazon does.”

 

---

 

📉 From the Hague to the Royal Courts — A Shell Game of Legal Hopscotch

 

Europeans once thought they’d clipped Shell’s wings. In 2021, a Dutch court ordered Shell to cut emissions by 45% by 2030. Shell filed an appeal, threw some lawyers at it, and walked away with the order overturned.

Even then, the court still reminded Shell it had a duty to mitigate dangerous climate change — something Shell continues to do by investing in carbon capture unicorns and polite greenwashing.

Now, UK courts must decide if Shell’s pollution is just “industry-standard atmospheric disruption” — or a liability.

---

 

🏦 Where’s BlackRock in All This?

 

Don’t worry, BlackRock is still quietly profiting from both sides of the collapse:

• It’s invested in Shell.

• It’s also issuing ESG reports.

• It will, of course, do nothing to resolve this.

 

When asked whether they support Shell’s position, a fictional BlackRock spokesperson whispered, “We’re monitoring the situation from our private island.”

---

 

📚 Shell’s Legal Strategy, Illustrated

 

Shell’s lawyers are expected to argue that:

• The typhoon would’ve happened anyway — with slightly fewer fatalities.

• Emissions are everyone’s problem, therefore no one’s responsibility.

• The survivors’ pain is “deeply moving,” but so is Shell’s 2025 dividend yield.

 

Their final move? Accuse the plaintiffs of attacking “energy freedom” while standing in knee-deep stormwater.

---

Disclaimer

 

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.