Shell's Actual Spending on Renewables is Fraction of What It Claims, Group Alleges (theguardian.com) 47
Shell has misleadingly overstated how much it is spending on renewable energy and should be investigated and potentially fined by the US financial regulator, according to a non-profit group which has lodged a complaint against the oil giant. From a report: The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been urged to act over Shell's most recent annual report in which it stated 12% of its capital expenditure was funneled into a division called Renewables and Energy Solutions in 2021. The division's webpage, which is adorned with pictures of wind turbines and solar panels, says it is working to invest in "wind, solar, electric vehicle charging, hydrogen, and more." However, Global Witness, the activist group that has lodged the new complaint with the SEC, argues that just 1.5% of Shell's capital expenditure has been used to develop genuine renewables, such as wind and solar, with much of the rest of the division's resources devoted to gas, which is a fossil fuel.
Oil company... (Score:2, Insightful)
.. misleads investors and instead spends money looking for more oil / gas.
In other news... Water is wet.
Film at 11.
Re:Oil company... (Score:4, Informative)
Current fracking operations, which have shorter cycles of discovery and exploitation [sciencedirect.com], can cover our needs for the next 20 years without requiring the searches for vast new reserves that the oil companies seem determined to make use of
Like many other sources of power, they fit into the short term needs, while governments, companies and individuals should be investing in nuclear power for the mid term and solar/fusion/wind/geothermal for the long term
However, to the CEO of a petroleum company, there is ONLY profit in oil
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is a different issue. If Shell is lying, then they're lying.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is a different issue. If Shell is lying, then they're lying.
And the investors will decide in any case.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe not. The investors can decide if they want to ignore it, but this is possibly a legal issue and they could face fines for lying about financial activities.
Re: (Score:3)
The investors can decide if they want to ignore it, but this is possibly a legal issue and they could face fines for lying about financial activities.
Or more likely it is just a publicity stunt by protestors. Like throwing soup on a Shell prospectus.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, if water is wet then I won't be able to store it in a carboard box. That ruins my plans for a DIY swimming pool.
Re: (Score:2)
Fake quote from Greta Thunberg (Score:2, Insightful)
By burning off this Natural Gas before it can enter the atmosphere Shell is helping to save the environment. And if they happen to get some energy out of the process, that's even better.
No. It wouldn't enter the atmosphere unless they frack it out of the ground in the first place. If you want to save the environment, you'd do it by not fracking and pumping it out of the ground in the first place.
You could, however, use it more efficiently. Right now a lot of natural gas is lost because it's not worth the effort to recover it.
- Greta Thunberg
The purported "quote" is, of course, fake.
Re: (Score:1)
The purported "quote" is, of course, fake.
No worries, nobody ever really thought she was that bright.
Misleading yes, criminal - nah, I doubt it (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes the layout is deceptive and the expenditure not what greens assume. However the labelling 'Renewables and Energy Solutions' gives LOTS of wriggle room for lawyers. Modern politics is all about fooling the voter; this is a textbook example of how to do it.
Re: (Score:3)
Civil: Yes very much so. Lying to investors is lawsuit waiting to happen and to be lost by the company. And unlike government suits these can end in far more than a slap on the wrist.
Hmmm.... (Score:2)
The data appears to be in the report to show the diligent that the story they thought they were hearing was untrue. The question is the precise wording of the comments made in summarising the material, which may, or may not, have been inaccurate. Yes, I would like to see Shell smacked hard for this; I'm not convinced that can be achieved. But I hope I'm wrong!
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure Shell's legal department is totally clueless and a random slashdotter has way more insight into the law
Re: (Score:2)
Legality isn't really the issue, it's the political reaction. These efforts are to appease political pressure to help move away from fossil fuels. If they are largely fake then whatever leeway they gained from them needs to be taken away, and then some.
They are petrochemical companies (Score:2, Insightful)
This doesn't make them dinosaurs, either. Long after we've moved our energ
Re:They are petrochemical companies (Score:4, Interesting)
Less than 5% of the oil and gas produced goes to supply feedstock for the plastic industry.
If this were the only use for fossil fuels, there would be a vast oversupply. The revenue would not even begin to sustain the five-trillion dollar fossil fuel industry.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They are petrochemical companies (Score:4, Interesting)
Since that last 5% does not involve burning the fossil hydrocarbons to make carbon dioxide, it's not terribly important to me that they do or do not stop producing it.
Re: (Score:2)
Since that last 5% does not involve burning the fossil hydrocarbons to make carbon dioxide, it's not terribly important to me that they do or do not stop producing it.
You are actually still going to have to do something with the majority of the other byproducts if you only use a tiny bit from each barrel of oil. Just sayin.
Re: (Score:2)
Less than 5% of the oil and gas produced goes to supply feedstock for the plastic industry.
Yeah a lot of it goes toward fertilizer, jet and heating fuel, gasoline, lubricants, and many other things, and the dregs are bunker oil for ships.
Fractional distillation is great. Like a cow or a chicken, nothing is wasted.
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, 20-30 years ago* Shell, Amoco, BP, Exxon, and several other of the big-oil companies built and sold solar panels, turbines, and other such renewable kit. The idea being - oil/gas is going to be phased out and replaced with this stuff. Let's invest in it now so we can own the means of energy production on the other side of the transition.
Then someone made the decision* - No, this is stupid! Let's fight the change, muddy the waters, disinformation campaigns, drill/mine more, and give lots of mone
Re: (Score:3)
Great post, although I wish that you have included some links
On your last point:
>>Milton Friedman and the University of Chicago school of Economics.
Milton Friedman has gutted Adam Smiths concept of business ethics as laid out in The Theory of Moral Sentiments and converted it into a justification of seeking profits over people. The result is markets as the arbitrators of ethical outcomes, and profit maximization as the ultimate moral code. [sciencedirect.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I heard a 3rd-hand story about a chemist working at one of the oil majors. He had an idea that would turn a 25% profit. He took it to an executive and pitched it. When he got to the part about potential profit, the executive said “Stop. I’m no longer interested. Don’t even talk to me unless you’re making 50% profit. Sinking money into a
Re: (Score:2)
Elon Musk and Tesla have demonstrated the ability to create profits from a renewable economy, which was deliberately avoided by oil companies and automakers until Musk came along [medium.com]
Re: (Score:2)
1. Management Consultants and outside Legal
2. Pharma Healthcare
3. US Shipbuilders
4. Aerospace/Def Contractors
5. EV Companies
6. Energy Producers / Utilities
When energy commodities prices are low and mega sized vertical integration is a bad thing, the help from government is low because that is the state the tax payer prefers. The swings in Shell margins are insane, crack spread vs discovery costs
Re: (Score:2)
I heard a 3rd-hand story about a chemist working at one of the oil majors.
I heard he invented a car that runs on water.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: They are petrochemical companies (Score:2)
Wow.... (Score:2)
Wow...Shell oil, doesn't want to shell out for renewables? :)
JoshK.
Reflecting on current events ... (Score:2)
Shell has misleadingly overstated how much it is spending on renewable energy ...
I'm thinking there's a George Santos joke in here somewhere, but I can't really imagine he would have allowed this malfeasance when he was President of Shell.
- Shell reports highest profits in 115 years - (Score:2)
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64... [bbc.com]
from BBC:
"Oil and gas giant Shell has reported record annual profits after energy prices surged last year following Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Profits hit $39.9bn (£32.2bn) in 2022, double last year's total and the highest in its 115-year history.
Energy firms have seen record earnings since oil and gas prices jumped following the invasion of Ukraine.
It has heaped pressure on firms to pay more tax as households struggle with rising bills.
Opposition parties said
Oil companies always lie (Score:3)
Oil Industry Executives Privately Contradicted Their Public Statements on Climate, Files Show [slashdot.org]
This is standard operating procedure for all corporate corrupt behavior. They will say anything to keep the money flowing, and it works. Just look at Big Tobacco and cancer. Look at Perdue Pharma [youtube.com] and the Sackler family [wikipedia.org], who became multi-billionaires by addicting millions to oxycontin and killing hundreds of thousands.
No matter how horrible the outcome, the perps almost always get away with their deception and get to keep their ill gotten gains. It's a safe bet. The only time they see the inside of a jail cell is if they cheat banks or other connected insiders, like with Theranos. Murder for profit is good business.
Meanwhile, they're fucking everyone over (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It is with a heavy heart but a spring in my step that I predict this maybe the last post from the one known as Rick Schumann, or as he more popularly known, Racist Rick.
Over the past year since he has been called out, rightfully I might add, his racist his postings to our lovely board have been dropping in quantity and quality. If you can call anything he posted as quality. It seems this might have been his last post here, which I'm fine with. I suspect that he has headed back over to where his kind a
The ROI isn't what they expected (Score:2)
Like BP, they figured out that the return on investment isn't anywhere near what they expected lot alone hoped for. It's pretty straightforward as long as you realize that ESG is bullsh*t.
Useless headling (Score:2)
"Spending is fraction of what it claims" is always true. 2/1 is a fraction, as is 1/1.
"Shell’s actual spending on renewables is 13% of what it claims, group alleges" would have both been more brief and more informative.
Good (Score:2)
Just increased my regard for Shell.