You must log in or register to comment.

Inappropriate_mind t1_j6ssvru wrote

Corporate cowardice.

Not being able to control yourself, your business, or corporation so much so that you knowingly circumvent oversight to take advantage of public and political support at the cost of continued destruction of our planet simply for bragging rights because the money gained is a mere drop in the ocean compared to their generational wealth built on such cowardly lying.

And the world bends a knee to this cowardice.


[deleted] t1_j6v3ga8 wrote



[deleted] t1_j6vszrj wrote



[deleted] t1_j6w0n0o wrote



[deleted] t1_j6x6jmu wrote



-pichael_ t1_j6v3zsr wrote

When will it stop, seriously? …


Dalliance-78 t1_j6y6t4a wrote

Power greed and money will never ease to exist...renewable energy just isn't enough for what our lifestyles are...I think this yr fussion actually took place for a brief moment.


garlicroastedpotato t1_j6sw5hd wrote

I don't see this going anywhere. Their case is that their website says it invests in "wind, solar, hydrogen, electric charging and more" that they've found they're misleading investors since they've only invested 2.5% of their capex on wind and solar (compared to 12% for this whole group).

But this fund isn't just for wind and solar power. It also covers electric charging stations at Shell gas stations, tidal power, geothermal power, hydrogen, blended biofuels, and hydropower.

There's really nothing misleading about what they're saying here to investors. If you read that page and thought Shell was putting 12% of its capex budget into solar... well I have a bridge to sell you.


MrNokill t1_j6ucqml wrote

>they've only invested 2.5%

Lawsuit argues it's only 1.5% of actual investment into green, and that's likely giving Shell the benefit of the doubt.


butts____mcgee t1_j6tk2ud wrote

Yup. The actual problem for Shell - like BP - is that they're spending way TOO MUCH money on a horribly unprofitable segment. ROCE gonna dive.


destraight t1_j6t1rgv wrote

I wish some people would stop buying gas from Shell. I think a lot of people forget that shell bought dirty Russian oil


foulorfowl t1_j6w70te wrote

What does that even mean.


VeronciaBDO t1_j6wit2k wrote

While a lot of countries either halted purchases or entire pieces of infrastructure of oil in response to the Russo-Ukrainian War, Shell continued buying oil from them for very cheap essentially funding part of Russia's military campaign


Dave5876 t1_j6wn8xu wrote

Like most of Europe. Which is still funding the war. I don't think anyone funded Putin's war more than the Western world.


VeronciaBDO t1_j6xrhww wrote

The EU banned the purchase of crude oil from them in December and are halting refined petroleum products in February.

Personally I think that's pretty late all things considered, but meeting the energy needs of an entire continent is arguably more important than a single company attempting to squeeze more profits at the expense of human life.

Also wdym the Western world has funded the war more than anyone else? I'd agree if you mean based on the oil that Europe has bought before the war, but otherwise the main purchases of Russian oil since the start of the war has been countries like China and India taking advantage of the discounted prices.


Dave5876 t1_j6xzy7i wrote

The Western world funded, and is funding the Putin way more than China and India combined.


VeronciaBDO t1_j6y04v3 wrote

Okay I get that, you said that. Where are you finding this information and what part of the West is doing so deliberately? Can you give me numbers or direct information, something?


Wild_Guess_7402 t1_j6ttlum wrote

Of course, they’re an oil company…lying is like first on the list of horrible things they do.


Skookmehgooch t1_j6vbp7c wrote

This is disappointing, I currently get my electricity from them in TX and they claim to be 100% renewable. Wonder how true that is…


XonikzD t1_j6wp6cx wrote

Well, track down their power providers. I guarantee they're buying offsets to make that claim for you.


kna5041 t1_j6ujbqf wrote

It's like saying burning left overs from the oil refinery is green energy.


Bearet t1_j6v65ib wrote

You mean, you think that they may be stretching the truth about this? Merde Alors! Instead of listing all the governments, industries and their leaders who should have noses twice as long as Pinocchio's, just list the ones that are at least trying to tell the truth. It won't take nearly so much time. Currently, anything that comes from the Canadian government I just interpret as "organic" garden fertilizer and since I am bilingual, I don't much like anything coming out of Washington D.C. either. Cut taxes for the nearly non-existent middle class.


mermaidrampage t1_j6vkmel wrote

I'm genuinely conflicted about how I feel about Shell and other oil companies getting into the renewable field. While I agree it's necessary and they have the funding to do it, it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth given that they're certainly only doing it because other companies and paved the way to make it a profitable business. Plus the fact that all the money they're dumping into carbon capture is essentially just allowing them to make more money to store the carbon emissions generated by the oil that they produced (and profited heavily off of)...the same oil which created those emissions in the first place. Simultaneously fucked and deviously brilliant when you think about it.


SwampyThang t1_j6w01ks wrote

It’s not hard, they’re a corporation which is bad to begin with but worst of all, it’s a corporation that actively works to destroy the planet to make money.

Oil corporations are the worst of the worst. Unless they give at least 50% of their profits to renewable energy then screw them all. Nothing they do is about helping.


OriginalCompetitive t1_j6x46n6 wrote

Green energy isn’t a very profitable business and probably never will be, at least compared to oil. That’s why it’s so challenging to make the switch. So it’s not exactly a prize.


stonecoldcoldstone t1_j6w19om wrote

a certain percentage of our energy is renewable - what percentage? - zero, zero is a percentage...


Otis_Inf t1_j6wj4vm wrote

Shell also made a record profit of $39.9 billion last year, mainly due to high oil/gas prices. They're not green, they're as anti-green as you can imagine. Oh and before you ask, no, they don't pay a lot of taxes on those $39.9 billion.


HyenaJack94 t1_j6vjn5h wrote

You’re a fool if you think any oil company is going to do any serious research into renewable energy.


Boggie135 t1_j6wlc28 wrote

Really? I am shocked /s


iqisoverrated t1_j6wmhoo wrote

Oil companies engaging in greenwashing? No! Really? Do tell. /s


CallFromMargin t1_j6wp8r6 wrote

Shell is interesting study/company. Back in 2021 they released a white paper claiming that peak oil was reached in 2019, and that whitepaper market the shift in Shell as a company. They reduced investment in new oil rigs and wells, they pocket (or rather pay out) extra profits (from money not invested into new oil wells) and they seem to be trying to switch both from "growing demand" to "stable demand" and from "oil company" to "renewable company". They might pull it off, they might not, but this will be studies for decades.


[deleted] t1_j6wpx3u wrote

Hey Shell, what are you doing about the Nigerian delta you’ve trashed?

What you say? You mean nothing?

Yeah, don’t use Shell for your fuel needs. Go elsewhere.


Peligreaux t1_j6x8goj wrote

Big oil knows their days are numbered so they’re gonna screw everyone over to maximize profits. They’ve held off the switch to electric for as long as they could and just wanna cash out. They’re not going to pivot to renewables. They’ll blow up the existing companies and then reform once they figure out how to make money in the new economy. The only thing they’ve been working on is how to delay the inevitable.


SupahSang t1_j6uf8gj wrote

When I was doing my master's we had a saying:

"If you like money, you go work at Shell. If you have a moral compass, you go literally anywhere else."


nadalist t1_j6uvlyc wrote

Did we really need a new term for this?


zestypurplecatalyst t1_j6v1nmx wrote

The term “greenwashing” has been around for at least two decades. For example, the Wikipedia page on Greenwashing mentions a publication by Greenpeace in 1992 with the word in its title. Also, the word was added to the Oxford English Dictionary in 1999.


DjImagin t1_j6uwjfe wrote

When people are amazed an Oil company dosent “really” invest in making itself obsolete 😂


Dubslack t1_j6uz7mt wrote

Renewables aren't making oil obsolete, oil is going to be obsolete regardless. We have 40-50 years left of known crude oil and it takes millions of years to make more.


DjImagin t1_j6vph8g wrote

Oh I know, we are waiting to use every drop of a finite resource and only then will that break the addiction.


LAYCH88 t1_j6w0u3c wrote

Unfortunately the 40-50 year estimate is based on economically viable fossil fuel reserves. See Fracking and how that changed the industry in the US when it became profitable. We won't see an end to fossil fuel use in our or our children's life time. We just hope it will decline to the point of irrelevance.


[deleted] t1_j6siclf wrote



Humanius t1_j6slywl wrote

Believe it or not, but acts of terrorism and murder do not necessarily lead to lasting change. Working within the system that exists in order to push through environmental legislation seems like a far more meaningful approach to me.

There are plenty of environmentalists who do more than just playing the Ukulele on YouTube.


[deleted] t1_j6smlwa wrote



maymaynibba t1_j6sp74d wrote

What good does it bring to kill the workers? Workers are replaced by someone else. The deceased family/friends will despise the murderers and the people will not support such " environmentalists " what good is it ?

Violence can be a useful tool, but in this instance your idea is pretty stupid.