Shell advisor quits, accusing agency of ‘excessive harms’ to atmosphere | Shell

A senior security guide has give up working with Shell after 11 years, accusing the fossil fuel producer in a bombshell public video of causing “excessive harms” to the environment.

Caroline Dennett claimed Shell had a “disregard for climate change risks” and urged others in the oil and gasoline trade to “walk away while there’s nonetheless time”.

The executive, who works for the impartial company Clout, ended her working relationship with Shell in an open letter to its executives and 1,400 workers. In an accompanying video, posted on LinkedIn, she stated she had stop due to Shell’s “double-talk on climate”.

Dennett accused the oil and fuel agency of “working beyond the design limits of our planetary techniques” and “not putting environmental safety before manufacturing”.

She mentioned: “Shell’s stated security ambition is to ‘do no hurt’ – ‘Goal Zero’, they name it – and it sounds honourable but they are fully failing on it.

“They know that continued oil and gas extraction causes excessive harms, to our local weather, to our environment and to individuals. And no matter they are saying, Shell is just not winding down on fossil fuels.”

Dennett advised the Guardian she “couldn't marry these conflicts with my conscience”, including: “I couldn't carry that any longer, and I’m able to cope with the implications.”

Shell was a “main consumer” of Dennett’s business, which specialises in evaluating safety procedures in high-risk industries including oil and gasoline production. She started working with Shell in the aftermath of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, which rocked the trade.

“I can not work for a company that ignores all the alarms and dismisses the dangers of climate change and ecological collapse,” she mentioned. “As a result of, opposite to Shell’s public expressions round net zero, they aren't winding down on oil and gas, however planning to explore and extract much more.”

Dennett – a prison justice graduate who has spent her profession in research and consultancy – was inspired to stop working with Shell after watching news footage of Extinction Rebellion climate protesters urging the company’s workers to go away. The motion’s TruthTeller whistleblowing project encourages oil and gas employees to stroll away from the trade.

The marketing consultant, who runs inner safety surveys and is based in Weymouth, Dorset, acknowledged she was “privileged” to be able to stroll away and “many individuals working in fossil gasoline companies just aren’t so fortunate”.

She urged Shell’s executives to “look in the mirror and ask themselves in the event that they really imagine their vision for extra oil and gas extraction secures a secure future for humanity”.

In late 2020, several Shell executives in its clear energy sector left amid stories they had been annoyed on the pace of Shell’s shift in the direction of greener fuels.

Her announcement comes on the eve of Shell’s AGM in London on Tuesday. Its plans to cut back emissions will probably be mentioned at the meeting the place the Dutch activist group Comply with This may push for the company’s insurance policies to be more according to the Paris local weather accord. Shell’s board has told buyers to reject the group’s decision that asks it to set extra stringent climate goals.

The Shell investor Royal London has mentioned it intends to abstain on a vote on the firm’s climate transition proposals.

The Shell chief govt, Ben van Beurden, might experience an investor rebellion towards his £13.5m pay packet on the AGM after the funding adviser Pirc urged a vote against it.

Sign up to the daily Business Immediately e-mail or observe Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

A Shell spokesperson stated: “Be in no doubt, we are determined to ship on our global technique to be a web zero firm by 2050 and 1000's of our people are working hard to attain this. Now we have set targets for the short, medium and long term, and have every intention of hitting them.

“We’re already investing billions of dollars in low-carbon vitality, although the world will nonetheless need oil and gasoline for decades to return in sectors that may’t be simply decarbonised.”

Shell also faces the prospect of a potential windfall tax to fund cuts to household payments after the power industry reported bumper income fuelled by the rise in market costs, prompting opposition events to name on the federal government to usher in a one-off levy.

On Monday, the most important oil and fuel producer within the North Sea spoke out towards a one-off levy, arguing it might result in the business approving fewer projects.

Harbour Vitality’s chief government, Linda Prepare dinner, advised the Financial Times: “A better tax burden will make it more challenging for brand new oil and gas projects to meet investment hurdle charges, that means fewer initiatives will be sanctioned.

“This is at a time when trade is being inspired to increase home UK oil and gas manufacturing and help an orderly energy transition.”

Harbour has instructed the government it plans to take a position $6bn in the North Sea over three years as industry makes its case against the tax. The Guardian revealed this month that Cook had obtained a £4.6m “golden howdy” from the firm.