Shell advisor quits, accusing firm of ‘extreme harms’ to setting | Shell

A senior security advisor has give up working with Shell after 11 years, accusing the fossil gas producer in a bombshell public video of causing “extreme harms” to the surroundings.

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

The manager, who works for the independent agency Clout, ended her working relationship with Shell in an open letter to its executives and 1,400 staff. In an accompanying video, posted on LinkedIn, she said she had stop because of Shell’s “double-talk on climate”.

Dennett accused the oil and fuel agency of “operating beyond the design limits of our planetary systems” and “not putting environmental safety before production”.

She said: “Shell’s acknowledged safety ambition is to ‘do no hurt’ – ‘Purpose Zero’, they call it – and it sounds honourable but they're completely failing on it.

“They know that continued oil and fuel extraction causes extreme harms, to our climate, to the environment and to folks. And whatever they are saying, Shell is simply not winding down on fossil fuels.”

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

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

“I can now not work for an organization that ignores all of the alarms and dismisses the dangers of local weather change and ecological collapse,” she stated. “Because, contrary to Shell’s public expressions around web zero, they don't seem to be winding down on oil and fuel, however planning to explore and extract much more.”

Dennett – a prison justice graduate who has spent her career in research and consultancy – was inspired to cease working with Shell after watching information footage of Extinction Revolt local weather protesters urging the company’s staff to depart. The movement’s TruthTeller whistleblowing venture encourages oil and fuel employees to walk away from the trade.

The marketing consultant, who runs inner security surveys and relies in Weymouth, Dorset, acknowledged she was “privileged” to have the ability to walk away and “many people working in fossil gas companies simply aren’t so lucky”.

She urged Shell’s executives to “look within the mirror and ask themselves if they actually believe their vision for more oil and fuel extraction secures a secure future for humanity”.

In late 2020, a number of Shell executives in its clear energy sector left amid reviews they have been pissed off at the pace of Shell’s shift towards greener fuels.

Her announcement comes on the eve of Shell’s AGM in London on Tuesday. Its plans to reduce emissions will probably be mentioned on the assembly where the Dutch activist group Follow This can push for the corporate’s insurance policies to be more per the Paris local weather accord. Shell’s board has instructed investors to reject the group’s decision that asks it to set more stringent local weather goals.

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

The Shell chief executive, Ben van Beurden, could experience an investor rise up against his £13.5m pay packet on the AGM after the funding adviser Pirc urged a vote in opposition to it.

Signal up to the daily Enterprise Right this moment email or comply with Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

A Shell spokesperson mentioned: “Be in little doubt, we're decided to ship on our world strategy to be a internet zero company by 2050 and 1000's of our people are working laborious to attain this. We have set targets for the short, medium and long run, and have each intention of hitting them.

“We’re already investing billions of dollars in low-carbon vitality, though the world will still need oil and gasoline for many years to return in sectors that can’t be simply decarbonised.”

Shell also faces the prospect of a possible windfall tax to fund cuts to family payments after the energy business reported bumper income fuelled by the increase in market prices, prompting opposition parties to call on the government to bring in a one-off levy.

On Monday, the largest oil and fuel producer in the North Sea spoke out against a one-off levy, arguing it could lead to the industry approving fewer projects.

Harbour Vitality’s chief executive, Linda Prepare dinner, informed the Financial Instances: “A better tax burden will make it more difficult for new oil and gas tasks to satisfy investment hurdle rates, which means fewer projects will probably be sanctioned.

“That is at a time when industry is being inspired to increase home UK oil and fuel production and assist an orderly vitality transition.”

Harbour has instructed the federal government it plans to invest $6bn within the North Sea over three years as industry makes its case in opposition to the tax. The Guardian revealed this month that Cook dinner had acquired a £4.6m “golden whats up” from the firm.