Waarom Shell in hoger beroep ging
Geactualiseerd op 25 mrt en 30 okt 2024
Shell is het met Milieudefensie eens dat dringende actie nodig is om klimaatverandering tegen te gaan. We hebben alleen een andere kijk op hoe dat doel moet worden bereikt. Wij geloven niet dat een gerechtelijke uitspraak tegen één bedrijf de juiste oplossing is voor de energietransitie.
For the English version, click here or scroll down
In april 2024 diende Shells beroep in de Klimaatzaak die door Milieudefensie is aangespannen. Het beroep ging over de vraag of Shell de juridische verplichting heeft om de wereldwijde CO2-uitstoot die het rapporteert in Scope 1, 2 en 3 tegen 2030 met netto 45% te verminderen in vergelijking met de niveaus van 2019. De rechtbank legde een zwaarwegende inspanningsverplichting op voor Scope 2 en 3. De uitspraak wordt op 12 november 2024 verwacht.
De rechtbank geeft Shell tot eind 2030 de tijd om de opgelegde uitstootvermindering te realiseren en geeft Shell ruimschoots de vrijheid om te bepalen hoe die moet worden bereikt. Terwijl we de uitkomst van het hoger beroep afwachten, zet Shell actief stappen om zich te houden aan de gerechtelijke uitspraak.
We gingen in beroep tegen de uitspraak omdat deze onrechtmatig is en we niet geloven dat het de juiste oplossing is voor de energietransitie. Doordat de uitspraak zich richt op één bedrijf, en alleen op het aanbod van energie in plaats van op de vraag ernaar, zijn wij van mening dat de uitspraak niet effectief en zelfs contraproductief is bij het aanpakken van klimaatverandering.
De gebeurtenissen van de afgelopen drie jaar hebben duidelijk gemaakt dat toegang tot betaalbaarheid van energie nog lang geen uitgemaakte zaak is. Bij energietransitie gaat het om het vinden van de balans, waarbij verschillende landen op verschillende manieren en tempo's omgaan met afwegingen. De rechter kan deze afwegingen niet maken voor Nederland noch voor de wereld. Alleen regeringen en wetgevers hebben de democratische en grondwettelijke legitimiteit om dergelijke beslissingen te nemen op basis van de behoeften van burgers en volgens beleidsprioriteiten. Dit alles in het licht van technologische vooruitgang en een dynamisch geopolitiek landschap.
Shell en de Klimaatzaak
Lees in ons dossier over de Klimaatzaak waarom we in beroep gingen, hoe we werken aan een toekomst met schonere energie en wat we doen én gaan doen voor de Nederlandse energietransitie.
Het vonnis van een Nederlandse rechtbank tegen een individueel bedrijf om zijn uitstoot te verminderen, zonder de vraag naar energieproducten te adresseren, zal de wereldwijde uitstoot niet terugdringen en het klimaat niet helpen. Als Shell bijvoorbeeld zou stoppen met de verkoop van kerosine of benzine, zouden mensen niet minder vliegen of rijden. Klanten zullen zich gewoon tot andere leveranciers wenden. Het zou zelfs kunnen leiden tot een toename van de wereldwijde uitstoot als andere leveranciers, die de plaats van Shell innemen om aan de aanhoudende vraag naar olie en gas te voldoen, meer uitstoten dan Shell. Het zou Shell ook kunnen beletten om bij te dragen aan de innovatie en investeringen die nodig zijn om de energietransitie te helpen realiseren.
Het is niet duidelijk hoe Shell kan worden bevolen om de uitstoot te verminderen bij klanten over wie zij geen controle heeft en die zelf niet een vergelijkbare wettelijke verplichting hebben om hun uitstoot te verminderen. Bovendien heeft Shell geen invloed op het moment dat ondersteunende regelgeving tot stand komt, en wanneer de benodigde technologie voorhanden is. Het zijn regeringen en wetgevers die beleid en wetgeving creëren om de energiekeuzes van consumenten te stimuleren dan wel te ontmoedigen.
De energietransitie vraagt om samenwerking tussen overheden, bedrijven en consumenten. Door samen te werken en met effectief overheidsbeleid kunnen we helpen de vraag van de consument te verschuiven naar koolstofarme producten en de benodigde infrastructuur en technologie te ontwikkelen. Dit zal helpen om leveringszekerheid en betaalbaarheid van energie te waarborgen, terwijl de wereld overgaat naar netto nul.
We streven ernaar om binnen de energietransitie het voortouw te nemen daar waar we een sterke concurrentiepositie hebben, waar een grote vraag van klanten is en waar we helder, ondersteunend beleid van overheden zien.
Meer lezen over de voortgang van Shell op het gebied van de energietransitie:
Why Shell appealed
Updated 25 Mar 2024 and 30 Oct 2024
We agree with Milieudefensie that the world needs urgent climate action, but we have a different view in how that goal should be achieved. We do not believe a court order against a single company is the right solution for the energy transition.
In April 2024, Shell’s appeal in the Climate Case brought by Milieudefensie was heard. The appeal is about whether Shell has a legal obligation to reduce the worldwide aggregate carbon emissions it reports across Scopes 1, 2 and 3 by net 45% by 2030, compared to 2019 levels. The court imposed a “Significant Best Efforts” obligation for Scopes 2 and 3. A verdict will be handed down on 12 November 2024.
The court order gives Shell until the end of 2030 to achieve the emissions reduction obligation and grants Shell broad discretion to determine how this reduction should be achieved. As we await the outcome of our appeal, we are taking active steps to comply.
We are appealing the ruling because there is no legal basis for it under Dutch law and we do not believe it is the right solution for the energy transition. By focusing on one company, and only on the supply of energy rather than the demand for it, we believe the ruling is ineffective and even counterproductive in addressing climate change.
The events of the last three years have made it clear that access to secure and affordable energy is far from a foregone conclusion. The energy transition is a balancing act where countries manage trade-offs in different ways and at different paces. The court is not able to make these trade-offs for the Netherlands or for the world. Only governments and legislators have the democratic and constitutional legitimacy to make such decisions based on the needs of citizens and policy priorities, and in the face of evolving technology and a dynamic geopolitical landscape.
An order from a Dutch court against an individual company to reduce its emissions, without addressing demand for these same products, will not bring down global emissions and will not help the climate. For example, if Shell stopped selling kerosene or petrol, people would not fly or drive less, customers would simply turn to other suppliers. It could even lead to an increase in global emissions if other suppliers who take Shell’s place in meeting continued demand for oil and gas have higher emissions intensities than Shell. It could also prevent Shell from contributing to the innovation and investment needed to help deliver the energy transition.
It is not clear how Shell can be ordered to reduce the emissions it does not control from customers, who are not under a similar legal obligation to reduce their emissions. We cannot control or guarantee the choices our customers make, nor can we control when supportive regulatory measures will be in place or when technology will be ready. It is governments and legislators that create policies and legislation to incentivise or disincentivise consumer choices for energy.
The energy transition requires collaboration between governments, businesses and consumers. By working together, with effective government policies, we can help shift consumer demand to low-carbon products and develop the infrastructure and technology needed. This will help maintain a secure supply of affordable energy as the world transitions to net zero.
We aim to lead in the energy transition where we have competitive strengths, see strong customer demand, and identify clear regulatory support from governments. Read more about the progress Shell is making on the energy transition in the following reports and web pages:
Cautionary Note
Cautionary Note
The companies in which Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this web page “Shell”, “Shell Group” and “Group” are sometimes used for convenience where references are made to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These terms are also used where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular entity or entities. “Subsidiaries”, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this web page refer to entities over which Shell plc either directly or indirectly has control. The term “joint venture”, “joint operations”, “joint arrangements”, and “associates” may also be used to refer to a commercial arrangement in which Shell has a direct or indirect ownership interest with one or more parties. The term “Shell interest” is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an entity or unincorporated joint arrangement, after exclusion of all third-party interest.
Forward-looking statement
This web page contains forwasrd-looking statements (within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Shell. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “aim”, “ambition”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “could”, “estimate”, “expect”, “goals”, “intend”, “may”, “milestones”, “objectives”, “outlook”, “plan”, “probably”, “project”, “risks”, “schedule”, “seek”, “should”, “target”, “will” and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect the future operations of Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this WEB PAGE, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, judicial, fiscal and regulatory developments including regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; (m) risks associated with the impact of pandemics, such as the COVID-19 (coronavirus) outbreak, regional conflicts, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and a significant cybersecurity breach; and (n) changes in trading conditions. No assurance is provided that future dividend payments will match or exceed previous dividend payments. All forward-looking statements contained in this web page are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Shell plc’s Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2023 (available at www.shell.com/investors/news-and-filings/sec-filings.html and www.sec.gov). These risk factors also expressly qualify all forward-looking statements contained in this web page and should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this web page, March 26, 2024. Neither Shell plc nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained in this web page.
Shell’s net carbon intensity
Also, in this web page we may refer to Shell’s “net carbon intensity”, which includes Shell’s carbon emissions from the production of our energy products, our suppliers’ carbon emissions in supplying energy for that production and our customers’ carbon emissions associated with their use of the energy products we sell. Shell only controls its own emissions. The use of the term Shell’s “net carbon intensity” is for convenience only and not intended to suggest these emissions are those of Shell plc or its subsidiaries.
Shell’s net-zero emissions target
Shell’s operating plan, outlook and budgets are forecasted for a ten-year period and are updated every year. They reflect the current economic environment and what we can reasonably expect to see over the next ten years. Accordingly, they reflect our Scope 1, Scope 2 and Net Carbon Intensity (NCI) targets over the next ten years. However, Shell’s operating plans cannot reflect our 2050 net-zero emissions target, as this target is currently outside our planning period. In the future, as society moves towards net-zero emissions, we expect Shell’s operating plans to reflect this movement. However, if society is not net zero in 2050, as of today, there would be significant risk that Shell may not meet this target.
Forward looking non-GAAP measures
This web page may contain certain forward-looking non-GAAP measures such as cash capital expenditure and divestments. We are unable to provide a reconciliation of these forward-looking Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures because certain information needed to reconcile those non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures is dependent on future events some of which are outside the control of Shell, such as oil and gas prices, interest rates and exchange rates. Moreover, estimating such GAAP measures with the required precision necessary to provide a meaningful reconciliation is extremely difficult and could not be accomplished without unreasonable effort. Non-GAAP measures in respect of future periods which cannot be reconciled to the most comparable GAAP financial measure are calculated in a manner which is consistent with the accounting policies applied in Shell plc’s consolidated financial statements.
The contents of websites referred to in this WEB PAGE do not form part of this WEB PAGE.
We may have used certain terms, such as resources, in this web page that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. Investors are urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov.
