Scares collide in Shell case: unlivable world or new energy crisis?

Scares collide in Shell case: unlivable world or new energy crisis? | climate

2 apr 2024 om 17:58

If the courts do not intervene, climate change will get out of hand and the world will become unliveable. If the judge does intervene, the energy transition will be derailed and we will be plunged into a new energy crisis. Milieudefensie and Shell presented these two clashing images on Tuesday in The Hague.

The appeal in the high-profile climate case against the oil giant started in the court of The Hague on Tuesday. In 2021, the judge obliged Shell to reduce emissions by 45 percent by 2030.

According to Shell, the court took climate interests into account in its original judgment, but did not take sufficient account of the importance of an affordable and reliable energy supply.

If the verdict is upheld, there is a threat of a future in which cars can no longer drive and gas-fired power stations can no longer run. We then shout for petrol and natural gas, but in vain. “In that case, Shell’s hands are tied,” lawyer Daan Lunsingh Scheurleer outlined.

The obligation to accelerate emissions reductions is contrary to the “orderly transition” required, for example, in the Paris climate agreement, Shell believes. “A transition that does not take place in an orderly manner has major consequences for society.”

Ontvang meldingen bij nieuws Stay informed with notifications

‘Judge in the chair of the legislator’

According to the company, the lower court has taken the seat of the legislator. According to Shell, only the government can determine how quickly greenhouse gas emissions should be reduced, and who will be first in line. In this way, governments determine which fossil fuels and which types of sustainable energy are still needed for the time being. It is up to Shell to then supply petrol, liquefied natural gas, green hydrogen or charging stations.

The energy giant pointed out that Milieudefensie clearly sees the Shell case as a first step. The group is already preparing a similar case against ING, and is also keeping a close eye on other multinationals. “Before you know it you will be next,” said a flyer from Milieudefensie.

This shows that Milieudefensie did not go to court just to call Shell to order, but to create a precedent that can be applied to all kinds of companies. And therefore to create climate policy through the courts, said Shell’s lawyer. “But that is up to the legislator,” Scheurleer emphasized.

‘Confidence in Shell betrayed’

Milieudefensie also warns of the disastrous consequences that the court’s ruling could have. But these consequences occur precisely if the original judgment is annulled and Shell is therefore allowed to continue to emit unhindered. According to lawyer Roger Cox, this would not only threaten the quality of life in the world, but also the democratic constitutional state.

He placed the matter in the context of increasing privatization, market forces and globalization. With the increasing power of multinationals, we have also given them more and more confidence to act in the interests of society, Cox said. “That trust is being betrayed by Shell and the fossil sector.”

According to Milieudefensie, there is no truth in the claim that Shell has no influence on the emissions of its customers. “Shell does not passively watch and wait to see how the demand for oil develops, but drives that demand itself,” Cox said. Milieudefensie pointed out in detail the lobbying activities that Shell has been undertaking for decades through dozens of trade organizations.

According to Milieudefensie, the judge is “the last bastion” that Shell can still call to account if politicians do not do so. The courts must intervene and force Shell to make a fair contribution to global climate goals, Cox said. “Otherwise, the law of the strongest, the boldest, the richest, the most powerful applies.”

Increasingly serious climate disasters

Cox quoted, among others, UN boss António Guterres, who has strongly criticized the record profits of oil and gas companies in recent years. He called them “unacceptable”, and said fossil fuels are “incompatible with human survival”.

“Guterres knows what Milieudefensie and Shell also know: that this is just the beginning,” Cox said. He points to climate science, which shows that we can expect increasingly greater weather extremes and climate disasters. According to Milieudefensie, the judge must therefore put on the brakes.

The Court of Appeal in The Hague has set aside three more days to hear the appeal. Shell will have all day on Wednesday to further explain its position and on Thursday it will be Milieudefensie’s turn. It is not yet known when the court will make a ruling.