Climate crisis: pressure to change to the power of three for oil companies

Dear readers,

"Court obliges oil company Shell to protect the climate",

"

Climate

activists win two seats on Exxon's board of directors",

"Chevron investors support plan for greater emissions reductions".

All three headlines are from Wednesday - and because they can seem a little implausible when put together: Yes, they are real (read here, here and here).

It's been a bad week for the traditional business model of some of the world's largest oil companies.

It has been known for years that burning fossil fuels is responsible for heating the planet, but little has changed for many of the companies that unearth them on a large scale every day.

A few green investments here, some promises of future emissions reductions, but nothing more.

This week, the pressure to change came in a pack of three.

The intro for the climate triple came on May 18th from the International Energy Agency IEA.

In a much-noticed report, the authority, which 15 years ago called for more oil to be extracted because oil was becoming scarce, called for an immediate move away from fossil fuels:

• As of

  today, there should be no more investments in new fossil fuel supply projects

  .

• No further final investment decisions for new coal-fired power plants

  are likely

  to be made.

• The

  least efficient coal-fired power plants would have to be shut down

  by

  2030

  , and the remaining coal-fired power plants still in operation until 2040

  would have to be

  upgraded.

• There is also a need for a policy that

  ends

  the

  sale of new cars with internal combustion engines by 2035

  , write the experts.

On Wednesday, a Dutch court in The Hague passed a historic judgment against the Shell oil company. The court found that this was responsible for CO₂ emissions from its own oil production. The company must therefore reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 45 percent net by the year 2030, based on the status of 2019. What makes the judgment particularly special is that Shell was called on not to allow damage to occur through further fossil fuel extraction, and not for example only to compensate for the destruction that has already occurred. “This is the first lawsuit in Europe that has dealt with the obligations of a multinational company, a forward-looking process. The verdict is groundbreaking, ”said Hamburg lawyer Roda Verheyen to SPIEGEL.

Remo Klinger, lawyer at the Berlin law firm Geulen & Klinger, now sees further lawsuits coming against large corporations, namely all those who are large and relevant to climate protection, »for example from the energy sector, but also from car production that have no credible path to be able to demonstrate accelerated greenhouse gas neutrality «, the lawyer told SPIEGEL. The ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court that recently led to stricter national climate targets in Germany shows that courts are playing an increasingly important role in climate protection. With the ruling in the Netherlands, a global company was legally obliged to protect the climate for the first time, says Verheyen. Which also means: These obligations are enforceable.

A few hours after the court ruling in The Hague, the US oil giant Exxon suffered a defeat from its own ranks. The company's shareholders voted for two candidates from the small activist hedge fund Engine No. 1 to the board of directors, even though the latter only holds 0.02 percent of the shares in Exxon. Engine No. 1 had urged Exxon to do more climate protection, apparently with the consent of the owners - and against the declared will of CEO Darren Woods.

The third turning point concerns Chevron, also one of the world's largest oil companies based in California. With a majority of 61 percent, investors forced the company to step up its efforts to protect the climate. What is new is that, according to the will of its owners, the group should also look at what are known as Scope 3 emissions. These are the greenhouse gases that arise when customers, for example in the form of fuel, burn the Group's products. This means that the company's responsibility would no longer only extend to its own oil production, but also to the consequences of the subsequent use of its products.

All three developments underline: Companies that are closing themselves off to the energy transition or are too hesitant to tackle it are coming under increasing pressure not only from long-term climate protection projects by governments, but also from courts and their own shareholders. However, decarbonization will not be a sure-fire success. Especially since for large state-owned oil companies, for example in Saudi Arabia, Russia and Latin America, different rules apply. Governments must press ahead with their exit from business - and international agreements on, for example, uniform CO2 taxes and emissions trading.

If you like, I will inform you once a week about the most important things about the climate crisis - stories, research results and the latest developments on the biggest topic of our time.

You

can

subscribe to the newsletter

here

.

The topics of the week

Judgment in the Netherlands: Court obliges oil company Shell to

protect the

climate

Seven environmental protection associations have sued Shell in a court in The Hague.

The decision is a signal for climate protection: The group is responsible.

He has to reduce his CO₂ emissions by 45 percent.

After the climate protection ruling against Shell: "We are already working on lawsuits against German companies"

The renowned environmental lawyer Remo Klinger calls the climate protection ruling against Shell in The Hague "historic".

Here he explains which German corporations have to be prepared for similar processes.

Simulation study for German electricity and heat supply: How the complete energy transition works by 2030

Within nine years, Germany can convert its electricity and heat generation entirely to renewable energies.

That is the result of a new study - which, however, lists many uncertainties.

Fighting Global Warming: The Methane Problem - And How We Can Solve

It It takes too long to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

UN researchers are now proposing a faster strategy: avoiding methane and burning it if necessary.

How is that supposed to work?

Struggle for road construction in Berlin: Autowahn 100

More than a billion euros for seven kilometers of asphalt: In Berlin, the federal government is beating Autobahn 100 through the city - as if there was no climate crisis.

A textbook example of Germany's transport policy yesterday.

Dispute over EU climate tariff: is eco-NATO coming now?

The EU wants to impose a CO2 tax on energy-rich products from abroad.

As the criticism of this project grows, politicians in Brussels, Berlin and Washington are looking for alternatives.

Siemens Energy boss on the new climate law: "The changes can be painful"

Christian Bruch says that Germany should discuss less about climate goals, but rather about how they can be achieved in the next few years.

He calls for more honesty in the debate.

Election program: The Left has stricter climate goals than the Greens - but it is struggling with its course

The Left Party no longer relies solely on its core clientele, but is fishing in the Greens' camp.

But the Wagenknecht camp is torpedoing the change of course - and climate activists are also skeptical.

Published

Mercury in meltwater

With the global warming and the Arctic in particular, the vast ice sheets of Greenland are melting at a worrying rate. Polar researchers first reported last week that a tipping point could already have been exceeded. In addition to the resulting rise in sea levels, this could have other negative consequences. When analyzing water from three fjords and from meltwater flows from three glaciers in southwest Greenland, geoscientists found unexpectedly high levels of mercury. The quantities were comparable to polluted rivers from Asian industrial regions. It is known that the poisonous metal, which is mainly released when coal is burned, accumulates in the Arctic, for example in permafrost soils.In the case of the inputs from Greenland, however, the researchers are more likely to assume that they must have a geological origin, since the measured concentrations are far too high for human emissions. In any case, it is likely that with the increasing melting of the Greenland ice sheet, more dangerous mercury will find its way into the Arctic environment and could ultimately end up on our plates via food fish.that with the increasing melting of the Greenland ice sheet, more dangerous mercury will find its way into the arctic environment and could ultimately end up on our plates via edible fish.that with the increasing melting of the Greenland ice sheet, more dangerous mercury will find its way into the arctic environment and could ultimately end up on our plates via edible fish.

Large subglacial source of mercury from the southwestern margin of the Greenland Ice Sheet

Hawkings et al., 2021

Nature Geoscience

Stay confident

Your Kurt Stukenberg