Shell -- Emissions -- For The Archives -- November 13, 2024

Locator: 48752EMISSIONS.

For the archives.

Link here. 

The Hague Court of Appeal on Tuesday agreed with Shell PLC that the company could not be legally forced to set a specific emissions target, overturning a 2021 ruling by a lower Dutch court.

However, the appellate court said “fossil fuel consumption is largely responsible for creating the climate problem” and that oil and gas companies have a duty to curb emissions.

The Hague District Court on May 26, 2021, ruled in favor of a group of plaintiffs led by Friends of the Earth Netherlands (Milieudefensie). The lower court ordered Shell to limit the annual volumes of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by its business activities and energy-carrying products by at least 45 percent net by 2030 relative to the 2019 level.

In Tuesday’s decision, which comes as countries gather at COP29 in Azerbaijan, the Court of Appeal affirmed that European civil courts can be entreated to enforce states’ obligation to protect citizens from climate change but concluded there was no legal and scientific basis to impose a specific 45 percent reduction figure on Shell.

And then this, if one reads far enough:

Shell has set targets of cutting Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 50 percent by the end of the decade compared to 2016 and customer emissions from the use of Shell’s oil products by 15 to 20 percent by 2030 relative to 2021.

Milieudefensie’s side acknowledged that Shell’s Scope 1 and 2 target corresponds to a 48 percent reduction of operational emissions by the end of 2030 relative to 2019, according to the appeal decision published on the Dutch judiciary’s website. However, the plaintiffs told the court “there is nevertheless an impending violation of a legal obligation because Shell has adjusted its policy before, and this target offers no guarantee of further or permanent emission reductions”, the court document stated.

The court ruled, “To assume the impending violation of a legal obligation alleged by Milieudefensie et al., the court would have to find that it is likely that Shell will not have reduced its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 45 percent by 2030, despite Shell’s concrete plans and the measures Shell has already taken to implement those plans”.

“Milieudefensie et al. have not provided sufficient arguments in support of that”, it added.

Again, for the archives.