Shell consultant quits, accusing agency of ‘excessive harms’ to environment | Shell

A senior security guide has give up working with Shell after 11 years, accusing the fossil gasoline producer in a bombshell public video of causing “excessive harms” to the atmosphere.

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

The manager, who works for the impartial company 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 mentioned she had quit because of Shell’s “double-talk on climate”.

Dennett accused the oil and fuel firm of “operating beyond the design limits of our planetary systems” and “not placing environmental safety earlier than production”.

She mentioned: “Shell’s said security ambition is to ‘do no harm’ – ‘Purpose Zero’, they name it – and it sounds honourable however they're utterly failing on it.

“They know that continued oil and fuel extraction causes extreme harms, to our climate, to the environment and to individuals. And no matter they are saying, Shell is just not winding down on fossil fuels.”

Dennett told the Guardian she “couldn't marry these conflicts with my conscience”, including: “I couldn't carry that any longer, and I’m ready to take care of the results.”

Shell was a “main shopper” of Dennett’s enterprise, which specialises in evaluating safety procedures in high-risk industries including oil and fuel manufacturing. She began working with Shell in the aftermath of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, which rocked the industry.

“I can now not work for an organization that ignores all the alarms and dismisses the dangers of climate change and ecological collapse,” she stated. “Because, contrary to Shell’s public expressions around net zero, they are not winding down on oil and fuel, however planning to explore and extract way more.”

Dennett – a criminal justice graduate who has spent her career in analysis and consultancy – was impressed to stop working with Shell after watching information footage of Extinction Insurrection climate protesters urging the corporate’s staff to leave. The movement’s TruthTeller whistleblowing venture encourages oil and fuel workers to walk away from the business.

The consultant, who runs inside security surveys and is based in Weymouth, Dorset, acknowledged she was “privileged” to have the ability to stroll away and “many individuals working in fossil gasoline companies just aren’t so lucky”.

She urged Shell’s executives to “look in the mirror and ask themselves in the event that they really consider their vision for more oil and gas extraction secures a protected future for humanity”.

In late 2020, several Shell executives in its clear vitality sector left amid stories they had been frustrated on the tempo of Shell’s shift in direction of greener fuels.

Her announcement comes on the eve of Shell’s AGM in London on Tuesday. Its plans to cut back emissions shall be discussed at the assembly the place the Dutch activist group Observe This may push for the company’s insurance policies to be more in keeping with the Paris climate accord. Shell’s board has instructed investors to reject the group’s decision that asks it to set extra stringent local weather targets.

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

The Shell chief executive, Ben van Beurden, may experience an investor riot towards his £13.5m pay packet on the AGM after the funding adviser Pirc urged a vote towards it.

Sign as much as the every day Business As we speak e-mail or follow Guardian Enterprise on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

A Shell spokesperson stated: “Be in little doubt, we are determined to ship on our global strategy to be a internet zero firm by 2050 and hundreds of our people are working arduous to realize this. We've got set targets for the brief, medium and long term, and have each intention of hitting them.

“We’re already investing billions of dollars in low-carbon energy, although the world will nonetheless want oil and fuel for decades to return in sectors that may’t be simply decarbonised.”

Shell also faces the prospect of a potential windfall tax to fund cuts to family bills after the energy industry reported bumper earnings fuelled by the rise in market costs, prompting opposition events to name on the federal government to bring in a one-off levy.

On Monday, the most important oil and fuel producer in the North Sea spoke out towards a one-off levy, arguing it would lead to the trade approving fewer projects.

Harbour Power’s chief govt, Linda Cook dinner, informed the Monetary Occasions: “A higher tax burden will make it more challenging for brand spanking new oil and gas initiatives to meet investment hurdle charges, which means fewer tasks will be sanctioned.

“That is at a time when business is being inspired to extend domestic UK oil and gas manufacturing and support an orderly power transition.”

Harbour has informed the federal government it plans to take a position $6bn within the North Sea over three years as industry makes its case towards the tax. The Guardian revealed this month that Cook dinner had received a £4.6m “golden hiya” from the agency.