Shell consultant quits, accusing firm of ‘excessive harms’ to surroundings | Shell

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

Caroline Dennett claimed Shell had a “disregard for climate change risks” and urged others in the oil and gasoline industry to “stroll away while there’s still time”.

The chief, who works for the independent company Clout, ended her working relationship with Shell in an open letter to its executives and 1,400 workers. In an accompanying video, posted on LinkedIn, she mentioned she had quit because of Shell’s “double-talk on local weather”.

Dennett accused the oil and fuel firm of “working beyond the design limits of our planetary techniques” and “not putting environmental security before production”.

She said: “Shell’s said security ambition is to ‘do no harm’ – ‘Objective Zero’, they call it – and it sounds honourable however they are fully failing on it.

“They know that continued oil and fuel extraction causes extreme harms, to our local weather, to the environment and to folks. And whatever they are saying, Shell is just not winding down on fossil fuels.”

Dennett informed the Guardian she “couldn't marry these conflicts with my conscience”, adding: “I could not carry that any longer, and I’m able to cope with the implications.”

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

“I can not work for a company that ignores all the alarms and dismisses the dangers of local weather change and ecological collapse,” she stated. “As a result of, opposite to Shell’s public expressions around net zero, they don't seem to be winding down on oil and gas, but planning to explore and extract rather more.”

Dennett – a felony justice graduate who has spent her career in analysis and consultancy – was impressed to cease working with Shell after watching news footage of Extinction Insurrection climate protesters urging the company’s staff to leave. The motion’s TruthTeller whistleblowing challenge encourages oil and fuel employees to walk away from the business.

The guide, who runs inner safety surveys and is predicated in Weymouth, Dorset, acknowledged she was “privileged” to have the ability to walk away and “many individuals working in fossil gasoline firms just aren’t so fortunate”.

She urged Shell’s executives to “look within the mirror and ask themselves if they really believe their vision for more oil and fuel extraction secures a safe future for humanity”.

In late 2020, a number of Shell executives in its clean vitality sector left amid studies they were annoyed at 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 reduce emissions will probably be mentioned on the meeting the place the Dutch activist group Follow It will push for the corporate’s policies to be more in keeping with the Paris local weather accord. Shell’s board has informed buyers to reject the group’s resolution that asks it to set more 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 revolt in opposition to his £13.5m pay packet on the AGM after the funding adviser Pirc urged a vote in opposition to it.

Sign up to the day by day Business As we speak e mail or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

A Shell spokesperson stated: “Be in no doubt, we are determined to ship on our world technique to be a internet zero firm by 2050 and hundreds of our individuals are working hard to attain this. We've set targets for the quick, medium and long run, and have every intention of hitting them.

“We’re already investing billions of dollars in low-carbon power, although the world will still need oil and gasoline for many years to come back in sectors that can’t be easily decarbonised.”

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

On Monday, the biggest oil and fuel producer in the North Sea spoke out against a one-off levy, arguing it will result in the business approving fewer initiatives.

Harbour Power’s chief government, Linda Cook dinner, informed the Monetary Times: “A better tax burden will make it more challenging for brand new oil and fuel tasks to satisfy investment hurdle rates, meaning fewer tasks will probably be sanctioned.

“That is at a time when trade is being encouraged to extend home UK oil and fuel manufacturing and support an orderly vitality transition.”

Harbour has advised the federal government it plans to take a position $6bn in the North Sea over three years as industry makes its case in opposition to the tax. The Guardian revealed this month that Cook had obtained a £4.6m “golden howdy” from the firm.