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

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

Caroline Dennett claimed Shell had a “disregard for local weather change risks” and urged others in the oil and gasoline trade to “stroll away whereas 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 employees. In an accompanying video, posted on LinkedIn, she said she had quit because of Shell’s “double-talk on climate”.

Dennett accused the oil and fuel agency of “operating past the design limits of our planetary techniques” and “not placing environmental safety earlier than production”.

She stated: “Shell’s acknowledged safety ambition is to ‘do no harm’ – ‘Aim Zero’, they name it – and it sounds honourable but they are utterly failing on it.

“They know that continued oil and fuel extraction causes excessive harms, to our local weather, to the environment and to individuals. And whatever they say, Shell is simply not winding down on fossil fuels.”

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

Shell was a “major client” of Dennett’s business, which specialises in evaluating safety procedures in high-risk industries together with oil and gasoline manufacturing. She started working with Shell in the aftermath of BP’s Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, which rocked the business.

“I can not work for an organization that ignores all of the alarms and dismisses the risks of climate change and ecological collapse,” she mentioned. “Because, contrary to Shell’s public expressions around web zero, they aren't winding down on oil and fuel, but planning to explore and extract much more.”

Dennett – a criminal justice graduate who has spent her career in research and consultancy – was impressed to stop working with Shell after watching news footage of Extinction Insurrection climate protesters urging the corporate’s workers to depart. The movement’s TruthTeller whistleblowing challenge encourages oil and gasoline employees to walk away from the industry.

The advisor, who runs inside safety surveys and is based in Weymouth, Dorset, acknowledged she was “privileged” to be able to walk away and “many individuals working in fossil gasoline companies simply aren’t so lucky”.

She urged Shell’s executives to “look within the mirror and ask themselves if they really imagine their vision for extra oil and gas extraction secures a secure future for humanity”.

In late 2020, several Shell executives in its clear power sector left amid experiences they have been frustrated on the pace of Shell’s shift in the direction of greener fuels.

Her announcement comes on the eve of Shell’s AGM in London on Tuesday. Its plans to cut back emissions will probably be mentioned at the assembly the place the Dutch activist group Observe It will push for the corporate’s insurance policies to be extra in line with the Paris climate accord. Shell’s board has advised investors to reject the group’s resolution that asks it to set extra stringent climate targets.

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

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

Sign up to the every day Business Immediately electronic mail or observe Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

A Shell spokesperson mentioned: “Be in little question, we are decided to ship on our world strategy to be a internet zero company by 2050 and 1000's of our persons are working exhausting to attain this. Now we have set targets for the brief, medium and long run, and have each intention of hitting them.

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

Shell also faces the prospect of a potential windfall tax to fund cuts to household payments after the power business reported bumper earnings fuelled by the increase in market costs, prompting opposition parties to name on the government to bring in a one-off levy.

On Monday, the largest oil and gasoline producer within the North Sea spoke out towards a one-off levy, arguing it might result in the industry approving fewer initiatives.

Harbour Energy’s chief executive, Linda Cook dinner, advised the Monetary Times: “A higher tax burden will make it more challenging for brand new oil and gasoline tasks to satisfy investment hurdle rates, which means fewer initiatives shall be sanctioned.

“This is at a time when trade is being encouraged to increase home UK oil and fuel manufacturing and help an orderly energy transition.”

Harbour has informed the government it plans to speculate $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 obtained a £4.6m “golden good day” from the agency.