<!–
<!–
<!– <!–
<!–
<!–
<!–
Shell yesterday appealed against a historic climate ruling that ordered the energy giant to reduce CO2 emissions.
The oil and gas major argued that the order lacks a legal basis and weakens the fight against climate change.
A Dutch court ordered Shell in 2021 to reduce CO2 emissions by 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2019 levels.
The order covered the company’s emissions and those caused by its customers.
Shell’s lawyer Daan Lunsingh Scheurleer told the court in The Hague that the case ‘has no legal basis’. He added: ‘It hinders the role that Shell can and wants to play in the energy transition.’
Climate ruling: A Dutch court told Shell in 2021 that it must cut CO2 emissions by 45% from 2019 levels by 2030. But the oil giant claims the order has no legal basis
He warned that support for going green will be lost if supply becomes too expensive or unreliable.
‘If people can no longer afford their energy or that energy is no longer reliable when you press the button or want to cook food and turn on the gas stove, then the support of people in the country here, but also in other countries, is for the energy transition will be lost,” he said.
The energy crisis caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine proved the importance of fossil fuels, Lunsingh Scheurleer argued.
“Oil and gas will play an important role in both security of supply and affordability during the energy transition,” he said.
Lawyers for the energy giant highlighted Shell’s investments in non-fossil fuels, its support for the Paris Climate Agreement and its own emissions reduction targets.
But the order to reduce the total emissions of its products by 45 percent went too far, according to Lunsingh Scheurleer.
“A general application of this order is impossible without drastic measures,” he said.
A Shell spokesperson said: ‘We agree that the world needs urgent climate action, but we have a different view on how to achieve that goal.
“By focusing on one company, and only on the supply of energy rather than the demand for it, we believe the ruling is ineffective and even counterproductive in tackling climate change.”
Green activists from Milieudefensie Nederland, who brought the case, say they will confidently appeal.
“The scientific basis on which we based our claims against Shell has only become stronger,” said the group’s lawyer, Roger Cox. ‘I am confident that we can once again convince the judges that Shell must act in line with international climate agreements.’
Shell backtracked on its CO2 reduction plans last month, citing strong gas demand and uncertainty in the energy transition.
The company aims to reduce the net carbon intensity of its energy products by 15 to 20 percent by 2030, compared to 2016 intensity levels. Previously, a 20 percent cut had been made.