Did you read @actmatthews❤️ love letter ❤️ to @Shell in @RI_news_alert?

“Should we trust Shell?” on climate, he asks.

We’ve taken off the rose-tinted glasses and come to a different answer to his. (Spoiler: it’s a ‘no’)

Let’s start with this:

@Shell scored terribly on the recent Climate Action 100+ ( @actonclimate100) benchmarks that Adam Matthews championed.

(More: https://www.climateaction100.org/company/royal-dutch-shell/)

Shell’s current ‘climate plan’ has no absolute emission reduction targets

Instead, their “carbon intensity” targets don’t guarantee absolute reductions & could even *increase* total emissions if fossil fuel production & sales increase

(More: https://www.esginvestor.net/shells-energy-transition-plan-half-baked/)

Shell committed to very small declines in annual oil production by 2030. These declines aren’t in line w/ the @IPCC_CH pathway to Paris-alignment

To make their love of fossil fuels even clearer, Shell plans large increases in gas production

(More: https://www.clientearth.org/the-greenwashing-files/shell)

Shell based their ‘climate plan’ on being able to capture and store massive and unrealistic amounts of carbon (of ~120 million tonnes a year by 2030) through ‘nature-based projects.’

This risky bet isn’t one the world can afford Shell to lose

(More: https://www.clientearth.org/the-greenwashing-files/shell)

Yet, Adam Matthews suggests that investors back Shell’s plan?!

What can investors do at Shell’s AGM on May 18 instead?

a) vote against management’s ‘Energy Transition Strategy’
b) vote for the @followthis2015 climate resolution

Read the resolution: https://www.criticalclimatevotes.com/shell .
You can follow @climate_votes.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: