Christie U. Omonigho with agency report
- SBTi’s proposal must reflect realistic societal and economic challenges, and provide companies with sufficient flexibility to transform into a net zero business by 2050 – Shell
(EnergyNow) Three large oil and gas companies were reported to have walked away from what was referred to as an “initiative seeking to put the industry on a credible path toward net zero emissions.”
Companies like Shell Plc, Aker BP ASA and Enbridge Inc. have all left what the Canadian news agency also referred to as the “expert advisory group of the Science Based Targets initiative”, the “leading global standard setter for corporate climate targets” according to the local news magazine. The retreat which was reported earlier by a news platform – the Financial Times as Energy Window International (Media) learnt, started late last year after the companies were told that a net zero emissions strategy accredited by SBTi would require them to stop developing new oil and gas fields.
Energy Window International (Media) gathered that the Companies considered to walk away as soon as SBTi issued a statement directing that all the oil and gas development standard be temporarily halted in order to focus on an “update to its broader corporate net zero standard.”
Spokesperson for Shell was reported to have said in an email to Bloomberg News that the company withdrew from SBTi’s advisory group in October after discovering that the “latest” draft standard set by the SBTi did not reflect the industry’s view “in any substantive way.”
EnergyNow also reported an Aker spokesperson as saying that the company exited because it found its “ability to influence the outcomes” was “limited.” The decision doesn’t reflect a lack of commitment by the company to climate action, the spokesperson was reported to have said.
Enbridge spokesperson was also reported to have provided reason for the company’s exit which according to Energy Window International (Media) news source was because the group’s feedback “was not reflected in the draft guidance.” A durable path to net zero “must include global energy security considerations and embrace flexibility,” the spokesperson said.
“The development marks the latest blow to net zero programs, which have seen a mass exodus of banks, asset managers and now energy companies. The moves, which coincide with intensified attacks on climate strategies by the administration of US President Donald Trump, threaten to slow efforts to limit global warming to the critical threshold of 1.5C.”
The spokesperson for Shell was further reported to have noted how Shell recognized the importance of a science-based methodology in the achievement of the climate targets, with believes however that any proposal should reflect “realistic societal and economic challenges,” and provide companies with “sufficient flexibility to transform into a net zero business by 2050.”
EnergyNow further reported that SBTi has, on separate grounds, delayed a deadline for financial institutions to halt financing for companies engaged in new oil and gas production. Adding that it (SBTi) would prefer such a step to be taken immediately, but is rather setting 2030 as the “absolute cutoff” point, the spokesperson was quoted to have said.
While reporting these disruptions of SBTi’s work as major setbacks recalled that only last year, it faced criticism over a perceived relaxation of its standards to allow for wider use of carbon credits, concerns which It is still seeking ways to address, including making proposals to relax its cap on the use of carbon-removal credits.
Meanwhile, and according to EnergyNow, Financial support for SBTi from the Bezos Earth Fund ended last year. “Bloomberg Philanthropies, the philanthropic organization of Michael Bloomberg, founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP is a project-specific funder of SBTi.”