Climate activists on Tuesday became agitated at Shell’s annual shareholder meeting in London upon learning that its investors–largely at the behest of the company itself–resoundingly rejected by a four-to-one margin a resolution that would have upheld the company’s promise to gradually transition toward more environmentally friendly technology.
In response to the company’s refusal to even set targets for carbon emission reduction by 2030, protestors became enraged, taking it a step further and demanding an immediate end to fossil fuel production. Chanting, “Go to hell, Shell” to the tune of the Percy Mayfield song, “Hit the Road Jack,” they were successful in delaying the start of the meeting for over an hour. Some demonstrators were physically removed and were thus promptly arrested.
Shell’s CEO, Wael Sawan, said the company had invested 4.3 billion USD in low-carbon energy, but acknowledged that the amount totaled a mere fraction of its total spending, the vast majority of which has been on oil and gas.
As reported by The Guardian, a UK news source, a founding member of the environmental advocacy group Follow This–in attendance at the event–chastised the short-term vision (i.e., greed) of the company for its resistance to renewable energy projects, which will not only cause climate breakdown, but will jeopardize the long-term financial viability of the company itself.
Climate protests in advance of these annual meetings have become de rigeur in recent years, with campaigns justifiably also targeting big banks such as HSBC and Barclays, who lend to fossil fuel projects.
Financial institutions and energy companies all over the world have reneged on their commitments to invest in green technology. Many of these behemoth enterprises claim an inability to jump too quickly to the new paradigm in their deceitful assertion that the Covid 19 debacle stunted their earnings. Yet, profits earned since the pandemic’s fallout by the financial and energy sectors in particular–even while adjusted for inflation–have never been higher in recorded history.
Furthermore, when faced with vocal opposition, public relations stunts by these companies have been perpetrated by these companies in thinly disguised attempts to avoid discourse, simply by the cowardly defamation of these activists as “ecoterrorists,” as evidence of further machination to hide behind their obscene profit margins.