Reuters (December 26)
“Solar, wind power and batteries are set to make life a misery for the liquefied natural gas market. Some fossil fuel executives already think the push by incumbents like Exxon Mobil, Shell, and Woodside Energy to hike global production by some 50% by 2030, per the International Energy Agency, is creating a bubble. But renewable energy’s advantages will make the pop even worse.”
Tags: 2030, Batteries, Bubble, Exxon Mobil, Fossil fuel, Global production, IEA, LNG, Pop, Renewable energy, Shell, Solar, Wind power
Reuters (May 13)
“With scars from a post-Ukraine energy security crisis fresh, oil prices around $80 a barrel, and central banks’ rate hikes reducing the value of long-term businesses like offshore wind, investors have already voted with their feet. Shell’s share price has risen by a third since 2023, while the benchmark FTSE 100 Index only gained 16% during the same period. Morningstar recorded net outflows globally from sustainable investing in the fourth quarter.”
Tags: 80, Barrel, Benchmark, Central banks, Crisis, Energy security, FTSE 100, Investors, Morningstar, Offshore wind, Oil prices, Outflows, Rate hikes, Share price, Shell, Ukraine, Value, Voted
BBC (May 24)
“Climate protesters stormed Shell’s annual shareholder meeting in London, with security having to step in to protect board members.” The protestors, activists and other “campaign groups are looking to ramp up the pressure on Shell and other energy companies to bring forward those targets to absolute carbon emissions cuts by 2030 and focus more resources on renewables.” The proposed targets were, however, “rejected in a vote by shareholders at the meeting.”
Tags: 2030, Activists, Annual meeting, Board members, Carbon emissions, Climate, Energy, London, Pressure, Protect, Protesters, Rejected, Renewables, Resources, Security, Shell, Targets, Vote
New York Times (March 9)
“A week after a chorus of Western executives from Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell and other companies… pledged to pull their companies out of Russian ventures, it appears the turbulence for Russia’s energy industry has only begun.” The industry now looks poised to undergo a “wrenching reworking…. because Russian oil and gas have suddenly become toxic to many buyers.”
Tags: BP, Energy, Exxon Mobil, Gas, Oil, Pledged, Reworking, Russia, Shell, Toxic, Turbulence, Ventures, Western, Wrenching
Bloomberg (March 1)
“First BP, then Shell. In just two days, Britain’s twin energy giants have dumped Russian investments nurtured over decades and shut themselves out of the world’s largest energy exporter, probably forever.” The moves will “put pressure on remaining foreign investors, including Exxon Mobil Corp. and France’s TotalEnergies SE, to follow suit as Russia’s war in Ukraine forces a dramatic rupture with the global economy.”
Tags: BP, Energy giants, Exporter, Exxon Mobil, Investments, Investors, Nurtured, Pressure, Russia, Shell, TotalEnergies, UK, Ukraine, War
Wall Street Journal (November 16)
Royal Dutch Shell will abandon its complicated dual British/Dutch structure, moving its headquarters to London. The move is being made to “help facilitate returns to shareholders and make it simpler to change up its portfolio of assets” as it transitions to low-carbon energy. The move should also improve the company’s “flexibility to buy back shares.”
Tags: Assets, Buy back, Dual structure, Energy, Flexibility, Headquarters, London, Low-carbon, Portfolio, Returns, Shareholders, Shell, Transitions
The Economist (July 6)
A profound “energy transition is under way: from fossil fuels to clean energy. Of all the oil majors, Shell’s attempts to navigate it…are the most intriguing.” With a $52 billion acquisition of BG Group, Shell became “the biggest listed gas producer” while its oil reserves have dropped “lower than those of its Western peers…. Shell is bolder than its rivals in forecasting huge global demand for clean power over the next 30 years. And it is the only firm to link its executive’s pay to progress in reducing emissions across its operations.”
Tags: BG Group, Clean energy, Clean power, Energy, Executive pay, Fossil fuels, Gas, Oil majors, Reserves, Shell, Transition
The Economist (October 3)
“Shell’s retreat from the frozen north shows the new realities of ‘big oil.’” Shell announced its withdrawal from exploration in the Chukchi Sea where it had already invested $7 billion on a single exploratory well. “The decision boiled down to costs, financial and reputational. Most big oil firms face similar pressures” and appear likely postpone costly Arctic drilling.
Tags: Arctic drilling, Big oil, Chukchi Sea, Exploration, Reputation, Retreat, Shell
