Intervention too strong?

The climate verdict against Shell and its consequences

Mitte Mai machten Demonstranten in den Niederlanden auf die Umweltverschmutzung durch den Öl- und Gaskonzern Shell aufmerksam.

(Bild: AFP/ANP/Bart Maat)

For the first time, a private company has been ordered to implement the Paris climate targets agreed by the government. What this means for the environment and the economy - an overview.

"The fossil age is coming to an end", comments the German Association for the Environment and Nature Conservation on the court ruling handed down by the District Court of The Hague against the oil and gas company Shell on Wednesday. At the beginning of May, the German Constitutional Court ruled that the state must take stricter measures to protect the climate. A court in Australia also ruled that the potential damage to the climate for younger people must be taken into account when building a coal-fired power plant.

What do the German and Dutch rulings have in common?
In both cases, the court found that the state or the company is responsible for climate protection in the long term and beyond its own immediate sphere. The German case is about the right of future generations to a clean future. In the case of Shell, the court found that the obligation applies not only to the company itself, but also to suppliers and end customers. The British-Dutch company "must play its part in the fight against dangerous climate change".

How does the Shell ruling differ from the German ruling?
The oil and gas company is the first private company to be obliged to implement the climate targets agreed by governments. State-owned companies had already been convicted in the Netherlands before, but similar lawsuits against private companies had previously always been decided against the plaintiffs.

Are lawsuits against other companies likely? 
Yes, the court in The Hague referred to this in its ruling. Shell had argued that reducing its emissions would only lead to other companies filling the gap. The court countered that responsibility could not be shifted to others - they had the same obligation.

The consequences of the ruling against Shell are considerable.

(Bild: AFP)

Is Shell also responsible for its suppliers and end customers? 
Only indirectly. There are targets for its own CO2 emissions that the company must adhere to. There is a "best-effort obligation" for customers and partners: Shell must "try its best" and, for example, offer a wider range of alternative energy sources.

Can companies claim to offset their emissions through greenhouse gas certificates? 
No, says environmental lawyer Erika Wagner. The certificates do not protect against an environmental lawsuit, as such a lawsuit is about other legal interests, such as health.

Is the ruling already having an impact on other companies? 
Yes, the two US oil companies ExxonMobil and Chevron are coming under pressure from shareholders to focus more on sustainable energy. On Wednesday, for example, several members of the climate protection activist group Engine No. 1 were elected to the board of directors of ExxonMobil.

Facts

According to the District Court of The Hague (Netherlands), Shell must reduce CO2 emissions by a net 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2019. Environmental organizations and 17,000 citizens had sued the company for investing in the extraction of oil and natural gas. Shell is responsible for the emission of 1.6 billion tons of CO2 annually, making it one of the biggest polluters. The company intends to appeal, but the court ruled that the judgment applies immediately.

Kronen Zeitung