Shell Sponsors London Climate Change Conference

R2uAVsWy_400x400
on

Senior officials from business, government, NGOs and academic institutions gathered in London this week for policy institute, the Chatham Houseโ€™s annual conference on climateย change.

The conference, held on 3-4 November, sought to โ€œexamine opportunities to raise ambition [on climate change] and convert this into resultsโ€ ahead of Decemberโ€™s COP 20 discussions inย Lima.

In addition to future climate negotiations, topics discussed included the benefits and costs of a low carbon economy as well as how to decarbonise โ€œkeyย sectorsโ€.

However, the event had a mixed bag of sponsors. Shell Oil was listed as its only corporate sponsor alongside the Climate & Development Knowledge Network, the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries as well as the Foreign & Commonwealth Office.

Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, did not hesitate to call out Shell for its โ€œJekyll and Hydeโ€ response to climate change, during his keynote speech at the event on 4ย November.

McKibben said: โ€œI didnโ€™t know Shell was sponsoring this conference when I agreed to do it, but Iโ€™m glad for the chance to say in public that Shell is among the most irresponsible companies onย earth.โ€

โ€œWhen they write the history of our time, the fact that Shell executives watched the Arctic melt and then led the rush to go drill for oil in that thawing north will provide the iconic example of the short-sighted greed that marks the richest people on ourย planet.โ€

Just this week Shell asked the U.S. government for a five year extension on its drilling licences in the Arctic waters north ofย Alaska.

asked the US government for aย five-year extensionย of its drilling leases in the Arctic waters north of Alaska – See more at: http://www.rtcc.org/2014/11/04/veteran-campaigner-slams-shells-jekyll-an…

Although the conference is held under Chatham House rules, McKibbenโ€™s speech is onย record.

โ€œWe won the argument about climate change 20 years ago but weโ€™ve been losing the fight ever since,โ€ McKibben said, adding it is the โ€œincredible vested interestsโ€ of fossil fuel companies that is holding back the movement to stop climate change.

โ€œChange requires power and money and the fossil fuel industry holds most of the power and almost all of the money,โ€ heย said.

Fossil fuel company representatives in the room however, refused the opportunity to reply to McKibbenโ€™s comments accusing them of being โ€œrogueย companies.โ€

Chatham House had no comment to add when asked why they chose to partner with Shell on theย event.

The conference comes on the heels of the UNโ€™s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changeโ€™s (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Synthesis Report published on 2ย November.

The IPCC report says that the use of fossil fuels should be completely phased out by 2100 with the exception of where carbon capture and storage isย used.

If the majority of our energy does not come from low-carbon sources by 2050, the world faces โ€œsevere, pervasive and irreversibleโ€ damage the IPCCย warns.

Picture: Platformย London

R2uAVsWy_400x400
Kyla is a freelance writer and editor with work appearing in the New York Times, National Geographic, HuffPost, Mother Jones, and Outside. She is also a member of the Society for Environmental Journalists.

Related Posts

Analysis
on

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.
on

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.
on

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.
on

Is the Gulf of Mexico the "single best opportunity" to store climate-warming gas โ€” or an existential threat to wildlife and people?

Is the Gulf of Mexico the "single best opportunity" to store climate-warming gas โ€” or an existential threat to wildlife and people?