Shell aiming for net-zero emissions by 2050, in step with society
Net zero. By now most of us have heard this term, but it will be everywhere in the years to come. And for good reason.
Net zero means achieving a balance in the global energy system. It means greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, buildings, industry and power generation are significantly reduced. That the remaining emissions are captured at the source or absorbed, thanks to trees, land and other carbon sinks.
For the US to tackle climate change, it must achieve net zero emissions by the middle of this century. And we’re willing to do our part.
This year, Shell announced our ambition to be a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050 or sooner, in step with society.
A company known for producing oil and gas striving to support a net-zero world? Some will be skeptical. We get that. So let’s talk details on how we intend to pursue this ambition.
The fact is, Shell’s current business plans will not get us to net zero. Those plans will have to change, over time, as society and our customers also change.
The fact is, Shell’s current business plans will not get us to net zero. Those plans will have to change, over time, as society and our customers also change.
I look at it in terms of three buckets: First, we aim to reduce our own emissions – not just the way we power our facilities but across our whole supply chain. So by 2050, we aim to be net-zero from the manufacture of all our products – oil and gas but also chemicals and lubricants.
The second bucket is about reducing the carbon intensity of the products we sell. Giving our customers – that means both businesses who buy our products, as well as individual consumers – access to low- and zero-carbon fuel alternatives. So that could be biofuels for jets, or hydrogen for heavy-duty trucking, or renewable power for peoples’ homes.
And the third bucket means working closely with business partners about decarbonizing their particular sector of the economy. Or working with our customers to help them reduce their individual carbon footprint.
So now, you might be wondering: why has Shell decided to take this action?
So now, you might be wondering: why has Shell decided to take this action?
It’s the right thing to do, certainly, but we’re fundamentally a business. And we simply believe that being in the business of reducing GHG emissions over the coming decades will yield profits.
We see consumers wanting to reduce their carbon footprint, and so we expect them to see value in the solutions we offer. We see businesses and governments looking to reduce their carbon footprints too, and we can draw from Shell’s 100-year-plus experience as an energy provider to make that possible. We believe that by helping find low- and zero-carbon solutions today, we will have a stronger business position tomorrow.
This has been a challenging year. If we as a society have learned anything, it’s that we have to be adaptable. And as we move forward, adapting means striving for net zero. As the world charts its course, so will Shell.
For more information on our net-zero emissions ambition, visit: shell.us/netzeroambition
Executive Director at CV Motion Technology
3 年There is a new Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) that will get the entire world's emissions reduced to the goal set by President Biden for the United States, but only if it is installed in everything that uses an ICE today.?We need for the industry to start using the CV Motion Tech engine design that has successfully removed the crankshaft from the engine, resulting in one of the cleanest burning engines ever invented.?With no loss of power and much greater torque, highly efficient, longer lasting and just overall better for the environment. Runs so clean, a Catalytic Converter will no longer be needed in gasoline burning vehicles.?Would be a fantastic opportunity for the Oil industry to champion behind this revolutionary engine.?
Consultant
3 年This article is more clear than the embedded video, but O&G companies and industry representatives need to use more precise language and highlight impact of future energy costs.?This article does use the term GHG in a few places which is good, but the general use of terms like “emissions” or “carbon emissions” invokes a dirty carbon residue vision to the average person which is misleading.?The average person does not understand carbon cycle or carbon intensity nor the difference between GHG emissions and traditional pollutants.?The main GHG emission of concern from the combustion of hydrocarbons is CO2.?CO2 is more oxygen (70wt%) than carbon, it is colorless, tasteless, mainly inert and non toxic especially at atmospheric concentrations of today.?It is a GHG, but its GH effect diminishes logarithmically with higher concentration.?This does not mean we ignore it or other GHG’s, but we should be more descriptive when talking about emissions. This transition endeavor is going to be very expensive and will be funded by taxpayers and consumers, not only energy consumers but also the consumers of most products.?Part of the cost is demonstrated in the high cost of CO2 equivalent emission value in carbon programs like LCFS and reflected in the large cost of proposed legislation.?Additionally, the reduction in hydrocarbon use will be a hit to fuel tax revenue and more importantly the phase out of an abundant commodity.?Energy will become less of a commodity and more like a niche product that rations demand through higher price rather than creating demand.?This maybe worth it to a number of people, but O&G should be clear about it.??
Freelance R&D Consultant in High-Tech and Energy Transition. Parttime available.
3 年Gretchen Watkins Great ambition. However, the 3 buckets are not independent of each other. Bucket 3 will -hopefully- generate roadmaps that influence buckets 1 and 2. And I would really appreciate it if Shell would define a 4th bucket: a carbon capture, storage & (re-)use approach, preferably based on (re-)forestation. When will the roadmaps till 2050 be available ?
Reservoir Engineer | Computational Geoscience | CCUS |
3 年Dear Gretchen, All the best in this Net-zero achievement by 2050. However Shell will need a upgraded labor force to accomplish 2050' goal. How does Shell think to adress it?. Take time to make a turn of this magnitude of Shell's labor force. I am an oil & gas professional and since 10 years ago I foresaw that energy trend would change and come a future reality. Hence, since 10 years I have been adressing my career to an interdisciplinary one getting a MSc. in Mechanical Engineer (focused on computational fluid dynamic) and to finish a MSc, in Renewable Energy Systems Technology from Loughborough University (UK). I would like to have the opportunity to be part of Shell's journey.