5 ms·
Shell has been very open in the last few years that they see themselves as an "energy" company and that they don't care very much if the energy comes from fossi
by WJW 6y ago
Shell has been very open in the last few years that they see themselves as an "energy" company and that they don't care very much if the energy comes from fossil fuels or from renewables, as long as consumers buy it from Shell. They've seen the writing on the wall and are moving to where the money will be in the future. Apart from this acquisition, they have also invested in wind parks (their offshore expertise is quite handy apparently), hydrogen electrolysers for damping renewable production peaks and several other large and capital intensive projects that they are very well positioned to take on.
The main concern seems to be whether they can make the cultural switch in management as there are quite a few "old hands" in middle management that are quite attached to the fossil fuel sector that they grew up with. On the other hand, the CEO and board seem fully on board so we'll see how it plays out. In the coming weeks with the annual report they are expected to present a new strategy document for the coming decade with more details on how they plan to go about it. This is a company that has tens of billions per year to invest in new energy projects, as well as some top tier talent. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with.
- rkangel 6y agoWhile this is a sensible strategy, I do retain some cynicism. "Have been very open about" can sometimes mean "our PR has been very good" while they privately lobby against anything renewable. Hopefully we can take what they're saying at face value though.
- WJW 6y agoCynicism is almost always a good idea. Companies like Shell (83k employees in 2019 according to wikipedia) are large enough that they can simultaneously have departments trying to diversify into renewables and also have different departments lobbying against renewables. Their willingness to invest billions of dollars in renewables and the surrounding infrastructure does make me hopeful though.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nashashmi 6y agoI always wonder why other companies did not take on this approach. When you dig up oil you get natural gas too. But oil and natural gas companies are seen in competition. Like wise when you exhaust an oil gas field you get free land for solar and wind. These things were such no Brainers.
- beauzero 6y agoMineral rights leases, I do not believe, are not extended to solar and wind in the USA. In the USA you don't necessarily own the land you are extracting resources from.
- cr1895 6y agoYou may like to read up on Orsted (formerly DONG). Formerly a major oil & coal energy producer, now one of the largest global players in green energy. It continues to be a remarkably successful transition.
- hetspookjee 6y agoThey're not so open about Nigeria and their responsibility there.
- cr1895 6y ago>The main concern seems to be whether they can make the cultural switch in management as there are quite a few "old hands" in middle management that are quite attached to the fossil fuel sector that they grew up with. Shell has recently made some very significant restructuring and reorganizing moves so I wonder how true this still is.
- jlawer 6y agoShell is in the middle of a restructure right now. From the top you can see many old Oil/Gas drilling/refining roles have been removed. Shell appear to be becoming more of an energy trading / retail organisation, as they view fossil fuels are being commodities that they can trade for and sell at a higher price with their brand name.