Many companies speak out of both sides of their faces. Open secrets is a great place to find out more balanced assessment of campaign contributions. Here is fo

Many companies speak out of both sides of their faces. Open secrets is a great place to find out more balanced assessment of campaign contributions. Here is for Shell Oil: https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs/shell-oil/C00039503/summary/2020 https://www.opensecrets.org/political-action-committees-pacs... I like how the PAC is called "SHELL USA, INC. EMPLOYEES' POLITICAL AWARENESS COMMITTEE," which is typical political doublespeak. History shows that Shell spent at least 2 to 1 on Republican versus Democrat campaigns. https://www.npr.org/2023/06/14/1182102392/shell-plans-to-increase-fossil-fuel-production-despite-its-net-zero-pledge https://www.npr.org/2023/06/14/1182102392/shell-plans-to-inc... Shell is claiming it will zero greenhouse gases by 2050 but is currently increasing the production of fossil fuel products. In investment groups evaluation of shell https://www.climateaction100.org/company/royal-dutch-shell/ https://www.climateaction100.org/company/royal-dutch-shell/ There are too many links to court cases against Shell for environmental damage to list here. At the end of the day, there has been enough validated investigative reporting on oil companies and their sabotage of climate change actions to discount the Guardian's article. There's too much money in fossil fuels, too many people getting a cut, and too many 401(k)s to be able to decimate the fossil fuel industry.