Riccardo Liguori The British oil giant will not have to reduce CO2 emissions by 45% by 2030, as established by a previous ruling. A decision that slows down the fight against climate change and raises questions about the role of companies in the energy transition
This is a setback for environmental activists and all those concerned with the future of our home, Earth: On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal in The Hague ruled in favor of Shell, setting aside the historic 2021 ruling that ordered the oil major to reduce its CO2 emissions by 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels. Shell, which had consistently disagreed with the first-instance ruling, insists that it is up to governments-not individual companies-to tackle the climate crisis.
The 2021 ruling is a historic victory
In 2021, the District Court of The Hague ordered the British-Dutch oil giant to drastically reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The decision was celebrated by activists from all over the world, setting a precedent for potential lawsuits against other fossil fuel companies.
The judgment had been built on a simple principle: companies have an obligation to respect human rights; and climate change presents a clear and direct danger to those rights. One of the largest producers of fossil fuels in the world, Shell was found to owe a duty of care to use its resources meaningfully in combating global warming.
Shell’s appeal and the court’s new decision
Shell appealed that decision, and the Court of Appeal has overturned the original ruling. It ruled that it’s not possible to demand from one company a certain level of reduction in emissions.
The court said, “There is insufficient consensus among climate scientists about a specific percentage of emissions reductions that one company should realize.” Moreover, it would be discriminatory and ineffective to set this target only for Shell, as others may simply move in and fill the market gap left by it.
Defeat for climate justice?
The decision of the Court of Appeal now marks a severe defeat in climate justice. If corporations cannot be held accountable for their emissions, then who can?
Environmental groups have decried the ruling as a step backward in the fight against climate change. “It hurts,” said Donald Pols, director of Milieudefensie, the Dutch branch of Friends of the Earth, which spearheaded the lawsuit against Shell. “It could have been an important step, but the battle is far from over.”
The ruling raises critical questions about what part corporations will play in the energy transition. If it is impossible to legally compel them to reduce their emissions, how are they to pull their weight in the fight against climate change?
Milieudefensie will be considering an appeal to the Dutch Supreme Court. Meanwhile, this decision may have a wider ramifications on other similar lawsuits underway in other countries.
It is an energy transition that requires commitment between governments, businesses, and citizens. On one hand, the discouraging decision by the Court of Appeal should inspire new efforts in the development of strategies and tools to sue corporations to ensure accountability and hurry along the shift toward a low-carbon economy.
