Fossil fuel vs renewable energy

Nilratan Halder | Published: July 09, 2023 20:20:29

Wael Sawan, chief executive officer (CEO) of Shell PLC, a giant oil company, has warned that slashing oil and gas production at this stage would be 'dangerous and irresponsible' as it would trigger soaring energy bill again. This in its turn will have an adverse impact on living standard of the global population as it did last year.
Quite naturally, he has come under fire from green campaigners and particularly Simon Stiell, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The head of the UN's climate change body has criticised Sawan for making such an 'irresponsible' comment.
Jamie Peters, head of climate at the Friends of the Earth has accused of the Shell boss of 'fuelling climate crisis and the soaring coast of energy'. In his scathing remark, he goes further to contend that the oil companies profit on the misery of ordinary people and are destroying the planet at the same time. The Shell CEO is now making a cynical case to lock everyone in a volatile fossil fuel market. He also points out the incompatibility of the Shell stand not to go by its earlier commitment to slash oil production by 1.0 to 2.0 per cent each year of this decade right at a time when the world has just experienced the hottest June on record and scorching heatwaves.
True, where the Shell chief's prime concern lies was made clear by himself when he did not mince words to say, "Ultimately, I am in the service of shareholder value". Notwithstanding his overriding concern for protection of the company's and its shareholders' interests, all his arguments cannot be refuted off-handed. His first contention is that a switch to renewable energy from fossil fuels is not happening first enough to replace those. His second point is even more compelling. He argues that the poorer and energy-scarce countries were 'at risk of being left behind in the transition to renewable energy' because these nations do not have the infrastructure required for the purpose. Then he cites the example of Bangladesh and Pakistan which lost out to rich European nations in the bidding war for gas in the international market at the peak crisis period in the aftermath of the war in Ukraine last year.
Indeed, these are hard realities the energy-poor and cash-starved countries are encountering still now, particularly for want of greenback. Notwithstanding the European Commission's policy on transition to clean energy, the European governments had to make a reverse journey on the use of coal. But this year, it is reported that they are likely to slash fossil fuel energy by 20 per cent. When the rich nations with the capacity to invest in renewable energy are still finding it hard, poorer countries with little or no infrastructure and technology are sure to find themselves in a more disadvantageous position. Even in Europe, different nations have different targets to meet the climate change goals, depending on their resources and facilities. The developing and underdeveloped nations are more handicapped depending on their resource base and ability to import technological support.
It is exactly at this point, the rich nations and the oil companies which have made outrageous profit on the misery of the poor can lend a helping hand. The Shell company's backing out of its commitment to slash its yearly output is unacceptable. But it has decided to go for further investment in oil production, instead. It is doubly unacceptable. It could, along with the rich nations, invest in the transferring process of technology to the poorer nations.
After all, the Paris Climate Agreement has to be respected and the temperature rise arrested at least below 2.0 degree Celsius above the pre-industrial level. It would have been better if the temperature could be limited below the 1.5 degree Celsius. Shell's decision is contradictory but world leaders must admit that they have failed to rise up to their commitment with matching actions. It is time, they abandoned their policies to protect interests of giant oil and gas companies and took a firm pro-people stand.