The true cost of a barrel of oil

by Paul on Monday, 25 May 2009 · 2 comments

in Climate, Energy

oil refinery

Not every barrel of oil has the same carbon footprint – some extraction processes radically increase the amount of greenhouse gases which are released.

Greenpeace have been collaborating on research to identify the worst offenders, and the report (released to coincide with the company’s AGM) singles out Shell as the most carbon intensive oil company in the world, based on its total resources.

Shell tops the list for three reasons:

  • Its reliance on Nigerian crude oil, which is associated with huge levels of wasteful gas flaring
  • Its investments in highly energy intensive liquefied natural gas
  • Its massive gamble on Canada’s oil-bearing tar sands, for which the extraction process is so energy intensive that it produces up to five times more greenhouse gases than conventional oil

The bad news for Shell shareholders is that 30% of its total resources are now in tar sands. As the US moves to introduce carbon control legislation, and the world looks towards December’s Copenhagen summit for action to limit climate change, Shell is fighting a determined rearguard action – taking a lead in industry lobbying against similar measures being proposed by the Eurpean Union.

Investors are voicing their concerns

To be fair, tar sands are not just a problem for Shell. Investors around the world are voicing their concerns over tar sands investment.

30% of ConocoPhillips shareholders recently voted for a resolution demanding an assessment of the environmental impact of the company’s tar sands projects, and at the AGM of Norway’s Statoil’s annual meeting, significant support is expected for a motion calling for the company to end its tar sands investment altogether.

Shell’s tar sands liability and carbon exposure is currently greater than any other company, making a mockery of its claims to be leader on ‘responsible energy’.

It urgently needs to rethink its position. A strategy based on tar sands won’t just damage the climate, but will also increase risks to the company’s future and threaten the value of shareholders’ investments.

Download the report: Irresponsible Energy.

From Greenpeace UK

Bookmark and share with your social networks
  • Facebook
  • MySpace
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Netvibes
  • Mixx
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
Recommended reading:
  1. Green News Round-up #22
  2. Green News Round-up #11
  3. Green News Round-up #18
  4. Green News Round-up #21

2 comments… read them below or add yours now

1 John Pelley Monday, 25 May 2009 at 22:54

Excellent article. Thank you for sharing the information about Shell’s carbon footprint.

Reply

2 Go Eco Store Friday, 5 March 2010 at 16:56

We love festivals and we love helping to save the planet! The eco products from our company Go Eco Store contribute to not damaging the earth as our products are eco friendly. We offer a range of eco products including recycled products, organic products, natural products and eco gifts. click on our name for the link.

Reply

Have your say...

Previous post:

Next post: