Ruling forcing Shell to cut CO2 emissions did not take all the side of the science into account…
Clintel Intervenes In Friends Of The Earth’s Shell Lawsuit
By Andy May
Friends of the Earth (Netherlands) sued Royal Dutch Shell, using The Netherlands law that allows non-governmental organizations to sue over environmental or social issues that affect all citizens. They won a judgement that ordered Shell to reduce its emissions in 2030 by 45% compared to 2019. The reduction includes the emissions by Shell’s customers around the world, including you and me.
Shell has appealed the verdict, which is now before the Hague Court of Appeals.
Clintel has intervened (in Dutch here) as a third party in the case to make the case that the court did not consider evidence that climate change is not a danger to Dutch citizens.
The court ruled that Shell’s emissions threaten to cause “dangerous climate change,” a phrase and concept that even the IPCC does not use.
Shell did not contest this phrase, a phrase that is not supported by observational evidence. The only evidence is from unvalidated climate models that clearly do not match observations to date.
Sign the petition
Since this case affects Shell’s customers and suppliers worldwide, Clintel is asking people from around the world to sign a petition asking the court to consider the scientific evidence that Shell’s global emissions are not dangerous. Shell, and other companies are often terrified of adverse publicity if they challenge the popular, politically correct, and erroneous view that anthropogenic climate change is dangerous. This is despite evidence that it is not. Until Shell and other companies “grow a pair,” it is up to us to fight this nonsense.
Please sign their petition here, and if possible, donate to help them pay their legal costs.
7 responses to “Skeptic Group Clintel Intervenes On Friends Of The Earth Lawsuit Forcing Shell To Cut CO2 Emissions”
Shell are also being attacked by ClientEarth:
“We’ve started legal action against Shell’s Board of Directors, in a claim that seeks to hold them personally liable for not managing climate risk and not preparing for a net zero future.”
Can I suggest that they are asked to prove that CO2 is the cause of the warming that the planet has received since the end of the Little Ice age. They may only use real data and not the guess-work of models in their submission.
I question if any court would find that defendant has a duty to” manage climate risk,” however that is done. Are there established “management” guidelines? Has anybody been penalized for causing only a projected risk not a real injury? How certain is the risk? How risky is it without known harm having arisen from it? And what in blazes does “net zero” mean anyway? Has there been evidence to describe and qualify this hallucinatory nirvana – apparently a quixotic goal, not a recordable condition? It all sounds like more fairy-tale fantasizing of unhinged “eco-chondriacs.” At English common law Shell may have a snappy defense of demurrer for failure to state a cause of action.
The only actual threat to humanity is the climate policy advocated by all those psychopaths. When will they be held accountable of all the arm they caused and are causing to the global population ?
Take away the ‘S’ in Shell, what do you have?
Fiends from Hell would sue Satan for Hell being too hot.
Friends of the Earth can stop living in dwellings, stop using electricity, stop using hydrocarbons, stop being hypocrites.
Go live in the wilderness where Friends of the Earth belong.
You won’t be missed. Good luck to ya!
Top UK Oil And Gas Producer Backs Out Of Licensing Because Of Windfall Tax
There is a Shell snippet :
Windfall Tax Puts Shell’s $30B UK Investment Plan At Risk
There is Wind Power and Windfall obscene profits, and now, horror of horrors Windfall Tax!
Looks like Shell et. al. have hugely benefited for both geopolitical and energy political idiocy.
Citizens have already paid!
Considering oil baron Rockefeller’s founding of the Club of Rome and the Davos Great Reset. Shell’s CEO John Loudon was right there with Maurice Strong.
And Royal Duch Shell CEO Jeroen ven der Veer in Feb 2007 called for a global cap-and-trade system, Reuters reported.
Anyone signing MUST demand an explanation from Royal Dutch Shell on why they founded the Panda and Petrol WWF, which started the crazy environmental stampede!
Face it: All Northern EU industries must relocate production, assets, and headquarters outside that zone asap. The Dutch and Germans have really gone off the deep end… the UK, Denmark, Sweden are not far behind.