Shell's Latest Marketing Scam

Summary

This video script exposes Shell's controversial marketing campaigns, including their partnership with 'Mythbusters' science educator Carrie Byron, to promote oil drilling platforms. It delves into Shell's carbon offset scheme, where customers can pay an extra 2-3 cents per liter for 'climate neutral gas.' The script scrutinizes the REDD+ projects Shell supports, questioning their credibility and effectiveness in reducing emissions. It highlights issues like manipulated carbon credits, the involvement of intermediaries, and the challenges in verifying real emission reductions. The script concludes by emphasizing the need for a systemic shift towards renewable energy, rather than relying on carbon offsets, and criticizes Shell's greenwashing tactics.

Takeaways

• 😷 Shell has been criticized for greenwashing, promoting their oil drilling platforms as 'super mega awesome' despite a history of undermining climate action policies.
• 🌱 The company offers 'climate neutral gas' in several countries, allowing customers to offset emissions by paying an extra 2 to 3 cents per liter of fuel.
• 💸 Shell's carbon offset scheme involves purchasing carbon credits from forest conservation projects, which are then used to offset the CO2 emissions from gasoline production and consumption.
• 🌳 The Ciera Azul project in Peru and the Kutai Project in Indonesia are two forest conservation projects featured by Shell, but both have faced scrutiny over their methods and claims.
• 🔍 The script delves into the murky world of carbon offsets, revealing issues like manipulated numbers, questionable investment funds, and false promises.
• 💼 Companies like Shell often work with intermediaries to buy carbon credits, which can lead to inflated prices and profits for middlemen rather than direct support for conservation projects.
• 🌿 Indigenous communities in areas like the Peruvian Amazon have been protecting forests for generations, but their rights and involvement in conservation projects are often overlooked.
• 🚫 Studies have shown that many REDD+ projects do not significantly reduce deforestation, and some are based on shaky assumptions and calculations.
• 🌍 Protecting forests is crucial, but tying support to carbon credits may not be the most effective approach; instead, substantial funding from industrialized nations is needed.
• 🛑 Shell's focus on carbon offsets and marketing claims of climate neutrality distracts from the need for systemic change and the company's ongoing investment in fossil fuels.

Q & A

What is Shell's recent marketing campaign involving Carrie Byron from Mythbusters?

Shell's recent marketing campaign involves a partnership with science educator Carrie Byron from Mythbusters to showcase the company's oil drilling platforms and how deep water energy works.

What is the criticism against Shell's involvement in carbon offset projects?

The criticism against Shell's involvement in carbon offset projects includes concerns about greenwashing, questionable calculations, and the involvement in projects that may not be as effective as claimed in reducing emissions or protecting forests.

How does Shell's carbon offset program work for customers in various countries?

In several countries, Shell offers customers the option to offset their emissions by paying an extra 2 to 3 cents per liter of fuel. Shell contributes an unspecified amount, and this money is used for projects like protecting primary forests.

What is the role of REDD+ in Shell's carbon offset strategy?

REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) plays a role in Shell's carbon offset strategy by providing a framework for projects that aim to protect forests and generate carbon credits, which Shell can then use to offset emissions from its operations.

What are the issues with the Ciera Azul project in Peru as featured in Shell's campaign?

The Ciera Azul project in Peru is criticized for its shaky calculations based on estimated population growth and theoretical deforestation rates. It's also noted that the area was already a protected National Park, and the indigenous communities living there were not properly consulted or involved in the project.

What is the controversy surrounding the Katangan project in Indonesia?

The Katangan project in Indonesia is controversial due to its questionable assumptions about the threat of deforestation from the popwood industry. Investigations have shown that the project area and large parts of the region were already protected, and the threat was exaggerated to sell carbon credits.

How do intermediaries play a role in the carbon credit market mentioned in the script?

Intermediaries in the carbon credit market act as middlemen between corporations like Shell and forest conservation projects. They are often involved in selling carbon credits at a profit, and there are concerns about the transparency and credibility of these transactions.

What is the criticism against the use of carbon credits by companies like Shell?

The criticism is that the use of carbon credits by companies like Shell can be seen as a way to greenwash their image and distract from the need for more substantial climate action. It also shifts the responsibility for emissions reductions onto individual consumers rather than focusing on systemic change.

What is the role of organizations like Vera in the carbon credit market?

Organizations like Vera play a significant role in the carbon credit market by certifying projects and issuing carbon credits. However, there have been criticisms about the accuracy and reliability of their methods and the potential for greenwashing.

How does the script suggest that the carbon offset market is flawed?

The script suggests that the carbon offset market is flawed due to the ease with which companies can purchase carbon credits without necessarily achieving real emission reductions, the involvement of intermediaries that may prioritize profit over environmental impact, and the lack of oversight and regulation in the market.

What is the script's stance on the effectiveness of carbon offsets in combating climate change?

The script is critical of the effectiveness of carbon offsets, suggesting that they are often not credible and can be used by companies to appear green without fundamentally changing their business practices or significantly reducing their emissions.