A Dutch appeals court has overturned a landmark ruling that ordered energy company Shell to cut its carbon emissions by net 45% by 2030 compared to 2019 levels. The court stated that 'protection against dangerous climate change is a human right.' This decision was a setback for environmental groups, including Friends of the Earth, who had celebrated the original ruling as a win for the climate. The ruling can be appealed to the Dutch Supreme Court.
Despite this ruling, the case has sparked discussions about the responsibility of major polluters in combating climate change. The court's decision comes as a 12-day U.N. climate conference is underway in Azerbaijan, focusing on funding emissions reduction and climate adaptation.
Climate activists faced a defeat after several courtroom victories in the past. The court's decision highlighted the ongoing debate on climate responsibility. Shell, a major polluter, has emitted a significant amount of carbon dioxide since 1854, contributing 2.1% of global emissions.
The court acknowledged Shell's duty to limit emissions but annulled the previous ruling due to insufficient consensus in climate science on specific reduction percentages for individual companies. The court stated that Shell's existing emission targets align with demands from environmental groups.
Shell's CEO welcomed the ruling, emphasizing the company's commitment to becoming a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050. The court's final judgment denied Friends of the Earth's claims and overturned the district court's decision.
This ruling has significant implications for the global energy transition and Shell's business strategy. The court's decision reflects the complexities of addressing climate change and the challenges in setting specific reduction targets for individual companies.
For more climate coverage, visit AP's climate coverage.
