GLOBAL: Big Oil lets sun set on renewables

Publisher Name: 
Guardian (UK)

Shell, the oil company that recently trumpeted its commitment to a low

carbon future by signing a pre-Bali conference communique, has quietly

sold off most of its solar business.



The move, taken with rival BP's decision last week to invest in the world's

dirtiest oil production in Canada's tar sands, indicates that Big Oil

might be giving up its flirtation with renewables and going back to its roots.



Shell and BP are among the biggest producers of greenhouse gases in the

world, but both have been keen to paint themselves green through a series

of clean fuel initiatives.



BP, under its former chief executive, John Browne, promised to go "beyond

petroleum" while Shell has spent millions advertising its serious interest in

the future of the environment.



But at a time when interest in solar power is greater than ever, with the

world's first "solar city" being built at Phoenix, Arizona, a small

announcement from Environ Energy Global of Singapore revealed that it

had bought Shell's photovoltaic operations in India and Sri Lanka, with more

than 260 staff and 28 offices, for an undisclosed sum.



The sell-off, to be followed by similar ones in the Philippines and

Indonesia, comes after another major disposal executed in a low-key way last year, when Shell hived off its solar module production business. The division, with 600 staff and manufacturing plants in the US, Canada and Germany, went

to Munich-based SolarWorld. Shell has however formed a manufacturing

link, with Saint-Gobain, and promised to build one plant in Germany.



The Anglo-Dutch oil group confirmed yesterday that it had pulled out of its

rural business in India and Sri Lanka, saying it was not making enough

money.



"It was not bringing in any profit for us there so we transferred it to

another operator. The buyer will be able to take it to the next level," said a

spokeswoman at Shell headquarters in London.



The oil group said it was continuing to move its renewables interests into a

mainstream business and hoped to find one new power source that would

"achieve materiality" for it. Shell continues to invest in a number of

wind farm schemes, such as the London Array offshore scheme, which has

government approval. Shell has also been concentrating its efforts on

biofuels, but declined to say whether it had given up on solar power even

though many smaller rivals continue to believe the technology has a bright

future.



Environmental groups have always accused Shell of using clean energy

initiatives as "greenwash" to deflect criticism from its core carbon

operations, especially tar sands. The latest pull-out has annoyed rival

business leaders at London-based Solar Century and local Indian operation,

Orb Energy, who fear the impact of a high-profile company selling off solar

business. Jeremy Leggett, chief executive of Solarcentury and a leading

voice in renewable energy circles, said Shell was undermining the credibility

of the business world in its fight against global warming.



"Shell and Solar Century were among the 150 companies that recently

signed up to the hard-hitting Bali Declaration. It is vital that companies

act consistently with the rhetoric in such declarations, and as I have told Shell

senior management on several occasions, an all-out assault on the

Canadian tar sands and extracting oil from coal is completely inconsistent

with climate protection.



"This latest evidence of half-heartedness or worse in Shell's renewables

activities leaves me even more disappointed. Unless fossil-fuel energy

companies evolve their core activities meaningfully, we are in deep trouble,"

he said.



Damian Miller, former director of Shell Solar's rural operations and now

chief executive of Orb Energy, said Shell was missing an opportunity by pulling

out at a time when renewables markets were starting to mature in the

developing world. He alleged some customers were complaining of being

abandoned by Shell and worried about the servicing of equipment they could

expect from Environ. "We see former Shell customers who are highly

disappointed not to be receiving proper service for the solar systems they

have invested in. These customers have often invested 20-30% of their

annual income in a system to ensure they have some minimum amount of

lighting and access to radio, TV, or a fan," said Miller.



He added that the oil majors, including Shell, had invested time and energy

in promoting their plans for renewable energy in the press and on TV, but

were not able to lead the transformation the world needs towards renewable

energy and energy efficient solutions.



Shell declined to comment on these criticisms or talk about where its

priorities lay. But the chief executive, Jeroen van der Veer, did make a

number of comments last summer which could have paved the way for a

change in policy. Alternative energy sources such as renewables will not fill

the gap, he argued, forecasting that even with technological breakthroughs

they could give supply only 30% of global energy by the middle of the

century. "Contrary to public perceptions, renewable energy is not the silver

bullet that will soon solve all our problems," he said.



Meanwhile, BP has been accused by Greenpeace Canada of lining itself up

to help commit "the biggest environmental crime in history". This follows its

decision to swap assets with Husky Oil, giving it an entrance ticket to the

Alberta tar sands, which are said to be five times more energy-intensive to

extract compared to traditional oil.



John Browne, the group's former chief executive, had said BP would not

follow Shell into tar sands as he established an alternative energy division

and pledged to take the group "beyond petroleum." The new boss, Tony

Hayward, has pointed the corporate supertanker in a new direction although

his public relations minders insist BP remains committed to exploring the

potential of renewables.



"Tony Hayward has been part of the management team at BP for many

years and has endorsed the low-carbon strategy that involved BP creating

its alternative energy business late in 2005. We are spending $8bn (£4bn)

over ten years and are pressing ahead with 450 megawatts of wind

production capacity in the US," said a spokesman. "The tar sands deal in

Canada does not represent a change in direction, it was just a very good

opportunity which represents a broadening of the portfolio."



Greenpeace climate campaigner Joss Garman said: "If Shell is to survive

the climate change age... it needs to become not just an oil company but an

energy company. One wonders if Shell's executives have noticed what's

happening in Bali or if we'll see slick adverts on TV boasting about their

retreat from renewables. Probably not."

AMP Section Name:Energy
  • 183 Environment
  • 190 Natural Resources