Has Shell "answered the call"?

A few of the really big companies speak with a different voice from that of the others and, for that matter, different from that which they used themselves a few years ago. The CEO of Royal Dutch Shell recalls in three "hard facts":

1. The majority of the earth's population does not yet have access to the standard of living that is the norm in OECD countries today. They represent a huge potential for accelerating demand.
2. Cheap oil reserves are running out.
3. Coal is abundant (and represents energy security), which is a temptation for many countries to meet the surging demand. Even if CCS-technology succeeds on the scale needed, it will take decades to develop.

His conclusion, after having dismissed the possibility of renewables filling in due to the slow pace of their development and the size of the needs, is that energy efficiency is immensely important and requires all focus. "What is the point of producing ever more energy if we continue to waste most of it?" is his main question!

Consider that the chairman of Shell (and former CEO of Nokia) Jorma Ollila to energy efficiency as the main issue and played down the role of different supply technologies, including nuclear!

These reactions from a multinational business seem to be in line with advice from Lehman Bros that the winners of the future business have to be more concerned with climate issues. John Llewellyn, who wrote the report for Lehman Brothers, put it in these words when he spoke to the CEOs among their clients:

"Your sector, like most sectors, will doubtless survive. Many companies, too, will survive, though some will not - their assets will be taken over by more successful companies. But only some CEOs will survive, and those will be the ones who correctly foresee the implications of climate change, and climate change policy for their industry, and act accordingly."

Who dares to turn down such a challenge?