In the burgeoning landscape of climate innovation and energy transition, the launch of Onward, a startup backed by Shell, has sparked a considerable amount of interest and scrutiny. Positioned as a catalyst for global energy innovation, Onward promises to connect thousands of innovators worldwide to address pressing energy and climate challenges. With Shell, a titan in the oil and gas industry, reporting $28 billion in profits last year, Onward’s emergence is both noteworthy and controversial. The company’s mission, as stated on its website, is to expedite the journey towards energy innovation, serving as a nexus for innovation, collaboration, and entrepreneurship, all while painting a compelling, evidence-based vision of the benefits of a net-zero future. The team behind Onward envisions a clean energy future filled with activities like kitesurfing, snorkeling, and hiking, reflecting a commitment to a sustainable and enjoyable life on Earth.
Despite the green veneer and progressive language used by Onward, a closer examination by Drilled and the Guardian reveals a different focus. Much of the platform’s current content and initiatives appear to lean towards enhancing oil and gas outcomes rather than pioneering new paths to sustainability. The “Projects” section of Onward’s site, ostensibly a job board for short-term positions, predominantly lists opportunities in oil and gas exploration, keeping the hiring companies anonymous. Among the projects described, nearly all are geared towards oil and gas production, with many archived jobs also aligning with this sector. Job postings seek expertise in areas like petroleum system assessment and subsurface fluid resource estimates along the US Gulf Coast, indicating a clear emphasis on traditional energy sectors.
Critics, including technology critic and podcast host Paris Marx, argue that initiatives like Onward enable companies like Shell to masquerade as part of the solution to climate change, rather than contributing to its acceleration. This critique is part of a broader discussion on the role of fossil fuel companies in the climate tech space. Shell, for example, has invested significantly in low-carbon energy solutions, with a reported 89% increase in such investments over the previous year. Similarly, other oil giants like Saudi Aramco and ExxonMobil have launched ambitious projects focusing on renewables, carbon capture, and futuristic fuels.
However, the sincerity and effectiveness of these ventures are under debate. The world’s leading climate authority has mandated that all oil and gas exploration must cease by 2030 to mitigate the worst effects of climate change. Despite this, major fossil fuel corporations, including Shell, under the leadership of new CEO Wael Sawan, are intensifying production and retracting prior climate commitments. This pivot towards increased oil production, even amidst record profits, raises questions about the industry’s commitment to a sustainable future.
Onward’s engagement with the media has been limited, with representatives offering scant details about the companies sponsoring their projects or how their job listings align with the stated goal of achieving a net-zero future. CEO Jeff Allyn’s comments to Axios emphasize the organization’s dedication to addressing complex challenges, such as “scope 3” emissions, through community engagement and innovation. This narrative of collaboration is a common thread in the oil and gas industry’s communication strategy, suggesting a collective effort to combat climate change.
Yet, critics argue that this facade of collaboration masks a deeper issue. Melissa Aronczyk, a professor of journalism and media at Rutgers University, highlights that the notion of equal stakeholder collaboration overlooks the conflicting interests at play. The inclusion of oil and gas companies and lobbyists at UN climate meetings, under the guise of collaboration, has been criticized for allowing these entities to obstruct necessary action. The narrative of an inclusive, all-hands-on-deck approach to solving the climate crisis is seen by some as a “Trojan horse,” granting legitimacy to those who may not be fully committed to the cause.
In summary, Onward’s launch represents a complex intersection of innovation, corporate interests, and environmental activism. While the initiative seeks to position itself as a leader in the energy transition, the underlying focus on traditional energy sectors and the involvement of major fossil fuel companies raise critical questions about the path to a sustainable future. The debate around Onward and similar projects underscores the challenges and contradictions inherent in reconciling the urgent need for climate action with the entrenched interests of the energy industry.
Source: The Guardian
