Climate Lobbying Overview: Since 2015, Shell has become more positive across different areas of climate policy, although it does continue to simultaneously lobby for policy to advance fossil fuel production and consumption, particularly gas. It also retains membership to various trade groups that directly contradict Shell's own position.

Top-line messaging on climate policy: In its Climate-related Policy Positions paper, updated in April 2020, Shell 10 Point Plan it strongly supports the goal of the Paris Agreement to limit the average rise in global temperatures to well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. In 2019, CEO Ben Van Beurden stated for Green Industrial Revolution.'Green Deal’ the European Climate Law, which formally legislates the net zero by 2050 target. Shell has also stated support for the implementation of the in the EU and for UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson's 'Green Deal’ the European Climate Law, which formally legislates the net zero by 2050 target. Shell has also stated support for the implementation of the in the EU and for UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson's 10 Point Plan it strongly supports the goal of the Paris Agreement to limit the average rise in global temperatures to well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. In 2019, CEO Ben Van Beurden stated for Green Industrial Revolution.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Throughout 2018-2020, the company has offered broad support for the need for carbon pricing policies, although its detailed engagement on specific carbon pricing policies appears to be mixed. In 2020, on its corporate website Shell appears to both carbon taxes and emissions trading as forms of carbon pricing mechanisms. Despite this, in 2018, US subsidiary Shell Oil lobbied klzzwxh:0004 to strengthen the ambition of the Cap and Trade scheme in California. Furthermore, in 2018, Shell’s CEO Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Throughout 2018-2020, the company has offered broad support for the need for carbon pricing policies, although its detailed engagement on specific carbon pricing policies appears to be mixed. In 2020, on its corporate website Shell appears to both carbon taxes and emissions trading as forms of carbon pricing mechanisms. Despite this, in 2018, US subsidiary Shell Oil lobbied klzzwxh:0004 to strengthen the ambition of the Cap and Trade scheme in California. Furthermore, in 2018, Shell’s CEO reforming a carbon tax policy in Washington prior to a public vote. In 2020, however, it advocated the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) to be aligned with the EU's more ambitious 2030 target as well as the net zero by 2050 target. Additionally, in 2020, Shell reforming a carbon tax policy in Washington prior to a public vote. In 2020, however, it advocated the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) to be aligned with the EU's more ambitious 2030 target as well as the net zero by 2050 target. Additionally, in 2020, Shell advocated finalizing Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which would establish the framework for international emissions trading. While Shell stated Article 6 could achieve Overall Mitigation of Global Emissions, it has also argued for the inclusion of offsets as part of the mechanism.

In 2019-2020, Shell appears to have been broadly supportive of emissions standards and targets. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0004 the Netherlands’ 2030 emissions reduction target of 49%, stating it was challenging yet offered the company 'opportunities'. In 2020, Shell pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018. pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018. pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018. pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018. pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018. pushing raising the EU Commission's 2030 GHG target to 55%, however, in its response to the 2030 Climate Target Plan in June 2020, Shell appeared to promote a GHG emissions target (50-55%) than that originally proposed by the Commission. In 2019, Shell klzzwxh:0001 to tighten rather than weaken methane regulations, and in July 2020 Shell called upon policymakers in the EU to implement measures to klzzwxh:0002 methane emissions across the full natural gas supply chain. However, the company previously with Trump Administration officials along with the in 2017-2018 to discuss methane, in 2018 that it advocated “fixing” the EPA’s Obama-era methane rule to make it “workable”. This suggests Shell met with the Trump Administration to weaken the Obama-era methane regulations. Similarly, in 2018, Shell klzzwxh:0001 the rollback of US Fuel Economy Standards despite being on the board of the klzzwxh:0002, which appears to have played a significant role in for their weakening in 2018.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Regarding the energy mix, Shell appears to the development of low-carbon and clean technology including through the electrification of transport. At the same time, however, Shell also continues to push a role for fossil fuels in the energy mix, particularly gas. In 2018, the company klzzwxh:0002 the EU commission to embed natural gas in the EU’s future energy mix. Between 2017-18, the company also klzzwxh:0003 US policymakers in support of opening new areas of US federal land for oil and gas exploration and production. In its Climate-related Policy Positions, updated in April 2020, Shell states klzzwxh:0004 for low-carbon electrification of the energy system, however, it also appears to support a long-term role for gas in the energy mix. In its 2019 Sustainability report, Shell also Positioning on Energy Transition: Regarding the energy mix, Shell appears to the development of low-carbon and clean technology including through the electrification of transport. At the same time, however, Shell also continues to push a role for fossil fuels in the energy mix, particularly gas. In 2018, the company klzzwxh:0002 the EU commission to embed natural gas in the EU’s future energy mix. Between 2017-18, the company also klzzwxh:0003 US policymakers in support of opening new areas of US federal land for oil and gas exploration and production. In its Climate-related Policy Positions, updated in April 2020, Shell states klzzwxh:0004 for low-carbon electrification of the energy system, however, it also appears to support a long-term role for gas in the energy mix. In its 2019 Sustainability report, Shell also stated a continued role for oil in the energy mix. Most recently, in August 2020, it was reported Shell's Vice President of Exploration and Transformation 'To meet growing energy demand, hydrocarbons will remain a part of the energy mix for decades to come.' stated a continued role for oil in the energy mix. Most recently, in August 2020, it was reported Shell's Vice President of Exploration and Transformation 'To meet growing energy demand, hydrocarbons will remain a part of the energy mix for decades to come.'

Industry Association Governance: Shell , Australian Industry Greenhouse Network over its indirect influence through industry associations. In April 2019, Shell published its first review of its industry association memberships and their alignment on climate change. The company identified one case of material misalignment and left , . However, Shell is still a member of these associations, which appear to continue to actively lobby against progressive climate policy, as well as other associations identified as aligned including , Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association. In April 2021, Shell published a further update to this review in which it identified one further case of material misalignment with the and , and International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, placing its membership of this association under review, with a final decision to be announced October 2021. In addition, Shell identified some misalignment with seven groups, including the ).Industry Association Governance: Shell , Australian Industry Greenhouse Network over its indirect influence through industry associations. In April 2019, Shell published its first review of its industry association memberships and their alignment on climate change. The company identified one case of material misalignment and left , . However, Shell is still a member of these associations, which appear to continue to actively lobby against progressive climate policy, as well as other associations identified as aligned including , Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association. In April 2021, Shell published a further update to this review in which it identified one further case of material misalignment with the and , and Australian Industry Greenhouse Network over its indirect influence through industry associations. In April 2019, Shell published its first review of its industry association memberships and their alignment on climate change. The company identified one case of material misalignment and left , . However, Shell is still a member of these associations, which appear to continue to actively lobby against progressive climate policy, as well as other associations identified as aligned including , Australian Industry Greenhouse Network over its indirect influence through industry associations. In April 2019, Shell published its first review of its industry association memberships and their alignment on climate change. The company identified one case of material misalignment and left , . However, Shell is still a member of these associations, which appear to continue to actively lobby against progressive climate policy, as well as other associations identified as aligned including , Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association. In April 2021, Shell published a further update to this review in which it identified one further case of material misalignment with the and , and International Association of Oil and Gas Producers, placing its membership of this association under review, with a final decision to be announced October 2021. In addition, Shell identified some misalignment with seven groups, including the ).