LONDON (Realist English). Shell, Aker BP, and Enbridge have exited a high-level climate advisory group after the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) circulated draft rules that would effectively bar oil and gas companies from developing new fossil fuel fields, according to internal documents seen by the Financial Times.
The companies withdrew from the expert panel tasked with shaping the global emissions reduction standard, ending a six-year effort to establish a sector-specific roadmap for reaching net zero. The SBTi is one of the most influential voluntary bodies in corporate climate governance, with firms from Apple to AstraZeneca seeking its endorsement for climate strategies.
A draft circulated in late 2023 proposed that companies submitting climate plans to the SBTi must cease developing new oil and gas fields by the time of submission — or by the end of 2027, whichever came first. It also called for a significant reduction in fossil fuel production. The proposal prompted backlash from energy majors, who argued the standard was unworkable.
Following the departures, the SBTi announced it would “pause” work on its oil and gas guidance, citing “capacity constraints” — but denied any connection to the industry’s withdrawal, calling reports of a link “without basis in reality.”
Shell, which had worked intermittently with the group since 2019, said its representative resigned after concluding the draft “did not reflect the industry view in any substantive way.” The company stated that while it remains committed to reaching net zero by 2050, any standard must “reflect society in a realistic way” and offer companies “sufficient flexibility.”
Norway’s Aker BP said it left the panel due to limited ability to influence the standard’s direction, adding the move “in no way reflects a lack of commitment to climate action.” Enbridge declined to comment.
The SBTi’s retreat comes as it also weakened guidance for banks and financial institutions, originally set to be released this week, on ending funding for new fossil fuel projects. The phase-out deadline has now been delayed to 2030, according to two people involved in the process. The revision was approved under the leadership of David Kennedy, a former EY partner who became SBTi’s chief executive in March.
“The more we delay, the more cover we are providing to big oil,” said a person who worked on both the oil and gas and financing guidelines.
SBTi defended its process, noting that its standards were developed through input from a broad base including public consultations, academics, NGOs, financial firms and corporate representatives. Nonetheless, critics argue that its shift undermines efforts to hold fossil fuel producers accountable.
The global scientific consensus has long held that to stay within a 1.5°C warming limit, no new oil and gas fields can be developed. Continued fossil fuel expansion, scientists warn, risks crossing irreversible climate tipping points and deepening ecological and economic damage.
Shell, while weakening its 2030 targets and scrapping its 2035 goal last year, has reaffirmed its commitment to net zero by 2050. The company remains under pressure from shareholders and climate groups to align its strategy with the Paris Agreement.
The SBTi’s next steps remain unclear. While it once called the oil and gas framework a top priority, internal communications suggest it is no longer on the immediate agenda.
