A Crack in the Shell

The report 'A Crack in the Shell' by the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) uses internal documents to demonstrate that Royal Dutch Shell had early and urgent notice of climate risks associated with fossil fuels. It highlights a dichotomy between Shell's internal scientific understanding—which acknowledged the link between CO2 and global warming as early as the 1950s and 60s—and its public efforts to sow doubt through industry groups like the Global Climate Coalition and the American Petroleum Institute. The document further argues that Shell continues this pattern by promoting the 'Sky Scenario' to appear aligned with the Paris Agreement while continuing to invest in fossil fuel expansion, including in the Arctic.

• Shell had early and repeated notice of climate risks linked to its products, with evidence dating back to 1958 when a Shell executive reported on industry research into fossil carbon in the atmosphere.
• In 1962, Shell's Chief Geology Consultant, Marion King Hubbert, produced a report acknowledging that the increase of CO2 from fossil fuels could cause a 'secular climatic change' leading to higher average temperatures and profound ecological effects, while suggesting the maximum use of solar energy.
• A confidential 1988 internal report titled 'The Greenhouse Effect' explicitly calculated that fossil fuels marketed and used by the Shell Group accounted for 4% of global CO2 emissions from combustion in 1984.
• Shell's internal awareness of climate risks led the company to take protective measures for its own infrastructure, such as raising a $3 billion natural gas platform by one or two meters in 1989 to account for sea level rise.
• Despite internal knowledge, Shell participated in a decades-long campaign of climate denial and obstruction through memberships in groups such as the Global Climate Coalition (GCC), the American Petroleum Institute (API), the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), and the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA).
• The report argues that Shell's 'Sky Scenario' is a misleading model that purports to meet Paris Agreement goals but relies on unproven carbon capture technologies and contradicts the company's actual investment plans, which continue to project increases in fossil fuel use through 2060.

APA

Feit, S., & Muffett, C. (2018). A Crack in the Shell. Center for International Environmental Law. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/A-Crack-in-the-Shell-April-2018.pdf

Chicago

Feit, Steven, and Carroll Muffett. A Crack in the Shell. Center for International Environmental Law, 2018. https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/A-Crack-in-the-Shell-April-2018.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Feit |first1=Steven |last2=Muffett |first2=Carroll |title=A Crack in the Shell |publisher=Center for International Environmental Law |date=April 2018 |url=https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/A-Crack-in-the-Shell-April-2018.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{feit2018crack, author = {Feit, Steven and Muffett, Carroll}, title = {{A Crack in the Shell}}, institution = {Center for International Environmental Law}, year = {2018}, month = apr, url = {https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/A-Crack-in-the-Shell-April-2018.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }