Clash between Repsol and Greenpeace. The CEO of Repsol, Josu Jon Imaz, has accused this environmental organization of being “responsible” for the increase in CO2 emissions in the world, which he attributed to “its ideology” and “its dogma.” Specifically, Repsol points out that Greenpeace favors the interests of the coal sector when it seeks to block the development of gas and oil (in its fight against warming). Their argument is that if oil and gas production stops, Europe will be more energy dependent. Greenpeace, for its part, reiterated its commitment to renewables and accuses Repsol of “being, year after year, the leading generator of climate change in Spain.”
Big oil and the influential environmental organization have engaged in an unusual confrontation and have taken to the extreme an enmity that has gone from latent to more than manifest.
The CEO of Repsol, Josu Jon Imaz, attacked Greenpeace this Friday, accusing it of acting dogmatically and favoring the interests of companies in the electricity sector. He did so at the ordinary general meeting of Repsol shareholders, where a representative of Greenpeace intervened and where this NGO launched a harsh blow by pointing out Repsol as the first CO2 emitter in Spain.
“You are responsible, from your ideology, from your dogma and many times from your defense of interests such as those of the electricity lobby, which are often combined. “You are the ones most responsible at this time for the increase in CO2 emissions in the world,” Imaz said at the company’s general meeting of shareholders when asked by representatives of Ethical Finance and Greenpeace.
The manager argued that these organizations are responsible for the increase in CO2 emissions by “putting pressure on financial institutions and investors so that they do not invest in oil and gas, and therefore do not undertake the financing of projects.”
It even disgraced Greenpeace that with its attitude it blocked development in emerging countries by forcing these nations to turn to coal. “(These nations), of course, need energy and what do they do? Obviously, because they have to feed their people, they have to heat their houses, they have to move, they have to feed their companies, they resort to the only energy source that they can afford, which is coal, and you are responsible, Greenpeace, Ethical Finance and many people like you,” he added.
Imaz defended the need to guarantee security of supply with ”affordable energy that families can pay for and that companies can buy so that they can compete, so that they can create industrial employment and so that we have a society in which people can get paid good”.
His thesis is that if Repsol stopped producing oil and gas, “the first thing that will happen is that we will generate more dependence in Europe.”
”I ask you: is it ethical to reinforce Putin in this way, as you are doing, saying that we do not have to produce gas so that Europe continues to have difficulty accessing the resources that we need for the European energy matrix, so that Families can have heating at home, so that industries can feed themselves? “Is this ethical?” she questioned.
For this reason, he warned that if oil and gas production stops “the price will increase”, and this would negatively impact “European families” and the industry.
”And let me tell you that this is not ethical, it is not ethical to close your eyes to the social reality of families and companies that cannot pay their energy bills,” he stated.
”We are going to continue with our commitment to decarbonization, because we are convinced that it is also the way to generate value for shareholders. But we are going to continue producing oil and gas at the same time, because the world needs them,” he indicated.
Coinciding with the celebration of the general meeting of shareholders of Repsol, a group of Greenpeace activists went to the Municipal Congress Palace of Madrid to denounce “the damage that (this multinational) causes to health, the environment and general security, its business model, based on oil and gas.”
Greenpeace denounces that “despite its marketing as a sustainable company,” Repsol “continues to be, year after year, the leading generator of climate change in Spain.”
According to a report from the Sustainability Observatory, the oil company is responsible for 62% of the emissions of all IBEX35 companies, followed by Naturgy (15%), Iberdrola (7%) and Endesa (4%). Furthermore, another InfluenceMap report, which analyzes the historical responsibility of the largest fossil corporations in the climate crisis, shows that Repsol is among the first 50 largest global polluters since the industrial revolution (1854–2022).
The Greenpeace organization maintains that this company “seems to care little about the destruction of nature and the human damage that the climate emergency is causing, generated mainly by fossil fuels,” and of which the more than 70,000 deaths in Europe would be proof. in 2022 due to heat or disasters caused by drought, floods or fires, according to a statement from this organization.
Imaz presented its 2024-2027 strategic plan to the Board, in which it reiterates its objectives, for 2030 and 2050, to continue providing fossil energy in a “safe” and “cheap” manner.
However, Greenpeace blames the company for saying that while “millions of families struggle to pay the increase in energy prices, the company accumulates extraordinary profits, quarter after quarter, and threatens to leave the country if taxes are raised.” .
Greenpeace replies that “the best alternative, renewable and citizen energies, as they provide safer, more democratic and cheaper energy in the face of climate insecurity and speculative volatility linked to the extraction and burning of fossil fuels.”
The environmental group maintains that Repsol’s current business model “will not be profitable very soon and has no place in the renewable, decentralized and citizen future.”
Greenpeace has not been the only civil society organization that, from within the board, has questioned Repsol’s model. Along the same lines, other organizations such as Oxfam Intermón or the Ethical Finance Foundation have come forward to ask for explanations and responsibility.
Repsol’s profits come from 99% of its oil and gas extraction, refining and marketing businesses. It extracted, on average, 599,000 barrels per day of oil and gas, 9% more than in 2022. This is equivalent to 60% of Spain’s oil and gas consumption.
The company intends to maintain this level of extraction at least until 2030 and invest in new wells in the US that use fracking to extract gas and oil. However, this method of extraction is prohibited in Spain and in many European countries; it is a particularly “aggressive, dirty, loaded with emissions and high consumption and contamination of water” technique, says this environmental organization).
“What is Repsol going to do to fulfill the mandate of the international community at COP28 to leave fossil fuels behind? Instead of disguising its responsibility with marketing and greenwashing,
“Repsol must stop drilling and start paying for the damages and climate consequences of its activity,” recalls Francisco del Pozo Campos, head of Greenpeace Spain’s Fossil Fuels campaign.
The company continues to invest in new wells in the US, Mexico, Brazil and Libya. His thesis is that it is possible to decarbonize fossil hydrocarbons by progressively reducing their emissions in the extraction, transportation, refining and distribution of oil and gas. However, regarding fundamental emissions (those from fuel burning, around 80% of the total), “the company holds the consumer responsible, not them.”
Greenpeace indicates that up to 82% of its investments for the future are still linked to fossils and only a tiny proportion of the energy distributed by the company is renewable.
Greenpeace recalls that the International Energy Agency has indicated that new oil and gas extraction infrastructures should not be opened, since only with the useful life of the existing ones we would be at risk of exceeding global warming at 1.5ºC.
Imaz has also reiterated its commitment to biofuels, as one of the company’s business lines to address decarbonization. Greenpeace, however, indicates that these are “false solutions.”
Together with CECU and Ecologistas en Acción, the environmental organization has presented, less than a month ago, complaints to the General Directorate of Consumer Affairs and to the CNMC, for partial and/or misleading communication about its biofuels. The expert reports conclude that Repsol “hides the deforestation and other environmental and social impacts caused by the production of palm oil that is used to manufacture its biofuels,” say the environmentalists. “The palm oil it uses is not sustainable and does not reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional fossil fuel.”
Greenpeace has launched a collection of signatures so that citizens can join and demand Repsol, and the rest of the fossil fuel companies, to stop their use and pay for the human and environmental damage caused.
