The six European oil and gas giants presented their new strategies ahead of their annual general meetings (AGMs), revealing a significant degree of backtracking on climate issues. (1) There is no longer any doubt that these companies’ climate-damaging strategies. While the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero Emissions by 2050 (NZE) scenario has included no new fossil fields or liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals since 2021, (2) these companies continue to prioritize fossil expansion and have reduced their commitment to renewable power. Financial institutions can no longer turn a blind eye. Far from being in transition, these companies have no intention of changing their model.
2025 was marked by BP resetting its climate strategy to prioritize oil and gas and significantly reducing its commitment to renewable power, which was already a small part of its strategy. This announcement was not without controversy, with nearly a quarter of shareholders opposing the re-election of Helge Lund as director at this year’s AGM, compared to less than 5% the previous year. (3)
Investments in “Low Carbon”: a drastic reduction
The five largest European oil and gas companies have significantly reduced their ambitions for investments in so-called “low carbon” activities. These activities include renewable power, but also controversial solutions such as bioenergy, carbon capture, and even gas power.
- BP has reduced its planned annual investments in “low carbon” to a fifth and reduced the timeline of its investment plan; (4)
- Eni has reduced its planned investments in renewable energy by nearly a quarter over the next four years; (5)
- Shell has seen its share of planned investments in “Renewables & Energy Solutions” activities drop from 19% in 2025 to 9% between 2025 and 2030; (6)
- TotalEnergies has decreased its planned investments in “integrated power and low carbon molecules” from 33% to 24% by 2030; (7)
- Equinor has abandoned its goal of allocating 50% of its gross investments to renewable and “low carbon” power by 2030. (8)
Only Repsol has kept its investment plan unchanged, with 19% of its planned investments in renewables. These adjustments clearly show the priority given to fossil fuels, which overall capture more than 60% of planned investments. To align with the NZE trajectory, these companies should cease all investment in new fossil projects and allocate most of their resources to “clean energy”. (9) These new investment plans mean that companies have backtracked on some of their key commitments: BP has abandoned its renewable capacity target for 2030, (10) while Equinor has significantly reduced its targets. (11)
A growing gap between the energy mix produced and climate goals
None of the six major European companies now plan to reduce their fossil fuel production. The NZE scenario, however, shows a 21% and 13% reduction in oil and gas production respectively by 2030, compared to 2023 levels. (12)
- BP, Eni, Equinor, and TotalEnergies have revised their oil and gas production targets by 2030 upwards, exceeding the NZE trajectory by more than 50%;
- Shell, which had already abandoned its oil production reduction target, plans to increase its oil and gas production by 1% per year until 2030, thus exceeding the NZE scenario by more than 20% (13);
- Repsol has not increased its production targets but nor or does it plan to reduce its oil and gas production, which will also place it more than 50% above the NZE scenario levels in 2030.
These targets are partly based on gas production, and more particularly LNG. Shell, TotalEnergies, Eni, BP, and Equinor are all planning new LNG export terminals by 2030, incompatible with the NZE. LNG, often described as a transition energy, is a fossil energy that is devastating for the climate, and which promotes the development of new gas fields by perpetuating and increasing demand. It is also responsible for significant methane leaks all along the value chain.
Impacted by the planned reductions in renewable capacity and increases in fossil production, the energy production mix of Eni, Equinor, Shell, and TotalEnergies will be highly carbon-intensive in 2030, with renewable power representing less than 10% of their future production.
Indirect Emissions: A Denial of Responsibility
By betting on fossil fuels and ignoring the NZE scenario trajectory, companies continue to produce excessive greenhouse gas emissions. For these six European companies, indirect emissions (scope 3) represented more than 90% of their emissions in 2024. (14) Reducing these emissions would require a change in model, which is not the direction taken by these companies. On the contrary, these companies minimize their responsibility for scope 3 emissions, aiming for a reduction “together with society” in the case of TotalEnergies, for example, or advocating false solutions such as carbon capture or offsetting.
The climate backtracking of companies over the last twelve months by indicator
| BP | Eni | Equinor | Repsol | Shell | TotalEnergies | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Share of “low carbon” in the investment plan | 
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Oil and gas production |
|
|
|
|
||
| Installed renewable capacity in 2030 |
|
|
|
N/A | ||
| Mitigation targets |
|
|
|
This lack of strategic willingness to align with a 1.5°C trajectory results in a dramatic revision of decarbonization targets for the climate. BP, Equinor, and Repsol have thus abandoned or reduced some of their targets including scope 3 for 2030. Repsol attempted to mask its backtracking by company abandoning its target of reducing carbon intensity scopes 1, 2, and 3 between 2016 and 2030, and setting a new target for absolute reduction for scopes 1, 2, and 3 with a new reference year of 2018 (15). As for BP, the company has simply abandoned its scope 3 target for 2030 and its commitment to achieve carbon neutrality for its production for scopes 1, 2, and 3 by 2050. This backtracking illustrates a total lack of willingness to transform in the short, medium, and long term.
These strategies, harmful to the climate, are only possible due to the support of financial institutions. The latter can no longer hide behind the promises of diversification from these companies, which prioritize oil and gas to the detriment of renewable power. During this AGM period, investors must take their responsibilities seriously. They must notably vote in favor of the shareholder resolution demanding more transparency on the LNG strategy and its alignment with the carbon strategy at Shell’s AGM on May 20 (16), in order to clearly condemn fossil fuel expansion. Reclaim Finance also calls on investors in Shell and TotalEnergies, which will hold its AGM May 23, to vote against the re-elections of the directors and their remuneration..
