The Shell files
1962–2026
What Shell Knew:
Sixty years of secrets
Shell’s own scientists warned the company in the 1960s that burning fossil fuels could wreck the climate. Shell told them to keep quiet, then spent decades deceiving the public so they could sell oil as climate change grew deadlier. But they left a paper trail…
Expose Shell:
Scroll to uncover their secrets
1962–2026
Scroll to follow the paper trail
Part 1 · 1962–2026
Oil giant Shell has known the climate risks of burning fossil fuels since the 1960s, according to uncovered confidential reports.
1962
Exhibit 01 · 1962 · Special report
Shell’s Chief Geologist Acknowledges Risk of Global Warming
M. King Hubbert acknowledged that global warming, driven by fossil fuel pollution, could lead to “profound effects both on the weather and on the ecological balances”.
Excerpt from page 96 of M. King Hubbert’s report Energy Resources, National Academy of Sciences–National Research Council, 1962.
- Note 1: “…seriously contaminating the earth’s atmosphere with CO₂.”
- Note 2: “This could have profound effects both on the weather and on the ecological balances.”
1966
Exhibit 02 · 1966 · Confidential report
Shell Scientist Warns Executives of Climate Change
Scientist James Lovelock warned Shell of “the almost certain fact that the climate is worsening” and “the probability that the combustion of fuel is responsible”.
Page 3 of James Lovelock’s confidential 1966 report to Shell, “Combustion of fossil fuel: large scale atmospheric effects”, 9 June 1966.
- Note 1: “the almost certain fact that the climate is worsening”
- Note 2: “the probability that the combustion of fuel is responsible”
Who
James LovelockScientist advising Shell
1966
Exhibit 03 · 1966 · Personal letter
Lord Rothschild Reprimands Lovelock for Sharing Research
Shell’s Head of Research, Lord Rothschild, warned James Lovelock not to share his findings with colleagues outside of his immediate circle.
Letter from Lord Rothschild to James Lovelock, Shell Centre, London, 25 November 1966.
- Note 1: Marked “Personal”.
- Note 2: “I think it was a mistake on your part to give part two of your note on the possible atmospheric effects of the combustion of fossil fuels to Deacon and Izard.”
- Note 3: “I do not think you ought to leave any documents with people in Shell other than those concerned with Research.”
Who’s involved
Lord RothschildShell’s head of research- James LovelockScientist advising Shell
1966
Exhibit 04 · 1966 · Lovelock biography
Lovelock Informs Shell Three More Times About Global Warming
Lovelock produced three more reports between 1966 and 1968 informing Shell that even a small change within climate and ecological systems could lead to “a temporarily irreversible step of great magnitude.” These reports surfaced only when historians and journalists explored Lovelock’s archive.
Illustration: the reports are not public. Source: Jonathan Watts, “The Many Lives of James Lovelock: Science, Secrets and Gaia Theory”.
Who
- James LovelockScientist advising Shell
1967
Exhibit 05 · 1967 · Confidential letter
Rothschild Warns Lovelock Not to Share his Findings with People Outside Shell
Lord Rothschild warned Lovelock not to talk to “non-Shell people” about the effects of fossil fuel combustion on the climate.
Confidential letter from Lord Rothschild to James Lovelock, 27 January 1967.
- Note 1: Marked “Confidential”.
- Note 2: “I particularly don’t want you to talk to non-Shell people about the subject of the note you sent me.”
Who’s involved
- Lord RothschildShell’s head of research
- James LovelockScientist advising Shell
1967
Exhibit 06 · 1967 · Lovelock biography
Lovelock Battles with Rothschild over the Severity of the Problem
Lovelock stood by his research, asserting that burning fossil fuels could cause consequences potentially “so unpleasant” that further research was crucial. Rothschild, however, reportedly kept looking for holes in Lovelock’s theory that fossil fuels were harming the climate.
Illustration: James Lovelock and Lord Rothschild. Source: Jonathan Watts, “The Many Lives of James Lovelock: Science, Secrets and Gaia Theory”.
Who’s involved
- James LovelockScientist advising Shell
- Lord RothschildShell’s head of research
1972
Exhibit 07 · 1972 · Published paper
Shell Releases Public Research that Casts Doubt over Climate Change
Shell buried Lovelock’s research, who was growing concerned about the risks of climate change. Instead, the company funded and published research which asserted publicly that it was “too early for policy conclusions” arising from climate research, and that other papers were making “pessimistic predictions”.
T. W. Oerlemans, M. M. J. Tellings and H. de Vries (Koninklijke Shell-Laboratorium, Amsterdam), “World Dynamics: Social Feedback may give Hope for the Future”, Nature, vol. 238, 4 August 1972.
- Note 1: Written at Koninklijke Shell-Laboratorium, Amsterdam.
- Note 2: “pessimistic predictions”
- Note 3: “too early for policy conclusions”
1988
Exhibit 08 · 1988 · Confidential report
Shell Conducts Confidential Research into the “Greenhouse Effect”
Shell recognises the severity of, and their contribution to, climate change in a 1988 internal report. They stated that climatic changes from burning fossil fuels “may be the greatest in recorded history”. The report was kept hidden from the public for thirty years.
Page 25 of Shell’s confidential report “The Greenhouse Effect”, Report Series HSE 88-001, 1988.
- Note 1: Marked “Confidential”.
- Note 2: “The changes may be the greatest in recorded history.”
1989
Exhibit 09 · 1989 · Confidential report
Shell Internally Recognises Risk of ‘Violent Weather’ Fuelled by Climate Change
Shell circulates another confidential document, remarking that global temperatures could rise, meaning “there would be more violent weather – more storms, more droughts, more deluges”.
Shell Group Planning, “Scenarios 1989–2010: Challenge and Response”, confidential, October 1989, page 36.
- Note 1: “These seem small changes but they mask more dramatic temperature changes which would take place at temperate latitudes. There would be more violent weather – more storms, more droughts, more deluges.”
1998
Exhibit 10 · 1998 · Confidential planning document
Shell-backed Lobby Groups Derail Global Climate Action
Shell has been a member of at least two industry bodies accused of spreading misinformation about climate change: the Global Climate Coalition and the American Petroleum Institute.
In 1998, the API, for example, which Shell was a member of at the time, orchestrated a disinformation campaign to undermine an international treaty tackling climate change – the Kyoto Protocol. The API wanted those promoting the treaty on the basis of “extant science” to “appear to be out of touch with reality”.
Page 4 of the American Petroleum Institute’s “Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan”, 1998.
- Note 1: “Those promoting the Kyoto treaty on the basis of extant science appear to be out of touch with reality.”
2025
Exhibit 11 · 2025 · Legal action
Shell Faces Lawsuit Over Climate Deception
After a violent storm in the Philippines fuelled by climate change, similar to what Shell forewarned in 1989, more than 100 survivors filed a legal claim against the company. The survivors claim that Shell knew the risks of climate change, hid and obscured the evidence, and continued to burn fossil fuels. Therefore, they claim that Shell is responsible for what they lost to the storm.
BBC News: “Shell facing first UK legal claim over climate impacts of fossil fuels”.
2026
Exhibit 12 · 2026 · Shell quarterly results
Shell’s Profits Skyrocket Amid Record Climate Losses
As the survivors’ claim moves through the UK courts and climate change shatters global temperature records, Shell’s share price continues to soar. The company has just announced Q3 profits of over £8.1 billion, while still resisting meaningful action on climate change and drilling new gas fields like Jackdaw.
Illustration: Shell’s share price climbs.
Part 2 · Facing the consequences
Now, Shell must pay.
For decades, Shell has gotten away with suppressing climate science, spreading misinformation alongside industry bodies, and delaying climate action – all to protect its profits. Their actions did not go unnoticed; the 100+ typhoon survivors are using this paper trail to expose them in a court of law.
Shell knew. They buried the truth. Expose Shell.
Spread the word
Sharing is the most powerful thing you can do right now. Send this site to your friends, or post it with one of the messages below.
Template messages
Use these on social media or messaging apps, or write your own.
Message 1
EXPOSED: oil giant Shell has known about dangerous climate change since the 1960s, according to uncovered confidential reports. But they buried the science to keep selling oil. See the receipts for yourself at ExposeShell.com #ExposeShell #TheOdetteCase
Message 2
EXPOSED: oil giant Shell has known about dangerous climate change since the 1960s, according to uncovered confidential reports. But they buried the science to keep selling oil. 100+ typhoon survivors are exposing their deception in court. Find out how at exposeshell.com. #ExposeShell #TheOdetteCase
Message 3
60 years ago, Shell made a choice. Confidential documents show Shell’s own scientists warned the company about the risks of climate change. But Shell chose profits over a liveable future, and now we’re all paying the price. Enough. It’s time to expose Shell for what they truly are – find out at exposeshell.com #ExposeShell #TheOdetteCase