British Cycling agrees 8-year sponsorship with Shell

I’m quite surprised by the pro-shell comments here tbh.

I’m not pro-Shell I’m pro analysis.

Shell was also criticised for greenwashing its activities in its 2018 #makethefuture campaign which used Instagram posts, short films, music videos, and a London-based “festival” to market clean-tech solutions to a millennial audience.

Company in marketing thing it’s done shocker. Not bad enough, next.

But Shell and BP ― the second- and fourth-largest oil companies by revenue last year ― are still active members of at least eight trade organisations lobbying against climate measures in the United States and Australia that were not disclosed in the public reviews, an Unearthed and HuffPost investigation has found.

Reviews of leaked and publicly available documents show those groups are part of the sprawling network of state and regional trade associations that have, in at least one case, boasted about quashing the very carbon-reduction policies the oil giants publicly claim to support.

Badder, but still very easy to explain by Shell simply having to make a living, and not necessarily directly instigating the particular boasting in question.

I mean this is all insinuation, and tied up with the fact that yes, Shell is implicated in doing something negative, but it’s all heavily tied up in the fact that they produce something we all use and to an extend we all need, and they have to compete with other companies doing the same thing.

What’s been posted so far is nowhere near Ford Pinto or BAT levels of scumbaggery. I mean yea, it’s not a great look and this kind of reaction should have been predicted, but this really feels like there’s a lot more to it than people seem to think on here.

Pretty depressing, all things considered.

I fully agree with that – it’s depressing such things are needed, and that big companies of all kinds have such lobbying influence.

I’m pretty sure that’s not the oil companies’ fault…

Whose fault is it?

Governments.

Why?

My point wasn’t so much that they ARE good, but that over 8 years and in the climate (again pun intended) they find themselves, that they will have to BECOME good. EV ownership is only going one way. After Ukraine, renewables are only going one way. They know this, but will extract what they can during the period it’s worth most waiting for government support to do what’s right. Just because something’s broken, doesn’t mean it can’t be fixed. Leaving them alone wont help fix it, maybe this might? Sponsorship can go both ways.

If I go and check my BC discount codes will I find 10% off at my local Shell garage?

Given the amount of fuel cycling consumes following a peloton then it strikes me as a good match. Let’s face it all the bikes are make from oil. The riders clothes are all made from oil. All the travel elite and upcoming racers do is all oil based it kind of makes sense.

The virtue signalling of people trying to pretend cycling for leisure has anything to do with being green is laughable. Let’s face it you could throw a whole load of criticism for being sponsored by one of the biggest financial companies in the world.

The virtue signalling of people trying to pretend cycling for leisure has anything to do with being green is laughable.

You could try to make your case without besmirching those with whom you disagree.

@molgrips who do you think is influencing the government? That’s what lobbying is

Lobbying influences a government but it doesn’t define it. They can only influence the people who’ve been elected. But what I meant was that governments should have identified this potential problem 50 years ago and done something about then. Governments should not have been open to lobbying. The lobby system in the US should have been reformed – by governments. Governments should have invested in alternatives.

And “just trying to sell their product” doesn’t wash. Would you extend the same argument to tobacco companies? Arms* manufacturers? Drug cartels?

No-one needs to smoke or take recreational drugs. We do need to get around though, and we’ll take whatever the easiest option is to do so. Why is driving the easiest option?

EV ownership is going to plateau unless and until there is significant investment in the re-charging infrastructure and, based on my horizon scanning, that’s not happening.

Of course it is. By 2040 you won’t be able to even buy an ICE and you think no-one will have seen an opportunity to profit? EV charging will be ramping up like nobody’s business.

Just because something’s broken, doesn’t mean it can’t be fixed.

Absolutely this. Those people who despise Shell, BP and all – would you be happy if they all went to the wall tomorrow?

As I depend on oil and gas to cook, heat my house and run my car. And as I use other oil products both directly and indirectly I am absolutely fine with Shell sponsorship.

These potential power cuts we are worried about are partly caused by investing too much in wind and ignoring the fact that when the wind drops we need gas.

These potential power cuts we are worried about are partly caused by investing too much in wind and ignoring the fact that when the wind drops we need gas.

I would correct and say that if we had massively insulated, shaded from sun, reduced wasteful energy use, invested in home solar, in nuclear, more pumped storage, more hydro, tidal – and more diverse wind supply, then things would look better.

As it stands we’ve spent 50 years rewarding private companies for extracting and selling as much cheap fossil fuel as we can from UK waters. We’ve blocked and obfuscated about proper energy reduction. We’ve allowed inefficient housing to be built below building standards. We’ve removed R&D and early funding for alternative energy.

We’ve invested heavily in wind as it’s a technology we could get big company to do big project – they don’t like insulating granny Miggins house, just want to sell her more power.

So I think molgrips is right to point at government, we all should take some responsibility. But, I maintain that these energy companies actively kept us hooked on cheap fossil fuels, campaigned and cooked blocked much research and change, and paid total lip service to changing their ways while green washing stunts like this were had.

@ransos

My case is that all this green virtue signalling is just nonsense.

please explain how this threat of a few people threatening to cancelling a membership whilst living lives dependent on oil and participating in a hobby that is dependent on oil is anything other than virtue signalling

I was a member of BC for a couple of years…apart from the comforting knowledge that the legal protection and 3rd party liability would either repair a drivers broken wing mirror or take the driver to court for running me over, depending on fault…I didn’t feel like anything else they offered was relevant to me as a cyclist not actively engaged in racing, apart from the odd 10% Halfords discount.

CyclingUK on the other hand, using my membership money to go the extra mile in everything that matters to normal cyclists;

Campaigned for and had a huge impact on the Highway Code changes earlier this year.
Campaigned in the run-up to KOP26 Climate Change summit as they had dropped cycling from the agenda in favour of EV’s.
Got 40 police forces on the same page for a National Day of Action against close passing.
Took West Sussex County Council to the high court for ripping out a Covid bike lane to appease a minority of vocal car drivers before its positive impact was assessed properly. The bike lane was only there for 3 months and was removed against government guidance. CyclingUK won.
Launched the West Kernow Way and King Alfreds Way, Rebellion Way in the making.
Campaigned to get the Humber Bridge reopened to cyclists and Pedestrians (60 mile detour anyone?)
Still campaigning alongside OpenMTB for Access Reforms in Wales.
Working with the BHS (British Horse Society) with consideration to taking the government to court over a decision to make the next National Trail (Wainwright Coast to Coast) a footpath. (In the 1960’s when CUK was the CTC, they lobbied to have the National Trail Legislation specifically amended to include cyclists and horses)

Not forgetting the usual discounts including 50% off singletrack 🙂

Lobbying influences a government but it doesn’t define it. They can only influence the people who’ve been elected.

How do they get elected? Money, power and influence. So you influence the media. Fund the politicians. Follow the money.

If the oil companies don’t influence power to the extent of ‘defining’ then I don’t know what does define it – I’d say they’re part of a corrupt influence that pretty much defines our politics here. The Tories are funded in part by the energy sector, Truss worked for Shell as an economist etc. Links everywhere.

Lest we forget.
Effectively the same bunch have been in bed with Murdoch (you know, who’s arsewipe newspapers tap dead teenagers phones for profit), and in bed for 3 or so years with a massive petro-chemical company that wants fracking to restart as they’ll make a shed load of ££ from it.
So it’s of zero surprise they choose yet another moral vacuum company as bed partners.

It will be interesting to see if a V-powered British Cycling elects to run campaigns such as this in the future:-

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campaigning/article/20161108-Give-tax-breaks-to-people-who-take-up-cycling-to-work–says-British-Cycling-0

BC is essential at the moment as that’s where the boys racing points, licence, entries etc are all within… Whether i approve of this decision or not, i will still be in with BC for the forseable

Understandable.
However as a member, a suitable letter to the board members and membership expressing disquiet would help.

‘virtue signalling’ is a bullshit phrase. It often just signifies a weak position in a discussion. If somebody starts to see what’s wrong and makes changes then the right thought process begins. You have to start somewhere, sometime. You can’t just go fully eco-compliant in one move. So being open to accusations of hypocrisy is inevitable – often called out by those who aren’t willing to make changes themselves. It’s better to encourage people along that path rather than engage in call-out sniping criticism. Because if you’re not also somewhere on that path, you’re the problem?

^ This.
Shades of green.
Effort to try.
A change where you can.
A rejection of what you can, when you can.
A self awareness and consideration of what you could do.
I am trying. I am still crap at it. But I am trying.
Whereas this decision by BC sticks two fingers up to our efforts and two fingers in their own ears so they won’t listen, to the change that needs to happen however small the step. Money over integrity. Not being the change.

BC is and always has been mainly focused on the needs of the racing community, and need sufficient sponsorship to keep those medals and Tour wins coming.

If you don’t race and are genuinely interested in supporting cycling infrastructure and a better planet, Cycling UK will happily take your money

I’m not sure Sky/Murdoch, HSBC etc were any better morally.

please explain how this threat of a few people threatening to cancelling a membership whilst living lives dependent on oil and participating in a hobby that is dependent on oil is anything other than virtue signalling

To describe people with whom you disagree as virtue signallers is to accuse them of arguing in bad faith: that they are wanting to appear good rather than arguing because of sincerely-held beliefs.

I think we’re all perfectly aware that to a greater or lesser extent, we rely on oil in our lives. I don’t see the hypocrisy in wanting to do better, part of which might be not associating cycling (part of the solution) with Shell (part of the problem).

The irony of your accusation is that arguably it might be better levelled at Shell – associating a fossil fuel producer with a sustainable mode of transport seems to me to be a pretty good example of virtue signalling.

It doesn’t take a genius to order Sky, HSBC and Shell in terms of suitability / x-washing for a relationship with a cycling organisation. They’re all bad but obvious one is obvious particularly in light of the ‘net zero’ press release.

Excellent words from Jameso up there on virtue signalling.

@rhayter All those follow cars need a fuel supplier

Joking aside I have often wondered why electric vehicle producers dont sponsor cycling. It would make a lot of sense, other than the fact that electric vehicles would been shown up for being completely inappropriate for the task in hand