Responsible Investment Annual Briefing

Royal Dutch Shell April 11, 2019
Royal Dutch Shell plc
April 11, 2019
Responsible Investment Annual Briefing
#makethefuture

Definitions and
cautionary note
This presentation contains data and analysis from Shell’s new Sky scenario. Unlike Shell’s previously published Mountains and Oceans exploratory scenarios, the Sky scenario is based on the assumption that society reaches the Paris Agreement’s goal of holding
the rise in global average temperatures this century to well below two degrees Celsius (2°C) above pre-industrial levels. Unlike Shell’s Mountains and Oceans scenarios which unfolded in an open-ended way based upon plausible assumptions and
quantifications, the Sky Scenario was specifically designed to reach the Paris Agreement’s goal in a technically possible manner. These scenarios are a part of an ongoing process used in Shell for over 40 years to challenge executives’ perspectives on the future
business environment. They are designed to stretch management to consider even events that may only be remotely possible. Scenarios, therefore, are not intended to be predictions of likely future events or outcomes and investors should not rely on them when
making an investment decision with regard to Royal Dutch Shell plc securities.
Additionally, it is important to note that Shell’s existing portfolio has been decades in development. While we believe our portfolio is resilient under a wide range of outlooks, including the IEA’s 450 scenario (World Energy Outlook 2016), it includes assets
across a spectrum of energy intensities including some with above-average intensity. While we seek to enhance our operations’ average energy intensity through both the development of new projects and divestments, we have no immediate plans to move to a
net-zero emissions portfolio over our investment horizon of 10-20 years. Although we have no immediate plans to move to a net-zero emissions portfolio, in November of 2017, we announced our ambition to reduce our net carbon footprint in accordance with
society’s implementation of the Paris Agreement’s goal of holding global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Accordingly, assuming society aligns itself with the Paris Agreement’s goals, we aim to reduce our Net Carbon
Footprint, which includes not only our direct and indirect carbon emissions, associated with producing the energy products which we sell, but also our customers’ emissions from their use of the energy products that we sell, by around 20% in 2035 and by around
50% in 2050.
Gearing is defined as net debt as a percentage of total capital. With effect from 2018, the net debt calculation includes the fair value of derivative financial instruments used to hedge foreign exchange and interest rate risks relating to debt, and associated
collateral balances. Free Cash Flow is defined as the sum of “Cash flow from operating activities” and “Cash flow from investing activities”. Cash flow from operating activities excluding working capital movements is defined as “Cash flow from operating
activities” less the sum of the following items in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows: (i) (increase)/decrease in inventories, (ii) (increase)/decrease in current receivables, and (iii) increase/(decrease) in current payables. Organic free cash flow is defined as
free cash flow excluding inorganic capital investment (acquisitions) and divestment proceeds. ROACE (Return on Average Capital Employed) is defined as the sum of current cost of supplies (CCS) earnings attributable to shareholders excluding identified items
for the current and previous three quarters, as a percentage of the average capital employed for the same period. Capital employed consists of total equity, current debt and non-current debt. Capital investment comprises capital expenditure, exploration
expense excluding well write-offs, new investments in joint ventures and associates, new finance leases and investments in Integrated Gas, Upstream and Downstream equity securities, all of which on an accruals basis. Divestments comprises proceeds from sale of
property, plant and equipment and businesses, joint ventures and associates, and other Integrated Gas, Upstream and Downstream investments, reported in “Cash flow from investing activities (CFFI)”, adjusted onto an accruals basis and for any share
consideration received or contingent consideration recognised upon divestment, as well as proceeds from the sale of interests in entities while retaining control (for example, proceeds from sale of interest in Shell Midstream Partners, L.P.). Headline divestments is a
non-GAAP metric. Divestment cash proceeds in 2016-2018 were equal to $26.7 billion (in Cash flow from investing activities) and $2.1 billion (“Change in non-controlling interest” in Cash flow from financing activities, primarily related to Shell Midstream
Partners, L.P.). Additionally certain contingent payments associated with these divestments are expected to be received in the future. This presentation contains the following forward-looking Non-GAAP measures: Organic Free Cash Flow, Free Cash Flow, Capital
Investment, CCS Earnings less identified items, Operating Expenses, ROACE, Capital Employed and Divestments. We are unable to provide a reconciliation of the above forward-looking Non-GAAP measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measures
because certain information needed to reconcile the above Non-GAAP measure to the most comparable GAAP financial measure is dependent on future events some which are outside the control of the company, such as oil and gas prices, interest rates and
exchange rates. Moreover, estimating such GAAP measures with the required precision necessary to provide a meaningful reconciliation is extremely difficult and could not be accomplished without unreasonable effort. Non-GAAP measures in respect of future
periods which cannot be reconciled to the most comparable GAAP financial measure are calculated in a manner which is consistent with the accounting policies applied in Royal Dutch Shell plc’s financial statements. As the projects are expected to be multi-
decade producing the per barrel projection will not be reflected either in earnings or cash flow in the next five years. Reserves: Our use of the term “reserves” in this presentation means SEC proved oil and gas reserves. Resources: Our use of the term “resources”
in this presentation includes quantities of oil and gas not yet classified as SEC proved oil and gas reserves. Resources are consistent with the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) 2P + 2C definitions. The forward-looking break-even price (BEP) presented is
calculated based on all forward-looking costs associated from Final Investment Decision (FID). Accordingly, this typically excludes exploration and appraisal costs, lease bonuses, exploration seismic and exploration team overhead costs. The forward-looking BEP
is calculated based on our estimate of resources volumes that are currently classified as 2p and 2c under the Society of Petroleum Engineers’ Resource Classification System. The financial measures provided by strategic themes represent a notional allocation of
ROACE, capital employed, capital investment, free cash flow, organic free cash flow and underlying operating expenses of Shell’s strategic themes. Shell’s segment reporting under IFRS 8 remains Integrated Gas, Upstream, Downstream and Corporate. All
outlook on financial metrics and/or alternative performance measures excludes the effect of IFRS 16 implementation.
Also, in this presentation we may refer to “Shell’s Net Carbon Footprint”, which includes Shell’s carbon emissions from the production of our energy products, our suppliers’ carbon emissions in supplying energy for that production and our customers’ carbon
emissions associated with their use of the energy products we sell. Shell only controls its own emissions but, to support society in achieving the Paris Agreement goals, we aim to help and influence such suppliers and consumers to likewise lower their emissions.
The use of the terminology “Shell’s Net Carbon Footprint” is for convenience only and not intended to suggest these emissions are those of Shell or its subsidiaries.
The companies in which Royal Dutch Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this presentation “Shell”, “Shell group” and “Royal Dutch Shell” are sometimes used for convenience where references are made to Royal Dutch
Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to Royal Dutch Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These terms are also used where no useful purpose is served by
identifying the particular entity or entities. ‘‘Subsidiaries’’, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this presentation refer to entities over which Royal Dutch Shell plc either directly or indirectly has control. Entities and unincorporated arrangements
over which Shell has joint control are generally referred to as “joint ventures” and “joint operations”, respectively. Entities over which Shell has significant influence but neither control nor joint control are referred to as “associates”. The term “Shell interest” is used
for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an entity or unincorporated joint arrangement, after exclusion of all third-party interest.
This presentation contains forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Royal Dutch Shell. All statements other than
statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown
risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements. Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Royal
Dutch Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “aim”, “ambition’,
‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘intend’’, ‘‘may’’, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘risks’’, “schedule”, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘should’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘will’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors
that could affect the future operations of Royal Dutch Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this presentation, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in crude oil and
natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g) environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the
identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, fiscal and
regulatory developments including regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts
with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; and (m) changes in trading conditions. No assurance is provided that future dividend payments will match or exceed previous
dividend payments. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Royal Dutch Shell’s Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2018 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov). These risk factors also expressly qualify all forward-looking
statements contained in this presentation and should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this presentation, April 11, 2019. Neither Royal Dutch Shell plc nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation
to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the forward-looking statements contained
in this presentation. We may have used certain terms, such as resources, in this presentation that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. U.S. Investors are urged to consider
closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov.
2

Ben van Beurden
Chief Executive Officer

Royal Dutch Shell April 11, 2019 4
Strategic
ambitions
1 Methane emissions intensity is for Shell operated oil and gas assets.
Focus on delivering
strong results
Thrive in
the energy
transition
World-class
investment case
Strong
licence
to operate
2018
◼ Portfolio reshaped, positioned for long-term resiliency
◼ Focus on asset resilience and longevity through the energy
transition
◼ Growth in areas that will be essential in the energy transition
◼ Strong financial delivery and strengthened financial framework
◼ Simpler organisation with higher returns
◼ ~$31 billion of organic free cash flow
◼ Leading through the energy transition
◼ Shorter-term targets to reduce the Net Carbon Footprint
◼ Maintain emissions intensity below 0.2% by 20251

ESG programme Key events
◼ Responsible Investment Annual Briefing
(since 2006)
◼ Board Engagement Day (2018)
◼ Chair roadshows
◼ Remuneration Committee (REMCO)
roadshows
◼ Engagements with IIGCC1 (CA100+2)
1 The Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change; 2 Climate Action 100+ (investor initiative).
www.shell.com/esg
5
Gerard Kleisterlee, Chair of the REMCO,
meeting shareholders in London

Sir Nigel Sheinwald
Chair of the CSRC

Linda StuntzCatherine J.
Hughes
Sir Nigel
Sheinwald
Chair
Responsibilities
◼ Assist and advise Board on:
◼ Safety – HSSE & SP Control Framework
◼ Environment, including climate change and social impact of projects
◼ Ethics: Shell General Business Principles and Code of Conduct
◼ Review other major issues of public concern affecting Shell’s reputation
◼ Input into the Shell Sustainability Report
Corporate
and Social
Responsibility
Committee
(CSRC)
7
Culture
& Conduct

CSRC areas of
focus
2018 2019
Safety
◼ Process safety
Environment & greenhouse gas
◼ Net Carbon Footprint
◼ Nature-based solutions
◼ Contributions to Sky and Shell Energy Transition report
Ethics & compliance
◼ Societal licence to operate
Country focus
◼ Pakistan, Nigeria, Netherlands (Groningen)
Visits
◼ Nigeria, Moerdijk
Safety
◼ Process safety, road transport
Environment & greenhouse gas
◼ Net Carbon Footprint
◼ Methane emissions and plastics
◼ Advise REMCO on sustainability and energy transition
Ethics & compliance
◼ Conduct & culture
Country focus
◼ Nigeria, Brazil, Canada (LNG), Netherlands (Groningen)
Visits
◼ Singapore, others
8
The CSRC is active and
involved
Skyline of SingaporePort Harcourt, Nigeria

Industry
Associations
Climate
Review
1 Full review is available here; 2 American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers.
Memberships should
not undermine Shell’s
corporate climate
positions
Selection Assessment Findings Actions
◼ Selected 19 industry
associations because
their climate-related
policy positions have
brought them to the
attention of investors
and NGOs;
◼ and because they
operate in regions or
countries with
significant Shell
business activities
◼ Alignment assessed
against public support
of 4 policy positions:
◼ The Paris
Agreement;
◼ Government-led
carbon pricing;
◼ Policy frameworks
for low-carbon
technologies; and
◼ The role of
natural gas
◼ Alignment with 9
industry associations,
some misalignment
with 9, material
misalignment with 1
◼ Improve internal
governance
◼ Developed a set
of climate-related
principles for
participation in
industry associations
◼ Published review
report on 2 April
20191
◼ Announced
withdrawal from
AFPM2
◼ Implement new
principles in 2019
◼ Track and report
material
misalignments on
Shell website

GHG metrics in
remuneration
◼ CSRC advises REMCO on sustainable development-related measures
◼ Greenhouse gas (GHG) metrics in the 2018 and 2019 scorecard cover close to 90% of the operated direct
and indirect emissions
◼ The Group annual bonus scorecard is aligned for Directors and staff
1 Solomon’s utilised equivalent distillation capacity.
◼ Strategy
drives change
◼ Remuneration
follows and
supports strategy
Cash flow from operating activities Operational excellence Sustainable development
30%
50%
20%
12.5%
LNG liquefaction
12.5%
Production
12.5%
Downstream availability
12.5%
Project delivery
5%
Personal safety
5%
Process safety
10%
GHG management
10%
Environment
10%
Safety
2018 Annual Bonus Scorecard
10%
GHG management
◼ Refining GHG intensity in tonne CO2-equivalent per UEDCTM 1
◼ Chemicals GHG intensity in tonne CO2-equivalent per tonne of steam cracker high-value chemicals production
◼ Upstream and Integrated Gas GHG intensity in tonnes CO2-equivalent per tonne production

Remuneration
developments –
energy transition
1 Long-Term Incentive Plan.
Evolution of GHG and energy transition-related metrics
◼ Measures are
evolving
◼ Introduction of
energy transition
metric in LTIP in
2019
2020 Policy Review
◼ GHG management in
Group annual bonus
scorecard:
◼ ~60% of operated
direct and indirect
emissions
◼ Applies to ~55,000
people
◼ Evolved GHG
management
in Group annual
bonus scorecard
(intensities)
◼ Close to 90% of
operated direct and
indirect emissions
◼ Energy transition in
LTIP1:
◼ 3-year NCF target
(energy products sold)
◼ Measures promoting
NCF reduction in the
long term
◼ GHG management in
Group annual bonus
scorecard
2017 2018 2019

25%
25%25%
25%
75%
Comparative
measures
25% Absolute
measures
12
Remuneration
developments –
energy transition
Energy transition LTIP metrics
1 For the 2019 award, the target is a 2-3% reduction in NCF from the 2016 baseline NCF, disclosed in the “Climate change and energy transition” section on page 77 of Shell’s 2018 Annual Report.
◼ 10% weighting,
expected to
increase over time
◼ Applies to 150
senior executives
◼ Key collaboration
with CA100+ and
major shareholders
2018 LTIP structure 2019 LTIP structure
TSR
ROACE
CFFO
FCF
TSR
ROACE
22.5%
22.5%
22.5%
22.5%
10.0%
Energy transition
32.5% Absolute
measures
67.5%
Comparative
measures
CFFO
FCF
◼ The energy transition condition will contain a mix of measures that set the foundation to contribute to Shell’s
strategic ambitions in the longer run:
◼ NCF: a target for reducing the NCF of the energy products Shell sells1
◼ Growth of our power business
◼ Advanced biofuels technology
◼ Development of systems to capture and absorb carbon

Shell cares
Enabling better
business outcomes
Care
Care for
communities and
deepening our
societal licence to
operate
A diverse and
inclusive work
environment
Enable people to
be at their best
through
engagement and
care
Setting the
standards on
worker welfare
No harm, no leaks
#Iamgoalzero
Safety
leadership
Worker welfare
Engagement
and performance
Diversity
and inclusion
Care for
communities

No harm
Good
products
Trusted
company
15
Strong societal
licence to
operate
Shell has a long
history of caring

Donny Ching
Legal Director

2018
Shell’s ethics
and compliance
programme
Ethics and
Compliance (E&C) staff
◼ 148 staff, reporting to
Chief E&C Officer
◼ Chief E&C Officer
reports to Legal Director
◼ Regular updates to
RDS plc Board
Training
◼ Around 146,750 online
courses taken
◼ Around 12,925 face-to-
face courses taken
◼ 143 Senior Executives
participated in ethical
leadership expectations
sessions
Based on core values:
honesty, integrity and
respect for people
Knowing our counterparties
Speaking up
~10 million
7,759
Counterparties, existing and potential
business partners screened on anti-bribery,
anti-money laundering and trade
compliance requirements
Enhanced pre-screenings for higher-risk
contracts
1,584
370
266
92
Reports to Shell Global Helpline
(76% online)
Substantiated Code of Conduct allegations
Employees or contractor staff subject to
disciplinary action
Contract terminations and dismissals
17

External Environment
Board
oversight
◼ Audit Committee
◼ Corporate and Social Responsibility Committee (CSRC)
◼ Nigeria Special Litigation Committee
◼ Business Integrity Committee
Link to E&C Manual
Shell General Business Principles
Board of RDS plc, CEO and Executive Committee
Businesses and Functions Legal Entities
Code of Conduct
Strategy, Planning
and Appraisal
Statement on
Risk Management
Standards and
Manuals
Controls and
Assurance
18

Year Event1
1998 Malabu awarded licence for OPL 245
2001 Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep (“SNUD”) farms in
2001 Federal Government of Nigeria (“FGN”) revokes the Malabu Licence
2002 SNUD bids for and is awarded OPL 245 by FGN and later signs a PSC with Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (“NNPC”)
2002 Various litigations follow
2006
FGN settles litigation with Malabu and reallocates licence to Malabu
Malabu and SNUD now have competing legal rights to the Block
2007
Shell (SNUD) commences Bilateral Investment Treaty arbitration against the FGN for wrongful expropriation
2008 FGN seeks resolution, negotiations commence
2010 Negotiations now include ENI
Settlement with FGN negotiated with Attorney General of FGN, Minister of Petroleum Resources, Minister of Finance and senior NNPC
officials
2011
Settlement of all outstanding disputes achieved. FGN receives $1.3 bln: Shell releases signature bonus in return for the licence and
pays $110.04 mln to ENI (NAE); ENI (NAE) pays FGN $1,092.04 mln for rights to the block; Malabu relinquished all claims on OPL
245 in exchange for payment from FGN of $1,092.04 mln
2017 Court of Milan decided that Shell and its four former employees should be remanded for trial
2018 Italian trial proceedings started
2019 Italian trial ongoing
2019 RDS plc informed of DPP preparing to prosecute
19
OPL 245
1 Further information can be found in Note 25 of the Consolidated Financial Statements of RDS filed in the 2018 Annual Report and Form 20-F.

OPL 245 Shell media statement:
“Based on our review of the Prosecutor of Milan's file and all of the information and facts available to us from
that file, we do not believe that there is a basis to convict Shell or any of its former employees in Italy. If the
evidence ultimately proves that improper payments were made by Malabu or others to then current government
officials in exchange for improper conduct relating to the 2011 settlement of the long standing legal disputes, it
is Shell’s position that none of those payments were made with its knowledge, authorisation or on its behalf.”
“We believe the courts in Italy will conclude that there is no case against Shell or its former employees.”
“Shell attaches the greatest importance to business integrity. It’s one of our core values and is a central tenet of
the Business Principles that govern the way we do business. Shell has clear rules on anti-bribery and corruption
and these are included in our Code of Conduct for all staff. There is no place for bribery or corruption in our
company.”

Harry Brekelmans
Director Projects & Technology

2018
HSSE
performance
Injuries – TRCF1 (per million working hours)
Goal Zero on safety
Million tonnes CO2-equivalent
Upstream flaring
Thousand tonnes
Operational spills
Number of incidents
Process safety
Goal Zero
No harm, no leaks
million working hours #
Working hours (RHS2)TRCF Volume of spills Number of spills (RHS)
Tier 1 incidents Tier 2 incidents
22
1 Total Recordable Case Frequency; 2 Right-hand side.

Case studies
Upstream /
Projects &
Technology
Bonga, offshore Nigeria SSAGS Project, onshore Nigeria
Goal Zero
No harm, no leaks
A Bonga ‘family unit’ on the deck of Bonga, Nigeria
Key to performance
◼ Impactful dialogues: staff welfare & worksite safety
◼ Care for people – family units
Key project facts
◼ Major maintenance project
◼ 1 million exposure hours, 0 recordable incidents
◼ GHG intensity nearly half of that in 2017
Key project facts
◼ Facility scope completed in 2018, start-up in 2019
◼ Target 100 million scf/d gas to domestic market
◼ 13 million exposure hours, no Lost-Time-Injury (LTI)
Key to performance
◼ Focused intervention on marine logistics
◼ Care for people – ‘Aunties and Uncles’
Southern Swamp Associated Gas Solution Project (SSAGS),
Nigeria

Case studies
Downstream /
Projects &
Technology
1The data included here is from commissioning through to startup, 2015-2019; 2 International Maritime Organisation.
Solvent de-asphalter (SDA) Pernis,
the Netherlands
Key to performance
◼ Respected neighbour with impact beyond Pernis:
residual heat project, support CO2 storage,
IMO 20202-compliant diesel
Goal Zero
No harm, no leaks
Key project facts
◼ SDA unit in largest integrated refinery in Europe
◼ ~3.5 million exposure hours of which ~3.2 million
hours by contractors, 2 LTIs1
Geismar A04, US Gulf Coast
Pernis refinery, The Netherlands Geismar chemical plant, USA
Key project facts
◼ Expansion to become largest alpha olefins producer
in the world
◼ 6 million exposure hours without LTIs
Key to performance
◼ Focused intervention on dropped object prevention:
high-potential reduction from 1 to 0 per month
◼ AO4 ‘project of choice’ for craft workers

Shell’s Sky
scenario – a
pathway to
keep in pace
with Paris
Source: Shell Sky scenario; 1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 2 Net Carbon Footprint (CO2 intensity of fuel mix); 3 Carbon Capture and Storage.
Gigatonne CO2 / year
Components of CO2 reduction to meet
the goals of the Paris Agreement
Exajoule/year
World primary
energy by source
◼ Assessed by MIT1 as
limiting temperature
increase to 1.75 °C
◼ Link to Sky scenario
26
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2015 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070
Oil
Biofuels
Natural Gas
Biomass
Coal
Nuclear
Solar
Wind
Other Renewables

Scope of our
Net Carbon
Footprint
ambition
27
◼ Full lifecycle of
energy products,
including
consumption
◼ Link to NCF ambition
The Net Carbon Footprint is not a mathematical derivation of total emissions divided by total energy, neither is it an inventory of absolute emissions. It is a weighted average of the lifecycle CO2 intensities of different energy products normalising them to the same
point relative to their final end-use. This graphic is only intended to give an indication of the scope of the emissions included within Shell’s Net Carbon Footprint.

Net Carbon
Footprint
ambition
Ambitions:
◼ Reduce Net Carbon
Footprint of our
energy products by
~20% by 2035
◼ Be in line with
society Net Carbon
Footprint by 2050

Shorter-term targets within a longer-
term framework ensures resilience and
customer focus
◼ Shell cannot predict society and government
future actions, nor customer demand
◼ In step with society’s drive to align with the
goals of the Paris Agreement
◼ Reassess progress every five years linked
to Nationally Determined Contributions process
Shell’s industry-leading approach is
more progressive
◼ The NCF ambition includes a much wider scope
of emissions
◼ Committed to setting shorter-term 3- or 5-year
NCF targets, linked to remuneration starting
from 20191
◼ The NCF ambition is consistent with the Paris
agreement
Shareholder
resolution –
response
1 The 2019 LTIP energy transition metric includes the first 3-year target. The new Remuneration Policy is subject to a shareholder vote at the 2020 AGM.
◼ Welcome Follow This
intent to withdraw
resolution
◼ Shareholders still
requested to vote
◼ Board unanimously
recommends to vote
against
29
Shell welcomes the announcement on April 7, 2019 by the Dutch
shareholder group Follow This of its intention to withdraw the
shareholder resolution which had been requisitioned by a group of
shareholders coordinated by Follow This and which is set out in
Resolution 22 (R22) of the 2019 Notice of Annual General Meeting
(AGM). Shell understands that Follow This is now in the process of
collecting the requisite support to request withdrawal of the shareholder
resolution. Shell will ensure that due procedure is followed ahead of
any decision by Shell to propose the withdrawal of R22 from the 2019
AGM. At present R22 remains on the agenda and shareholders are
requested to vote. The Directors of Royal Dutch Shell plc maintain that
R22 is not in the best interests of Royal Dutch Shell plc and its
shareholders as a whole and unanimously recommend that
shareholders vote against R22 for the reasons set out on page 7 of the
2019 Notice of AGM.

Maarten Wetselaar
Director Integrated Gas & New Energies

Potential tools
to achieve our
Net Carbon
Footprint
ambition
Shell is active in
all of these areas
Existing
examples
Wind power Quest CCSRaízen
biofuels
Shell Recharge
& New Motion
Flare reduction Increased LNG Nature-based
offsets

◼ Adjacencies to
existing businesses
◼ Value chain
integrator
◼ Demand-driven
development
Power value chain
CUSTOMERS OPTIMISATION
SUPPLY AND
GENERATION
Leverage portfolio flexibility and
arbitrage opportunities
Multiple parties are active on
the demand side
Not all products are supplied by Shell,
some are purchased from third parties
◼ New Motion
◼ MP2 Energy LLC
◼ First Utility
◼ GI Energy
◼ sonnen
◼ Shell Energy North America
◼ Shell Energy Europe
◼ Shell Energy Australia
◼ Shell Energy Brazil
◼ Carbon emissions rights trading
◼ US onshore wind portfolio
◼ NoordzeeWind
◼ Borssele 3 and 4 offshore wind
◼ Silicon Ranch
◼ Moerdijk solar
◼ Cleantech Solar
32

Gas and biofuels
◼ Cleanest-burning hydrocarbon
◼ Critical component of energy transition-demand
from hard-to-decarbonise sectors
◼ Coal-to-gas switching leads to 78% improvement in
Beijing winter air quality
◼ Readily available source of energy, easily transported
via pipelines and ships
◼ Support peaks and valleys in renewable availability
Gas
◼ We are one of the largest biofuels blenders and
distributors
◼ Raízen JV some of the lowest-CO2 conventional
biofuels
◼ Investment in advanced biofuels using alternative
feedstocks such as forestry, agricultural and sorted
municipal waste
◼ Waste-to-chemicals Rotterdam consortium could be first
commercial project in Europe
Biofuels
Providing energy
for everyone, while
reducing impact to
the planet and the
air we breathe
Skyline of Beijing, China Harvesting of sugarcane, Brazil

NBS and CCS
◼ Creation of carbon sinks, like forests and wetlands
◼ Short-term potential to deliver over one-third of
greenhouse gas reductions needed1
◼ Invest in nature offsets in support of low-carbon future
◼ Encourage regulatory frameworks that support and
facilitate private sector investment
◼ Create commercial business models to help customers
decarbonise
Nature-Based Solutions (NBS)
◼ CCS is a critical technology to help reduce CO2
emissions
◼ IPCC2 Global Warming Report identified significant
role for CCS in limiting temperature increase
◼ Shell is developing and participating in many CCS
projects
◼ Industry-group membership for further development
and commercialisation of CCS technology
Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS)
Essential to deliver
required emission
reductions in timescale
to match global
climate ambitions
1 Source: WBCSD; 2 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Quest at the Scotford Upgrader, Alberta, CanadaRanger looking out over Kashigau corridor, Kenya

Access to
energy
Aim to provide reliable
electricity supply
to 100 million
people in the
developing world
by 2030
36
◼ Mini-grid company
◼ Hybrid solar and
biomass gasification
technology
◼ Reliable electricity
on a pay-as-you-go
basis
◼ Operations in India
and Tanzania
◼ Off-grid solar home
systems company
◼ Customised and
modular systems
◼ Operations in
Uganda and Kenya
◼ Technology company
◼ Universal smart
metering platform
for mini grids and
other utilities
◼ Focused in
Africa and Asia
◼ Solar debt finance
company
◼ Provides financing
for solar assets in
emerging economies,
including inventory,
working capital,
construction and
structured finance
loans

Strong societal
licence to
operate
Shell has a long
history of caring
No harm
Good
products
Trusted
company

Questions and Answers
Ben van Beurden
Chief Executive Officer
Sir Nigel Sheinwald
Chair of the CSRC
Harry Brekelmans
Projects & Technology
Director
Donny Ching
Legal Director
Maarten Wetselaar
Integrated Gas &
New Energies Director

Additional information

Health, Safety,
Security &
Environment
◼ We focus on the three areas of safety with the highest risks associated with our activities:
personal, process, and transport
◼ Process safety is central in achieving Shell’s goal of zero harm to people and the environment
◼ Managed by combining asset integrity principles with a risk management approach, supported
by visible safety leadership
40
Asset integrity
principles
Risk management
approach
Process safety
performance
Threats Consequences
CONTROLS, BARRIERS RECOVERY MEASURES
TOP
EVENT
Design
Integrity
Technical
Integrity
Operating
Integrity
Integrity
Leadership
GOAL
ZERO
NO
HARM
NO
LEAKS
NO HARM
TO PEOPLE
NO LEAKS
FROM OUR
OPERATIONS

Thrive in the energy transition
Driving to
resilience and
ambition
1 Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures.
TIME HORIZON
SHORT TERM
GHG
management
◼ Focussed on
operational action
◼ Included in Group
annual bonus
scorecard
MEDIUM TERM
Strategic positioning and
portfolio resilience
◼ Disclosures aligned to TCFD1
recommendations
◼ Demonstrate financial resilience
of portfolio to energy transition and
climate change actions
LONG TERM
Net Carbon Footprint
◼ Covers full range of emissions from our
energy products through to consumption
◼ Specific NCF targets for 3- or 5-year periods until 2050
◼ 2019 Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) energy transition
condition includes our first 3-year target towards
achieving our NCF ambition
1-3 YEARS 5-10 YEARS >10 YEARS
5% Process safety
5% Personal safety
10% GHG management
Sustainable
development
41
Demonstrating Shell’s
approach across
multiple time horizons

Leading through
the energy
transition
1 The 2019 LTIP energy transition metric includes the first 3-year target; 2 The new Remuneration Policy is subject to a shareholder vote at the 2020 AGM; 3 Methane emissions intensity is for Shell-operated oil and gas assets.
2018 Highlights Proof points
Innovating to meet
changing society and
customer preferences
◼ Net Carbon Footprint – long-term ambition
operationalised with shorter-term targets; linked to
executive remuneration1,2
◼ Methane – maintain emissions intensity below
0.2% by 20253
◼ Task force on Climate-related Financial
Disclosures (TCFD) – driving effective climate
change disclosures as a member of Oil & Gas
Preparer Forum
◼ Thought leadership – Shell Energy Transition
report and Sky scenario publication
Nigeria
Decrease in flaring intensity by
~70% over the last 10 years
Brent Delta platform (UK)
Decommissioning >97% of
material to be recycled
Quest CCS (Canada)
>3.5 million tonnes CO2
captured and stored
Solar
Investments in Asia and
North America
Bonny, Nigeria Brent Delta, UK
Quest, Canada Silicon Ranch, USA

Resilience
Financial
framework
All information on this slide from the 2018 Shell Energy Transitions Report which is based on 2017 data.
1 Cash flow from operations; 2 Significant variations in oil and/or gas prices will potentially impact certain operating costs, or result in foreign exchange movements, the effect of which are not reflected in the $10 price sensitivity; 3 Assuming oil price fell from
around $65 per barrel today to $40 per barrel money of the day; 4 Assuming oil price rose from around $65 per barrel today to $100 per barrel money of the day.
$ billion
CFFO1 excluding working capital Capital investment flexibility
◼ Growing free cash
flow
◼ Capital discipline
and flexibility
◼ Strong balance sheet
◼ $10 per barrel movement in Brent prices, around
$6 billion cash flow impact indicative estimate2
◼ At $40/bbl impact of -$15 billion on CFFO3
◼ At $100/bbl impact of +$21 billion on CFFO4
◼ $10 per tonne CO2 movement in global CO2 price,
around $1 billion pre-tax impact on cash flow
◼ Applying more resiliency criteria to capital
allocation
◼ Lower break-even prices
◼ Shorter payback periods
◼ Improving project delivery
Average Brent oil price ($/bbl)
$ billion (per annum) 2018 – 2020
Oil products 4-5
Conventional oil + gas 4-5
Integrated gas 4-5
Deep water 5-6
Chemicals 3-4
Shales 2-3
New energies 1-2
Total 25-30
$#
0
10
20
30
40
1 2 3 4 5
$99
$52
$44
$54 $50

Resilience
Portfolio
All information on this slide from the 2018 Shell Energy Transitions Report which is based on 2017 data.
The forward-looking breakeven price for pre-FID projects is calculated based on all forward-looking costs associated with pre-FID projects in our development portfolio. Accordingly, this typically excludes exploration & appraisal costs, lease bonuses, exploration
seismic and exploration team overhead costs. The forward-looking breakeven price for pre-FID projects is calculated based on our estimate of resources volumes that are currently classified as 2C under the Society of Petroleum Engineers’ Resource Classification
System. As these pre-FID projects are expected to be multidecade producing projects, the less than $30 per barrel projection will not be reflected either in earnings or cash flow in the next five years.
Diverse business segments Geographic diversity Active portfolio management
◼ Resilience from
diverse and actively
managed portfolio
◼ Assessed risk of
stranded assets as
low
Marketing earnings
Chemicals earnings
Americas Asia EU + Africa
◼ Operations across energy
system
◼ Strength of integrated model
◼ Global business in more
than 70 countries
◼ In 2017, 19 countries
accounted for 80% of CFFO
◼ Focus on cost reduction
◼ Improving CO2 performance
DEEP WATER
Projects waiting FID: average
break-even <$30
SHALES
Permian direct field
expenses -33% in 2017
INTEGRATED
GAS
Since BG, underlying
operating expenses -11%
CHEMICALS
Pennsylvania ethylene cracker
expected top quartile CO2 intensity
OIL
PRODUCTS
INTEGRATED
GAS
CHEMICALS
SHALESNEW
ENERGIES
Cash
engines
Growth
priorities
Emerging
opportunities
DEEP WATER
CONVENTIONAL
OIL + GAS

Nigeria
environmental
performance
1 United Nations Environment Programme; 2 SPDC JV = 30% Shell, 55% NNPC, 10% Total, 5% Agip; all data on 100% basis unless otherwise stated;
Clean-up Bodo & UNEP1 progress
◼ Bodo spill cleanup first phase completed (free-phase
oil removal), contracting for remediation nearly
finalised (target starting date Q2 2019)
◼ July 2018: SPDC JV2 completed its first-year
contribution to HYPREP3 of $180 million
Oil spill prevention & remediation
◼ Long-term trend improving
◼ Alternative livelihood initiatives to address oil theft
and sabotage (Livewire programmes)
◼ Deployed wellhead cages: 171 in place, 0 breaches;
drone trial to help enable faster response
◼ Remediation and certification efforts
ongoing (116 sites out of 202 remediated in 2018)
◼ Further increase in theft volumes and sabotage spills;
multi-disciplinary initiative to help curve trend
◼ IUCN4 collaboration on remediation
standards and practices
90% of spills related to
sabotage
Link to Nigeria
Briefing Notes
3 Hydrocarbon Pollution Restoration Project – this body was established under the Nigerian Ministry of Environment, aimed at the sustainable clean-up of Ogoniland; 4 International Union for Conservation of Nature.
Thousand tonnes
SPDC JV spills
SPDC JV Production and theft
0
200
400
600
800
0
20
40
60
80
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Production (RHS)
Thousand barrels per day Thousand boe/day
Theft
#
0
100
200
300
0
5
10
15
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Volume of sabotage spills Volume of operational spills
Operational spills >100kg (RHS) Sabotage spills >100kg (RHS)

50:50 joint venture
between Shell and
ExxonMobil
NAM
January
Earthquake Zeerijp
with a force of 3.4
on the Richter scale
46
January
Minister Wiebes
announces new
damage protocol
Source: www.nam.nl, 1 Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate.
February
Gas production
locations Loppersum
shut down on behalf
of Minister Wiebes
March
Temporary commission
for mining damage (RVO) opens
counter and starts handling
outstanding damage claims
March
Minister announces proposal:
gas production level and
completion plan Groningen
June
Heads of Agreement
MEAC1, ExxonMobil,
Shell; signed
September
Final report on 6000
outstanding damage claims to
MEAC
October
Presentation ‘Nationaal
Programma Groningen’
October
Change in
‘Gaswet/
Mijnbouwwet’
came into effect
December
Start new
‘National
Coordinator
Groningen’
December
Announced extension to the
new-build arrangement by NAM
(at the request of MEAC) until
1 July 2019
2018

Tax and revenue
transparency
47
One of
the founders
of the Extractive
Industries
Transparency
Initiative (EITI)
2003 2012 2016 2017 2018
Publication of
Shell’s Approach to
Tax
First voluntary
publication of tax
payments
(covering 2011)
Shift from voluntary to
mandatory reporting in
line with EU regulations;
first publication of
Payments to
Governments Report
(covering 2015),
includes payments per
country and project
for extractive activities Country-by-Country
Report submitted to
tax authorities
Publication UK Tax
Strategy and
Statement on Tax
Evasion
Publication taxes
paid NAM, Canada,
Germany, Australia
Shell commits to the
B-Team Responsible
Tax Principles
Pilot International
Compliance and
Assurance
Programme
In 2018 Shell paid $64.1 billion to governments
◼ $10.1 billion income taxes
◼ $5.8 billion government royalties
◼ $48.2 billion levies on fuel and other products
Shell is transparent on its tax payments
◼ Total tax contribution publication and filing of
Payments to Government Report with UK
Companies House
◼ Provides information on taxes paid per country and
per project for Upstream activities
Shell is actively involved in responsible tax
discussions
◼ Working with industry, governments and civil society
◼ Founder of B-Team Responsible Tax Principles
◼ Includes providing regular information to stakeholders
about approach to tax and taxes paid
Active advocacy and
transparent tax
reporting

Chemicals
and plastics
The problem is
not with plastics, but
what happens after
people use them
Chemicals
◼ Chemicals demand is growing faster than GDP
◼ Growth priority for Shell
◼ Chemicals are a component in medicines, detergents,
textiles and plastics
Plastics
◼ Many plastics have long-term use that use fewer
resources and have a lower-carbon footprint than glass,
paper and metal
◼ Plastics provide important health, safety and
sustainability benefits
◼ Plastics don’t belong in our oceans, rivers or landscapes
Shell plastic waste management
◼ Investments in conversion of waste materials into valuable
chemicals and biofuels
◼ Reduce, reuse and repurpose waste across operations
◼ Lubricants business exploring sustainable packing
solutions
Alliance to End Plastic Waste
◼ Shell a leading member1
◼ Alliance goal to invest $1.5 billion over the next 5 years
to help eliminate plastic waste
◼ Members include companies that make, use,
sell, process, collect and recycle plastics
Four strategic pillars:
INFRASTRUCTURE INNOVATION EDUCATION CLEAN-UP
1 Alliance website.

Oversight
of climate
change risk
management
Climate change
is managed as a
significant risk factor
49
(1) Oversight of climate change risk
management.
(2) Non-executive Directors appointed
by Board to review and advise on
sustainability policies and practices
including climate change.
by the Board to oversee the
effectiveness of the systems of risk
management and internal control.
by the Board to set the remuneration
policy in alignment with strategy.
(5) Responsible for implementing Shell’s
GHG strategy. They are represented
in Safety and Environment Leadership
Team
Corporate and
Social Responsibility
Committee (CSRC) (2)
Audit Committee
(AC) (3)
Remuneration
Committee
(REMCO) (4)
Board of Royal
Dutch Shell plc (1)
CEO and Executive Committee
Executive Vice President,
Safety & Environment
Vice President,
Group Carbon
EVP Steering Team
Group strategic steer
Most senior individuals
with accountability for
climate change risk
management
Businesses and Functions (5)
Safety and Environment
Leadership Team
Operational
implementation steer

Joint statement –
updates
1 Full review is available here.
Joint statement
developed with
institutional investors
on behalf of Climate
Action 100+
50
Public short-term
Net Carbon
Footprint targets
Targets linked
to remuneration
Review of progress
Alignment
with the TCFD
recommendations
Corporate
climate lobbying
◼ 3- or 5-year targets to operationalise the long-term NCF ambition
◼ Update: first target set in 2019 (2019-2021)
◼ Update: link between energy transition and long-term remuneration in
2019
◼ Full Remuneration Policy subject to a shareholder vote at the 2020
AGM
◼ Annual update on the progress towards the NCF ambition
◼ Initial disclosures in Sustainability Report, but with a commitment,
to integrate this into the Annual Report/Form 20-F as appropriate
◼ Disclosure of metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant
climate-related risks and opportunities, where material, at relevant
intervals
◼ Review of industry associations memberships to assess alignment with
the company’s stated positions
◼ Update: results of this review1 were made public on April 2, 2019

Shareholder
resolution –
response
Follow This resolution Shell response
Shareholders request the company to set and publish targets that
are aligned with the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement to limit
global warming to well below 2°C.
◼ Shell already set the Net Carbon Footprint1 (NCF) ambition (November 2017):
◼ Around 50% reduction of Net Carbon Footprint of our energy products by 2050, around 20%
by 2035 (gCO2e/MJ), in step with society’s progress toward the goal of the Paris Agreement
◼ Shell’s NCF ambition is consistent with the emission reductions needed to meet the Paris
Agreement.
◼ Reassess every five-years aligned to Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) process
◼ The 2019 LTIP energy transition condition includes our first three-year target towards achieving our
NCF ambition
These targets need at least to cover the greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions of the company’s operations and the use of its energy
products (Scope 1, 2, and 3), and to be intermediate and long-
term.
◼ Shell’s Net Carbon Footprint Ambition goes well beyond Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions of our energy
products
◼ Includes customers’ emissions produced when they use the energy products we sell
◼ Includes emissions from elements of energy products life-cycle not owned by Shell, such as:
◼ Oil and gas processed - but not produced - by Shell
◼ Oil products and electricity marketed by Shell not processed or generated at a Shell facility
◼ GHG metrics in executive bonus scorecard (since 2017)
◼ The 2019 LTIP energy transition condition includes our first three-year target towards achieving our
NCF ambition
1 Net Carbon Footprint measured on an aggregate “well to wheel” or “well to wire” basis, from production through to consumption, on grams of CO2-equivalent per megajoule of energy products consumed; chemicals and lubricants products are excluded. Carbon
Footprint of the energy system is modelled using Shell methodology aggregating lifecycle emissions of energy products on a fossil-equivalence basis. The methodology will be further reviewed and validated in collaboration with external experts.
The Board
recommends
voting against the
Follow This resolution
51
Shell welcomes the announcement on April 7, 2019
by the Dutch shareholder group Follow This of its
intention to withdraw the shareholder resolution
which had been requisitioned by a group of
shareholders coordinated by Follow This and which
is set out in Resolution 22 (R22) of the 2019 Notice
of Annual General Meeting (AGM). Shell
understands that Follow This is now in the process of
collecting the requisite support to request withdrawal
of the shareholder resolution. Shell will ensure that
due procedure is followed ahead of any decision by
Shell to propose the withdrawal of R22 from the
2019 AGM. At present R22 remains on the agenda
and shareholders are requested to vote. The
Directors of Royal Dutch Shell plc maintain that R22
is not in the best interests of Royal Dutch Shell plc
and its shareholders as a whole and unanimously
recommend that shareholders vote against R22 for
the reasons set out on page 7 of the 2019 Notice of
AGM.

Chronology
of events (1)
OPL 245
Phase 1
◼ 1998 – Malabu awarded licence for OPL 245
◼ March 2001 – Shell Nigeria Ultra Deep (“SNUD”) farms in
◼ Representations and warranties were provided on ownership of Malabu
◼ Federal Government Nigeria (“FGN”) consented
Phase 2
◼ July 2001 – FGN revokes the Malabu Licence
◼ May 2002:
◼ SNUD bids for and is awarded OPL 245 by FGN and later signs a PSC with Nigerian National Petroleum
Corporation (“NNPC”)
◼ Signature bonus ($209 million) is placed in escrow pending outstanding disputes with Malabu
◼ SNUD conducts exploration and appraisal work programme
52

Chronology
of events (2)
OPL 245
Phase 2 (continued)
◼ Various litigations follow:
◼ May 2002 – SNUD commenced International Chamber of Commerce arbitration
proceedings against Malabu
◼ August 2002 – Malabu commenced proceedings against FGN, Shell Nigeria Exploration and
Production Company (“SNEPCO”), SNUD and other Shell parties in New York federal court
◼ May 2003 – (following a petition by Malabu), the Nigerian House of Representatives issued a
report concluding: (i) OPL 245 was legally awarded to Malabu, (ii) the revocation of Malabu’s licence
should be set aside, (iii) SNUD should pay $550 million compensation to Malabu. SNUD appeals
◼ September 2003 – Malabu commenced proceedings in Nigeria against FGN, NNPC and SNUD for
a declaration that the award of OPL 245 to Malabu was valid, a declaration that the award to SNUD
was invalid, and damages of $100 million
53

Chronology
of events (3)
OPL 245
Phase 3
◼ December 2006 – FGN settles litigation with Malabu and reallocates the licence to Malabu
◼ Malabu and SNUD now have competing legal rights to the Block
◼ April 2007 – SNUD commences Bilateral Investment Treaty arbitration against the FGN for wrongful
expropriation
◼ 2008 – FGN seeks resolution, negotiations commence
54

Chronology
of events (4)
OPL 245
Phase 4
◼ 2010 – negotiations now include ENI
◼ Settlement with FGN – negotiations are conducted with Attorney General of FGN, the Minister of Petroleum
Resources, the Minister of Finance and senior NNPC officials
◼ April 2011 – settlement is achieved. FGN receives $1.3bln:
◼ Signature bonus is released by SNUD to FGN from 2003 escrow funds in return for the licence
◼ SNEPCO pays $110.40 million to ENI (Nigerian Agip Exploration (“NAE”)) ($25.40 million interest on the
escrow, plus $85 million)
◼ NAE pays $1,092.04 million to FGN for settling all outstanding claims on the Block
◼ FGN agrees to indemnify SNEPCO and NAE from any other claims on the Block
◼ SNEPCO and NAE hold the licence 50/50. NAE is operator
55

Agreements
of April 2011
OPL 245
◼ Heads of Agreement between NAE and SNUD and SNEPCO: allocation of the payments due to FGN
◼ Block 245 Resolution Agreement: FGN, NNPC, SNUD, SNEPCO and NAE
◼ Payments to FGN and award of the licence
◼ FGN indemnifies SNEPCO and NAE against competing claims
◼ Key fiscal terms of future PSC
◼ Block 245 Resolution Agreement: FGN and Malabu. Payment to Malabu; settlement of claims
◼ Block 245 Resolution Agreement: FGN and SNUD. Settlement of claims
◼ Settlement submission to Court of Appeal, Abuja: SNUD, SNEPCO, Malabu and Nigerian House
of Representatives (“NHR”). Withdrawing SNUD and SNEPCO appeals against a 2003 NHR report
in favour of Malabu
56

Shell review
OPL 245
◼ Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, an international law firm, was retained by the Shell Group
◼ Debevoise conducted and led an investigation which included staff from the law firm
and Shell’s Business Integrity Department
◼ Periodic updates to senior management, Audit Committee and RDS Board, as well as the Nigeria Special
Litigation Committee, an ad hoc committee of the Board that assists in monitoring and providing oversight of
matters related to the investigations by various authorities into OPL 245
◼ Final report to RDS Board in July 2016
◼ Findings shared with authorities during 2016
57

Responsible Investment Annual Briefing

More Related Content

What's hot

Similar to Responsible Investment Annual Briefing

More from Shell plc

Responsible Investment Annual Briefing