Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

SHELL CERTAIN IT CAN RIDE OUT GULF STORM

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express Express - Breaking news, sport and showbiz from the World's Greatest Newspaper

By Andrew Johnson: Friday July 30, 2010

ROYAL Dutch Shell yesterday expressed confidence in its safety standards in the wake of BP’s Gulf of Mexico oil spill as it unveiled a near doubling in profits to $4.5billion (£2.9billion) for the second quarter to June.

Chief executive Peter Voser (right) said the disaster was a “tragedy” that would have “far-reaching implications” for the whole industry.

Stricter rules are expected to drive up costs. However, he said Shell already complied with or exceeded most of the changes to safety regulations now being proposed, before adding: “At the end of the day, you will not be in a position to say it will never happen, because accidents do happen.”

Shell took a $56million hit from the deep water drilling ban imposed by the US government after the spill, which is expected to cost three million barrels of oil this year in production. Voser did not rule out trying to reclaim the money from BP.

The company saw profits rise by 94 per cent during the second quarter, while those for the first half rose 67 per cent to $9.4billion, as it benefited from higher oil prices and bigger than expected gains from its restructuring programme, which was completed six months earlier than expected.

This has seen $3.5billion slashed from annual costs at the expense of 7,000 jobs. Shell is also looking to accelerate its asset disposal programme by selling $7billion to $8billion of assets over the next year, rather than $2 billion originally highlighted. Most will come in refining, chemicals and petrol station operations globally, with Shell looking to increase production from 3.2 million barrels a day last year to 3.5 million by 2012.

“We may not be the only company targeting 3.5 million barrels a day but we are travelling in the right direction,” said finance director Simon Henry in a dig at BP, which has said its own production would fall from 4 million barrels to 3.5 million following its asset sales.

Voser defended deep water drilling, saying it would have an “important role” in global energy supply in the future.

The company is one of those involved in setting up a $1billion Gulf of Mexico “spill containment” unit.

Shell chemical fallout

For obvious reasons, “SHELLTOX”, is not a brand name Shell would adopt these days. The “flykiller” was launched in the USA in the late 20’s. Aptly named, it contained a mixture of toxic chemicals deadly to flies and humans. An indiscriminate killer.


Shell Chemical also had to take its “No-Pest-Strip” off the market… the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was finding hundreds of other cases of poisoning by DDVP–the cancer-causing stuff in Shell’s strip that kills pests . . . and some people.

U.S. courts have ruled that Shell Oil Co. is also responsible for cleaning up three decades worth of deadly pesticide pollution at Rocky Mountain Arsenal


Shell Oil Co. marketed ‘Shell SU 2000′, at the same time Shell marketed that ‘other’ failed scientific formula – Formula Shell.

Like Formula Shell, it was unceremoniously pulled from the gasoline market…

Latest Corrib delay exposes monumental folly of Bellanaboy plan

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Western People

EDITORIAL: Latest Corrib delay exposes monumental folly of Bellanaboy plan

It is almost ten years since plans were unveiled for a gas processing facility at Bellanaboy in North Mayo.  When permission was initially sought from Mayo Co Council for the gas terminal, the promoters of the Corrib project  confidently predicted that gas would flow by late 2003.  Last week’s revelations confirm that Corrib is now a decade behind its initial schedule and millions of euro over budget.

Shell’s plan to construct a tunnel through Sruwaddacon Bay to house the controversial supply line from the landfall to the terminal is optimistically expected to take at least two years.  The project will be the subject of a lengthy oral hearing next month at which objectors will be able to voice their concerns about this latest effort to connect the nearly completed terminal with the actual gas field.

The problems that Shell are now encountering are the result of a series of decisions taken in the early part of the last decade by a Government that has subsequently been proven to have been, at best, incompetent and at worst, downright reckless.

No person who has studied the Corrib project can honestly assert that Bellanaboy site was the correct location for the terminal.  Bellanaboy was chosen because it was a quick-fix solution for a lazy Government that couldn’t be bothered regulating the exploration industry in the same way it couldn’t be bothered regulating the banking sector.

Rather than force the promoters of Corrib to jump through a series of regulatory hoops, the Government became a simpering cheerleader for exploration companies, as it did for bankers and developers.

At a time when he should have been demanding high standards for the largest infrastructural project in the history of the State, the then Minister for the Marine Frank Fahey was signing every piece of legislation he could get his hands on to ease Shell’s passage through Erris.  And it would have all gone unnoticed had it not been for conscientious objectors such as the Rossport Five who decided they would not be bullied by a giant multi-national waving spurious legal demands in their faces.

The stance taken by the Rossport Five has since been wholly vindicated by events in America where the exploration on BP’s Deepwater Horizon platform has clearly demonstrated that the processing of oil and gas is an imperfect business.  Those who promoted the plan for a gas pipeline through the village of Rossport were either genuinely ill-informed – believing the pipeline was no different to the low pressure domestic supply lines in Dublin and elsewhere – or plainly disingenuous.  The truth is that no one would welcome the installation of such a facility within a few dozen metres of their homes; and if people are honest they will accept that fact.

The problem for Shell is that it now has a completed terminal but no proper connection to the landfall at Glengad.  The tunnel through Sruwaddacon is probably the only realistic solution to the pipeline conundrum but it is a wholly unsatisfactory one.  Sruwaddacon Bay is a special area of conservation and should, in the normal scheme of things, be subject to very stringent environmental regulations.  At a time when farmers are being subjected to every sort of rull and regulation by a Green Party intoxicated on power, it seems extraordinary that a major multi-national is planning to spend two years digging its way through a special area of conservation.

Yet what else can Shell do?   Such is the disastrous manner in which the Corrib project has been handled that Shell finds itself with a terminal but no connecting pipeline.  It is akin to a person building a mansion in the middle of a bog only to realise they have no connecting road.

The time-line for the completion of the tunnel through Sruwaddacon Bay is extremely optimistic, as it does not take into account the obstcles Shell is likely to encounter along the way.  One of the characteristics of the Corrib project has been its uncanny ability to lurch from one debacle to another, and there is nothing to suggest that this unfortunate cycle will not be repeated again.

The only conclusion one can reach is that Corrib is a microcosm of everything that is wrong in the Irish State.  Already a decade behind its original schedule, it is a fitting memorial to a feckless, bungling Government that has dumped this country and its people in an economic dustbin.

What is even more depressing is the realisation that the priceless natural resource at the heart of this sorry saga has been handed over free gratis to a multinational whose annual profits equate to half of the entire tax revenue of this State.

Is it any wonder we hang our heads in despair when our Taoiseach, on a recent visit to Belmullet, tells us to “be positive”?

http://www.westernpeople.ie/

BP spill cases head to court as Shell counts cost

Potentially adding its name to the line of claimants, Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSa.L) idled seven rigs and took a $56 million charge related to the drilling ban on Thursday. Saying the ban would reduce its production by almost 3 million barrels this year, the company did not rule out reclaiming the cash from BP. Shell, one of the biggest oil producers in the Gulf of Mexico, said it had idled rigs rather than move them elsewhere because the ban’s six-month duration meant it was not profitable to redeploy them to other areas.

Click to continue reading “BP spill cases head to court as Shell counts cost”

Obama Turns to China, Mideast to Bid to Get Iran Sanctions `Globalized’

Shell is among companies that have said they’re still considering whether to continue their investments, he said. New sanctions adopted this month by the European Union probably will accelerate Shell’s decision, he said.

Click to continue reading “Obama Turns to China, Mideast to Bid to Get Iran Sanctions `Globalized’”

Shell defends deep water drilling as cuts boost profits

Telegraph.co.uk

Royal Dutch Shell has defended the safety record of deepwater drilling, as cost-cutting helped it to make $4.4bn of profits in the last quarter.

By Rowena Mason
Published: 6:30AM BST 30 Jul 2010

The oil giant slashed its spending by $3.5bn over the last 18 months by shedding 7,000 staff and making operational savings. It saw a 15pc increase in profits – on a cost of supply basis stripping out inventory changes – and 49pc rise in pre-tax profits to $8.7bn.

Peter Voser, the chief executive, insisted that safety budgets and asset integrity had been ring-fenced from the cuts. US politicians have blamed cost-cutting for contributing to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and oil leak – an allegation that BP denies.

The Anglo-Dutch company intends to carry on making “efficiency savings” but said its radical restructuring programme had come to an end earlier than planned.

Mr Voser said Shell’s deepwater drilling programme should continue, despite concerns about the industry’s capability to cope with an oil spill a mile under the sea.

“The recent announcement of Shell’s participation in a new $1bn Gulf of Mexico oil spill containment system is an example of where we are working with governments and partners to improve the industry’s capabilities,” Mr Voser said. Shell has taken a $56m hit on the new US deepwater drilling ban after BP’s accident and stands to lose around $200m by November.

Last year, the company lagged behind the profitability of BP, but Shell has a production pipeline that is aiming for an increase from 3m to 4.5m barrels per day by 2014. Current output will be boosted when its huge Qatar gas projects comes on stream over the next year.

Meanwhile, BP is slimming down, reducing its daily output from 3.8m to 3.5m via a huge asset sell-off.

Shell is also intending to accelerate its programme of asset disposals to $8bn by the end of 2011, focusing on selling refineries and petrol stations. Mr Voser said this was to fund growth rather than make the company smaller.

“With the Qatari projects on track to start up by year end, we continue to believe that Shell offers the most compelling risk-reward proposition,” said Alejandro Demichelis, an analyst at Merrill Lynch.

Shell’s share price stayed largely flat yesterday, rising 6 to £17.13. An interim dividend of 42p will be paid on September 8.

TELEGRAPH ARTICLE

US gas stations: Stay BP or change name to Amoco?

NEW ORLEANS — BP gas station owners across the country are divided over whether the oil giant stained by its handling of the Gulf spill should rebrand U.S. outlets as Amoco or another name as part of its effort to repair the company’s badly damaged reputation.

Click to continue reading “US gas stations: Stay BP or change name to Amoco?”

Exxon Mobil sponsors Australian Journalism conference

The PR Report

“What’s the story?” is the title for the Australian Journalists 2010 annual conference. It’s a good theme; the core of excellent journalism is to ask the question “what’s the story?”

Which leads nicely to this question: what’s the story with the Australian Journalists union accepting sponsorship from Exxon Mobil?

See the details on the Walkley/MEAA website here:
http://www.walkleyconference.com.au/supporters

Why is Exxon Mobil the GOLD Sponsor of the Australian Journalism conference? Given the recent public relations disasters by oil giant BP, and allegations of oil companies funding specific academics and conferences, (link to Clive Hamilton’s blog on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s commentary website, The Drum), is this the image the Australian Journalist’s peak body is after?

The conference has received plenty of advance editorial from some Australian Journalists; Caroline Overington, Editor of The Diary at The Australian, and Tim Burrowes, Editor of mUmBRELLA.

Background: The Walkley Foundation is the fundraising and awards arm of the MEAA (The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, a.k.a. the Australian Journalists Union).

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell: New Perdido Field Shut By US Drilling Moratorium

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

JULY 29, 2010

LONDON (Dow Jones)–Royal Dutch Shell PLC’s (RDSB) new Perdido field in the Gulf of Mexico was shut down in April by the U.S. drilling moratorium less than a month after starting up and won’t resume production until October, said the company’s Chief Financial Officer Simon Henry Thursday.

The six-month ban on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico in response to the BP PLC (BP) blowout and oil spill prevented essential development drilling on the field, said Henry. When work resumes in October, the field will ramp up to its peak production of 100,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day more slowly than previously expected, he said.

Shell has seven drilling rigs idled and has taken a charge of $56 million in the second quarter because of the moratorium, Henry said. Shell’s 2010 output will also be 8,000 barrels a day lower because of the drilling ban, he said.

-By James Herron, Dow Jones Newswires; +44 (0)20 7842 9317; james.herron@dowjones.com

Order free Annual Report for Royal Dutch Shell

Visit http://djnweurope.ar.wilink.com/?ticker=GB00B03MLX29 or call +44 (0)208 391 6028

SOURCE ARTICLE

Royal Dutch Shell profits almost double

Second-quarter profits at oil giant Royal Dutch Shell have almost doubled after the firm completed a year-long corporate restructuring programme.

The firm reported profits of $4.5bn (£2.9bn) on a current cost of supplies basis, up from $2.3bn a year ago.

But it marked a drop from the $4.9bn it made in the first three months of the year as it continued to see “mixed signals” in the world economy.

Earlier this week, rival BP reported a record $17bn loss.

That included a provision of $32bn to cover the costs of its oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

In contrast to BP, who suspended dividends for the rest of the year, Shell said it would pay a second quarter dividend of $0.42 per share.

Excluding one-off items, Shell’s profit was $4.2bn, compared with $3.1bn last year.

Shell said that its restructuring programme had achieved cost savings of $3.5bn, beating its target by about 15% and some six months ahead of schedule.

It added that as a result of the changes, 7,000 employees would leave the company 18 months earlier than planned.

Shell also said it expected to sell $7bn-$8bn of assets in 2010-11 as it refocuses its portfolio on projects with higher growth potential.

“We continue to see mixed signals in the global economy,” Shell chief executive Peter Voser said.

“Oil prices have remained firm so far this year, but refining margins, oil products demand and natural gas spot prices all remain under pressure.

“Our earnings and cashflow have rallied from 2009’s lows, but the outlook remains uncertain.”

The price Shell received for its oil was 41% higher than the same period a year ago, while gas prices were 15% higher.

‘Focused strategy’

Richard Hunter, head of UK equities at stockbrokers Hargreaves Lansdown, said Shell’s update underlined the “stark difference in fortunes of the UK’s two oil majors”.

“Whereas its fierce rival BP has been the subject of forced introspection, Shell has continued to drive its own prospects forward,” he commented.

“Refining margins are improving, the restructuring programme continues apace and the proposed sale of assets will enable a more focused strategy in the future.”

BBC ARTICLE