News and information on Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Shell’s investment in its Alaskan Arctic offshore exploration program has now far exceeded $3 billion, with the company yet to be able to turn a drill bit, Shell’s Alaska manager told an Anchorage business group Aug. 14.
Click to continue reading “Shell’s Arctic investment tops $3B”
LONDON, Aug. 20 (UPI) — The Stanlow oil refinery in Cheshire, England, will not shut down despite tenders offered by Indian industrial conglomerate Essar, Royal Dutch Shell said.
Essar offered to buy the Stanlow refinery as part of a push by the Indian company to establish a footprint in European markets.
Stanlow is part of a $1.95 billion offer from Essar to acquire three fuel-manufacturing plants in Europe. The two other plants are located in Germany.
Shell is refocusing its investment strategies to Asian markets while Middle Eastern and Asian companies move into the European market.
Essar said it has set up a mergers and acquisitions team in London to examine the pitch to make it more attractive to regional parties.
A statement from the British supermajor said it had “advised” its employees in Cheshire of the pending deal as it weighed its long-term ownership options, the Manchester Evening News daily newspaper reports.
Shell added, however, that the refinery, its remaining facility in Britain, would remain open.
“There are no plans to close the refinery or associated local marketing businesses,” a Shell statement read.
Aug. 21 (Bloomberg) — Australia’s government will decide within days whether to give environmental approval for the Chevron Corp.-operated A$50 billion ($41 billion) Gorgon liquefied natural gas project. San Ramon, California-based Chevron and its partners Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch Shell Plc won environmental approval from the Western Australian state government earlier this month.
Click to continue reading “Australia to Decide on Chevron’s Gorgon LNG Next Week”
Aug. 20 (Bloomberg) — Total SA, Europe’s third-largest oil producer, Royal Dutch Shell Plc and UGI Corp. units received complaints from France’s antitrust agency as part of an investigation into the propane and butane industry.
Click to continue reading “Total, Shell Get French Complaints in Butane Probe”
AUGUST 18, 2009, 9:43 P.M. ET
MELBOURNE (Dow Jones)–Arrow Energy Ltd. (AOE.AU) said Wednesday that the company has completed the sale of a 12% stake in the Tipton West Joint Venture to a unit of Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSA), subject to approvals.
Shell paid Brisbane-based Arrow A$49.5 million, half of the purchase price of A$99 million, to obtain a further 12% of the joint venture, with the balance payable after third party and regulatory approval, the company said in a statement.
Shell also will reimburse Arrow for 30% of any future contingent payments, or up to A$21 million, that the company makes to Beach Petroleum Ltd. (BPT.AU) under the terms of the Arrow/Beach Tipton West sale agreement, Arrow said.
After the completion of the transaction, ownership of the joint venture is 70% Arrow and 30% Shell, the company said.
-By Andrew Harrison, Dow Jones Newswires; 61-3-9292-2095; andrew.harrison@dowjones.com
August 19, 2009 By The Associated Press
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — A top executive of Royal Dutch Shell who spearheaded the company’s return to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina is retiring after 33 years with the company.
The company says Frank A. Glaviano Sr. will leave his post as vice president of production for Shell’s Americas region on Nov. 30.
Glaviano is a New Orleans native and graduate of Tulane University. He has held engineering and operations leadership positions in Houston, New Orleans and Transverse City, Mich.
Following Katrina in August 2005, Glaviano oversaw the restoration of Shell’s petroleum production in the region and the return of 1,000 employees to New Orleans.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.
Protesters in Houston, Texas, on Tuesday, venting their feelings against the climate change bill Photograph: AP
BP and Shell are being told to tear up their membership of the American Petroleum Institute (API) in protest at the organisation’s attempts to incite a public backlash against Barack Obama‘s energy and climate change bill.
The two oil companies are also being asked to bring a halt to their own political lobbying in Washington in letters sent to their chief executives from Greenpeace and the Platform environmental group.
“BP maintains its membership of the API through paying substantial fees based on the large size of BP’s business. It is our concern that these fees are used by the API to undermine US government action on climate change and that BP’s membership of the API contradicts its position on the issue,” writes John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK, in a letter to Tony Hayward, the BP boss.
The letter also questions the $8m (£4.8m) worth of spending on lobbying in Washington since the start of 2009, saying this runs against the commitment made by BP’s former boss, Lord Browne, in 2002 that BP would from now on “make no political contributions from corporate funds anywhere else in the world”. A similar letter has been sent to Peter Voser, the new boss at Shell.
The demands from Greenpeace follow revelations in the Guardian last Friday that the API was pumping money into a series of “citizen rallies” to put pressure on the Obama administration over its support for a climate change bill sponsored by Congressmen Henry Waxman and Edward Markey which comes before the Senate next month.
The proposed legislation, which has already successfully passed through the House of Representatives, marks a clear move by the US to adopt a greener political and economic agenda and ditch the kind of sceptical views on global warming that were the hallmark of the previous government run by George W Bush, himself a former oilman.
An email sent by Jack Gerard, president of the API, says the lobby group will provide “upfront resources” to pay for a highly experienced events company to organise the public protest meetings, but it says oil companies themselves should encourage their staff to go to some of the 20 rallies being considered.
“In the 11 states with an [oil] industry core, our member company local leadership – including your facility manager’s commitment to provide significant attendance – is essential,” the note says.
Greenpeace and Platform believe these actions are “astroturfing” – a determined attempt to create a false appearance of popular opposition to the Obama plans to control carbon emissions from oil while boosting wind and other cleaner technologies. The environmentalists remind Hayward and Voser that their companies were once members of the API-backed Global Climate Coalition in the US which successfully campaigned against it signing the Kyoto protocol on the grounds that there was not enough proof that global warming was being made worse by man-made carbon dioxide pollution.
After protests, BP and later Shell withdrew from the GCC and started to make tentative investments in renewable energy, notably wind farms in America, which continue today. The two companies are now actively involved in the United States Climate Action Partnership, which is seen by environmentalist campaigners to be playing a very positive role on driving forward the green agenda in a country only recently overtaken by China as the world’s biggest carbon producer.
BP said it was “highly unlikely” it would pull out of the API, which was just one of hundreds of trade bodies to which it was affiliated. But it stressed that it was not involved directly in any of the planned public rallies. “Our views on climate change legislation are fairly well known,” said a BP spokesman at its London headquarters. “We support action to counter emissions although we favour market mechanisms, like trading schemes.”
Shell said tonight that it had told the API that it would not participate in the rallies but indicated it would not be leaving the organisation. “Our focus is on seeking common ground with stakeholders that can aid Congress in enacting a fair and effective cap and trade program. We will continue to express our position within API and other business and trade associations of which we are members,” added a spokesman at its headquarters in The Hague.
Meanwhile ExxonMobil, a stalwart of previous opposition to Kyoto but a company that insists it is not a climate change denier, seems to support the API wholeheartedly. The part of the company’s website devoted to the “ExxonMobil Citizen Action Team” gives pride of place to an official letter from the API opposing the Waxman-Markey legislation.
A note above from Rex Tillerson, chairman and chief executive of the world’s biggest publicly quoted oil company, says: “Our elected officials make decisions that affect all of us. It is critical that we as a company, and more importantly as individuals, are part of the political process. By linking ExxonMobil employees and retirees to their elected officials, we can let our representatives know that the ExxonMobil family is an important force in civic life.”
This difference of view has resulted in what Voelte described yesterday, with rare understatement, as some “argy-bargy” between Woodside and the other owners of the Browse gas discoveries — Chevron, BP, Shell and BHP Billiton. Now as anyone who knows the Other Don can tell you, Voelte is not easily intimidated.
Click to continue reading “Voelte takes on partners over Browse LNG project”
PetroChina’s deal is the latest to meet China’s growing energy needs
|
PetroChina, Asia’s largest oil company, has signed a $41bn (£25bn) deal to purchase gas from a field off Australia’s north-western coast.
The pact is the largest trade deal in Australian history and was hailed by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd.
“This agreement provides the basis for the creation of thousands of jobs and also injecting billions of dollars into our economy,” he said.
The 20-year deal comes despite recent tensions between Australia and China.
‘We need China’
Last week, four employees of Anglo-Australian mining giant Rio Tinto were formally arrested in China on suspicion of stealing Chinese trade secrets and taking bribes. Stern Hu, head of Rio’s iron ore operation, was later charged with commercial spying.
Rio had pulled out of a deal that would have seen it receive a $19.5bn investment from China’s Chinalco.
A diplomatic row has also broken out over a visit to Australia by exiled Uighur activist Rebiya Kadeer, who Beijing accused of inciting the recent riots between ethnic Uighurs and Han Chinese in Xinjiang province.
“China needs us, we need China,” Trade Minister Simon Crean said after the PetroChina deal.
The Chinese company has agreed to buy 2.25 million tons per year of liquefied natural gas from the yet-to-be developed Gorgon gas field, from the share owned by US oil and gas giant ExxonMobil.
Mr Rudd said the deal would create up to 6,000 jobs.
Karen Warren/Houston Chronicle, via Associated Press: A rally against legislation to set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions in Houston on Tuesday. Oil companies bused in their employees.
HOUSTON — Hard on the heels of the health care protests, another citizen movement seems to have sprung up, this one to oppose Washington’s attempts to tackle climate change. But behind the scenes, an industry with much at stake — Big Oil — is pulling the strings.
Hundreds of people packed a downtown theater here on Tuesday for a lunchtime rally that was as much a celebration of oil’s traditional role in the Texas way of life as it was a political protest against Washington’s energy policies, which many here fear will raise energy prices.
“Something we hold dear is in danger, and that’s our future,” said Bill Bailey, a rodeo announcer and local celebrity, who was the master of ceremonies at the hourlong rally.
The event on Tuesday was organized by a group called Energy Citizens, which is backed by the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry’s main trade group. Many of the people attending the demonstration were employees of oil companies who work in Houston and were bused from their workplaces.
This was the first of a series of about 20 rallies planned for Southern and oil-producing states to organize resistance to proposed legislation that would set a limit on emissions of heat-trapping gases, requiring many companies to buy emission permits. Participants described the system as an energy tax that would undermine the economy of Houston, the nation’s energy capital.
Mentions of the legislation, which narrowly passed the House in June, drew boos, but most of the rally was festive. A high school marching band played, hot dogs and hamburgers were served, a video featuring the country star Trace Adkins was shown, and hundreds of people wore yellow T-shirts with slogans like “Create American Jobs Don’t Export Them” and “I’ll Pass on $4 Gas.”
The buoyant atmosphere belied the billions of dollars at stake for the petroleum industry. Since the House passed the bill, oil executives have repeatedly complained that their industry would incur sharply higher costs, while federal subsidies would flow to coal-fired utilities and renewable energy programs.
“It’s just a sense of outrage and disappointment with the bill passed by the House,” said James T. Hackett, chief executive of Anadarko Petroleum, who attended the rally. He defended, as an environmental measure, the use of buses financed by oil companies and Energy Citizens to carry employees to the rally. “If we all drove in cars, it wouldn’t look good,” he said.
While polls show that a majority of Americans support efforts to tackle climate change, opposition to the climate bill from energy-intensive industries has become more vigorous in recent weeks. The Senate is expected to consider its own version of the bill at the end of September.
A public relations company hired by a pro-coal industry group, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, recently sent at least 58 fake letters opposing new climate laws to members of Congress. The letters, forged by the public relations company Bonner & Associates, purported to be from groups like the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and Hispanic organizations.
Bonner & Associates has acknowledged the forgeries, blaming them on a temporary employee who was subsequently fired. The coal coalition has apologized for the fake letters and said it was cooperating with an investigation of the matter by a Congressional committee.
For its part, the oil industry plans to raise the pressure in coming weeks through its public rallies so that it can negotiate more favorable terms in the Senate than it got in the House. The strategy was outlined by the American Petroleum Institute in a memorandum sent to its members, which include Exxon Mobil, Chevron and ConocoPhillips. The memorandum, not meant for the public, was obtained by the environmental group Greenpeace last week.
“It’s a clear political hit campaign,” said Kert Davies, the research director at Greenpeace.
In the memorandum, the president and chief executive of the American Petroleum Institute, Jack N. Gerard, said that the aim of the rallies was to send a “loud message” to the Senate. He said the rallies should focus on higher energy costs and jobs. “It’s important that our views be heard,” Mr. Gerard wrote.
Cathy Landry, a spokeswoman for the American Petroleum Institute, confirmed the contents of the memorandum, but said that the rally was not strictly an institute event and that Energy Citizens included other organizations representing farm and other business interests.
The House bill seeks to reduce greenhouse gases in the United States by 83 percent by 2050 through a mechanism known as cap and trade, which would create carbon permits that could be bought and sold. President Obama initially wanted these permits to be entirely auctioned off, so that all industries would be on the same footing, but the sponsors of the bill agreed to hand out 85 percent of the permits free to ensure passage of the legislation.
The power sector, which accounts for about a third of the nation’s emissions, got 35.5 percent of the free allowances. Petroleum refiners, meanwhile, got 2.25 percent of these allowances, although the transportation sector accounts for about 40 percent of emissions. That means oil companies would have to buy many of their permits on the open market, and they contend that they would have to raise gasoline prices to do so.
But Daniel J. Weiss, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a research and advocacy organization, said that refiners would be allowed to keep the value of the free allowances they received, while public utilities would be required to return the value of their permits to customers.
“There is a myth out there that this is a giveaway to utilities,” Mr. Weiss said. “It’s not true. The oil industry’s goal is to block or weaken efforts to tackle global warming.”
The rallies have opened a rift within the industry. Royal Dutch Shell, an initial supporter of climate legislation, said that it had told the institute that it would not participate in the rallies, although its employees would be free to attend if they wanted to. ConocoPhillips, meanwhile, has opposed the bill since its passage and, in a note on its Web site, encouraged employees to attend the rallies.
Since Mr. Obama’s election, the oil industry has lost some clout in Washington. The rally on Tuesday gave voice to the feeling among employees of oil companies that their industry was being battered.
“I experienced Carter’s war against the industry, and I’m tired of being pushed around,” said David H. Leland, a geological map maker for NFR Energy. “We provide a product for a reasonable price, and we’re going to be punished for doing a damn good job.”
: It appears that Voser finally got fed up with Mr Overpromise/Underdelivery. Despite all the nice words about him, he is clearly kicked out. Plenty of sycophants around him are now fearing for their jobs and positioning themselves whom to kow-tow now. This bearded fellow wasted his great brain on very small details and he was unable to delegate. I think his only real good project was the SLIM project. This was many moons ago and launched him to the top jobs. And there he failed as frequently and eloquently pointed out on the Donovan site. Big brain, a micromanager on par with the pointy haired boss in Dilbert, a vicious and vindictive attitude to those that were of no use to him or that might talk back. In summary: Good riddance and now the legal system of Scotland can go after him. But I doubt they will.
: What goes around comes around.... The announcement of Brinded has long been anticipated. We now wait for the next much smaller announcement.... Tom Purves to retire..... This will make our day when that moment happens. Shell never deals with the issue of bad leadership until it is too late and the havoc has been wreaked.... However, as we say in the US, Every dog has its day..... and today that was Malcolm.
: So early retirement then after all that ....... REPLY BY JOHN D. You are still playing a point scoring game. You seem to forget that the avoidable deaths of Shell offshore workers on Brent Bravo is at the heart of this matter. The deaths occurred after a safety audit led by Bill Campbell exposed a shambolic, illegal and shameful safety regime on Brent Bravo. They occurred after Shell senior Expro management had promised Bill that Shell would bring an end to the "Touch F*** All" culture and the falsification of safety records. The explosion and record breaking fine provide proof that the promises were not kept. There is NO commercial aspect to this matter as far as Mr Campbell is concerned. He is driven solely by a fear of an even worse event due to the same policy by Shell of putting production and profits before the safety of offshore workers. Please give Bill some credit for his integrity and for his long campaign, which has rightly received cross-party support from many MP's.
: Agent provocateur indeed!! Never been called that before, and I am most certainly not in league with Shell in any way! I again reiterate my point : was Campbell fired or given early retirement from Shell and thereby lies his grudge or did he reach full retirement age in the company? An honest answer might convince many that his continuous aggressiveness against Shell is genuine or just an ongoing grudge. This is not a "slanging match" merely a point of clarification. REPLY BY JOHN DONOVAN: Mr Campbell has made it clear that he does not wish to get into discussion with someone making insulting comments while hiding behind an alias. With regards to his comment that you may be an agent provocateur, perhaps he gained that impression from checking your history of postings. Just so there is no misunderstanding, we welcome contributors who provide a counter-balance to negative postings about Shell. I have provided some links to further information about the Brent Bravo scandal. Despite all of the promises by Shell senior management about safety, which including appointing a safety Czar, its track record remains atrocious. Years after the Brent Bravo debacle, it was revealed that the lifeboats for a Shell North Sea platform were not seaworthy. You could not make it up. “Lifeboats trouble at Brent field” published on 14 March 2008, UpstreamOnline revealed “SHELL’s safety record on its Brent Bravo platform in the UK Northern North Sea is once again under scrutiny after the discovery of technical problems with two lifeboats on the installation that resulted in both of them being removed from service.” Jake Molloy, general secretary of the Offshore Industry Liaison Committee was quoted in the article by Christopher Hopson as claiming “If they had loaded up this particular lifeboat, the chances are it could have been launched into the sea in an uncontrolled fashion which would have caused death or injury as it was held in place by corrosion and not by the designed system”. The article said that problems had been found with a second lifeboat on the Brent Bravo platform. It also reported that a lifeboat had launched itself into the sea from Shell’s Tern platform because the brakes and clutches were “dysfunctional” and had damaged the launch mechanism off the platform. Shell confirmed problems had been discovered with two lifeboats on Brent Bravo during “routine maintenance”. Shell was quoted as stating that it viewed the matter seriously and had “mobilised an investigation team on the platform”. BILL CAMPBELL EMAIL SENT TO MEMBERS OF THE UK HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT ROYAL DUTCH SHELL SAFETY CONCERNS
: LondonLad: In many cases "Reaching Retirement age" in Shell simply means being unable to find a position outside Shell -nowadays the most competent people generally move on long before reaching retirement age and pursue a second career elsewhere.
: To : an observer of Shell, you state "It is commonly known that a great many employees of Shell Expro are freemasons". Where did you get this "fact" from - smoking whacky backy?? I doubt very much that a great many are indeed freemasons. Even if they are (wich I seriously doubt), so what? Let's face it they are a society that provide one of the largest contributions to charities in the UK. I think you very clearly have an axe to grind against Shell. In that context why does Campbell have such a chip on his shoulder over Shell? Was he sacked for some reason? Did he actually reach his retirement age in Shell? Would be nice to know so that we can believe more that his rants are genuine problems he has with Shell rather than caused by some hidden grudge.
: GTW, I know you are right, TP and others will get their due. What is painful is that those whose lives have been changed and whose spirits have been destroyed because of his actions, will not be compensated. Tom is not the only one taking credit for this new cruel process of forced ranking, by claiming credit for what market demand has meant for profits. There are promotions taking place right now because credit is claimed by those executing Tom's plan for performance 'refirings'. I worked in manufacturing sites where management and performance was a joke, and profits were above forecast. It's always been market demand and the hard work of the folks on the ground that make manufacturing successful, Tom is not a pioneer in taking undue credit for local successes, but he has certainly been the cruelest!
: I have no proof nor will I ever find that proof, but this reprehensible conduct of the legal authorities smells to high heaven of masonic lodges. It is commonly known that a great many employees of Shell Expro are freemasons. The police forces all over the world are well presented in the various lodges. I would not be surprised if Brinded himself is a member. Bill Campbell is a very courageous man taking on these evil forces. We in Shell all knew him to be a completely honest and competent Maintenance manager and HSE auditor. But he loses against all the parasites and sycophants whose sole job is to protect the directors. And then live well on the spoils of their abhorrent activities. Top marks for the Donovans who keep this festering sore in the spotlight. To some it maybe a lot of repeating old stories, but those that want to hide and bury their bad actions know that time is on their side. And Shell has deep pockets and knows how to procrastinate.
: John, there is no issue with my post. This is the same GTW that has been providing updates for some time on the ill fated project CEP and the ill fated Tom Purves, both of which should be going fading into the background this year as old worn out news.
: I retract my previous statement. COMMENT BY JOHN DONOVAN: WE HAVE REASON TO SUSPECT THAT THIS POSTING IS NOT IN FACT FROM THE PARTY WHO USES THE ALIAS "GOLDENTRIANGLE WATCHMAN ON THIS BLOG, BUT IS FROM AN IMPOSTER.
Shell Blog RSS Feed
