Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

Posts from ‘April, 2010’

Shell appeals land case to Nigeria’s supreme court

Customers fuel up at a Shell gas station in Westminster, Colorado October 30, 2008. REUTERS/Rick Wilking

By Austin Ekeinde Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:46pm GMT

PORT HARCOURT, Nigeria (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell has asked Nigeria’s supreme court to overturn a ruling that requires the firm to forfeit its residential headquarters in Port Harcourt, a spokesman said on Tuesday.

An appeals court ruled in favour of the Mgbesilaru community in the Port Harcourt oil hub last week, saying their land was illegally given to Shell by the federal government.

The case has inspired a similar lawsuit against Shell by the local community on Bonny Island, where the company has its main crude oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals.

Relations between foreign oil companies and local community groups have long been fragile in the Niger Delta, which is home to Africa’s biggest oil and gas industry and where poverty is widespread.

Decades of neglect and frustration in the region led to the rise in militancy and criminal activity in recent years.

Shell’s spokesman John Barnden said the company immediately appealed to the supreme court against the April 15 ruling. He declined to comment further about the case.

Shell paid rent to the Mgbesilaru community for decades until it was given ownership of the land by the federal government in 1999.

The court ruled the government did not have the right to give Shell the land.

“The bad faith of Shell is glaring. It is an intolerable conduct of a tenant,” said Emmanuel Asido, one of the lawyers representing the Mgbesilaru community.

A lower court in a similar case ruled in favour of the Bonny community last year, saying Shell must forfeit land ownership on the island. The company has also appealed that decision.

Shell’s oil facilities at Bonny can process and export up to 1.25 million barrels per day, making it the largest terminal of its kind in Africa.

© Thomson Reuters 2010 All rights reserved

REUTERS ARTICLE

World LNG Demand Will Double by 2020, Shell’s Outen Says

BusinessWeek Logo

By Robert Tuttle

April 20 (Bloomberg) — World demand for liquefied natural gas will double by 2020, Guy Outen, executive vice president for exploration and production at Royal Dutch Shell Plc, said at a conference in Oran, Algeria.

European gas demand will increase 1 percent a year while local production will fall 2 percent annually. World gas demand will rise 25 percent to 4 trillion cubic meters a year by 2020 as electricity demand rises 75 percent in the period, he said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Robert Tuttle in Doha at rtuttle@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Rob Verdonck at rverdonck@bloomberg.net

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell Conchas Project Is ‘Above Expectations,’ Odum Tells Valor

Bloomberg.com

By Laura Price

April 20 (Bloomberg) — Royal Dutch Shell Plc’s Parque das Conchas oil project in Brazil is performing “above expectations,” Valor Economico said, citing Marvin Odum, the company’s upstream director for the Americas.

Shell has been drilling at Parque das Conchas in the Campos Basin for six months, the Sao Paulo-based newspaper said. Oil exploration in Brazil, where Shell currently produces about 117,000 barrels a day, is one of the company’s priorities, Valor said, citing Odum.

Shell plans to drill 10 wells in Brazil by the end of 2011, including two in the so-called pre-salt region of the Campos and Santos Basins, Valor said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Laura Price at lprice3@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: April 20, 2010 07:26 EDT

SOURCE ARTICLE

Royal Dutch Shell at the crossroads

“No attempts are currently being made to rectify under-performance in either the refining or the marketing sectors. Refiners, like Stanlow, will be disposed of to others who, if they keep them operating, will have the energy and the skill to make them profitable. Shell doesn’t want to do this.”

Posting on Shell Blog by Wilt Staph on Apr 20th, 2010 at 10:06 am

There is a palpable sense that Shell is at the crossroads in so many ways at the moment. The broad strategy, “More Upstream, Profitable Downstream” reveals more, to insiders, than the bare words may suggest. The truth is that Shell is increasingly an upstream company – for many years this business segment has been the primary focus but over the past year or so, and especially under Voser, this has accelerated. Almost any upstream is good – one is reminded of George Orwell’s Animal Farm where the rather similar mantra was “Four legs good, two legs bad!”. The upstream has four legs and the downstream only two but, reluctantly it seems, “bad” though it is, some downstream assets and businesses will be held onto so long as they are “profitable”. No such requirement seems to apply to the upstream!

Many of Shell’s new upstream projects have been dogged by immense complications. From Sakhalin to Corrib in Ireland to Tar Sands in Canada these projects are controversial for a whole range of environmental, political and social reasons. But they will continue to be pursued, despite the difficulties, because they are “good”. No such luxury applies to the downstream. No attempts are currently being made to rectify under-performance in either the refining or the marketing sectors. Refiners, like Stanlow, will be disposed of to others who, if they keep them operating, will have the energy and the skill to make them profitable. Shell doesn’t want to do this. Similarly downstream marketing businesses, like Shell New Zealand, are deemed surplus to requirements. Once again the purchaser will make them work (or they wouldn’t buy them). Shell would prefer to walk away rather than allocate resources to the radical restructuring of such apparently underperforming assets.

In the downstream especially Shell is cherry-picking what it does. The pretence that refining and marketing are core businesses has now disappeared. The Boston Consulting Group matrix is useful to summarize what is underway. The “Stars” are all in the upstream and investment will take place in them. The “Question Marks” are in the downstream, and to some extent in the upstream, and there has been a steady divestment from those that are not perceived as core for the future. The “Cash Cows” are both in the upstream (Brunei, Oman…) and the downstream and they will be milked as long as possible. Finally the “Dogs” are almost exclusively in the downstream – refineries and low return marketing businesses – and they are being disposed of at a swift rate. What is missing from this strategy is any real understanding of where Shell wants to be in the future. The evidence is that Shell will, in say ten years time, be an exclusively upstream business. If that is acknowledged now then the sensible thing to do with the two downstream businesses (refining and marketing) would be to sell them as going concerns rather than let them gradually wither away from lack of investment and lack of top management focus. Many years ago British Gas successfully divided itself into two very different businesses – one “upstream” in construct and the other a predominantly consumer business. Shell has the option of doing the same and creating a separately traded marketing business which would be similarly focused on the customer. The alternative is simply to dispose of this business in its entirety to one of the many willing buyers who regularly knock on doors in London and The Hague.

The Downstream review team currently at work should take a step back from their spreadsheets and consider the alternative of keeping the marketing business together as a whole and either creating a brand new Shell-branded company to run it in a focused way – or of selling it off in its entirety. And they should reminder that there is no synergy between refining and marketing any more and that these two wholly different businesses require separate treatment.

Related posting on Shell Blog by “Outsider” on Apr 20th, 2010 at 2:59 pm

The cost of capital for manufacturing/petrochemicals will always be lower than for E&P simply because the market perceives the risks to be lower. Burdening downstream operations with Upstream’s cost of capital guarantees that downstream will not be able to compete with their specialist peers. For gas utilities the cost of capital is even lower than for manufacturing, justifying BG’s break-up.

Nigerian Appeal Court Sacks Shell from Bonny Terminal Land

By Davidson Iriekpen 20 April 2010

Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) is about to forfeit ownership of the land hosting its biggest export terminal in the country following the judgment of the Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

The Bonny terminal currently has over 12 million barrels of crude oil storage capacity and is also the biggest export terminal in Nigeria.

It has a helicopter landing pad and facilities capable of loading super tankers – in addition to an indoor berthing facility that can take six ocean going tankers, an expatriate club, a residential area, amongst others.

The Court of Appeal at the weekend re-affirmed Rivers State High Court order which ordered the multi-national oil giant to forfeit the land to the indigenes of Bonny.

The appellate court panel, made up of Justices Suleiman Galadima, Istifanus Thomas and Ejembi Eko, in a unanimous decision, did not only uphold the judgment of the lower court, but also dismissed the appeal filed by Shell, describing it as “substantially lacking merit”.

FULL ARTICLE

Shell, Exxon to sell U.K. assets

From Herald News ServicesApril 19, 2010 10:00 PM

North Sea – Royal Dutch Shell PLC and ExxonMobil Corp. plan to sell assets in the central part of the U.K. North Sea to focus on other projects.

The companies are inviting cash bids for their interests in the producing Guillemot A, Teal, Teal South and Cook fields, according to Schlumberger Ltd.’ s energy marketing website.

The fields produce 11,500 barrels of oil and 11 million cubic feet of gas daily. They hold 91 million barrels of oil equivalent in recoverable reserves.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Shell Confirms Worker’s Death At Motiva Port Arthur Refinery

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

APRIL 19, 2010

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Royal Dutch Shell said Monday that a worker died at the Motiva Port Arthur refinery it operates in Texas.

The worker’s death “can be confirmed, and we are investigating what the cause was,” a Shell spokeswoman said. No further details were available, but the company said a statement will be issued soon.

The Motiva Port Arthur refinery, 50% joint venture between units of Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSA, RDSA.LN) and Saudi Aramco, has the capacity to process 275,000 barrels of crude oil a day.

-Naureen S. Malik, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-4210; naureen.malik@dowjones.com

WSJ ARTICLE

Real reason behind Shell spying operation on the Donovans?

“It would indeed be ironic if the resources of one investigative arm of the U.S. government has been used by Shell in an attempt to impede the Shell/Gale Norton corruption investigation being carried out by another investigative arm of the U.S. government.”

By John Donovan

In December 2009, following an analysis of Shell internal communications and documents supplied to us by Shell in response to a SAR application under the Data Protection Act, it became clear that Shell had once again resorted to cloak and dagger activity directed against us.

Reuters revealed that Royal Dutch Shell had asked an anti-fraud agency “NCFTA”, to target our website – royaldutchshellplc.com – on the basis  that “There will be no attempt to do anything visible to Donovan”.  The article said that NCFTA, the US National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance in Pittsburgh, did not respond to emails or telephone calls from Reuters on the subject.

In subsequent Shell communications supplied in response to a further SAR application, NCFTA was identified by Shell as being the National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance, a high tech investigation organization funded and staffed partly by the FBI.

There is nothing new in Shell having a close connection with cloak and dagger organizations.  Some 90 years ago, Shell recruited the then newly retired head of British Military Intelligence, Major General Sir George MacDonogh.   Shell “Corporate Affairs Security” (CAS), the current Shell in-house spook organisation, exposed as a key player in the current undercover operation against us, is headed by Ian McCredie OBE, another former MI6 senior officer. He is Royal Dutch Shell plc Vice-President for Security.

What prompted such attention and activity, mobilizing CAS and a specialist resource of the FBI? The latter move obviously suggested a US connection. Was it because Tom Purves, the unloved Shell Motiva VP had been the subject of leaks to the Donovans? Or was the reason more sinister?

During the same period, another investigative arm of the U.S. federal government was already moving forward with an investigation of alleged corruption relating to Shell Oil General Counsel Gale Norton, the former Secretary of the Interior, whose department awarded Shell three potentially lucrative oil shale prospecting licenses.  This was prior to her joining Shell.  Norton was appointed as Interior Secretary by President George W. Bush whose father, President George Bush, another oil man, had enjoyed a business relationship with Shell through his company, Zapata Offshore.

Our reputation as the worlds leading source of Shell insider information has spread far and wide.  Hence it is perhaps no surprise that we were approached by the federal investigators carrying out the corruption probe (and a Los Angeles Times reporter who broke the story about the corruption investigation). With the help of our network of Shell insiders, we supplied confidential Shell documents to assist the investigation.

Had Shell Oil also recognized our potential as an intermediary and source of  Shell inside information – and the threat this posed? Was this the real reason for Shell’s mobilization of internal and external spying resources?

It would indeed be ironic if the resources of one investigative arm of the U.S. government has been used by Shell in an attempt to impede the Shell/Gale Norton corruption investigation being carried out by another investigative arm of the U.S. government.

Fitch Warns on Shell’s Credit Rating

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

APRIL 19, 2010 By JAMES HERRON

LONDON—Fitch Ratings on Monday revised its outlook for energy giant Royal Dutch Shell PLC’s credit rating to negative from stable, citing doubts that the company’s medium-term cash flow will be strong enough to maintain its current double-A-plus rating.

The decision is a blow for Shell, which is nearing the end of a major restructuring and hopes that 2010 will mark a turnaround from its weakening performance in recent years.

“Despite Shell’s forecasted production increase of approximately 600,000 barrels of oil equivalent [a day] by 2014 in a $60 per barrel price environment, the company’s operating cash flow in the medium term may be insufficient to restore its financial profile,” Fitch said in a statement.

Shell could have its rating downgraded in the future if it doesn’t increase oil and gas production, hold down spending in its North American operations or recover from operational weakness in refining and petrochemicals, Fitch said. But the company could have its outlook return to stable if it can demonstrate it is able to generate enough cash to cover capital expenditure and dividends, and use the extra money to pay down its debt, Fitch added.

Shell’s gearing, or ratio of net debt to total capital, at the end of 2009 was 15.5%, well below its maximum level of 30%, although the figure does not include pension liabilities.

Write to James Herron at james.herron@dowjones.com

WSJ ARTICLE

EARNINGS PREVIEW: Momentum Shifts From BP To Shell In 1Q

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

19 APRIL 2010 By James Herron of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

TAKING THE PULSE: After many quarters of lagging its rival BP PLC (BP), Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB.LN) is expected to regain some momentum in this year’s first quarter.

Improvements in many of Shell’s key markets and a long-awaited return to oil and gas output growth should paint a more positive picture for Shell after a bad set of fourth-quarter results, analysts say.

“[This] could be a more important quarter for Shell. Its above-average exposure to European gas seasonality given the cold weather, to crude-linked gas prices and refining should help start to restore the market’s confidence in its earnings power,” said Collins Stewart in a research note.

However, the company still has a lot of ground to make up and will lag BP in overall profitability, albeit to a lesser extent than previously.

The recovery in the oil price will be the main driver of profit growth for European integrated oil companies, which on average will see their first-quarter profits rise 31% year-on-year, said ING analyst Jason Kenney.

COMPANIES TO WATCH:

Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB.LN) – Wednesday, April 28

MARKET EXPECTATIONS: “We see quarter-on-quarter growth in Shell’s earnings of close to 50%, versus 10% for BP,” says Collins Stewart. This means Shell earnings will only lag BP by around 15%, compared with an average of 40% in the second half of 2009, it said. The biggest turnaround will be in refining, where Shell is likely to post a $600 million profit, versus a $400 million loss last quarter.

MAIN FOCUS: The bulk of Shell’s corporate restructuring has been implemented and analysts will be looking for any signal from management about how this will affect performance this year. Indicators of progress on key gas projects in Qatar, set to drive output growth over the next two years, will also be important. “The big question is whether management can deliver the next stage on time and on budget,” said Brewin Dolphin analyst Iain Armstrong.

BP PLC (BP) – Tuesday, April 27

MARKET EXPECTATIONS: BP put in a strong operational performance in the fourth quarter and analysts expect a repeat of this in the first quarter, setting the company up to make the most of the 72% rise in the price of Brent crude. ING’s Kenney expects BP’s net profit to be up more than 90%. The company’s oil and gas output should be down around 0.2%, in line with the company’s forecast, he said.

MAIN FOCUS: BP delivered impressive savings in 2009, cutting cash costs by around $4 billion thanks to efficiencies and currency effects. The company aims to carry this momentum forward, reducing costs to 2004 levels within two to three years. Analysts will be looking for evidence that this target is achievable now that much of the low-hanging fruit has been plucked.

BG Group PLC (BG.LN) – Thursday, April 29

MARKET EXPECTATIONS: Gas-focused BG Group will struggle a little more than BP and Shell, ING’s Kenney. He expects a decline in profit of around 8%. This is because U.K. gas prices actually fell by almost a quarter compared with a year ago and U.S. prices rose just 5%. He sees BG’s liquefied natural gas earnings at $494 million versus $892 million a year ago. “I don’t think the gas momentum is as positive for BG as some had hoped,” he said.

MAIN FOCUS: BG Group and its partners in the Karachaganak gas and condensate project in Kazakhstan have been hit by a flurry of charges over labor violations, environmental damage and is accused of making illegal earnings by over-producing from the field. This is widely seen as the Kazakh government pressuring the consortium to sell a stake in Karachaganak to national oil company KazMunaiGas. The market will be watching for any signal that this situation could be resolved.

Company Web sites: http://www.bg-group.com

http://www.bp.com

http://www.shell.com

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

WSJ ARTICLE