Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

Posts from ‘April, 2011’

Alaska Sen. Begich pushes bill to create federal coordinator for Arctic offshore drilling

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — U.S. Sen. Mark Begich on Monday compared the regulatory atmosphere for offshore drilling in the Arctic Ocean to a whack-a-mole arcade game, where the player uses a mallet to smack down moles as they pop out of the ground.

In the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, under the Alaska Democrat’s scenario, oil companies are the players and federal agencies are the moles.

“Each time we have one mole beat down, another one pops up and derails the process,” Begich said.

Standing with representatives of Alaska oil companies who want to drill, including Shell Oil and ConocoPhillips, Begich said the answer is a federal coordinator for Arctic outer continental shelf drilling who could smooth applications through the bureaucracy.

“For too long, well before the current administration, federal agencies have erected roadblocks to that development,” Begich said.

He has introduced a bill to create an offshore drilling coordinator’s office, and said the $2 million price tag is would be than worth it if Alaska’s vast resources are tapped.

“This office would have the authority to work across agencies causing Alaska so much heartburn today — the EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Interior Department,” Begich said.

The measure would also have an effect on permit appeals. Short of the U.S. Supreme Court, the bill would require expedited rulings to challenges of permits and move jurisdiction to the federal district court in Washington, D.C.

Shell Alaska Vice President Pete Slaiby endorsed the measure.

“The legislation that the senator is proposing today could go a long way to address some of the regulatory challenges facing responsible offshore development in Alaska,” Slaiby said.

America needs energy from Alaska waters and Alaskans need the jobs from offshore petroleum development, Begich said. Federal regulators estimate Arctic waters hold 26 million barrels of recoverable oil and 130 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

“For too long, well before the current administration, federal agencies have erected roadblocks to that development,” Begich said.

What Begich called roadblocks, others have called precautions.

Environmental and Alaska Native groups contend the oil industry has not demonstrated the ability to clean up an oil spill in ice-choked waters.

Drilling critics say too little is known about the species that live there, which already are being affected by global warming and less summer sea ice, or how seismic tests and other drilling activity will affect them.

Even in the window of ice-free months, conditions can be brutal off Alaska’s northeast and northern shore. The nearest Coast Guard base is more than 1,000 miles away from lease areas and the northern Alaska coast lacks deep-water ports and major runways near most drilling sites.

In the aftermath of the Gulf of Mexico spill, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said the department would use “utmost caution” in future drilling lease sales in Arctic Ocean waters.

Begich said the current system is not working. Shell has spent more than $3 billion for the opportunity to drill, he said.

“Just when it appeared the development had a green light a few weeks ago, an internal EPA environmental appeals board sent the air quality back to the drawing board,” he said.

Begich said the offshore oil and gas industry grew up in the Gulf of Mexico.

“The process there with the same oil companies and the same agencies works much better,” he said.

His legislation, he said, would allow permit appeals.

“It does recognize America needs this energy and the issues surrounding it should be resolved quickly,” he said.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Port Arthur activist wins $150,000 environmental prize

POSTING BY GOLDEN TRIANGLE WATCHMAN

John D, you want to engage with a true activist that has been a pain in the rear for Motiva, read this article. Motiva and the Purves gang are busy building the project. They had to buy this guy off to get the permit…. Might be worth connecting with him and seeing if he truly understands Shell’s equity position on crude when the project completes. They won’t be running the Saudi crude as much since it is going to China… where do you think they are going to get the crude…. Answer another question… Where is Shell’s investment of late north of the border in Canada…. oil sands…. on it’s way to PAR…

By Matthew Tresaugue, Houston Chronicle
Published 07:45 a.m., Monday, April 11, 2011

Port Arthur activist Hilton Kelley speaks out in 2008 about Veolia Environmental Services, which is asking permission from the EPA to reverse a longtime ban on importing PCBs. James Nielsen/Houston Chronicle / Houston Chronicle

The public housing project where Hilton Kelley was born and raised sits in the shadows of two refineries that belch toxic chemicals into the air.

His mother moved him away from Carver Terrace long ago, but he is still here, waging what seems to be a one-man crusade in one of America’s most polluted places. With many of this Gulf Coast town’s poorest residents suffering from asthma, skin irritations and cancer, he has neither forgotten nor forgiven.

So for the past decade he has pushed and prodded, with a bit of shouting, mostly by him, for more restrictions on industrial construction and stricter monitoring of plant emissions.

And now, what once seemed like a quixotic pursuit – greater environmental and public health protections in a refinery town – no longer seems so quixotic.

“Port Arthur has been a dumping ground for years because this was the area of least resistance,” Kelley says. “But this is a new day.”

For his work, Kelley is one of the 2011 winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize, sometimes called the Green Nobel as the highest honor of its kind for grass-roots environmentalists.

He will be in San Francisco today to receive the award, given annually to an environmentalist from each continent, and the $150,000 check that goes with it. Past winners have sought justice for victims of environmental disasters at Love Canal and Bhopal, India, resisted oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and tried to prevent the U.S. military from incinerating chemical weapons.

Film, TV in California

The 50-year-old Kelley came to environmentalism late and without any training in community organizing. He left Port Arthur for the U.S. Navy in 1979 and later settled in Oakland, Calif., where he worked as a stuntman and extra on movies and television shows filmed in the San Francisco Bay area, including CBS’ Nash Bridges

During a visit for Mardi Gras in 2000, Kelley saw his once-vibrant hometown in a relentless decline – its storefronts shuttered, its fields filled with rusty debris, its residents sick and its children with nothing to do. He returned to life in California, but not for long.

“I didn’t see anyone doing anything about it,” he said. “And then one day I looked in the mirror and said, ‘I’m from Port Arthur. What am I doing about it?’”

Kelley recognized that the town could not pull itself back up without addressing the environmental problems first, but he knew change would not come easily in a community dependent on refineries and chemical plants for jobs. One of his early protests outside City Hall attracted only two people, and one was his brother.

Paid for air samples

Port Arthur, near the Louisiana border, was built on oil wealth. The city’s west side, which is largely African-American, is home to eight major industrial plants, including the Motiva and Valero oil refineries.

Without the support of many, including the mayor at the time, Kelley took a different tack, collecting air samples during “upset events,” unpermitted releases caused by lightning strikes, human error, startups and shutdowns. He used the results, at a cost of $500 per sample, to prod regulators and the plants to take action.

Among his victories was a deal with an expanding refinery that included new pollution controls and a $3.5 million fund to support small businesses and provide health coverage for residents of Port Arthur’s west side. He also managed to stop the shipment of highly toxic PCBs from Mexico for disposal at a nearby incinerator.

And his efforts have made Port Arthur visible again. Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency put it on a list of 10 cities nationwide that would receive attention and funding over two years to address disproportionate environmental burdens.

“I have a lot of respect for Hilton,” said Al Armendariz, the EPA’s chief for Texas and four adjacent states. “I really admire his work. He cares a lot about his community and he pushes our agency to do all we can to serve them. He is successful because he doesn’t give up and because his goals are to help others.”

Jobs come first

So far, the discussions, which involve Kelley and representatives from the city, EPA and industry, have touched on the relocation of Carver Terrace, additional emissions reductions and an improved alarm network for upset events.

Kelley said his goal is not to close the refineries and chemical plants but to make them cleaner, so that Port Arthur may be able to regain a bit of its past self.

“We understand that Port Arthur may never be what it was, but it can be better than it is,” he said recently while standing among a row of abandoned storefronts on Procter Street, once a main commercial strip in the city’s downtown.

At the same time, his focus on rebuilding the city has put him at odds with other environmentalists. Kelley, for example, does not oppose the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would bring heavy crude from Canada’s oil sands to the Port Arthur area for refining, because the city has 17 percent unemployment.

“That pipeline will bring thousands of jobs,” he said. “Our fight starts when we smell the sulfur. I’m hopeful that by the time the pipeline is done, the proper emissions controls will be in place.”

Matthew Tejada, director of the environmental group Air Alliance Houston, said Kelley’s position made him rethink how he does his job. It’s easy for activists “in the treetops,” like himself, to lose sight of the nuances at the grass-roots level, Tejada said.

“He is one of the best environmental activists in the country because he takes his marching orders from the community,” Tejada said. “It’s not born out of idealism. It’s about seeing the state of a community he loves and grew up in and doing something about it.”

SOURCE ARTICLE

RELATED ARTICLE:

THE WASHINGTON POST: Goldman Environmental Prize goes to Texas man who took on refineries over pollution

Regulation of Offshore Rigs Is a Work in Progress

Sandy Huffaker for The New York Times: Michael R. Bromwich, who was chosen by President Obama to overhaul the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, speaking to University of San Diego students during a recruiting tour.

By JOHN M. BRODER and CLIFFORD KRAUSS

A version of this article appeared in print on April 17, 2011, on page A1 of the New York edition.

WASHINGTON — A year after BP’s Macondo well blew out, killing 11 men and spewing millions of barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, the much-maligned federal agency responsible for policing offshore drilling has been remade, with a tough new director, an awkward new name and a sheaf of stricter safety rules. It is also trying to put some distance between itself and the industry it regulates.

But is it fixed? The simple answer is no. Even those who run the agency formerly known as the Minerals Management Service concede that it will be years before they can establish a robust regulatory regime able to minimize the risks to workers and the environment while still allowing exploration offshore.

“We are much safer today than we were a year ago,” said Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, who oversees the agency, “but we know we have more to do.”

Oil industry executives and their allies in Congress said that the Obama administration, in its zeal to overhaul the agency, has lost sight of what they believe the agency’s fundamental mission should be — promoting the development of the nation’s offshore oil and gas resources. Environmentalists said the agency, now known as the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, has made only cosmetic changes and remains too close to the people it is supposed to regulate.

Even the officials who run it, Mr. Salazar and the new director, Michael R. Bromwich, admit that they have a long way to go before government can provide the kind of rigorous oversight demanded by the complex, highly technical and deeply risky business of drilling for oil beneath the sea.

The blowout preventers in use today remain incapable of handling a well rupture of the force of the BP blast. The containment system developed by the industry to respond to another blowout has not been tested in real-life conditions and, by the industry’s own estimate, could still allow hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil to spew before a runaway well could be capped.

The seven-member commission named by President Obama to investigate the BP accident looked at the regulatory failures that contributed to it, and its conclusions were blunt.

“M.M.S. became an agency systematically lacking the resources, technical training or experience in petroleum engineering that is absolutely critical to ensuring that offshore drilling is being conducted in a safe and responsible manner,” the panel said in its final report, issued in January. “For a regulatory agency to fall so short of its essential safety mission is inexcusable.”

Many of those flaws remain, according to William K. Reilly, a former Environmental Protection Agency administrator who was one of two chairmen of the commission. He said last week that Mr. Bromwich was doing a creditable job, but that the agency still lacked the technical expertise needed to oversee such a specialized industry. “They changed the name, but all the people are the same,” Mr. Reilly said. “It’s embarrassing.”

The job of repairing the agency has fallen to Mr. Bromwich, a former federal prosecutor and Justice Department inspector general who was pressured into leading the agency by Mr. Obama. While defending the employees of the agency, Mr. Bromwich, who took over last June, made no excuses for its past misbehavior, including a scandal at the Denver office that involved agency officials and oil company employees having sex and sharing drugs.

Mr. Bromwich acknowledged that accident rates for offshore drilling were several times higher in the United States than in Australia, Canada, Norway and the United Kingdom, in part because those countries imposed effective new rules after major accidents.

After the Deepwater Horizon spill, the regulatory agency was broken into parts, dividing the revenue collection office from the oversight division to eliminate conflicts of interest. A series of new rules involving well design, spill response and environmental review were imposed. Permitting and production were set back months while the industry absorbed the changes.

But Mr. Bromwich says his agency still lacks the resources, personnel, training, technology, enforcement tools, regulations and legislation it needs to do its job properly. He lays a large part of the blame on insufficient financing.

The bureau’s budget has been basically flat since it was created in 1982, even as drilling activity in the deep-water gulf has drastically increased and the technology has grown more complicated.

“Without more resources, we can keep doing what we’re doing, but we can’t grow,” Mr. Bromwich said in an interview during a recruiting trip to nine West Coast universities, where he was trying to lure young scientists and engineers to apply for relatively low-paying government jobs. “We need more people, and we need new people.”

Mr. Bromwich has asked the Office of Personnel Management to adjust pay schedules so his office can compete with oil companies, which in some cases are paying twice the government salary for petroleum engineers. Mr. Obama has asked for an increase of more than $100 million to the agency’s roughly $250 million annual budget. Congress provided about half that amount in the short-term budget deal reached last week, but discussions have not begun on next year’s budget.

The House is considering three bills that would force the agency to move more quickly on drilling permits, to open vast new areas along the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts to drilling and to reopen lease sales that had been canceled after the Deepwater Horizon spill. A separate bill would ease environmental rules for drilling off the shores of Alaska.

“Much of the legislation that I have seen being bandied about, especially with the House Republicans, is almost as if the Deepwater Horizon-Macondo well incident never happened,” Mr. Salazar said last week. “If another Macondo happened and we didn’t have the ability to contain it, it would probably mean the death of energy development in the nation’s oceans.”

Employees of the remade agency are candid about its persistent shortcomings. At a recent industry-government forum in New Orleans, officials from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management repeatedly admitted that they could not answer many of the questions and could not account for many of the delays in responding to applications.

Valerie Land, regulatory supervisor at W & T Offshore, complained that agency officials sent back permit plans with questions that had been answered in the applications. Even some simple questions, like whether a blowout preventer would be above or below water, seemed to flummox some officials, she said.

Michael Tolbert, a senior engineer with the bureau, shrugged and said, “We have a lot of new people looking at the plans.”

Randall B. Luthi, a Wyoming rancher who was once a Congressional aide to Dick Cheney, served as head of the Minerals Management Service for two years in the administration of President George W. Bush. He said morale in his former agency is low because of the constant charges of corruption and coziness with industry, accusations echoed last year by Mr. Obama.

Mr. Luthi, who now leads an industry group representing offshore drilling contractors, said the new leadership had centralized much of the decision making in Washington.

The offshore operators Mr. Luthi represents are frustrated with the moratorium on deep-water drilling that has just recently begun to ease, saying companies that had nothing to do with the BP disaster believe that they were being indiscriminately punished. Although he refrained from criticizing Mr. Bromwich directly, Mr. Luthi suggested that the new director was making decisions based on inadequate knowledge and experience.

“They have instituted a lot of changes that would ordinarily require a year of research,” he said. “Here, Interior was forced to announce the changes and then do the legwork.”

The oil and gas industry has, mostly, been cooperating in the regulator’s efforts. Two industry groups helped create systems for capping out-of-control wells like BP’s Macondo, which spewed nearly five million barrels of oil into the gulf over 87 days.

The Interior Department held off granting new deep-water permits until new systems were in place; 10 have been issued since the moratorium was formally lifted in October. An additional 15 deep-water permits are pending.

Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, has been equally critical of industry and government regulators.

“We should be requiring more of the oil companies to continue deep-water drilling than passable response plans, unreliable blowout preventers and a containment system that has only been used once and can’t be deployed past 8,000 feet,” Mr. Markey said.

Rig inspectors, most of whom are from the same towns and culture as the industry employees they are supposed to police, are trying to adopt a more professional stance and no longer accept free transportation and meals from the rig operators.

“They’re bringing their own lunches when they make visits,” said Mark Shuster, Shell’s manager for gulf operations. He described inspections as more effective and comprehensive, but said the agency remained woefully understaffed and apparently lacking in resources to hire enough qualified new talent.

“They need experienced people who really do know what they are doing,” he said.

New York Times Source Article

Shell Expects to Drill in Alaska’s Arctic in 2012

APRIL 15, 2011

By ISABEL ORDONEZ

Royal Dutch Shell PLC expects to start drilling in Alaska’s Arctic waters in the summer of next year and have in place an oil-containment system specifically designed for the area ready at the same time, the head of the company’s U.S. operations said Friday.

“Our aspiration is to drill in the 2012 season,” Marvin Odum, president of Shell Oil Co., the U.S. unit of the Anglo-Dutch giant, told Dow Jones Newswires in a interview. “We are hopeful, but also cautions.”

Shell still has to obtain a number of permits from the federal government in order to go ahead with its $3.5 billion investment to drill in the state’s Beaufort and Chukchi seas. Shell’s plans have been delayed by environmental lawsuits and permit issues on top of calls for better spill prevention and containment capabilities following BP PLC’s oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico last year.

Mr. Odum said the company will wait until about September to see the amount of progress in the permitting process before making a final decision to start deploying the system needed to drill next summer. “It takes about six months to build up the capacity you need to start the program,” Mr. Odum said. “This is a very significant resource for the country, which is worth pursuing, and we are focused on getting it done.”

Shell is planning to have in place an oil-containment system specifically designed to work in the cold-climate conditions of the Arctic by the time drilling starts, Mr. Odum said.

Shell said it has a three-tier, Arctic oil-spill response system consisting of an on-site oil-spill response fleet, near-shore barges and oil-spill response vessels, and onshore oil-spill response teams staged across the North Slope of Alaska that in the event of a blowout or spill could be ready to respond within one hour.

Separately, Mr. Odum said he believes it could take a year until the level of drilling activity in the Gulf of Mexico’s deep water returns to normal levels, but that it could take longer if the federal government doesn’t speed up the permitting process.

The Obama administration imposed a drilling moratorium in the area after BP’s oil spill. The ban was lifted in October, but permits started to be issued only in late February.

Shell last month received the first authorization since the spill to drill a new well that complied with new regulations from the government. The company started drilling last week. However, Shell’s production in the area will be about 50,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day lower this year due to the impact of the moratorium, Mr. Odum said.

The executive said the company is following closely the oil-shale acquisitions some of its U.S. rivals have recently made in the U.S. and that it is working on developing its oil-shale portfolio.

Mr. Odum said the world’s oil markets are well supplied and that current high oil prices reflect the risk traders are seeing in short-term supply. He added that the ongoing oil glut at the Nymex delivery point of Cushing, Okla., could be solved in 2012 or 2013.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Natural Gas from Shale Contributes to Global Warming, Researchers Find

Natural Gas from Shale Contributes to Global Warming, Researchers Find

ScienceDaily (Apr. 13, 2011) — Natural gas extracted from shale formations has a greater greenhouse gas footprint — in the form of methane emissions — than conventional gas, oil and coal over a 20 year period. This calls into question the logic of its use as a climate-friendly alternative to fossil fuels, according to Robert Howarth and colleagues, from Cornell University in New York.

Their work is published online in Springer’s journal, Climatic Change Letters.

Shale gas has become an increasingly important source of natural gas in the United States over the past decade. Shale gas is extracted by a high-volume hydraulic fracturing (fracking) process. Large volumes of water are forced under pressure into the shale to fracture and re-fracture the rock to boost gas flow. A significant amount of water returns to the surface as flow-back within the first few days to weeks after injection and is accompanied by large quantities of methane.

Howarth and team evaluated the greenhouse gas footprint of natural gas, obtained by high-volume hydraulic fracturing of shale formations, focusing on methane emissions. They analyzed the most recently published data — in particular, the technical background document on greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry (EPA 2010), as well as a report on natural gas losses on federal lands from the General Accountability Office (GAO 2010).

They calculated that, overall, during the life cycle of an average shale-gas well, between four to eight percent of the total production of the well is emitted to the atmosphere as methane, via routine venting and equipment leaks, as well as with flow-back return fluids during drill out following the fracturing of the shale formations. Routine production and downstream methane emissions are also large, but comparable to those of conventional gas.

Methane is a far more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, but methane also has a 10-fold shorter residence time in the atmosphere. As a result, its effect on global warming falls more rapidly. Methane dominates the greenhouse gas footprint for shale gas on a 20 year horizon, contributing up to three times more than does direct carbon dioxide emission. At this time scale, the footprint for shale gas is at least 20 percent greater than that for coal, and perhaps twice as great.

Robert Howarth concludes: “The large greenhouse gas footprint of shale gas undercuts the logic of its use as a bridging fuel over coming decades, if the goal is to reduce global warming. The full footprint should be used in planning for alternative energy futures that adequately consider global climate change.”

SOURCE ARTICLE

Farmers say ‘no fracking way’ to Shell

FIONA MACLEOD Apr 15 2011 10:58

Shell’s plans to drill wells for natural gas across a large swathe of the Karoo are fatally flawed and should be rejected, according to lawyers representing local landowners.

Derek Light Attorneys criticised Shell’s environmental management plan submitted to the Petroleum Agency of South Africa (Pasa) this week, describing it as “a worthless paper exercise” that was misleading, biased, unprocedural and unconstitutional.

The attorneys also represent AgriSA and business tycoon Johann Rupert, who owns a farm in the Karoo. The area is the world’s largest mohair producer and has wool, red meat and ecotourism sectors.

Shell Exploration, a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell, this week submitted plans to Pasa for wells to be drilled at various sites in the Karoo Basin using controversial hydraulic fracturing, colloquially known as “fracking”.

“The general perception is put across in the draft environmental management plan that Shell maintains some lofty internationally accepted environmental standard that must surely be good enough for the South African context,” said the lawyers’ critique. “The strategy that Shell knowingly followed by submitting this fatally flawed plan is in fact an attempt to bypass legislation that is in place to protect the people of South Africa.”

Shell’s plan has set the stage for a possible legal battle over its ambitions to drill for natural gas in shale formations that cover about 90% of South Africa. The country has the world’s fifth-largest shale gas reserves and oil giant Shell, which reported profits of $18,6-billion last year, is one of several companies preparing extraction applications.

Well sites inadequate
Fritz Bekker, an environmental practitioner asked by the attorneys to review Shell’s plan, said the impact of fracking could include chemical contamination, gas flaring, explosions and water reduction in an already water stressed environment.

Most of the proposed fracking activities were listed and needed environmental authorisation and impact assessments, but Shell’s consultants, Golder Associates, had attempted to bypass these requirements.

“All risks to the environment and the people of the Karoo must first be investigated in detailed site specific specialist investigations before applications for unfamiliar and invasive exploration technologies should be considered,” Bekker said.

Shell’s plan suggested that eight wells would be drilled in each of the three areas it had mapped out for fracking, but no assurance was given that drilling would be confined to this. “It must therefore be assumed that Shell will drill as many wells as it may require …

“We are of the view that the size of well sites has been understated and that the proposed one hectare exploration well sites provided for [in the plan] will be inadequate,” the review said.

‘Speculative’ plans
Bekker said the 50-odd scientists who worked on the review estimated that each well site would have to include storage bunkers for explosives and hazardous chemicals, drilling tailings and rigs, gas burners, roads and accommodation facilities.

Shell’s application did not include a plan to manage or rehabilitate these and other environmental impacts of fracking, in contravention of the relevant legislation, he said.

The review also criticised the public participation process involved in Shell’s application. Given the unregulated and invasive nature of fracking, landowners should have been notified in writing and given the opportunity to make meaningful input, it said.

Instead, a limited number of landowners were invited to several public meetings hosted by Shell and were given less than a month to comment on “speculative” plans posted on Golder’s website.

“As a consequence hundreds of landowners, perhaps thousands of interested persons, are still unaware of the process and the landowners have been prevented from participating meaningfully in the consultation process.”

‘No adverse impacts’
Bekker told the Mail & Guardian that a fatal flaw in Shell’s application was the assertion by Golder that fracking would cause “no adverse impacts”.

“The National Environmental Management Act specifies that environmental consultants must not be biased.

“Golder Associates played along with Shell’s strategy by conjuring a far-reaching blanket finding that no adverse impact will occur as a result of Shell’s activities on any environmental aspects, socio-economic conditions or cultural heritage resources in the Karoo.

“They have risked tarnishing their professional integrity by presenting this biased document as an environmental management plan and could be charged under the Act.”

Detailed questions about the review, sent by the M&G to both Shell and Golder, were not answered. Pasa and the department of mineral resources have 120 days to decide on Shell’s application.

Life’s not a gas when you live near the wells
The mayor of Dish in Texas, Calvin Tillman, decided to leave town when his sons repeatedly woke up at night with mysterious nosebleeds.

Tillman told the Huffington Post recently he had spent his time in office fighting to regulate natural gas companies that have drilled 60 fracking wells into shale. But when his five-year-old son awoke with a severe nosebleed in the middle of a night filled with strong odours from the wells, he had no choice but to leave.

“He had blood all over his hands, blood on the walls, our house looked somewhat like a murder scene,” he said.

Nosebleeds reported by many residents living near the thousands of wells dotted around the American landscape are just one reason why fracking is under intense government scrutiny in the United States.

A moratorium on the gas-extraction technique has been imposed by at least 160 communities in the US, as well as in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Canada’s Quebec province.

In February, the New York Times published government documents that showed unacceptably high levels of radiation in drinking water near some wells. The documents revealed that waste water from some wells was being hauled to sewage plants not designed to treat it and then discharged into rivers that supply drinking water.

Gasland, a documentary by Josh Fox exposing the dangers of fracking, which has been shown at various locations in South Africa, was a runner-up in the “best documentary” category at this year’s Oscars.

And in a special report on “The great shale gas rush”, National Geographic reported late last year that fracking wells had destroyed the Pennsylvanian idyll of a young couple, Chris and Stephanie Hallowich. After settling on 10 acres of long-fallow farmland, the couple found themselves surrounded by an industrial panorama that included four wells, a gas processing plant, a compressor station, buried pipelines, a three-acre plastic-lined holding pond, and a road with truck traffic.

“It’s ruined our lives. That’s what it comes down to,” said Chris Hallowich. “It’s ruined our plans that we had for the kids. It’s ruined what we thought was our perfect 10 acres.”

What is fracking?
Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, involves injecting huge amounts of water, mixed with sand and chemicals, at high pressure to break up rock formations and release natural gas.

A fracking well can produce millions of litres of waste water, which is often laced with highly corrosive salts, carcinogens such as benzene and radioactive elements including radium, all of which can occur naturally underground. Other carcinogenic [cancer causing] materials can be added to the waste water by the chemicals used in the fracking process.

Shell’s environmental management plan said it would use “green” chemical additives in the Karoo. The critical review responded that this “is misleading as it is unknown what the chemical composition of the fracturing fluids will be”.

“Many of these chemicals are carcinogenic, hormone disruptors, mutagens [gene disruptors] or simply toxic to various organs or to the ecology. Others are secret or proprietary mixtures,” said environmental researcher Glenn Ashton.

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency has documented diesel and radioactive material in fracking waste water. It said that it could not be made safe. According to a recent report in the New York Times radioactivity in the waste water in Pennsylvania, which has roughly 71 000 active gas wells, is sometimes hundreds or even thousands of times the maximum federal limit.

SOURCE ARTICLE WHERE SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS CAN BE READ

Tar sands pipeline impact worries environmentalists

Golden Triangle Watchman

Check out this article. Best believe, Shell is bringing the tar sands to Port Arthur as well….

April 14, 2011

Sherry Koonce The Port Arthur News

BEAUMONT — BEAUMONT — A proposed pipeline project that would bring tar sands crude oil from Canada all the way to Gulf Coast refineries could pose a significant environmental threat to Southeast Texas, a group of scientific researchers and conservationists said Thursday.

The Lamar University Chapter of Sigma Xi, the scientific research society, hosted a town hall meeting to discuss what impact the proposed 1,700-mile oil pipeline called Keystone XL would have not only on Southeast Texas, but the U.S.

“I am horrified by what they are doing in Canada. This is a horribly poor pipeline and I’d like to get this thing stopped,” Bruce Drury, conservation chairman for the Big Thicket Association, said.

Carla Tucker, a Lamar instructor and hydrogeologist, warned that the pipeline would impact groundwater resources, surface water bodies, has the potential for spills, could impact the stability of a fault zone in the path of the pipeline, harm wildlife and pose health risks.

In Texas, the pipeline would cross the sensitive Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer, which supports 10-12 million people in 60 counties.

In the nation’s heartland, particularly Nebraska, farmers are organizing to stop the pipeline in an effort to save their land.

Because the pipeline originates in Canada and crosses the U.S. boundary, the U.S. State Department has to give its stamp of approval before the project can move forward. The state department is expected to decide whether to approve construction later this year.

Built by TransCanada, the 36-inch underground pipeline would connect the tar sands fields of northern Alberta to Texas refineries. If approved, the pipeline would become operational in 2013.

Opponents say tar sands oil is a dirty, corrosive, toxic fuel source that looks much like heavy black peanut butter.

Brittany Dawn McAllister, coordinator with Stop Tarsands Oil Pipelines, a consortium seeking to prevent the project, said people were meeting all over East Texas trying to stop the effort.

Diluted Bitumen, also called DilBit, or tar sands oil, is the most corrosive and acidic fuel in the world, McAllister said.

A supplemental environmental impact statement is expected to be released any day now, McAllister said.

The statement will call for a 45-day comment period —something opponents would like to see extended, along with added public hearings.

In addition to the environmental impact, landowners all across the U.S. are threatened by eminent domain, and don’t have much choice other than to take the deal that TransCanada offers. Land needed for the pipeline is as large as the state of Florida, McAllister said.

Not everyone is against the pipeline. McAllister said because the pipeline would be expected to bring jobs, chambers of commerces and the Better Business Bureau are pushing hard to get the pipeline through.

Others are looking at the pipeline as a way to cheapen and expand the production of crude oil.

Valero Energy Corporation has already signed up to be a customer of the Canada tar sands crude, Bill Day, executive director of media relations, said in a telephone interview Thursday.

“This would allow us to bring a steady supply of crude into Port Arthur from a favorite trading partner like Canada,” Day said.

Valero’s Port Arthur refinery has the capacity to process crude from Canada, and with the completion of the plant’s hydrocracker unit at its Port Arthur facility, the plant can process more crude, he said.

Valero currently purchases small amounts of heavy Canadian oil from Canada which is transported via ship. Because of the distance, transportation costs for the Canadian crude can be expensive, more so than markets such as Mexico and South America, where Valero gets most of its crude supply.

If the proposed pipeline running from Canada to the Gulf is built, the Canadian crude is expected to be less expensive and more efficient.

Mexican oilfields are declining, making the Canadian crude even more attractive, Day said.

“It’s not like this would be a new thing for Valero to be processing heavy oil; it would just from a different source,” Day said.

Representatives from Motiva Enterprises in Port Arthur could not immediately reached by The News for comment.

skoonce@panews.com

SOURCE ARTICLE

RELATED ARTICLE

HOUSTON CHRONICLE: Proposed oil pipeline through Texas raises worries

Extract

…critics warn that the oil flowing through the 2,000-mile pipeline would come with a high environmental toll, leaving behind toxic sludge ponds and destroyed forests while producing large amounts of gases linked to climate change.

Ranchers also worry about the possibility of groundwater contamination, while some Houston-area residents say refining the crude will further foul the region’s already dirty air.

“This isn’t a hard thing for people to understand,” said Matthew Tejada of the advocacy group Air Alliance Houston. “We’re picking up Canada’s trash and dumping it in Texas.”

We don’t want SHELL in Oman any more

Received from the “OmanOil 4us Campaign”

We are group of Omani youth, engineers and others who have started a campaign to demand the nationalization of PDO and therefore to cancel the PSA agreement between PDO (& hence SHELL) and the government of OMAN.

Our goals are:

-Nationalization, take back the 40% currently owned the private shareholders through legal process
-Restructuring the company completely and thoroughly
-Dividing block 6 into smaller concession areas; easy ones which can be solely operated by national resources and more difficult ones which require sophisticated technologies and high capital investment which can be offered for PSA’s

We would be grateful if we can help us to get:
-any insight of SHELL position in OMAN,
-any information of the renewed sharing agreement of 2004,
-any correspondences related to the subject,
-any confidential documents,
-any information of how the Omani government approached Shell regarding the overbooked reserves prior to 2004?
-your own view of the subject would be highly appreciated

Any information which you think will help the campaign and you can share with us will be appreciated. How do you think we should proceed? Any advice?

Regards,
The Coordination Committee of The Campaign to Nationalize PDO

RELATED ARTICLE

Unrest Spreading to Petroleum Development Oman

Shell reports release of sulfur dioxide at Convent Refinery

By John Donovan

Shell has reported the unauthorized release of a hazardous substance, sulfur dioxide, at its Convent Refinery in Louisiana.

This is not the first controversy surrounding the Shell/Motiva Convent Refinery…

Shell Email Leak Says US Convent Refinery Income Dismal -Blog

LONDON -(Dow Jones)- Income performance at Motiva Enterprises LLC’s Convent refinery near Baton Rouge in Louisiana has been dismal since July 2008 and the company needs to cut costs to return to profitability, according to an internal email from part-owner Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSB) which was leaked to a blog critical of the company. “We are getting our costs in line at Convent in order to become competitive in a tough business environment,” the email sent to Motiva staff by manager David Brignac said. “We are considering reductions in operator positions, but no final decisions have been made on operator staffing levels,” he writes in the email posted Friday on royaldutchshellplc.com.

Brignac denied that the company already has plans for a second round of layoffs at the refinery but says it is impossible to predict the future and, “whenever we as a business entity are not generating income, we are not in control of our own destiny.”

Some analysts expect Shell’s refining business to have made a loss in the second quarter because of low profit margins, weak demand and high stocks of transport fuels. New Chief Executive Peter Voser plans a major restructuring of the company, trimming back some unprofitable units.

Earlier this month the company said it is considering selling or closing its 130,000 barrel a day refinery in Quebec, Canada. Motiva is a joint venture between Shell and a subsidiary of state-owned Saudi Aramco. It operates nearly 7,700 gasoline stations, three refineries with combined capacity of 740,000 barrels per day and oil storage facilities.

Company Web site: http://www.royaldutchshellplc.com -By James Herron, Dow Jones Newswires; +44 (0)20 7842 9317; james.herron@dowjones.com

RELATED ARTICLES

Forbes: Shell refineries settle with government: Associated Press, 03.31.2010, 02:40 PM EDT

ST. ROSE, La. — Two Shell chemical companies have agreed to install $6 million in pollution reduction equipment at two petroleum refineries in Louisiana and Alabama and upgrade a terminal in Puerto Rico as part of a Clean Air Act settlement with the federal government. Shell Chemical LP and Shell Chemical Yabucoa, units of Royal Dutch Shell PLC ( RDSA – news – people ), also will pay a combined $3.3 million civil penalty to the federal government, Alabama and Louisiana.

About $193 will go to Louisiana organizations for environmental education, teacher workshops and emergency operations. The new pollution control equipment will be installed at Shell Chemical refineries in St. Rose, La., and Saraland, Ala. The settlement was announced Wednesday by the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency.

NASDAQ: Shell To Pay $9.5 Million In Settling Clean Air Act Allegations: Mar 31, 2010 | 3:00PM

DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDSA, RDSA.LN) has agreed to pay $3.5 million in penalties and spend an estimated $6 million to install pollution-reduction equipments at three U.S. refineries to reduce harmful air emissions. The equipment is intended to cut output of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides by more than 1,450 tons a year at the facilities in Louisiana, Alabama and Puerto Rico. Assistant Attorney General Ignacia Moreno said the settlement is an example of businesses’ effort to comply with government environmental regulations. “We will continue to work with industry to achieve compliance under the Clean Air Act to remove harmful pollution from the air we breathe,” she added. -By Jodi Xu, Dow Jones Newswires; 212-416-3037; jodi.xu@dowjones.com (END) Dow Jones Newswires 03-31-101334ET Copyright (c) 2010 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Los Angeles Times: Shell refineries reach Clean Air Act settlements: By Associated Press March 31, 2010 | 12:02 p.m.

ST. ROSE, La. (AP) — Two Shell chemical companies have agreed to install $6 million in pollution reduction equipment at two petroleum refineries in Louisiana and Alabama and upgrade a terminal in Puerto Rico as part of a Clean Air Act settlement with the federal government. Shell Chemical LP and Shell Chemical Yabucoa, units of Royal Dutch Shell PLC, also will pay a combined $3.3 million civil penalty to the federal government, Alabama and Louisiana. About $193,000 will go to Louisiana organizations for environmental education, teacher workshops and emergency operations. The new pollution control equipment will be installed at Shell Chemical refineries in St. Rose, La., and Saraland, Ala. The settlement was announced Wednesday by the Justice Department and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Unauthorised venting and flaring of gas by Shell in USA

On 5 August 2003, the United States Department of Justice announced [19] that Shell Oil Company had agreed to pay $49 million USD “to settle claims under the False Claims Act and various administrative provisions relating to its unauthorized venting and flaring of gas…” at its Auger platform, located some 150 miles (240 km) off the coast of Louisiana and at other Shell facilities in the Gulf of Mexico. The settlement also resolved claims that Shell had failed to properly report, or pay royalties on the vented and flared gas. This was the third case settled by Shell Oil Company in the period 1999 to 2003 alleging that it had underpaid royalties owed to the United States. In 2000, Shell agreed to pay $56 million to settle claims that it undervalued gas produced from federal leases. Shell paid $110 million in 2001 to settle [20] US Department of Justice claims that it undervalued crude oil extracted from federal lands.

Shell Reports Release of Deadly Benzene Chemical at Deer Park Refinery: 26 February 2011

Shell Reports ‘Unplanned’ Flaring At Martinez Refinery: 26 February 2011

Motiva Releases Emissions at Convent Refinery in Louisiana

By Paul Burkhardt – Apr 12, 2011 12:37 PM GMT+0100

Motiva Enterprises LLC’s Convent Refinery in Louisiana released 500 pounds of sulfur dioxide from three flare stacks because of an imbalance in the fuel gas system, according to a filing with the National Response Center.

U.S. refineries must notify the response center if they release hazardous substances in excess of reportable quantities, according to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund.

Motiva is a refining and marketing joint venture of Saudi Refining Inc., a subsidiary of Saudi Aramco, and Shell Oil Co., a unit of Royal Dutch Shell Plc. (RDSA)

A message left on Shell’s media line wasn’t immediately returned.

The Convent refinery can process 255,000 barrels of crude a day, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

To contact the reporter on this story: Paul Burkhardt in New York at pburkhardt@bloomberg.net;

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Dan Stets at dstets@bloomberg.net.

SOURCE ARTICLE