Posts from ‘November, 2011’

The Irish Times – Tuesday, November 22, 2011

ÁINE RYAN

SHELL HAS announced the appointment of a new managing director at the Corrib gas project.

The communique came as local protest groups yesterday declined an invitation to contribute to a joint Oireachtas committee hearing on offshore resources and their exploration.

Michael Crothers is a Canadian native, born to Irish parents, and takes the helm as Shell prepares for the final phase of the operation. This involves construction of the longest sub-sea raw gas pipeline in western Europe.

Challenges by An Taisce and local residents to key consents for this final phase were settled in the High Court recently.

Mr Crothers takes over from Terry Nolan on December 1st next. Mr Nolan, who held the position for four years, announced his intention to retire some weeks ago and said he was “hugely proud” of the “many collective achievements” attained by partners and contractors at Corrib. “I would also like to thank the people of Erris for their welcome and support and for the many challenges they have raised,” Mr Nolan said.

Mr Crothers has worked around the world in the oil and gas industry over a 28-year period, 24 of which have been with Shell.

His most recent post was as general manager of Expansion Operations for Shell’s upstream business in the Americas. He has also worked in London as vice-president of health, safety, environment and sustainable development for Shell’s downstream business. He will divide his time between Dublin and Erris.

Meanwhile, local community group Pobal Chill Chomáin has strongly criticised the decision of An Taisce to make a settlement on judicial reviews of the project, removing one the final obstacles to the project. The group claims the project is now in a legal limbo.

The group also wrote to Andrew Doyle TD, chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee for Communications, Natural Resources and Agriculture, declining an invitation to participate in a session to be held next week on November 29th. Pobal chairman Vincent McGrath states in the letter that the group’s key concerns for the “health and safety of the community” had not been addressed in a multitude of forums and settings.

“No integrated, cumulative risk assessment has ever been conducted on this project. Laws have been changed, standards amended, European rules ignored in order to advance the project,” Mr McGrath wrote.

He also said he wished to “to highlight the State’s facilitation of the project at every level, the criminalisation of our legitimate protests and the resultant human rights violations . . . We have been consistently excluded from having these issues properly and fully addressed.”

Maura Harrington of Shell to Sea also said they would not contribute either. Pro-Gas Mayo also received an invite to the meeting.

SOURCE ARTICLE

NOVEMBER 21, 2011

By HASSAN HAFIDH

BAGHDAD—The Iraqi oil ministry could ask Royal Dutch Shell PLC to develop Iraq’s supergiant West Qurna Phase 1 oil field in southern Iraq, if the government decides to terminate Exxon Mobil Corp.’s contract after it signed a deal to explore for oil in the Kurdish region of the country, a senior Iraqi oil official said Monday.

“We have many options,” said Abdul Mahdy al-Ameedi, head of the ministry’s petroleum contracts and licensing directorate, when asked what the ministry would do if the West Qurna 1 oil field contract with ExxonMobil is canceled.

“It is possible that Shell, or any other company, can replace ExxonMobil in West Qurna 1 field,” Mr. Ameedi said in an exclusive interview. “The partner of Exxon Mobil in West Qurna 1 is Shell and Shell is a giant and big company and it is well aware of and taking part in all operations and activities in the field.”

Exxon Mobil Iraq Limited is the lead contractor at West Qurna Phase 1, with a 60% stake, while Shell has 15% and the remaining 25% belongs to the Iraqi state company. ExxonMobil has signed six exploration oil and gas deals with the northern Kurdish region, which is at loggerheads with the central government in Baghdad over oil, land rights and distribution of power between the regional and central governments.

Baghdad has said any oil deals signed with the semiautonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq aren’t valid because they haven’t been approved by the central government, and has suggested the ExxonMobil accord in the north could jeopardize its contract to develop West Qurna 1.

Mr. Ameedi said the ministry is in the process of writing a new letter to ExxonMobil asking why it signed deals with the Kurdistan Regional Government, despite a warning from Baghdad. The new letter will be the fourth the Iraqi government has sent the company without response.

“Taking a decision to terminate West Qurna 1 contract is easy and the (oil) minister can take such a decision tomorrow, but we don’t want to rush,” Mr. Ameedi said. “We want first to make our position very clear and based on legal and sound basis despite the terms of the contract consolidating our position.” ExxonMobil hasn’t so far commented. Chief Executive Rex Tillerson, who is currently in the Saudi capital Riyadh, declined to comment.

ExxonMobil is already producing about 370,000 barrels a day of oil from West Qurna. Many other large oil companies have similar contracts to redevelop aging oil fields.

These contracts have helped Iraq increase its oil output to around 2.9 million barrels a day in recent months, compared with 2.4 million barrels a day a year ago. They haven’t been especially lucrative but are seen as an entry point into one of the world’s most promising oil areas, analysts have said.

—Summer Said in Riyadh contributed to this article.

Write to Hassan Hafidh at hassan.hafidh@wsj.com

SOURCE ARTICLE

Turkey’s state-owned oil company, Turkish Petroleum Corporation (TPAO), has reached an agreement with Royal Dutch Shell to explore for oil and gas off of Turkey’s Mediterranean coast.

The agreement signifies a major shift in Turkey’s oil exploration efforts as the focus turns to the Mediterranean from the Black Sea coast, where TPAO partnered with Exxon and Petrobras to dig exploration wells. Source: IIT

SOURCE ARTICLE

MONDAY 21 December 2011: Pressure is mounting on the Federal Government and its agencies to compel telecom firms like giant MTN, GLO, Airtel, Etisalat and oil producing firms like Shell and Exxon Mobil, to list their shares on the Nigerian Stock Exchange, following the clamour to broaden access to their ownership, Business Day has learnt.

From AFRICA ENERGY INTELLIGENCE 24 AUGUST 2011

By MARK LANDLER and ALAN COWELL

A version of this article appeared in print on November 19, 2011, on page A8 of the New York edition.

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration plans to impose a new round of sanctions against Iran’s petrochemical industry, a Western official briefed on the plans said Friday, less than two weeks after a United Nations report published evidence that the Iranian government was working on a nuclear weapon.

The sanctions, expected to be announced on Monday, build on existing measures against Iran’s oil and gas industry, which aim to curb foreign investment in refineries or other facilities. European nations are expected to announce similar measures when their leaders meet later in the week, the official said.

The sanctions come after the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, rebuked Tehran on Friday, but stopped short of threatening further pressure or actions to curb its contentious uranium enrichment program.

In the wake of the report, the United States has been working to build international support for new sanctions. Much of its focus has been on cutting off the Iranian central bank or placing further curbs on the petroleum industry.

But there are hurdles to sanctioning Iran’s central bank, because China, Japan and other countries rely on it to process transactions for purchases of oil. The White House is also reluctant to undertake measures that could lead to spikes in oil prices and rattle a fragile American economy.

While the details of the new sanctions were sketchy — and the Treasury Department declined to comment — the official said they were focused more on investments in Iran’s petrochemical industry than on cutting off sales of oil, which could disrupt the market.

Meanwhile, the criticism from the nuclear agency drew an immediate and sharp response from Iran, which maintains that the evidence for the agency’s report was fabricated by enemies of the Islamic Republic. An Iranian envoy insisted that his country would not be deterred “for a second” from a nuclear program it says is for peaceful purposes. The diplomat also said Iran would boycott a planned meeting next week of Middle Eastern countries, called to discuss ways of freeing the world of nuclear weapons.

The exchanges came at the end of a two-day closed meeting of the 35-member board of governors of the atomic energy agency at its headquarters in Vienna. The agency’s report last week drew on a vast trove of evidence to conclude that there was a “credible” case that Iran engaged in secret and possibly continuing efforts to construct a nuclear weapon.

The concluding resolution, approved overwhelmingly, did not refer to punitive measures against Iran, or send the matter to the Security Council for action, reflecting the diplomatic balance between Western powers eager to crank up pressure on Iran and two leading powers in the diplomacy, Russia and China, that have adopted a milder line.

The resolution expressed “deep and increasing concern about the unresolved issues regarding the Iranian nuclear program,” and urged Iran to return to talks and restrain its nuclear work as outlined by prior Security Council resolutions. The board approved the statement by 32 to 2, with Cuba and Ecuador opposing it and Indonesia abstaining.

The resolution did not set deadlines for Iran to comply with the agency’s demand for access to nuclear sites for its inspectors and greater openness about the country’s nuclear program.

In a statement, the White House welcomed the agency’s sharp criticism of Iran, emphasizing the completeness of the case against Iran made by the agency’s report. “The Director General’s report and today’s action by the Board of Governors expose once and for all the hollowness of Iran’s claims, and reinforce the world’s demands that Iran come clean and live up to its international obligations,” the statement said.

The Iranian envoy to the agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said his country would not halt uranium enrichment for even “a second,” Reuters reported, after having earlier dismissed the resolution’s mandates as “not legally binding, thus they are not applicable.”

Mr. Soltanieh said his country would not participate in the planned gathering next week, under the agency’s auspices, of Middle Eastern countries, likely to include Israel and Arab states.

Western powers that have long pressed for Iran to halt its nuclear enrichment program — the United States, Britain, France and Germany — appear to have been unable to use the unexpectedly strong agency report to create a consensus for stronger action. Instead, the relatively mild resolution reflected lengthy and intense diplomatic wrangling with Russia and China, the other countries most directly involved.

Earlier, Mr. Soltanieh accused the nuclear agency of endangering the lives of Iranian scientists by releasing their names in an annex to last week’s report about the suspicions of nuclear weapons work.

“The release of the names of the Iranian nuclear scientists by the agency has made them targets for assassination by terrorist groups as well as the Israeli regime and the U.S. intelligence services,” he said in a letter to the body’s director general, Yukiya Amano.

Parts of the letter were published by Iran’s state-financed Press TV satellite broadcaster, which noted that several Iranian nuclear scientists had been killed in incidents attributed by Iran to Israeli, British and American intelligence services.

Mr. Soltanieh contended that disclosing the names of Iranian experts represented a violation of the agency’s rules and said Tehran reserved the right to seek damages from the agency for any harm to its personnel or property as a result of the report — a possible reference to Tehran’s frequently voiced fears of an Israeli military strike on its nuclear facilities.

The agency’s report has amplified talk of a potential Israeli attack, a move that Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said last week would have a “serious impact” on the Middle East and possibly on American forces in the region, without seriously disrupting Iran’s nuclear program.

On Friday, Mr. Panetta planned to meet Ehud Barak, his Israeli counterpart, and indicated that he would speak of potential “unintended consequences” from a military strike. He was speaking to reporters traveling with him to a security forum in Canada, where he is to meet with Mr. Barak.

RELATED ARTICLES

Senator Kirk joins bill for Iran sanctions on Royal Dutch Shell: 17 February 2011

WikiLeaks: Royal Dutch Shell machinations over Iran sanctions: 26 January 2011

Royal Dutch Shell Iranian treachery: 20 November 2010

Royal Dutch Shell trading with the enemy, Iran: 30 October 2010

Wiesenthal Centre Slams Shell on Iran: 19 October 2010

Shell Iran controversy: internal emails reveal panic at Shell: 28 September 2010

Shell’s treachery in Iran: 20 May 2010

Royal Dutch Shell playing with fire in Iran: 27 October 2007

An email to Bill O’Reilly at Fox News: Shell’s treachery in Iran : 19 March 2007

Hélène Michaud: 18 November 2011

Cleaning up extensive oil pollution in the Niger Delta is the primary responsibility of the Nigerian government, Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal told a parliamentary commission on Thursday.

He was supported by the Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs, Henk Bleker, who pointed out that the Nigerian government, like all governments, is responsible for the well-being of its population. On top of that the Nigerian state is the majority shareholder in the SPDC joint venture of oil companies that includes Royal Dutch Shell, Bleker added.

High on the agenda of the commission’s debate on the Netherlands’ corporate responsibility programme was how Shell’s home country should respond to the United Nations Environmental Programme’s (UNEP) report on the massive soil and water contamination caused by oil spills in the Delta’s Ogoni region. The report recommends that oil giant Shell and the Nigerian government take urgent measures to clean up the environment.

Corporate responsibility police

Last week, human rights organisation Amnesty International accused Shell of delaying the cleanup operations in the Ogoni region. Opposition parties called on the Dutch government to “put pressure on Shell” to take action. The ministers responded that the Netherlands would not play the role of “corporate responsibly police” abroad.

Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal said that the Netherlands is seen as a trendsetter in terms of corporate social responsibility in the world. Socialist MP Ewout Irrgang said he was “shocked” by this assertion and asked the minister whether he didn’t feel ashamed given the suffering in the Niger Delta.

Merchant

Green Party MP Liesbeth van Tongeren referred to the old saying that the Dutch behave both as merchants and moralistic preachers in their contacts with the rest of the world. In the case of Nigeria the Netherlands clearly preferred the role of the merchant, she argued.

Rosenthal said that environmental issues and the situation in the Delta were often raised “diplomatically” in bilateral talks with the Nigerian authorities and during regular meetings between the Dutch government and Shell. He said that the situation in the Niger Delta was too complex, with too many actors involved, to expect Shell to act alone.

Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs Bleker said he would offer the Nigerian government Dutch expertise in the field of oil industry monitoring.

Funds

In general, the Dutch MPs, many of whom had attended a recent briefing offered by UNEP, gave the impression of being well informed about the situation in the Niger Delta.Christian Democrat MP Ad Koppejan suggested that Shell start putting aside funds for the one billion dollar special fund the UNEP said should initially be created to finance the cleanup operation in Ogoniland.

In a reaction to Radio Netherlands Worldwide, Shell said that “delicate talks” were going on between the Nigerian government, SPDC and other oil industry representatives on how this fund should be set up.

Copyright © 2011 Radio Netherlands Worldwide. All rights reserved.

SOURCE ARTICLE

The big question is: Can Shell keep riding this tiger? What prevents PetroChina’s parent, CNPC, from exploiting the Western producer for what it wants and then tossing it aside or perhaps even taking it over?

November 18, 2011 at 1:56 pm by Associated Press

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — A 2008 lease sale in the Chukchi Sea off Alaska’s northwest coast remains legally flawed and should be cancelled, Alaska Native and environmental groups say in a court filing.

Earthjustice attorney Erik Grafe said Thursday the sale does did not follow federal environmental law despite Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s conclusion last month that shortcomings identified by a federal judge had been addressed. Top federal government scientists acknowledge gaps in what is known of basic features of the Arctic Ocean, Grafe said, such as areas important to bowhead and beluga whales, walrus, seals, birds and fish.

“There are huge gaps in information that we think preclude an ability to analyze the facts and choose alternatives and manage any kind of lease sale manage or oil and gas activity up in the Arctic,” Grafe said.

An Interior spokeswoman said the department would have no comment.

The Minerals Management Service conducted the Chukchi sale during the waning days of the Bush administration, putting up nearly 46,000 square miles — an area larger than Ohio — in the waters off Alaska’s northwest coast. About 4,312 square miles were sold. A subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell spent $2.1 billion and hopes to drill during the open water season next summer.

The 15 groups sued before the sale, claiming federal regulators had ignored environmental law requirements.

U.S. District Court Judge Ralph Beistline ruled in part that regulators failed to determine whether information they acknowledged was missing before the sale was relevant or essential, or whether the cost of obtaining that information was exorbitant.

Salazar on Oct. 3 said the replacement for the Minerals Management Service, the new Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, had met the judge’s concerns with supplemental environmental work. That included an analysis of potential effects of natural gas development, the relevance of the missing information, and the environmental impacts of a hypothetical large oil spill.

By affirming the 2008 lease sale, Grafe said, the Obama administration has adopted the mistakes of the previous administration.

Interior officials contend that not a single piece of missing information is critical to make a reasoned choice among lease sale alternatives, Grafe said in his brief, such as how disturbances from lease sale activity may affect bowhead whales, the lynchpin of Inupiat Eskimo subsistence culture. They withheld sales from nearshore areas to accommodate spring bowhead migration, Grafe said, but acknowledge they know less about bowhead aggregation in summer and fall.

“That’s the kind of information that’s critical at this stage, that kind of spatial information, what’s important habitat for these animals” he said.

BOEM uses boilerplate explanations used to justify that information is not essential, such as that information can be obtained later in the offshore development process, or that other environmental laws will preclude adverse effects, Grafe said in his brief. The groups also said the government has refused to analyze and consider the climate change effects of burning oil and gas produced by the lease sale.

Mike LeVine, an attorney for Oceana, one of the plaintiffs, said by phone from Juneau that agency officials have been contradictory. In announcing a new five-year offshore leasing plan last week, Interior officials said they would hold Arctic Ocean sales late in the five-year time frame to allow for scientific evaluations in the “frontier” drilling area.

“On the other hand, it’s gone out and said it doesn’t need any more information to affirm its decision to sell the leases from 2008,” LeVine said. “It’s inconsistent.”

SOURCE ARTICLE