News and information on Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Cash All Gone: To Relieved: it's easy to try to live in a digital world - 1 or 0, on or off, while the real world is analog and has a whole spectrum in between... I tries to give you factual information, but I see that it is not worth the effort... Good luck and have fun...
OSSL: Hi Relieved ...on the matter of self serving underlings .. Shell trying to declare that top management booze senders on Shell Corrib didn't actually work for Shell ..our lawyer put them right on that ...and they backed off and blamed us for carrying out a Shell instruction ...integrity zero.
Relieved: To Cashallgone: Ah yes, failure on this project is the fault of the evil and corrupt garlic eaters. How many times have we heard this same old story - Shell management is the victim of its partners, its contractors, its employees, etc., etc., all of whom are crooked, dishonest and incompetent. Failure at Shell is due to saintly management being duped by evil and self serving underlings and hirelings. Shell needs a new story. This one is worn out.
Cash all gone: To Relieved: the issue with the CashAllGone pipeline has nothing to do with material selection. By the way, the project was executed under management of ENI, and these Italiam crooks brought in some incompetent Turkish welders who caused a lot of weld defects, which then were attacked by the gas and caused brittle failure. Shell is only involved in the operational phase, and just is a shareholder for execution. If ENI did not ask help, Shell had very little opportunity to get involved...
Paddy Briggs: This is an obscenity. No ifs. No buts. It's wrong in every way. Former Shell chief paid £22m over two years despite profit warning
OSSL: Mr Resolution, Peter Voser 22 Million...it must be by agreement ....can we have our booze money now ....also by agreement and supplied by demand of Shell when you were at the helm?
Relieved: Several news outlets have reported that the recent production shutdowns at the giant Kashagan field in Kazakhstan are related to H2S corrosion and embrittlement issues in the production pipelines. These should never have arisen. RDS is a partner in that project. At one time RDS had a great deal of technical expertise in dealing with gas and oil containing high concentrations of H2S. In the 1970's and 1980's Shell USA set the standards for the design of H2S service equipment in the US and elsewhere. These were known as the Shell NACE standards. What has happened? I take it the bean counters at Shell have disposed of its technical brains trust as an 'unnecessary' overhead item. I wonder how many billions that decision will now cost the company? The people running this company today are damned fools.
OUTSIDER: By definition any court record is in the public domain, so you are perfectly within your rights to publish anything that is available from the court system. Historically, obtaining the information was more difficult and required a visit to the court itself but the same rules applied.
John Donovan: Reference the article relating to Iain Percival that I removed at his request, after I offered to do so if he had any objection to its publication. I want to make it plain that the main focus of the article - the correspondence between Mr Percival and Mr Hans Bouman - both senior people at Shell at the time, was not private mail via their own email addresses, but Shell internal correspondence using their designated Shell email addresses. It is for this reason that it was included by Shell lawyers in Shell discovery documents that formed part of the relevant class action litigation process. It is no secret that this website has thrived over the last decade on publishing Shell internal documents and correspondence, whether leaked, obtained via SAR applications to Shell, or sourced from court records. As the activities of Wikileaks and Edward Snowden have shown, no one using the Internet or any Intranet can ever rely that any electronic communication, however confidential or sensitive, will not end up being published for all the world to see and as we now know, captured, analysed and stored in vast data centres by US and UK spooks.
Stuart: With unreserved apologies if you HAVE gotten his support: I find it very sad that you would decide to publish old documents from Iain, a man whose integrity and dignity you praise. His career concerns, his job applications etc are not something that should be shown around for cheap amusement, and to keep alive your anti-Shell moaning. Yes this stuff was already in the public domain, but your explanation for publishing essentially says "it was hard to find, so I've made it easy for everyone to gawp at it". Take the document down, and show some dignity in return. Again to repeat, if Iain is happy then I apologise, but if not, please remove it. REPLY FROM JOHN DONOVAN: Hello Stuart. I sent an email to Iain immediately the article was published. I explained why, for legal reasons, I did not send it to him in advance. I offered to modify or delete the article if he so desired. I have now heard from him and honoured my offer to delete it. Since there was no legal issue in relation to Mr Bouman, I did contact him in advance and obtained his consent to publish. For the record, the article has been on the US Court records system for several years available to anyone willing to purchase a copy. Once it was posted online on 10 October 2007 the entire information, including the email correspondence, was no longer private but put into the public domain as a consequence of the litigation. The same applies even to documents marked strictly confidential. I was under no obligation to contact anyone. I obtained the document completely legitimately and was entitled to publish it and a related article without reference to anyone else. I contacted both gentleman out of respect for them. There are very few current or former Shell people who I would treat similarly.