Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

Posts under ‘Gulf of Mexico’

Shell Losing $1 Billion a Year on U.S. Gulf Drilling Delays

February 02, 2012, 1:20 PM EST

By Eduard Gismatullin

Feb. 2 (Bloomberg) — Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Europe’s largest oil company, is losing about $1 billion a year from drilling delays in the Gulf of Mexico since the 2010 Macondo disaster.

Shell’s production in the region will be curbed by about 50,000 barrels of oil equivalent this year, similar to 2011, Chief Financial Officer Simon Henry said. The company expects to return to planned operations off the Gulf coast by 2014.

“The cash flow implications are a billion dollars or more per year relative to where we want to be,” Henry said in London today. “We are catching up.”

The company, which in March said it planned to raise output to 3.5 million barrels of oil equivalent a day in 2012, is now warning that production could be lower due to Gulf drilling delays, asset sales and oil and gas prices in the U.S.

The U.S. Interior Department issued new safety regulations after lifting the drilling moratorium in October 2010 put in place after BP Plc’s Macondo well exploded in April the same year. The blowout, which killed 11 and sank the drilling rig, led to hundreds of lawsuits against BP and its partners and contractors.

–Editors: Stephen Cunningham, Randall Hackley.

To contact the reporter on this story: Eduard Gismatullin in London at egismatullin@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Will Kennedy at wkennedy3@bloomberg.net

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell accused of ‘moral bankruptcy’

Shell has been accused of “moral bankruptcy” by unions after unveiling a 54% rise in full-year profits less than a month after shutting its final salary pension scheme to new employees in Britain.

The oil company reported global annual earnings of $28.6bn (£18bn) – more than £2m an hour – while paying out $10.5bn to shareholders during 2011 and promising to raise dividend levels further in the coming months.

Peter Voser, Shell’s chief executive, said “there is more [good profit] to come” as he outlined a new programme of increased global investment as well as cuts that he said would provide even better returns for investors.

“We have worked hard to generate a strong pipeline of investment opportunities for Shell … All of this is supported by efficiency gains from our continuous improvement programmes,” Voser said.

But Europe’s largest oil group was attacked for displaying “predatory capitalism” by Len McCluskey, leader of the Unite union. “Shell reminds us of the moral bankruptcy of the corporate elite. The company is needlessly closing its final salary scheme while posting colossal profits,” he said. “Rather than provide security to its future staff and still make a profit, it has chosen greed. Shell is not alone: Unilever is needlessly slashing its employees’ pension benefits when there is no financial reason for doing so.”

Shell, which has also upset staff by unveiling plans to shut its major research and development centre at Stanlow in Cheshire after disposing of its refinery there, said it was surprised by the attack.

A spokesman pointed out that most government and private pension schemes paid in Britain were supported by Shell, which provides 12% of all dividends from the FTSE 100 index of leading firms.

The Anglo-Dutch group is riding high on the back of surging oil prices – which were more than $30 per barrel higher last year than in 2010 – and booming demand for gas, but says it is making most of its money outside Britain and makes barely 1p per litre out of petrol sales.

Voser pointed out that two thirds of the UK pump price went straight to the government as tax. He blamed near record prices for forecourt diesel on global crude market conditions and said Shell’s UK retail operations continued to come under “very heavy competitive pressures”.

Shell would continue to invest in the North Sea in oil projects such as those it has west of Shetland, but said there was a need for the right “tax structures to keep the oil and gas industry alive here”.

The company was doing “our bit for balancing the books” of the Treasury through paying a heavy tax burden, it said, while denying that its recent sale of the Stanlow refinery to an Indian group had any impact on the wider refining and distribution problems that have recently hit the south-east of England.

Shares in Shell rose 11% last year while arch-rivals such as BP saw no growth at all but on Thursday the Anglo-Dutch group’s stock market valuation fell slightly as the City was disappointed by the financial performance in the last quarter of the year.

Shell reported three-monthly earnings of $6.5bn, which was up on the same period last year but down quite heavily on the third quarter.

Total oil and gas production in the fourth quarter was lower, at 3.3m barrels of oil equivalent per day compared with 3.49m barrels a year ago. Shell said it would increase annual production to 3.7m barrels by 2014, helped by a $100bn investment plan which started in 2010.

The company said it would put much of its drilling efforts into the US and it now claims to have become the biggest driller – but not producer – in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico where BP used to reign supreme. Since the government moratorium on drilling in the Gulf, imposed following BP’s Deepwater Horizon spill, was lifted, Shell has obtained permission to drill five wells during 2012.

The company said it was treading carefully, meanwhile, in the Middle East in the wake of the Arab spring, but hopes to reveal soon how its exploration programme has been going in Saudi Arabia and when it plans to get back to similar work in Libya.

Shale hopes

Shell is hoping to turn the “shale gas revolution” sweeping north America into an export earner but also expects to see the controversial new energy source taking off in Europe once an “emotional” debate dies down.

The Anglo Dutch oil company is looking at possible plans to ship surplus quantities of the fuel, as liquefied natural gas or “gas-to-liquid” processed fuel, from the US.

Natural gas prices in north America have fallen to a 10-year low due to the discovery that gas can be extracted from shale rock using a technique known as hydraulic fracturing or “fracking”. It uses an assortment of chemicals to release gas with tiny explosions and has upset environmentalists and some politicians.

Peter Voser, chief executive of Shell, said $6bn would be spent worldwide on different kinds of shale gas operation, half of this in the US. The heavily populated nature of Europe versus the US made it more difficult to “frack” this side of the Atlantic, Voser conceded, but he said governments should “not take fast and emotional decisions” to restrict shale extraction. Shell expects Poland and even Germany to proceed with shale gas exploitation but it is also looking at operations in Ukraine and China.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell Earnings Decline on Lower Gas Prices


By Eduard Gismatullin – Feb 2, 2012 8:02 AM GMT

Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA), Europe’s biggest oil company, expects to raise its dividend this year for the first time since 2009 as new projects generate more cash.

Shell plans net capital investment of $30 billion, with cashflow from operations in 2012-2015 expected to be as much as 50 percent higher than in the 2008 to 2011 period.

Chief Executive Officer Peter Voser said growth will be driven by more than 60 new projects, unlocking potential resources of more than 20 billion barrels of oil equivalent. That’s on top of 14 projects started in 2009-11, including Qatar’s Pearl gas-to-liquids venture.

“Our improving financial position creates an opportunity to increase both our dividends and investment levels,” Voser said today in a statement.

Net income fell to $6.5 billion in the fourth quarter from $6.79 billion a year earlier, The Hague-based Shell said. Excluding one-time items and inventory changes, profit missed analyst estimates.

Shell is the first of Europe’s biggest oil companies to report earnings. It will be followed by BP Plc on Feb. 7 and Total SA on Feb. 10. Exxon Mobil Corp., the world’s largest energy company by market value, reported fourth-quarter sales that fell short of analysts’ estimates earlier this week.

Shell posted adjusted earnings of $4.8 billion, compared with the $5.2 billion median estimate of 15 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg.

‘Substantial Undershoot’

“The overall result represents a substantial undershoot against a consensus which just three weeks ago was above $7 billion,” said Stuart Joyner, an analyst at Investec Bank Plc.

U.K. front-month natural gas prices are down about 20 percent since reaching a 2011 high of 67.80 pence per therm on Nov. 7. Milder weather in Europe and maintenance curbed Shell’s production by about 100,000 barrels of oil equivalent in the quarter, according to Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.

Shell will increase production to about 4 million barrels of oil equivalent a day in 2017-2018. Last March, it said daily output would rise to 3.5 million barrels this year and 3.7 million barrels by 2014.

Output fell 5.5 percent to 3.305 million barrels a day in the fourth quarter from the year-earlier period.

Profit was also curbed by maintenance at rigs in the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea. Shell shut the Bonga field in Nigeria after an offshore oil spill, the nation’s worst in more than a decade. A fire disrupted shipments from Shell’s Pulau Bukom plant in Singapore, the company’s biggest.

Shell made a loss of $278 million from its refining and marketing operations, compared with a profit of $482 million a year earlier. Crude-processing fell 17 percent as sales dropped.

Refining margins from processing oil into fuels such as gasoline and diesel on the U.S. Gulf coast fell 22 percent to $7.16 a barrel in the fourth quarter from a year earlier, according to BP Plc data.

Of the 31 analysts that cover Shell, 21 recommend buying the shares, nine have ‘hold’ ratings, and one advises investors to sell the stock.

Shell plans to increase the dividend by 2.4 percent to 43 cents in the first quarter from 42 cents announced in the fourth quarter.

To contact the reporter on this story: Eduard Gismatullin in London at egismatullin@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Will Kennedy at wkennedy3@bloomberg.net

SOURCE ARTICLE

Profits at Shell set to anger drivers

Published on Sunday 29 January 2012 00:00

HIGHER annual and quarterly profits from oil heavyweight Royal Dutch Shell are this week expected to ignite the fury of hard-pressed drivers who continue to face near record prices at the petrol pump.

But the figures are likely to spell good news for investors as analysts raise the prospect that Shell, which boasts one of the largest dividends on the FTSE, may recommend an increase in the pay-out.

Although both full-year and quarterly numbers will be released, the City will focus on profits for the last three months of 2011, which are expected to be about 20 per cent higher compared to the same period in 2010.

However, analysts forecast they will be roughly 27 per cent below the third quarter as oil prices remained relatively flat over the final three months of 2011. That followed steep price gains earlier in the year driven by the political turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa.

The City spotlight on Thursday will also be on whether Shell confirms progress in getting American regulatory permits to explore an eventual potential oil bonanza off the Alaskan coast.

Jason Kenney, oil analyst with Santander, said: “Shell is a cash machine, but not really a growth entity. The ambitions [for Alaska] are still there, however.

“It [Alaska] will be a big exploration opportunity when it gets the full go‑ahead, with identified targets [for oil exploration].”

Analysts at broker Charles Stanley believe Shell “should have room to increase the [Q4] dividend”. It cites cash flow of $45 billion (£28.6bn) generated in 2011 compared to capital spending of $27bn and dividends of $10bn in the first three quarters. The broker forecasts rival BP, which reports the following week, will peg its fourth-quarter dividend at seven cents.

Santander forecasts an underlying profit at Shell, on a current cost of supplies basis, of $4.9bn, up from $4.1bn in the same quarter of 2010.

For the full year, the bank’s broking arm expects profits will have gone up to $24.7bn from $18.6bn in the previous 12 months.

While Shell’s exploration and production division is expected to have boosted profits to more than $5bn in the final three months of its financial year, up 52 per cent, it is thought the downstream – refining and marketing – arm may have fallen to a loss of between $180m and $210m.

Refining and petrochemical margins have been under pressure throughout the whole energy industry, partly on lower chemical volumes and the weakness of the euro.

BP, which reports on 7 February, is also seen as having boosted earnings as it continues to put the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster behind it.

Charles Stanley forecasts that BP’s fourth-quarter profits will have jumped 22 per cent to $2.2bn.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell pays $25 million to settle royalty claims

WASHINGTON, Jan 17, 2012 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell has paid $25 million to the U.S. government to resolve claims that the company underpaid royalties on federal offshore oil and gas leases, the U.S. Interior Department said on Tuesday.

WASHINGTON, Jan 17, 2012 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell has paid $25 million to the U.S. government to resolve claims that the company underpaid royalties on federal offshore oil and gas leases, the U.S. Interior Department said on Tuesday.

The settlement applies to royalty-in-value and royalty-in-kind production from Shell deepwater leases in the Gulf of Mexico between 2000 and 2008.

Interior’s Office of Natural Resources Revenue said audits of Shell’s leases had uncovered “various valuation issues”.

“This settlement further demonstrates that ONRR’s audit program is working diligently to collect every dollar due from energy companies operating on federal leases,” said Greg Gould, acting deputy assistant secretary for natural resources revenue.

(Reporting By Ayesha Rascoe)

Follow us on Twitter: @ReutersLegal

SOURCE ARTICLE

RELATED ARTICLES

From our archives: Viewpoint: Sex, drugs and natural gas royalties: 27 September 2011


From our archives: $2.2 million Shell settlement for knowingly underpaying royalties: 27 September 2011


From our archives: Plaintiffs win $66 million from Shell Oil: 26 September 2011


From our archives: SHELL SETTLES ROYALTIES CASE FOR $33.5 MILLION: 26 September 2011


Shell leader expects Arctic offshore drilling this year

By Emily Pickrell, HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Published Thursday, January 12, 2012

Shell Oil Co. expects to clear remaining regulatory hurdles and begin drilling later this year in the Chukchi Sea near Alaska, company President Marvin Odum said at a scientific conference on Thursday.

Shell received conditional federal approval last month to drill six exploratory wells in the Arctic offshore region but still must secure permits for individual wells.

Among the requirements for Shell to obtain those permits will be selling regulators on its plan for responding to spills or other accidents at the sites.

Odum said Shell is mindful of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, and the wide criticism BP and others involved received for the conditions leading to the accident and their response.

“We will have every piece of response in Alaska available on a one-hour notice,” Odum said in a keynote address at the ninth conference of the Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas.

“The access to the equipment will provide for a much different response than what the world watched in the Gulf of Mexico.”

Environmentalists who oppose the drilling contend that no proven technology exists for cleaning up a spill in the slushy Arctic environment.

The area about 70 miles off the Alaska coast is more remote than the Gulf, and winter ice causes additional challenges.

Odum noted, however, that the drilling will be in about 150 feet of water – far shallower than the well under a mile of water that blew out in the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

He said that Shell is also working with Norwegian experts on how best to clean up any potential spills in colder climates.

On another subject, Odum predicted that Shell will soon get into the gas-to-liquids business in the U.S., with plants similar to its $20 billion Pearl plant in Qatar, which converts natural gas to liquid transportation fuel.

“With very low natural gas prices, we have a market that still has to import much of its liquid fuels,” Odum said. “It is high time to do something like that in the U.S.”

A view of the wind

In another panel Thursday, Shell Wind Energy President Richard Williams presented an optimistic view of the opportunities in wind.

“Everyone asks us if a wind farm makes money,” Williams said. “The answer is yes.”

The cost of turbine construction has decreased about 30 percent, and installation costs have gone down about 10 percent, Williams said, while improvements in safety and additional technical education programs have made it easier to find and train employees to run wind farms.

Odum emphasized, however, that while Shell is continuing to explore opportunities in renewable energy, growing demand will mean continued reliance on oil and natural gas.

“Thirty percent of global energy could come from alternatives to oil and gas, but at the same time, the world will need twice as much energy as today,” Odum said.

emily.pickrell@chron.com

SOURCE ARTICLE

Europe’s Oil Firms Cook Up a Treat

JANUARY 12, 2012

By ALEXIS FLYNN

European energy companies are expected to return more money to shareholders in 2012 as stubbornly high oil prices swell their balance sheets.

With full-year results only weeks away, expectations are growing that heavyweights like Royal Dutch Shell will cap an extraordinary 12 months by raising dividends.

According to Deutsche Bank, the sector has “plenty of headroom” to support a forecast of 5% aggregate dividend growth in 2012. Already, it says, companies in the sector are expected to accumulate 50% more cash than they need to cover operating costs in 2012 and 2013.

Even BP PLC may raise its dividend.

The U.K. oil company, which for many years was known for bumper payouts, had to suspend its dividend in the wake of 2010′s Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Only last February did it resume payments, at a lower level.

As the company’s ultimate liabilities for the spill become clearer, management could be confident enough to increase the payouts, analysts from Credit Suisse say.

Investors in recent years have had to contend with major oil companies plowing their free cash into new sources of oil, and the technology to extract it, although the sector has remained a reliable source of dividends.

Still, Moody’s Investors Service points out, four energy companies—Shell, BP, Total SA and Statoil ASA—rank among the 20 European firms with the best cash positions. It also notes that the European energy sector as a whole ranks third, after utilities and automotive firms, in terms of its cash holdings.

Investors are still spooked by the memory of 2008. Crude prices were then rapidly dragged down by Lehman Brothers’ collapse and a sudden contraction in the global economy. Oil firms’ stock prices fell, but analysts say history is unlikely to repeat itself in 2012.

Oil and gas prices weathered last year’s uncertain macroeconomic environment because of supply issues, such as the civil war in Libya, while the earthquake and tsunami in Japan forced the government to temporarily shut down all nuclear power generation. Utilities had to scramble to buy liquefied natural gas, lending strength to LNG prices.

Growing tension between Iran and the West and threats to supply in Nigeria are likely to keep crude prices elevated for the foreseeable future.

Since higher energy prices are currently translating into superior cash generation, analysts say the sector’s top firms already feel confident enough to give money back to investors.

“Healthy cash flow should leave room to increase shareholder returns in the form of dividends or buybacks, for some select companies,” said Credit Suisse in a note.

It added that chief financial officers will also likely keep some cash on the books as insurance against economic risk and in case opportunities for mergers arise.

Continued high oil prices are the keystone upon which any largess rests, analysts argue. “The sector now requires an average $90 a barrel to achieve cash neutralityacross 2012/13,” said Deutsche Bank. If a company is cash-neutral, it is generating enough cash to cover its costs.

The firm most likely to deliver continued dividend increases in the medium term is Shell, according to analysts at Nomura. The bank says Shell will continue to see the benefit of its long-term investments in big-ticket projects in Canada and Qatar.

However, Goldman Sachs sounded a note of caution on Shell’s fortunes. It said that while the Anglo-Dutch giant could enjoy a bumper year, its fourth-quarter results could bring down its earnings per share.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Canadian Exposure Critical to Growth at Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell

NEW YORK, NY–(Marketwire -01/09/12)- The oil and gas sector is set to play a big political role this election year as President Obama must decide whether or not to approve the controversial Keystone Pipeline which would send tar sands crude from Alberta to Texas. Originally, the Obama administration announced that it would delay a final decision in order to complete additional environmental studies. However Republicans in Congress are seeking to force Obama’s hand as the pipeline has become a cause for Republican presidential candidates. The Paragon Report examines the outlook for companies in the Oil and Gas sector and provides equity research on Chevron Corporation (NYSE: CVXNews) and Royal Dutch Shell PLC (NYSE: RDS-ANews) (NYSE: RDS-BNews) (LSE: RDSA.LNews) (LSE: RDSB.LNews). Access to the full company reports can be found at:

www.paragonreport.com/CVX

www.paragonreport.com/RDS

Last week at his annual “State of American Energy” speech, American Petroleum Institute head Jack Gerard proclaimed that President Obama faces “huge political consequences” if he does not approve the proposed 1,700-mile Keystone XI pipeline that would link Alberta’s oil stands to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast. The Obama administration must decide by February 21 to accept or deny a permit for the project.

FULL ARTICLE

Proceed with caution in Alaska

January 03, 2012

After what happened last year when BP’s oil well blew out and dumped millions of gallons of crude into the Gulf of Mexico, the idea of drilling for oil in the frigid Arctic Ocean off northern Alaska sounds risky.

Even in the relatively placid and temperate Gulf, it took 86 days to cap BP’s damaged well, and by then raw crude had spread for hundreds of miles. Further, the frigid arctic waters aren’t as rich in the oil-eating bugs that limited damage in the Gulf. The Beaufort and Chukchi seas, where Royal Dutch Shell wants to drill next summer, are covered with ice two-thirds of the year.

But despite those risks — and the fact that the Shell bid is shaping up as an election-year controversy — other factors say Shell should be allowed to drill. And, in fact, the Obama administration has granted the company a conditional go-ahead.

There are at least three reasons for moving ahead:

• The Arctic Ocean is much shallower than the Gulf of Mexico. Shell would drill in 160 feet of water or less, compared with the mile-deep water where BP was drilling in the Gulf. And well pressures off Alaska are just a third to a half what they are where BP drilled. If something did go horribly wrong, Shell would benefit from BP’s experience.

• Shell and other companies have drilled more than 100 wells in the Arctic waters off Alaska and Canada without serious incident, which suggests that drilling there, safely, is possible. Shell also has a better safety record than BP, and with $4 billion already invested in Arctic operations would face significant losses if it caused a serious spill.

• The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that the area holds more than 20 billion barrels of oil, which would rival some of the mega-fields in the Middle East— a serious consideration for a nation that still imports almost half its oil.

In an ideal world, there’d be no need to drill in Arctic waters, just as there’d be no need to build the controversial Keystone pipeline to bring tar sands oil through the United States from Canada, or even to resume drilling in the ultra-deep Gulf of Mexico. But until most of America’s 250 million motor vehicles run on something other than gasoline, pretending that the nation doesn’t need more domestic oil is foolish.

Americans shouldn’t stand for another disaster like the one that a careless, clueless BP caused last year, but neither can their energy needs be ignored.

Give Shell the go-ahead, but keep it on a short leash.

OPPOSING VIEW: Say no to Arctic drilling

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell foes will never accept Arctic drilling

COMPASS: Other points of view

By PETE SLAIBY Published: January 4th, 2012

Pete Slaiby is vice president for Shell Alaska.

In her recent opinion piece (Jan. 2), Wilderness Society Arctic Program Director Lois Epstein assumes that neither Alaskans, the nation nor Shell are “ready to drill safely in the Arctic.” Ms. Epstein then dismisses decades of data that indicate otherwise and claims drilling in the Arctic would lead to a “reasonable likelihood of disaster.” The fact is, Shell and others have successfully drilled more than 35 wells in the Alaska offshore without incident — not counting the Cook Inlet wells that have helped heat Anchorage homes for over 50 years.

It’s unfortunate Ms. Epstein continues to lean on hyperbole in her attempts to stop offshore drilling. There are hard questions being asked of Shell — appropriately so — by regulators and stakeholders from Alaska’s coastal communities — all part of a dialogue that’s been taking place for years on this important topic. But organizations like the one Ms. Epstein represents have consistently proven they are not interested in these constructive forums.

Nor are they interested in the facts.

In list-like fashion, Ms. Epstein states that “very few” post-Macondo blowout findings have been implemented. Not true. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement have made significant changes to the requirements for offshore exploration. These include a new section on Safety and Environmental Management and new planning requirements. The bureaus have also issued numerous Notices to Lessees which incorporate learnings from Macondo. Ms. Epstein, as a member of BSEE’s Offshore Energy Safety Advisory Committee, should be aware of these changes — including Shell’s commitment to a capping and containment system similar to the one that stopped the BP blowout.

In her letter, Ms. Epstein claims not enough is known about the ecology of the Arctic. Not true. A 100-year compendium of scientific data proves the Alaska Arctic is one of the most studied regions in modern history. The collection of new data will continue to be driven by industry’s interest in the region. Shell, alone, has dedicated more resources to arctic science in the last five years than all federal agencies combined. Ms. Epstein labels as “primitive” the tools and techniques available for cleaning up oil in the Arctic. Again, Ms. Epstein has not done her homework. Oil in ice research has been ongoing for more than 30 years and field trials prove there are several effective ways to recover oil in arctic conditions. In addition to leading these research projects, Shell has spent hundreds of millions of dollars ensuring that ice-capable vessels and Arctic-tested oil spill assets will be on-site in the extremely unlikely event they are needed. No other company has assembled the oil spill response assets that Shell has in Alaska.

Ms. Epstein goes on to criticize Sens. Begich and Murkowski — both of whom have taken time to question and learn about Shell’s arctic capabilities. Both have advanced Alaska’s offshore agenda because they are engaged, demand operational excellence, and understand the need to find new energy and create new jobs for Americans.

In short, they are credible.

Ms. Epstein, and organizations like hers, lack that credibility when they insinuate there could come a day when they would accept drilling in the Arctic. They will not. Not only have these groups litigated nearly every Shell permit, their reasoning for why Shell should not be allowed to proceed depends on the day. Recently, Ms. Epstein signed a letter that claims Shell should be denied Arctic air permits because emissions from our drilling rigs and oil spill response fleet will accelerate global warming. In a classic contradiction, Ms. Epstein appears to desire more oil spill response capability, but doesn’t want the engines on those vessels to actually be turned on. The truth is, Ms. Epstein’s goal is to stop Shell in the Arctic. Under no condition will she nor the environmental groups she associates with “be ready” to drill in the Arctic. Fortunately, we are.