News and information on Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Qatar also signed an initial agreement with local Chinese authorities, the Chinese state-run oil company C.N.P.C. and Royal Dutch Shell to be part of a petrochemical and refining complex in China, the world’s second-biggest oil consuming nation.
Click to continue reading “Qatar Has World in Its Sights for Power Projects”
By Rania El Gamal
BASRA, Iraq | Mon Dec 5, 2011 7:43am EST
Dec 5 (Reuters) – Officials in Iraq’s southern oil hub Basra are trying to cancel a $17 billion Shell gas deal because they want a bigger say, highlighting the pressure on central government to ease its control over the provinces.
Basra, where dozens of international oil companies signed up to develop some of Iraq’s largest oilfields, is increasingly restless with the slow pace of development in the province and wants more control over its natural resources and revenues.
Demands for more provincial power have simmered for years in Iraq, split by ethnic, sectarian and tribal tensions. But the Basra push and an autonomy drive from Salahuddin province threaten to stir tensions as the last U.S. troops withdraw.
The final contract with Royal Dutch Shell and Mitsubishi to capture flared gas in three southern Iraqi oilfields was signed on Nov. 24 despite objections from the Basra local council that it was not included in talks or the deal’s signing.
Officials from the Basra Provincial Council filed a lawsuit against the Iraqi Oil Ministry on Nov. 25 demanding the cancellation of the gas agreement.
“In principle, we don’t have any problem with developing the gas but when the contract is signed, there has to be an article that shows the provincial council has agreed … Unfortunately, we did not know anything about this contract,” said Sabah al-Bazouni, head of the Basra Provincial Council.
“Basra is the most suitable province to become an autonomous region.”
Regional autonomy would give the province more power over finances, administration and laws, and an upper hand in supervising public property, which could loosen Baghdad’s grip on the oil and gas sector.
The legal case is unlikely to deter Shell and delay the project, but it raises concerns about future disputes over oil and gas rights in Iraq, which is struggling to rebuild after years of violence just as Washington prepares for a full troop withdrawal by the end of December.
“Just as the constitution gave rights to the region, it also gave similar rights to the producing provinces … Today, the Kurdish region signs a deal with ExxonMobil and the central government objects, it is double standards,” said Bazouni.
Minority Kurds in the north of Iraq have enjoyed semi-autonomy for years since Western powers imposed a no-fly zone after the 1991 Gulf War. The Kurdish north is now seen as a model for other regions seeking more autonomy.
Iraqi Kurdistan was able to attract foreign investment and provide its residents with better security and living standards than in the rest of Iraq, where bombings and power cuts are a part of citizens’ everyday lives.
But the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and Baghdad are locked in a row over land and oil. The central government has objected to a recent deal between the KRG and U.S. oil giant ExxonMobil to explore for oil in the northern region.
Despite that, officials in Basra look to the KRG’s experience and blame the lack of progress on political wrangling in Baghdad and rivalry among the Shi’ite Muslim, Sunni Muslim and Kurdish parties, each jostling for more power.
“Part of what drove us to demand regional autonomy is that political problems are usual in Baghdad not in Basra, where the governing parties are a known quantity,” said Ghanem Abdul-Amir al-Maliki, a member of Basra Provincial Council.
“It is clear that the Kurdistan region is stable to a large degree because the governing parties there are a known factor … In Baghdad, everyone is trying to please his own party on the account of others. We want to get rid of the political infighting in Baghdad by setting up a region.”
SHARE OF OIL WEALTH
Provinces need a public referendum and parliamentary approval to attain regional autonomy. Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who took part in writing the constitution in 2005, supports powerful central government.
His government has tried to quieten the autonomy movement, partly out of concern that it could lead to instability as the U.S. troop withdrawal picks up pace. The remaining 10,000 troops are scheduled to leave before Dec. 31.
In October, the mainly Sunni Salahuddin province symbolically decided to declare the area autonomous. The move was criticised by Maliki.
In the mainly Shi’ite oil hub of Basra, autonomy talk has bubbled for years. Basra sent a formal request for autonomy more than a year ago, but has had no response from Baghdad.
The southern city used to be called “The Venice of the Middle East”, but now, Basra’s crisscrossed canals are filthy pools of stagnant water filled with heaps of rubbish.
Roads are damaged and only a few hours of electricity are provided every day.
Most of Iraq’s oil exports come from the fields around Basra, but residents are fed up with shortages of power, water, jobs and housing. They complain they have seen little benefit from the oil wealth.
“Federalism is the solution. It has been eight years and Basra is still the same. The central government was not able to solve the problem of the electricity, water and other services in Basra,” said Raied Khoudair, 34, a government employee.
“Until when Basra will remain the cow that Iraq milks for everything, and gets nothing from Iraq? We see the development in the Kurdistan region and the prosperity they live in, we are no less than them.” (Additional reporting by Aref Mohammed; writing by Rania El Gamal; editing by Elizabeth Piper)
Printed below is an article by Tony Allwright, a retired Irish Shell EP manager. (SOURCE ARTICLE)
26 November 2011
Protests – overwhelmingly unfounded and politically unchallenged –
have trebled the cost of developing Ireland’s offshore Corrib gasfield.
This huge “political risk” will deter further such investments for a generation.
Many years ago, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, there was a Dutch company with an Irish name, Shell Teoranta BV, whose raison d’être was to seek and hopefully find oil offshore Ireland (“Teoranta” is Irish for ““Limited”). It drilled a number of wells – for example, on 19th December 1979, the Irish Times featured a photo of a jack-up rig drilling an exploration well just offshore Dublin – but to no avail. All the holes were dry. Concluding that Ireland was a lost cause, Shell Teoranta packed its bags and shut up shop, though not before claiming a huge write-off from the Dutch taxpayer for all its futile Irish expenditure, a provision of Netherlands law which explains why Shell Teoranta was registered there. Shell reckoned it had better uses for its shareholders’ money than to fritter it away on the ultra-long-shots of Irish exploration.
Fast forward a few decades and Enterprise Oil, a significant independent British oil company though not in the same league as the majors, disproved Shell’s pessimism by discovering, in 1996, a small-to-medium sized gas field offshore Mayo, which it called Corrib. Containing natural gas reserves eventually calculated to be around one TCF, ie a trillion cubic feet (equivalent to the energy of about 170 million barrels of oil), it lay 3,000 metres below the seabed in waters 350 metres deep some 83km off the north west coast of Ireland. Notwithstanding that weather and sea conditions are among Europe’s wildest, and that Ireland possesses the barest of offshore oilfield infrastructure, the economics were nevertheless positive – albeit marginally so – thanks largely to the improved (from the oil industry’s standpoint) contract terms promulgated in 1987 by Energy Minister Ray Burke.
Enterprise Oil had never before attempted such a demanding project. Yet in the year 2000 it decided to go ahead with bringing Corrib’s hydrocarbons ashore anyway, quickly busying itself with organizing finance, drawing up engineering plans and ordering equipment. Yet its inexperience manifested itself early on and remained long undetected when it failed to discuss in any detail its plans with the local people, listen to their concerns and secure their enthusiastic support. This is an elementary but vital step in the project process that the international oil industry has learnt the hard way over many decades.
The world-wide eruption of protests in 1995 at Shell’s environmentally sound decision to sink the North Sea platform Brent Spar in the far Atlantic was one of that company’s bitterest lessons. This reputational catastrophe showed in starkest terms that it was no longer sufficient for the industry to be right; it must convince those who might be affected (even if only emotionally) by its plans that it is right. Even Greenpeace eventually acknowledged that Shell’s original plan would have had minimal ecological impact – Brent Spar had been comprehensively voided of all toxic material and there is anyway little life on the Atlantic seabed at a depth of 2½ kilometers. Shell realised that its prior philosophy of “Trust me” must be replaced by one of “Show me”.
Enterprise Oil’s failure to ensure that the locals were onside over the Corrib development was a mistake with enormous long term implications, as anyone with but a passing interest in the activist Shell-to-Sea organization will be aware.
In April 2002, Shell, chastened no doubt by the voracious acquisition of the US oil companies Arco and Amoco in recent years by its arch-rival BP, splashed out £3.5 billion to buy Enterprise Oil, whose portfolio of assets fitted rather well with Shell’s.
But like someone sitting down to a lunch of two dozen luscious Gillardeau oysters, the world’s most expensive, only to discover a bad ‘un among them, Shell found itself responsible for delivering a demanding major offshore development project in Ireland, by no means a blockbuster, in the country it had with good reason foresworn twenty years earlier. Oh, and its return to Ireland meant it had to refund Shell Teoranta’s juicy rebate from the 1980s back to the Dutch taxpayer.
Nevertheless, Shell in good faith put together a team, including some Enterprise personnel, to take over the Corrib project. Drawing on its extensive experience and expertise in this type of deep water harsh environment, it reviewed the Enterprise plans and in 2003 agreed a budget of €800,000 and four years. First gas, as it is known, was expected in 2007.
Thus a properly designed, operated and maintained pipeline simply will not fail, and speculation about failure is pointless.
Though the onshore pipeline was (initially) to run within 70 metres of some homes, as for the plant itself, it was sufficiently remote from residents’ buildings for them to be unaffected even in the highly unlikely event of a disaster.
But by the time, Shell recognised it had a problem with the locals, that problem had transformed from a rational fear to an emotional fury. With the fury came press attention, with that came international interest, with that Corrib became a cause célèbre, and an opportunity for professional objectors everywhere to vent their manufactured spleen at a wicked multinational oil company whose only desire is to destroy the lives of simple natives.
The professional objectors have on several occasions been joined by overseas protestors, including the son of Mr Saro-Wiwa. And with the inauguration in November of the left-wing Michael D Higgins as Ireland’s new president, the objectors now number the First Citizen among their supporters. Though some funds are raised via websites, it is unclear who provides the bulk of its funding, but Sinn Fein and other sinister sources have been cited. I have asked the major anti-Corrib pressure group “Shell to Sea” where it gets its money and am still awaiting a reply.
Meanwhile, from the moment Shell got involved with Corrib until the present, it has been on the back foot in trying present its side of the story to the world while simultaneously progressing the project.
I first wrote about these objections, in some detail, almost two years ago, in a piece titled “Organizational Dementia”.
The project itself has been exemplary in its technical aspects, and indeed in many ways is an industry trailblazer. Shell, and particularly Ireland, should be in the position of bragging to the world of its prowess. Ireland should be using the success of Corrib as a means to attract not just future investment in offshore (and indeed onshore) exploration and production, but also the vast, highly technical contract industry that supports such activities.
Instead, the project is conducted almost behind closed doors and talked about in whispers, in the shadow of continuous low-level but toxic protest, for fear of unleashing another round of hysterical tabloid agitation. Earlier this year, a private, low-key purely technical presentation about the project to a select group of about fifty interested engineers had to be cancelled when Shell-to-Sea got wind and threatened to disrupt the meeting and call in the media.
For Shell, all these difficulties has pushed up the price tag from €800m to €2.5 billion. But the nation is also paying a terrible cost that, both now and in the future, that no country can afford in these times of financial crisis and meltdown.
It is instructive to compare Corrib with other recent major offshore development projects. One such is Norway’s Ormen Lange, in which Shell holds 17% and recently took over the running of the field:
So Ormen Lange, by any measure a bigger more complex project even than Corrib, was delivered on budget in just 3½ years. Corrib, on the other hand, is expected to take twelve years – three times as long as originally planned – and to cost three times its original budget.
Have a look at another major construction project in an entirely different industry – aircraft construction. Boeing dreamt up its 787 Dreamliner in January 2003 and eventually delivered it in October 2011. This was 3½ years behind schedule, a big overrun, which was solely due to technical problems, apart from a two-month Boeing Machinists Strike.
Corrib’s far greater delay, by comparison, is due not to technical problems at all, nor financial ones nor labour ones. Local politics, and the way they were handled, are entirely to blame. How embarrassing is that?
The local politics boil down purely to those objections by local people, and their national and international supporters, to the onshore elements of the project, objections with only the thinnest veneer of legitimacy to start with, and none at all following substantial concessions instituted by Shell, principally
Meanwhile, for the past eight years the politicians have steadfastly looked on with, at best, bemused disinterest and without the slightest concern for Ireland’s industrial reputation. Moreover, enforcement of the law has been low on their priorities and many (including the current president) have overtly supported the activists.
So view Corrib from the standpoint of outside investors. A major, innovative project that has encountered no substantive problems in terms of technology, finance or industrial relations, is nevertheless delivered three times over budget and over time, due entirely to local impediments and the complete lack of political will to overcome them.
People will look at Ireland, and surely assign it a massive political risk of 200% to 300%.
The Corrib experience is such that there will undoubtedly be no further major investments of this nature in Ireland for at least a generation until this one has been forgotten. Even industrial investors in other heavy industries will be looking askance at Ireland and asking themselves if the favourable corporate tax rate of 12½% is really worth the enormous cost of all the political hassle it can expect from local objectors and the spinelessness of politicians.
Far better to sink your money in havens such as Somalia and Iraq where the political risk will be much less punitive than in the erstwhile Celtic Tiger.
Ireland’s chance to showpiece its technical expertise and perhaps secure for itself a permanent corner of the massive, lucrative and long-lasting offshore market for the future is gone.
Meanwhile, Shell is licking its wounds and battling on. Eventually, once natural gas finally begins to flow in 2015 (?) it will get its money back as it supplies Ireland with 60% of its gas, but it will be a long long slog.
Declaration of interest:
I worked for Shell for thirty years, though not through the Corrib period
RELATED REPORT BY A FORMER ROYAL DUTCH SHELL EXECUTIVE, MR PADDY BRIGGS
By Ammar Karim (AFP) Sunday, 27 November 2011
BAGHDAD — Iraq finalised a $17-billion joint venture deal with Shell and Mitsubishi to capture and process gas from its southern oil fields, at a ceremony at the oil ministry on Sunday.
The deal was signed by Shell CEO Peter Voser, Mitsubishi Vice President Tetsuro Kuwabara and Iraqi Oil Minister Abdelkarim al-Luaybi.
“Today’s event represents a big change in the oil industry,” Luaybi said, adding that the deal constitutes the best use of the gas in line with Iraq’s needs.
“We are pleased to be partners in this project,” said Shell’s Voser.
“Iraq is now an important partner for us in the Middle East,” he said.
Earlier this month the Iraqi cabinet approved the deal which creates the Basra Gas Company, a joint venture to process associated gas from the Rumaila, Zubair and West Qurna-1 fields.
“The company will start its work in a year, and before the end of this year we will deal with the needed procedures related to the company’s administrative structure,” said Ahmed Shamaa, the deputy oil minister in charge of refineries.
“We will also work on completing bilateral agreements signed between the investors,” he said.
Shamaa had previously said that the accord was favourable to Iraq because of the significant amount of gas that can be used for electricity and industry, and revenues that will total $31 billion over the 25-year period.
State-owned South Gas Company will hold a majority 51-percent stake in Basra Gas, while Shell will have 44 percent and Mitsubishi five percent, government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said.
He said the total investment would be “$17 billion for a period of 25 years.”
The output capacity of the proposed project will be two billion cubic feet, or 56.6 million cubic metres, per day, Dabbagh said.
Luaybi also said on Sunday that Iraq is waiting for a reply from oil giant ExxonMobil to various letters it has sent the company.
Exxon has signed an oil exploration contract with the autonomous Kurdistan region in north Iraq, angering Baghdad, which says all contracts must be with the central government.
“We sent three letters, two of them from the oil ministry and the third from the office of the prime minister, and we may send a confirmation letter tomorrow,” Luaybi said.
“We are awaiting a reply, and in light of that there will be a clear stance from the ministry and the government,” he said.
Copyright © 2011 AFP. All rights reserved.
By Kadhim Ajrash and Khalid Al-Ansary – Nov 27, 2011 2:08 PM GMT
Iraq, seeking to boost power output after years of conflict and sanctions, signed the final accord for a $17 billion project with Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) to capture natural gas at oil fields.
Shell Chief Executive Officer Peter Voser and Oil Minister Abdul Kareem Al-Luaibi signed the agreement to produce gas that is currently flared off at fields in southern Iraq, in a ceremony today in Baghdad.
Under the 25-year agreement, the government will hold a 51 percent stake in a venture called South Gas Co., while Shell will have 44 percent. Mitsubishi Corp. (8058) is also a partner in the project and will hold the rest. South Gas will help collect more than 2 billion cubic feet (57 million cubic meters) of fuel a day at the Rumailah, Zubair and West Qurna fields in southern Iraq, Deputy Oil Minister Ahmad al-Shamaa said Nov. 16.
Iraq holds the fifth-biggest gas reserves in the Middle East and wants to produce more as fuel for power stations, which have been unable to meet domestic demand since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that toppled President Saddam Hussein. The country hopes eventually to produce enough gas to export.
To contact the reporter on this story: Nayla Razzouk in Dubai at nrazzouk2@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephen Voss at sev@bloomberg.net
NOVEMBER 21, 2011
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
LONDON | Wed Nov 16, 2011 7:39pm EST
Nov 17 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell Plc has pulled out of oil-development talks with the Kurdistan regional government in an effort to protect lucrative investments in southern Iraq, the Financial Times reported on Thursday.
The newspaper cited people familiar with the discussions as saying Baghdad is seeking to impose a de facto ban on companies operating in Kurdistan, a semi-autonomous region in northern Iraq.
Over recent days Iraqi government officials have threatened to cancel an existing oil field contract with Exxon Mobil Corp and on that basis, Shell’s move is precautionary to protect a potential $17 billion natural gas deal, according to the FT’s sources.
“Baghdad’s real power lies in denying future contracts and Shell still had something else on the table. They still had not signed the southern gas field deal,” said one person familiar with the talks, cited in the article.
Shell’s gas deal with the Iraqi government cleared its last major hurdle on Tuesday after it was approved by Baghdad’s council of ministries.
Royal Dutch Shell was unavailable for immediate comment.
November 16, 2011 10:05 pm
By Sylvia Pfeifer and Javier Blas in Erbil, northern Iraq
Royal Dutch Shell has pulled out of oil-development talks with the Kurdistan regional government in an effort to protect lucrative investments in southern Iraq, including a potential $17bn natural gas deal.
Published: November 15, 2011
BAGHDAD — Iraq’s cabinet approved a multibillion-dollar contract on Tuesday for Royal Dutch Shell, the Anglo-Dutch energy giant, to collect the vast amount of natural gas emitted, and currently burned off, as oil is pumped to the surface at three major oil fields in the south.
The project, which will eventually greatly reduce Iraq’s greenhouse gas emissions, is intended to bring modern methods of managing oil fields to an industry frozen in time by sanctions and the war. In addition, it strengthens Shell’s foothold at a time when international petroleum companies are vying for advantage in one of the few regions of the world where easily accessible, on-land fields are opening to new investment.
But it also strikes a political nerve. Some members of the Iraqi Parliament protested the deal as overly generous to Shell and its Japanese partner, Mitsubishi, though the investment — $17 billion over 25 years to build pipes and filters to collect the gas — will be funneled through a newly created joint venture owned 51 percent by an Iraqi state company, the South Gas Company.
Ali al-Dabbagh, a government’s spokesman, said that Shell and Mitsubishi’s project involved the fields at Rumaila, West Qurna, and Zubair, which are operated by consortiums led by BP, Exxon, Lukoil of Russia and Eni of Italy. Some 700 million cubic feet of “associate gas” is burned off, or flared, annually at the three fields.
The Shell project is one of several creating shared infrastructure in the south for companies that won technical service contracts in 2009, among the first awarded for Iraq’s oil fields since the fall of the government of Saddam Hussein in 2003. For instance, ExxonMobil is building a plant to process water for injecting into the fields, something all the companies will need to pump more oil.
Shell said it would sell the gas to electrical utilities in Iraq, but that it may also eventually export some.
“Capturing this gas will create a reliable supply of energy for Iraq while at the same time reducing greenhouse gas emissions,” Shell’s chief executive, Peter Voser, said in a statement. “This also sends a positive signal about the investment climate in the country.”
Iraq’s energy politics mostly swirl around oil. But as its riches of natural gas have come into focus, so too have disputes over dividing them. Some analysts noted that the new project focused on the associate gas that is abundant in the southern oil fields, in areas that are mostly Shiite, while untapped gas fields in the predominantly Sunni western desert remain unexplored.
In another recent agreement, over the weekend, officials in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region in the north confirmed Exxon had signed a contract to explore for oil there.
By Nayla Razzouk – Nov 15, 2011 12:16 PM GMT
Iraq’s cabinet approved a $17 billion contract with Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSA) and Mitsubishi Corp. (8058) for the capture of natural gas at three oil fields in the south of the country, a government spokesman said.
“The government has a 51 percent stake in the partnership, and the companies 49 percent, including 44 percent for Shell and the rest for Mitsubishi,” Ali Al-Dabbagh said today by telephone from Baghdad. “The agreement is for 25 years.”
Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, has been in talks with the government since 2008 to set up the venture to gather gas that is currently flared off and wasted. Iraq holds the fifth- biggest natural-gas reserves in the Middle East and is struggling to restore capacity for power generation after years of conflict and economic sanctions. Associated gas, once captured, would help feed power stations and overcome electricity shortages.
Iraq has signed 15 licenses for the development of energy resources, including three for gas, since 2008, five years after the U.S.-led invasion of the nation.
To contact the reporter on this story: Nayla Razzouk in Amman at nrazzouk2@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Shaji Mathew at shajimathew@bloomberg.net
: With all of this money spent on the CEP expansion, it has been built on an old electrical infrastructure. I guess no one is counting how many times you read about a "short" electrical outage at the plant. Tom Purves and the Motiva leadership know exactly why this is happening and how to fix it. They don't want to pay for it. They have been given the project and have turned it down at least twice. Meanwhile, we just keep having outages. Going ot be interesting when both refineries come down in the future.
: LondonLad: the lack of stories concerning Shell should be welcomed, if it implies that Shell are cleaning up their act, perhaps due in part to the efforts of the Donovans.
: US Observer, surely almost all (NOT all)contributors to this website have an axe to grind against Shell, particularly those who have a perception that they have been screwed by Shell in times gone by. As for Itchy Woman, she clearly has a femanistic / burn-the-bra approach to work in Shell. AND I would like to add that once again an old old article (from someone who has an axe to grind against Shell) has to be republished due to lack of news against Shell (I refer to Briggs 2009 article). COMMENT BY JOHN D. Would it not be fairer to say that everyone posting on this blog, including you, has an axe to grind. It is easy enough to look back over your contributions and reach a conclusion.
: It is easy to figure out who Witchy Woman is (LC). She has an "ax to grind" and is using this forum
: @uscitizen Voser is a competent and amicable chap. You claim Shell has delivered on its deliverables. Let me tell you everyone delivers on their deliverable.... But joking apart, look at the promises over the years and how well Shell has delivered on these promises. Their trackrecord is not very good over the last 15 years or so. They are a good money making machine. And sofar they have delivered on their constant or increasing dividend payments. Sometimes by increasing their debt but they have done it. A nice high oilprice has helped, don't you agree?? So my only observation was that his 'promise' to extend North Sea fields is quite opposite their activities in this area. And they have promised this before and done the opposite. It was a nice promise to build a new and expensive office in Aberdeen, more jobs for the UK and more activity and extending of production. Just check back what they have done. And predicting future productionlevels by Shell in general and Brinded in particular is nothing but a sick joke.
: To - an observer of Shell Shell has been delivering on its deliverables - why would you paint Voser as some one who is not??
: This was not a personal attack now was it Witchy one?? #133 Witchy woman on May 8th, 2011 at 1:42 pm Marvin Odum who probably has the worst safety record in Shell goes for a diversity vote and someone who has no safety experience to replace the VP of safety he just fired. Clear message where his priorities lie.
: Witchy Woman - you blase me for personal attacks???? That is so rich! I am defending people that are attacked if you had not noticed - and yes I do slam the folks who are throwing garbage out! Live with it!! Enjoy your retirement! Shell has a good retirement package in the US dont they??
: I feel the value of your posts is also minimal, just a complainer. PS - here is where you bash Denise - remember - or do we need to question your integrity the way folks question Shell leaders?? Witchy woman on Dec 7th, 2011 at 12:35 pm In GOM we thought that hurricane season was done. Why is Hurricane Denise causing so much damage then? Like all Hurricanes though they move on the professionals are left to pick up the pieces.
: According to the Independent article posted today the boss of Shell is telling us all not to get too emotional about fracking. Has he not seen the confirmation that fracking causes earthquakes? You have cited the Reuters article. There are others including coverage of a fracking earthquake in Blackpool England. I have to conclude that Voser is a fracking idiot.
Shell Blog RSS Feed
