Posts under ‘Russia’

Ian Lyall, Daily Mail
16 March 2010, 9:52pm

He said he was ‘energised’ and up for the fight. But as he stood at the podium to deliver the company’s annual strategy review, Shell boss Peter Voser (right) looked anything but.

His audience of a hundred or so British and foreign journalists listened with an air of resignation rather than in rapt attention.

Voser isn’t a natural orator. His clipped Swiss accent and the dry delivery may work well around the boardroom table, but his style is hardly inspirational.

Which is a pity. Because his message was an uplifting one for Shell investors, and addressed the concerns of the critics who dismiss the Anglo-Dutch giant as low growth, bureaucratic and bloated.

Voser’s trick was to come up with a fairly punchy production target and spice it with a subtle change of direction and emphasis.

And it seemed to work, with the company’s London-listed A shares rising 27.5p to close the day at 2920p.

The briefing re- capped the impact Voser has made in his short tenure. Since becoming chief executive in the summer of last year, he has spearheaded an impressive $2bn cost cutting drive that has seen the loss off 5,000 jobs, mostly mid-ranking managerial posts.

An extension to that programme was unveiled yesterday. It will save another $1bn by cutting a further 1,000 roles, though the workforce still numbers more than 100,000.

But what grabbed the analysts’ attention was his plans to have Shell pumping around 3.5m barrels of oil a day by 2012.

This implies an annual growth rate of 3.5%, which is well ahead of the rather pedestrian performance of rival BP at around 1.5%.

Shell even seems to have raised its game in finding new oil and gas fields, with its reserve replacement rate running at a healthy 288%.

Voser showed he recognised the lingering misgivings of investors, though he was careful to couch the message in diplomatic terms that wouldn’t offend his colleagues and predecessor.

‘When I became chief executive in the middle of last year, I did think the organisation of the company was working against us,’ he told the meeting at a central London hotel.

‘Shell had become too complicated, and slower than I’d like, and working on too many areas and options.’

The simplification of Shell, which has many moving parts, is borne out of necessity.

With the oil price hovering at, or close to, $80 a barrel, more investment is going into exploration and production.

For recession-hit refining, in the middle of the worst slump in 20 years, the pendulum has swung the other way. Capacity is set to be cut by around 15%, with plants sold or even shut down.

And the marketing operation, which owns the company’s filling stations and also sells motor oil and jet fuel, is also undergoing a shake-up. It is focusing on fewer markets to improve profitability.

Only one of the laggards seems to have been spared the Voser treatment: Shell’s gas business.

It has been hit by the downturn but is deemed to be a fundamentally sound business.

Voser trumpeted a series of exploration success stories that tell a tale of a growing conservatism, so we heard about the company’s strikes in the Gulf of Mexico, Australia and North America.

Relatively expensive regions in which to work, they do have the upside of being politically stable and incredibly easy places to do business.

Air-brushed from the literature were the likes of Nigeria and Russia.

It was only when prodded that Voser commented on the war-torn African nation, where the oil reserves are plentiful, but the region is a mess of infighting and instability: ‘In the past, as I have said many times, Shell has depended a lot on the growth of Nigeria. In today’s situation, we still have the same growth potential in Nigeria. But we have seeded plenty of projects in other parts of the world where we also can achieve growth.’

Hardly a ringing endorsement of the country’s prospects.

Some analysts, such as Collins Stewart’s Gordon Grey, see Voser’s latest strategy pronouncement as ‘an important turning point operationally’ for Shell.

The respected and experienced Richard Griffith of Evolution has been following the company for far too long to be totally convinced: ‘It’s a positive statement, but there is still plenty to be delivered.’

News articles generated by royaldutchshellplc.com and its Shell insider sources in 2009

TNK-BP and BP declined to comment yesterday on the decision from RosPrirodNadzor, which was reminiscent of the manouvering by Russian agencies that resulted in Shell losing control of its Sakhalin project in the Russian Far East in 2006.

Article by Glen Frost, Editor, The PR Report

Yes, 15 billion. This is the claim of John Donovan, a UK blogger who campaigns against  the global oil producing giant Shell (full name Royal Dutch Shell) using his blog www.royaldutchshellplc.com .

Arguably the most powerful blog in the world dedicated to covering one company; and intrigued as to how the site developed such influence, Glen Frost met with the blog’s founders, John and Alfred Donovan, to get the full story.

EXTRACTS

The blog is now so popular, and trusted, the site appears on the front page of major newspapers (see pictures), and has ex‐employees from Shell contributing regular articles

The Russian connection: the scoop that made the  Donovan’s blog famous

The Donovans had been collecting and publishing information online about Shell’s activities since 2001; this information dates back to the mid 1980’s and their former business relationship with Shell. Over the years, more and more people in the oil industry discovered the website, and the Donovan’ s have been swamped with information about Shell from both suppliers, contractors, insiders and former employees.

Some of this information concerned Shell’s activities in Russia from 1996. A Shell‐led consortium (called Sakhalin Energy) and the Russian Government entered into a production sharing agreement. It was information on alleged environmental abuses by the consortium from the Donovan’ s that killed the deal. John Donovan said he suspected his information was the trigger but didn’t know for sure until Oleg Mitvol, a senior figure in the Russian Government, stated so in a media interview.

Asked by a journalist from PetroleumArgus, a trade magazine, who his sources were for the environmental abuse charges that Mitvol laid against the Sakhalin Energy consortium, Mitvol, then deputy head of Russia’s environmental watchdog Rosprirodnadzor, said he had “email correspondence between executives in Sakhalin Energy management from 2002.”

The compromising material had come from Donovan, owner and blogger of the anti‐Shell website www.royaldutchshellplc.com, Mitvol said.

Donovan estimates the value lost to Shell is US$15 billion.

The Donovan’s website is a full frontal attack on Shell’s management and ethics. Shell has tried to shut the site down on the grounds that it uses the company name. However, the site www.royaldutchshellplc.com  makes no money, and, crucially, is registered in the USA, where laws on websites are weighted in favour of the domain owner.

“Our site receives up to 2.2 million hits a month; we want it to become a magnet for people who have a problem with the
company,” says Donovan.  “Many of the people using the site are Shell employees.

Blog publishes market sensitive information

Donovan publishes market sensitive information on the site, and he, and the website, are now quoted by esteemed news organisations like Reuters and The Financial Times. For example, Donovan  published information questioning the level of Shell’s reserves, in which the company was found to have inflated its oil and gas reserves by some 20% in 2003‐04, which led to negative media headlines.

The picture (right; The Daily mail, UK 8th Sept 2009) shows how Donovan’s blog published details of staff cuts before Shell had announced them to the markets and the media.

Because of the blog, and the Donovan’s insistence on publishing all information he can verify about Shell, good and bad, John Donovan’s influence with the media is now global, instant and at a senior level – John lists the names of all the UK, US and global media outlets, their Editors or senior correspondents covering corporate news or the oil sector as his contacts.

Shell’s external PR advisors

A post on the Donovan’s website links to an article in a recently published book on corporate reputation and the rise of blog sites that attack, or expose, poor corporate ethics and illegal or dubious corporate activity, and what CEOs should do about such sites; http://www.shellnews.net/images/CorporateReputationAED.pdf ‐ the book is written by Dr Leslie Gaines‐Ross, who, incidentally, was previously CMO of Burson‐Marsteller USA, who manage Shell’s public relations.

FULL ARTICLE (FREE SUBSCRIPTION)
Previous PR Report issues here: http://thepublicinterest.ning.com
PR Report Facebook page: http://tinyurl.com/ykg6p7j
PR Report YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/theprreport

EXTRACT FROM BOOK REFERRED TO ABOVE: “REPUTATION LOSS – 12 Steps to safeguarding and Recovering Reputation”

One such empowered activist is arch Shell critic Alfred Donovan. No one was more surprised than Royal Dutch Shell PLC to learn that this 88-year-old British army veteran had purchased the Internet domain name www.royaldutchshellplc.com. The gadfly Donovan was a well-known, though underestimated, critic of the company. By acquiring the domain name, Donovan obtained the perfect platform to voice his criticisms of the oil giant. Who would have thought a decade ago that such an unlikely individual could stand up to a corporate powerhouse, waging a war of words against one of the world’s largest companies?

Below an extract from a Wall Street Journal article published today reporting on the profits of Gazprom and Sakhalin Energy, the company in which Shell was forced to surrender its majority stake.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

FEBRUARY 1, 2010

Foreign-Exchange Gains Boost Gazprom’s Net

By JACOB GRONHOLT-PEDERSEN

Sakhalin Energy, a Gazprom joint venture with Royal Dutch Shell PLC and Japan’s Mitsui Co. Ltd. and Mitsubishi Corp., posted earnings of 10.65 billion rubles in the third quarter. Sakhalin Energy opened Russia’s first plant for liquefied natural gas last February and shipped 5.5 million tons of LNG in its first year.

COMPLETE ARTICLE

ExxonMobil is (XOM) at loggerheads with the Russian government over the Sakhalin I project. The issue is the one that eventually spelled Shell’s (RDS.A) doom in Sakhalin II: Development costs under the production sharing agreement (PSA):

Christopher Helman, 01.21.10, 12:00 PM EST

Chances are your energy needs are going to flow from one of these 10 fields in the future.

HOUSTON — This month Iraq will finalize contracts with the likes of ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell and BP to develop some of its biggest oil fields. These giants are among the world’s last remaining pockets of so-called “easy oil.” They don’t require ultradeep drilling or innovative production techniques, just the application of Big Oil know-how. No wonder the oil companies agreed to develop Iraq’s fields without even getting an ownership stake in the fields and collecting as little as $1.15 per barrel recovered.

Given the size of Iraq’s undeveloped giants there are no technical reasons why within 10 years the country can’t supplant both Iran and Russia to become the world’s No. 2 oil producer after Saudi Arabia. No wonder Iraq holds three of the top 10 fields of the future.

The world gets its daily ration of 85 million barrels of oil from more than 4,000 fields. Most of these are small, less than 20,000 barrels per day. Giants, producing more than 100,000 bpd, account for just 3%. Then there’s the megafields that gush out 1 million bpd. These are the most important sources of energy in the world–fields worth fighting over. In figuring the top 10 fields of the future, we’re not interested in most of the giants of yesteryear, and not necessarily even the giants of today. Just the giants of tomorrow–those fields that might not even be producing yet, but will likely be doing better than 1 million bpd a decade from now.

The once and future king of the world’s oil fields, Ghawar, in Saudi Arabia, ranks first on our list. It is thought to have had more than 100 billion barrels of recoverable oil in place. At 160 miles long and 16 miles wide it confounds even the most experienced geologists. With something on the order of 60 billion produced over the past 60 years, you’d be excused for thinking that Ghawar was sliding into its twilight years. Yet the Saudis insist that Ghawar is still going strong, producing 4.5 million bpd from six main producing areas with the ability to do 5 million bpd if called upon.

The secret to Ghawar’s longevity is water injection. Starting in the 1960s Saudi Aramco began injecting water underneath the oil around the outer borders of the field. Today the water flood is up to millions of barrels a day, with the oil floating up to the top of the reservoir on sea of water. In conversations with Forbes in 2008 Aramco executives insisted that by continuing to treat Ghawar with kid gloves they’ll be able to coax 4 million bpd out of her for many years to come.

Coming in second is West Qurna, in Iraq, home to an expected 21 billion barrels of oil. This month a joint venture between ExxonMobil ( XOM – news – people ) and Royal Dutch Shell ( RDSA – news – people ) were awarded the contract to develop the 9 billion barrel first phase of the West Qurna oil field. They will aim to raise output from 300,000 bpd to 2.3 million bpd. It’s tough to make the case that the two biggest oil companies from the countries that invaded Iraq in 2003 are getting a sweetheart deal. The contract calls for the government of Iraq to retain ownership of the field and the oil. Exxon and Shell, as contractors, are to be paid just $1.90 for each a barrel they produce.

Third is Majnoon, also in Iraq. At 13 billion barrels, these massive reserves are in a relatively small area near the Euphrates River in southern Iraq. The field’s abundance was so mind-boggling that it was named Majnoon, Arabic for “crazy.” This easy oil hasn’t been developed in part because of its location so close to the Iranian border. In the 1980s, during the Iran-Iraq war, managers reportedly buried the wells, concerned that they might be targeted by Iranian forces. The field produces just 50,000 bpd now, but has the potential to do 1.8 million bpd.

The Rumaila field in Iraq, with 17 billion barrels, is the forth-largest field. In November, British giant BP ( BP – news – people ) and China National Petroleum Corp. won the first oil contract of the post-Saddam era to redevelop Rumaila. Located on the border with Kuwait, the field is already producing 1 million bpd, half of Iraq’s total production. The partners intend to spend some $15 billion to treble that to 2.85 million bpd. That output would be enough to put Rumaila in second place worldwide after Saudi Arabia’s Ghawar.

So what won’t you see on this list? Mexico’s Cantarell is nowhere to be seen. It used to be the second-biggest producer in the world, giving more than 2 million bpd; it’s now in terminal decline, slipping below 400,000 bpd. Likewise Russia’s Samotlor. It was the monster field of the Soviet Union, with production peaking at 3.5 million bpd in the 1970s. Today it’s doing more like 350,000 bpd. No respect for China’s biggest field Daging either; it still produces roughly 800,000 bpd but is in serious decline.

As for Canada’s heralded oil sands region–sure it’s a massive resource, but easy oil it ain’t. Oil sands require monstrous amounts of water and natural gas to recover and process. A barrel of oil sands oil costs roughly 20 times more to produce than one from Iraq. And environmentalists think it’s dirty.

Lots of oil provinces didn’t quite make the cut. West Africa could see the biggest growth of all across Nigeria, Angola and Ghana–but so far no individual fields look big enough on their own. Same for Siberia, which has most of Russia’s production, but from mature fields.

Saudi Arabia could have been better represented. Its 750,000 bpd Shaybah field was a runner-up. Iraq too. The government didn’t receive any bids to redevelop the 8 billion barrel East Baghdad field because much of it lies under residential neighborhoods. And Kirkuk, in northern Iraq, has something like 8 billion barrels remaining, but it was damaged by overproduction in the latter years of Saddam’s rule and won’t likely regain its peak of 700,000 bpd. But it could.

FORBES ARTICLE

Shell Chief Executive Peter Voser said his company looks “forward to a good cooperation with the government,” but he refused to say how much money will be spent on the project.

Not many people think of the Netherlands as oil country, but a billion-barrel field lies under a nine-mile strip of grazing land along the Dutch-German border. When oil prices cratered in the 1990s, Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil shut the Schoonebeek field down. Company executives reckoned that its thick, hard-to-extract crude wasn’t worth the trouble, even though only about 25% of Schoonebeek’s oil had been produced. The main evidence of the town’s petroleum past was an old-fashioned bobbing oil pump, known as a nodding donkey, which still stands in a parking lot near a bakery. Now higher prices and technological advances are spurring a new joint venture of Shell, Exxon, and the Dutch government to pump Schoonebeek’s reserves once more.

PETROLEUM ECONOMIST

A new book tells the story of the oil industry’s boom-bust cycle through the personalities of its main protagonists. It isn’t always a flattering portrait, writes Derek Brower

The book is especially strong on such juicy details, not least when it describes the machinations – rivalries, personality clashes and egos at work – during the mega-merger period of the late 1990s. Browne’s successor, Tony Hayward, is seen entertaining Gazprom boss Alexei Miller at a Chelsea football match in London. Shell’s former chief, Jeroen van der Veer, argues in German, without interpreters, with Russia’s then president Vladimir Putin about the Sakhalin Energy project at a private function in Holland. And so on.

The majors also have personalities. Exxon, a participant in the mega-mergers when it bought Mobil, is the brooding presence throughout. Shell was repeatedly bruised by run-ins with environmentalists and activists, and its bi-national schizophrenia left it flatfooted as Browne and BP seized the agenda.

Shell also handled its Russian investments badly, unintentionally antagonising the authorities, with humiliation on Sakhalin island the result. The Anglo-Dutch firm emerges from the narrative as a sluggish behemoth, crippled by internal rivalries between the Hague and London, undermined by its own constitution and eventually brought low by the reserves scandal. Phil Watts, the chairman at the time, who was eventually exonerated from wrong-doing in the affair, receives relatively sympathetic treatment in the book. Shell did wrong, acknowledges Bower, but other majors were booking reserves in a similar way and escaped censure or lobbied their way out of it.

But it’s not a book that leaves the reader feeling positive about the characters who dominate the world’s most important industry. “Oil men can play to any rules they are asked to play,” Bower quotes former Shell chairman John Jennings. “Oil breeds arrogance because it’s so powerful.”

THE ABOVE ARE EXTRACTS FROM DEREK BROWER’S REVIEW: FULL REVIEW