Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Rotating Header Image

Posts under ‘Shell’

Mystery of how Shell escaped Brent Bravo criminal prosecution

Feb 7th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

The Sunday Times article may go some way to illuminating the mystery of how Shell miraculously escaped criminal prosecution.

By John Donovan

An article published in Scotland by The Sunday Times may help to explain why the health and safety division of the Crown office and Procurator Fiscal Service decided not to prosecute Royal Dutch Shell for alleged criminal offences arising from an explosion on the Brent Bravo platform.

In 2005, Shell was fined a record £900,000 at Stonehaven Sheriff Court, for a series of safety failings on the platform which led to a gas leak inside the giant platform’s utility leg and the tragic deaths of two workers, Keith Moncrieff and Sean McCue.

Former Shell International HSE Group Auditor, Bill Campbell, revealed that Shell had operated a “Touch F*** All” safety culture on the platform and that safety records had been falsified. He reported this to Malcolm Brinded, the then Managing Director of Shell Expro, who failed to take proper action. This was before the explosion.

Mr Campbell later courageously provided evidence, which resulted in Grampian Police conducting a long investigation into related alleged bribery and corruption of HSE officials by Shell. The police passed the case file to the Procurator Fiscal Service for a decision on whether to prosecute.

Mr Campbell was surprised when the Procurator Fiscal Service announced that it had dropped the case because there was insufficient evidence to justify a criminal prosecution. He was even more surprised to discover that NO witnesses were ever interviewed from the list he had provided to the Police. Neither witnesses from Shell or HSE.  Or indeed, the independent witnesses who could have provided corroboration.

Mr Campbell still maintains that there is an abundance of evidence provided by Shell employees and by HSE as a result of their internal investigation and through information released under the Freedom of Information Act. He remains utterly baffled why witness statements were not requested from the Procurator Fiscal by Crown Counsel.

The Sunday Times article may go some way to illuminating the mystery of how Shell miraculously escaped criminal prosecution.

It is alleged that Scottish prosecutors cherry-pick the easiest “slam dunk” cases. This would explain a 99% success rate. They allegedly do not pursue health and safety cases which are “slightly more difficult”.

Bill Campbell handed over a wealth of evidence, but for some reason, it was not properly followed up by the Procurator Fiscal, leaving Mr Campbell and apparently Grampion Police, mystified by the outcome.

The Sunday Times 5 February 2012

Lord advocate ‘takes only easy health and safety cases’

SCOTLAND’S top prosecutor has been accused of inflating the conviction rate in health and safety proceedings by only targeting so-called “slam dunk” cases where success is almost guaranteed.

Lord advocate Frank Mulholland has defended the claims which have been raised at Westminster, insisting every case placed before him will be taken on, regardless of difficulty.

Since the health and safety division of the Crown office and Procurator Fiscal Service was set up in 2009, 77 of the 78 completed cases have resulted in convictions – a success rate of 99%.

However, while appearing before the Commons Scottish affairs committee, he was accused by chairman Ian Davidson of cherry-picking the easiest cases.

The Scottish Labour MP asked whether, given the number of fatalities and reported serious accidents in Scotland, he thought he was taking on enough prosecutions.

Davidson said: “There’s a chance they are not pursuing the cases which are slightly more difficult. So paradoxically, this is one situation where having a lower success rate is possibly better.

“Our initial suspicion is they are restrained in terms of manpower and therefore they are only pursuing prosecution in those cases which we describe as slam dunk. That would worry us quite a bit.

“If they are not being passed on to him, the question is whether they are being filtered out at an earlier stage in the process before they get to him. It may be that those who are passing them on to him are taking too cautious a view of what might be prosecutable.”

He added: “We have been worried for some time about the high rate of health and safety-related deaths and serious injuries in Scotland. There are more people in agriculture, quarrying, construction, but that didn’t explain all of it.

“If someone is getting a 1Wlo success rate with prosecutions, then it potentially means they are only taking ones where they are.absolutely certain of a success. Our concern is that there is a filter which removes difficult cases.”

There has been a number of high-profile health and safety prosecutions in Scotland in recent years, including the Stockline Plastics explosion in Glasgow’s Maryhill in 2004 which claimed nine lives.

Operators ICL Plastics and ICL Tech were fined £400,0000 after admitting four charges. The High Court in Glasgow, heard that the leaking pipework that caused the explosion could have been replaced for just £405.

Utility firm Transco was fined a record £15m after being convicted on a charge arising from an explosion which killed four people. Andrew and Janette Findlay and their children Stacey, 13, and Daryl, 11, died in the explosion in Larkhall, South Lanarkshire, in December 1999.

Transco was found guilty after a six-month trial in Edinburgh of breaching health and safety laws.

A Crown Office spokesman rejected the suggestions.

He said: “If we have sufficient admissible, credible and reliable evidence, and it is in the public interest to prosecute, then we will prosecute.

“The excellent record of the health and safety division is due solely to the diligence and expertise of our prosecutors, who work extremely hard to secure guilty pleas and convictions in the most complex of cases.

“The lord advocate made the committee aware that 219 eases had been reported to the health and safety division since its inception. Of those, 78 have been prosecuted and 77 have resulted in convictions. There are 116 live cases under consideration for which no decision has been taken.

“Ten cases have resulted in a Fatal Accident Inquiry. No proceedings have been taken in 15 cases. In six of those cases proceedings could not have been taken because the company was no longer trading.

“In another five cases proceedings could not have been taken because there was insufficient evidence in law.”

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmscotaf/uc1344-vii/uc134401.htm

OGONI HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH BUREAU INAUGURATED

Feb 6th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

Human Rights Watch Bureau Director – Chief Superintendent of Police, Chief Yaesu Neebee.

As part of a broader civil society mechanism to protect and defend every Ogoni person – child, man and woman against doctrines, policies and practices that infringe human rights and fundamental freedoms in Nigeria, MOSOP President/Spokesman, Dr. Goodluck Diigbo today February 3, 2012 inaugurated the Ogoni Human Rights Watch Bureau in Bori, Ogoni.

Headed by a retired Chief Superintendent of the Nigeria Police Force, Chief Yaesu Neebee as Bureau Director, and assisted by a retired Assistant Superintendent of Nigeria Police, ASP Lucky Nuataa, the body collaborating with two law firms in Nigeria, is to independently document human rights situation at the village or city level in a fair, impartial and competent manner.

Already, 17 city representatives have been recruited by MOSOP secretariat to coordinate activities at village level as grassroots monitors, while each village or city has 14 days to set up a grassroots center.

Former Chair Person of the 2010 Ogoni Referendum Committee, Ms. Christiana Nwiko is to serve as secretary of the Human Rights Bureau.

An oversight body – Ogoni Human Rights Board headed by Pastor Nelson Diginee, an experience activist minister is to work with representatives of Council of Ogoni Churches, Federation of Ogoni Women Association, National Youth Council of Ogoni, Council of Ogoni Traditional Rulers Association and the Ogoni Farmers Council as members. Other board members include representatives of the Ogoni Teachers Union and the Ogoni Technical
Association.

A number of Ogoni lawyers with offices in Ogoni and one law firm in Port Harcourt are to jointly provide pro-bono services. The Board is open to cooperation with other human rights institutions and groups in the effort to initiate follow-up measures on actionable reports presented by the Bureau.

The Bureau will cover all human rights issues and cooperate with MOSOP Peace and Security Council to end illegal and random land survey by Nigerian armed security forces.

In his message, Diigbo charged the body to act without fear or favor, and appealed to institutions and organizations, domestic and international that are genuinely interested in supporting human rights work in Ogoni to liaise with the Ogoni Human Rights Watch Bureau since it is a grassroots oriented body.

The Bureau Director, Retired CSP Neebee is a dedicated Community leader, and currently, a member of Gbam Bo-Ue Community Chiefs and Elders Peace Council in the Babbe Kingdom of Ogoni.

While in the Nigeria Police Force, he had served in many capacities, including as a trainer for International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on Human Rights in professional Policing Concepts, a lecturer and directing staff at the Police Training School, Nonwa in Rivers State.

He attended train-the-trainer course at the Central Planning and Training Unit Staff College, Jos. He was appointed to serve as the police officer in charge of Human Rights in Eleme Division in Rivers State, where he introduced enforcement of human rights as part of policing duties.

In his new role, CSP Neebee also has responsibility to plan and implement train-the-trainers programme for grassroots human rights assistants and build a respectful relationship between the Ogoni people and the security forces in matters concerning human rights.

The Human Rights Watch Bureau is a significant aspect of continual effort to structure and build institutions for Ogoni Central Indigenous Authority (OCIA).

Hon. Dum Ade John Budam

MOSOP Secretary General


AP Interview: Shell hopeful for Arctic drilling

Feb 5th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

By DAN JOLING
Associated Press

Published: February 5th, 2012 08:59 AM
Last Modified: February 5th, 2012 09:04 AM

ANCHORAGE, Alaska – It’s the billion-dollar question in Alaska for 2012: Will this be the year Shell Oil begins large-scale offshore exploratory drilling in Arctic waters?

Two months into 2012, the oil giant is beyond the lead time it said it needed to assemble the flotilla of support vessels that must accompany drill ships to leases in the to the remote Chukchi and Beaufort seas. But Shell Alaska Vice President Pete Slaiby remains hopeful drilling can begin when Arctic Ocean ice melts this summer, even as he awaits a green light from regulators.

“There is clearly more certainty with the regulatory process than we’ve had in previous years,” Slaiby said in an interview.

President Obama in July created an interagency working group to coordinate energy development in Alaska. Discussions with Shell have been fruitful, Slaiby said.

“There’s a lot of questions coming back from the regulators: How does this work, when will you have this in place? What are your competencies? How do you ensure it will work? This is stuff we had all thought out,” Slaiby said. “It was not like it is new stuff, or somebody was coming back with something we hadn’t thought about. But they are clearly now front and center in asking questions and in really doing the things that the public demands.”

Alaska’s elected officials are banking on offshore development to maintain Alaska’s petroleum-based economy. Environmentalists fighting to protect marine mammals have contested every permit application, claiming oil companies can’t clean up spills in ice-choked oceans. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, in the wake of the BP oil disaster, pledged “utmost caution” in Arctic offshore drilling, to the frustration of Shell, which has spent upward of $4 billion on Arctic offshore development.

The federal government estimates Arctic Ocean outer continental shelf reserves at 26.6 billion barrels of recoverable oil and 130 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Diminished production on Alaska’s North Slope has lowered flow in the trans-Alaska pipeline to less than a third of its capacity.

Shell hopes to provide a source to fill it, and has made progress.

The company cleared a hurdle last month when the Appeals Board of the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed an air permit for one of Shell’s drill ship, the Noble Discoverer, which had blocked 2011 drilling. Shell hopes to use the drill ship in the Chukchi Sea.

The federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management in December approved Shell’s exploration plan for the Chukchi – with a major caveat. Shell must stop drilling into hydrocarbon zones 38 days before ice is likely to move in, roughly Sept. 24, to have time to fix a wellhead blowout.

Shell contends the chance of a blowout is minimal and that its cleanup preparations can address any spill. It is trying to reverse the 38-day restriction but will move ahead with drilling if it can’t.

“Look, you have 105 days,” Slaiby said. “Thirty-eight days is a large factor in 105 days. But it looks like we’ll have to take a bit of measure of inefficiency unless we’re successful in challenging it,”

Shell has other hurdles to clear. The company could hear this month whether the Bureau of Safety and Environment Enforcement will sign off on its spill response plan, the focus of environmental groups that contend oil companies have not demonstrated they can clean up a spill 1,000 miles from the nearest Coast Guard base and from infrastructure – ports, major runways, even warehouses and hotels – that is available elsewhere.

Shell continues to make its case that it has an effective cleanup plan in place with response vessels standing by and additional support from resources staged at Prudhoe Bay and elsewhere.

“It’s been a process where we’ve not had to significantly change what we’ve done, but we’ve had to put in a lot more explanation of how it’s doing,” Slaiby said.

Well control will include a “capping stack” that can be lowered onto a well as BP did to stem the Macondo blowout. It’s being fabricated in Louisiana and will be tested in Washington or Alaska waters before drilling begins, Slaiby said.

“We’re going to have that ready to go,” Slaiby said. “It will be tested. It will meet with all of the BOEM, BSEE, requirements. We’re going to have it offshore with us. It will actually be resident on one of our anchor handlers, with a lifting frame and ready to be deployed.”

Shell is awaiting a decision on an appeal of the EPA’s air permits for its other drill ship, the Kulluk, which it hopes to use for exploratory wells in the Beaufort Sea.

Environmental and Alaska Native groups have challenged Shell’s exploration plan in the Beaufort. Arguments in the case are scheduled for March.

Shell is constructing an ice-hardy spill containment barge in Seattle. The Kulluk has been undergoing upgrades in dry dock since last summer, including replacement of engines to make them compliant with air standards. The Noble Discover is finishing up a well in New Zealand before it will make the trip to the West Coast for modifications.

Environmental groups have challenged the lease sale that allowed the 2008 sale of leases in the Chukchi. A federal judge in Anchorage ruled that the former Minerals Management Service had not followed environmental requirements before the sale. He’s now considering corrections made by the Interior Department. A negative outcome, Slaiby conceded, could block Chukchi drilling.

Slaiby remains optimistic about progress in the regulatory process. Interior Department Deputy Secretary David Hayes, the chairman of the interagency group on Alaska energy, has done a good job assembling various agencies to “kick the tires” on the project to make sure it was put together properly.

“I think the end result is pretty good,” Slaiby said.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell pledges to spend, spend, spend – but gamble leaves City cold

Feb 4th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

The Times: 3 February 2012

Tim Webb Energy Editor

Ambitious plans to boost growth will cost too much and knock Shell off its top spot, the City warned yesterday. Unveiling disappointing results, the Anglo-Dutch oil group further unnerved investors when it said it planned to spend even more heavily on new oil and gas projects.

Analysts said that Shell would make lower returns from the huge outlays, leaving less room to raise its dividend significantly. The company, which has outperformed its rivals over the past 18 months, would struggle to maintain its position at the front of the pack, they added.

Despite having ratcheted up spending in recent years, Shell missed its production target in 2011. Profits of $4.8 billion in the fourth quarter were 18 per cent higher than last year, mainly because of record oil prices, but about 6 per cent lower than forecast.

Shares in Shell dropped by more than2 per cent in early trading, but recovered to close down 1.2 per cent at £22.97.

Stuart Joyner, analyst at Investec, said that Shell was having to spend “more for less” with the rising investment bringing in lower returns.

He predicted that analysts would slash their profit forecasts for the company and added that Shell’s earnings this year were likely to be flat, particularly after it booked a $287 million loss from its downstream refining and marketing division. This was after a fire at its Singapore refinery wiped $200 million off the bottom line and because of an industry-wide collapse in refining margins in the fourth quarter.

Analysts at Citigroup said Peter Voser, the chief executive, had failed to convince investors that the group could make the best investments to continue its recent run of stellar growth.

“After significant sector and market outperformance over the last 18months, we viewed further outperformance as dependent on management convincing that the company can continue to reinvest more profitably than peers,” they wrote. “The new medium-term strategy fails to offer that differentiated story.” Even Shell’s modest dividend rise – its first for three years – disappointed as it was less than expected.

Mr Voser admitted at the results presentation that Shell’s profits have fluctuated wildly in recent years because of seesawing oil and gas prices and are likely to continue to do so. ‘We are in a world where volatility has increased,” he said. He unveiled a new target to increase cashflow of $136 billion between 2008 and 2011 by up to 50 per cent over the next four years. He said that Shell would produce 4 million barrels of oil a day by 2018, a 20 per cent increase on current levels.

This year Shell will produce more gas than oil for the first time. It already produces more liquefied natural gas than any other oil company. The company will spend about $6 billion this year on developing its shale oil and gas projects, particularly in North America. Some $1 billion of this will go on producing oil and other liquids from shale rock, mainly at its giant Eagle Ford field in Texas.

The value of Shell’s shale gas assets was underlined yesterday when PetroChina bought a 20 per cent stake, thought to be worth $1 billion, in the company’s Groundbirch assets in Canada.

3 states offer big tax breaks for Shell Oil plant

Feb 2nd, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

Published February 01, 2012| Associated Press

PITTSBURGH –  Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia are trying to top each other with the sweetest package of tax breaks for Shell Oil Co., which plans to build a huge new petrochemical refinery in the region.

But some are questioning why there’s been so little public discussion over exactly what’s being offered, and how the deals would impact communities and the region.

“Who’s going to be paying for the roads?” asked Robert P. Strauss, a professor of economics and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University. “You have to think through very carefully what the additional costs will be.”

The proposed plant, called a cracker in the industry, would take ethane out of natural gas and convert it into the basic materials for literally hundreds of consumer and industrial materials, including plastics, fertilizers and antifreeze.

Strauss, who worked on tax policy at the U.S. Treasury and on Congressional committees before he began teaching in the 1970s, said there’s a history of politicians and the media exaggerating the long-term benefits that may come from a large industrial plant.

He said there’s no question a petrochemical plant would create jobs, but perhaps not as many as people hope.

The American Chemistry Council, a Washington, D.C.-based industry lobbying group, estimates that the plant would employ 2,484 people directly in the chemical industry and 6,262 in related businesses.

Shell, part of Royal Dutch Shell PLC, has previously said that the core plant could employ 10,000 workers short-term, and several hundred long-term.

Shell has said that the basic plant could cost $2 billion to $3 billion just to build, and would attract a range of smaller plants nearby.

The company hasn’t commented on specific possible locations, but government and industry officials agree on several: A former steel mill in Aliquippa, Pa., about 35 miles north of Pittsburgh, and industrial parks along the Ohio River in New Martinsville and Institute, W. Va. Ohio also has industrial land on its side of the river in that region.

Dan Carlson, Shell Chemical’s general manager of new business development, said in a statement that the three states “have shown great interest in having us build our petrochemical plant in their states. We will make an official announcement when the site selection is confirmed.”

Some are disturbed that states haven’t released a more detailed economic analysis of the proposed tax breaks.

“We have no idea how much the state is losing in revenue each year. Nobody knows,” added Ted Boettner, director of the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy. “It’s about transparency and accountability. Is it clear to county officials, school boards, how much revenue is being foregone?”

West Virginia has offered a 25-year property tax break, Pennsylvania 15 years, and Ohio has reportedly offered major incentives.

West Virginia officials estimate that without incentives a $2 billion plant would pay about $29 million in property taxes each year, compared to about $11 million in Ohio.

But new legislation passed by West Virginia lawmakers last week would cut the bill to just $1.6 million each year there.

Steven Kratz, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of Community & Economic Development, didn’t have dollar figures for what the proposed 15-year tax break might be worth to Shell.

Strauss doesn’t question the basic concept behind Shell’s plan: to build an ethane refinery close to both the booming supply of shale gas and to huge numbers of consumers in the Northeast.

But Strauss noted that when German automaker Volkswagen AG opened a major manufacturing plant south of Pittsburgh in the late 1970s, there were huge tax incentives and projections for large numbers of long-term jobs. Ten years later the plant closed, never coming close to the rosy job estimates.

Others said that isn’t likely to happen if Shell builds an ethane refinery.

“I think that a petrochemical plant is likely to be far more stable,” said Ehud Ronn, a professor of energy studies at the University of Texas in Austin.

Ronn noted that if Shell doesn’t build a plant in the Appalachians, it will have to transport raw gas down to Gulf Coast refineries for processing, and then ship the ethane product back up to the northeast.

“It makes certainly a lot of sense to build it near both the input and the output,” Ronn said of Shell’s plans.

Boettner said his group isn’t against a cracker plant coming to the region, but it wants to make clear that someone has to pay for local infrastructure costs.

“It’s a classic race to the bottom, to pit states against each other,” he said. “We have leverage. We don’t have to give away the candy store,” given the vast reserves of shale gas in the region.

In both Pennsylvania and West Virginia the tax breaks are targeted towards businesses that invest over $1 billion.

“Small businesses sort of get the shaft,” Boettner said. “Somebody is going to have to make up the difference.”

But Shell isn’t the only company looking at building in the region.

Leonard Dolhert, CEO of Aither Chemical in South Charlestown, W. Va., said the demand for ethane is so great that more than one plant is needed.

“An idea situation would be to build a plant in each state,” he said, adding that ultimately there could be billions of pounds of products made from ethane in the region each year.

“In the long run, once the first plant is built, it should create economic development in all three states,” he said.

Brian Iams, spokesman for Bayer Corp., which owns the West Virginia industrial parks along the Ohio river, said his company has had discussions with more than one company that’s interested in building a plant.

Shell has only spoken generally about its criteria for a site, mentioning river and rail access.

But Strauss said Shell and other major multi-national corporations take great care to examine such huge investments, looking at other intangibles such as the quality of education, infrastructure, and even government.

Strauss said he suspects that the biggest question for Shell may be which site has the best reputation for reasonable local and state government, given their long-term investment.

___

Associated Press writer Kantele Franko in Columbus, Ohio, contributed to this report.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Will disgraced Shell boss Sir Philip Watts be stripped of his knighthood?

Jan 31st, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

POSTING ON SHELL BLOG BY “SirPhil” ON 31 Jan 2012

“Having read that the former RBS-CEO, Fred Goodwin, has been stripped of his knighthood by UK authorities. Makes you wonder if and when Sir Phil Watts will stripped of his one. No doubt Phil’s selfish behaviour at the helm of Shell did more harm to the industry and private investors than Fred.”

RELATED ARTICLES

Memos expose Shell’s years of lying

EXTRACT: The correspondence between Mr Watts and Mr Van de Vijver began in June 2001 when Mr Van de Vijver took over as head of exploration and production. He was promoted after Sir Philip was made chief executive partly because of his success with reserves. The two engaged in a “pointed dialogue”, with Mr van de Vijver complaining Shell had overbooked reserves throughout the 1990s.

‘It happened on my watch. I am determined to fix it’

EXTRACT: Shell chairman Sir Philip Watts is resisting pressure to quit following the oil giant’s devaluation of its reserves.

Royal Dutch Shell still diddling its shareholders

EXTRACT: What a mad world we are in when the person most responsible for the fraud, Sir Phillip Watts KCMG, escaped with a severance/pension package of $18.5 million and also managed to retain his title and his Order of St Michael and St George, a British order of chivalry founded in 1818.

FSA Interrogation of Sir Philip Watts following resignation in disgrace as Shell Group Chairman

EXTRACT:

Transcript of Financial Services Authority Interview with Sir Philip Watts: 24 June 2004

Samantha Griffin for the FSA to Sir Philip:

“You are not under arrest and are free to leave any time. The interview is being conducted under caution. That is to say you do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something you later rely on in Court. Anything you say may be given in evidence. Do you understand?”

Link for searchable Transcript of Financial Services Authority Interview with Sir Philip Watts: 24 June 2004: 75 pages – every page marked “CONFIDENTIAL”

Peter Voser, another Royal Dutch Shell CEO tainted by scandal

EXTRACT:

by John Donovan of royaldutchshellplc.com

Soon after Sir Philip Watts was escorted by security guards from the Shell Centre in humiliation and disgrace as a result of his leading role in the Royal Dutch Shell securities fraud, Shell directors appointed Jeroen van der Veer to replace him.

This was despite the fact that van der Veer and fellow Royal Dutch Shell Group Managing Director, Malcolm Brinded, “only narrowly avoided being sacked over their role in the oil giant’s reserves scandal.” Both had signed Form 20F Declarations submitted to the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission containing materially false information. Both were subsequently co-defendants in a U.S. class action lawsuit settled by Shell in which Royal Dutch Shell, as part of the multi-million dollar settlement, made a range of commitments about future governance of the oil giant.

THE SADISTIC SACKING OF SHELL CHIEF EXECUTIVE WALTER VAN DE VIJVER

EXTRACT: He resigned as a result of the cumulative assault, shocked, humiliated and disgusted at the shabby inhuman treatment he received from his colleagues.

Shell arch-critic emailed over 400 Royal Dutch Shell senior execs

Jan 27th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

In a front page lead story in the Financial Times, our site was properly credited with breaking news of the restructuring plans of Peter Voser.

FROM OUR ARCHIVE: EXTRACT FROM A RELATED EMAIL MESSAGE SENT BY JOHN DONOVAN TO OVER 400 SENIOR SHELL EXECUTIVES

Congratulations!

I am writing to offer our best wishes on your appointment/new title, as announced on our website royaldutchshellplc.com within the lists of Shell senior executive appointments we published on 22 June and 3 August.

The unauthorised publication of leaked Shell confidential information on our site has become a news event in its own right, regularly reported by The Wall Street Journal and other news organisations.

In a front page lead story in the Financial Times, our site was credited with breaking news of the restructuring plans of Peter Voser.

Our role was acknowledged in many other news stories including, for example, the London Evening Standard which reported:

“Meanwhile, staff flocked to Royaldutchshell.com to attack the group’s management.”

Reuters also acknowledged “The Royaldutchshellplc.com website was the first to reveal news of the planned restructuring.”

Our insider sources know that we will protect anonymity.  If you ever feel the need to supply information, please contact me and I will advise on setting up secure communications.

SHELL BLOG

Comments posted by Shell employees on our “Shell Blog” have been quoted in many news articles.

If you want to keep in touch with uncensored grassroots opinion of Shell stakeholders, I would strongly recommend regular visits to the facility, as the comments are often insightful and reflect all shades of opinion. Why not post your own views? You can do so anonymously. What do you think about Shell executives being forced to reapply for their jobs? What do you make of the callous comment by Peter Voser that asking staff to reapply had been “an interesting exercise“?

You are also welcome to supply Shell related articles for unedited publication under your own name. We have published numerous articles on this basis from eminent Shell retirees, Shell executive Paddy Briggs, Shell International HSE Group Auditor, Bill Campbell, and Royal Dutch Shell Global Chief Petroleum Engineer, Iain Percival.

The Shell Blog has replaced “Tell Shell”, the official Shell Internet forum for open and lively debate, “temporarily suspended” (permanently) after we exposed the secret censorship of postings considered too open and too lively.

Shell General Counsel Richard Wiseman (now RDS Plc Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer) confirmed to us in an email dated 11 November 2005 Shell’s censorship of Tell Shell postings.

In the same email, Mr Wiseman stated:

The extraordinary tolerance shown to your internet activities ought to demonstrate better than anything else the fact that we are uninterested in, and unmoved by, your current activities

Richard Wiseman subsequently, at his own initiative, sent us an updated photograph of himself to display on our website (left).

In a further development revealing the truth, as opposed to the spin, we found out from documents obtained under the Data Protection Act that Shell set up a team in an attempt to counter our activities. The relevant internal email exposes the hostility towards us and the fact that it is is held in check by fear of reprisal on our part. If you find this difficult to believe, read the email.

So much for being uninterested and unmoved!

Update: Richard Wiseman retired from Shell in March 2011.

Shell puts extra €90m into Irish subsidiary

Jan 23rd, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

The Irish Times – Monday, January 23, 2012

GORDON DEEGAN

OIL AND GAS multinational Shell has injected €90 million into its Irish subsidiary to deal with the spiralling costs of the Corrib gas field project.

Documents filed with the Companies’ Registration Office show that the global group has pumped the extra money into Shell Ireland.

The Irish company confirmed yesterday that the 5km onshore gas pipeline to bring gas from the offshore Corrib field to the market will not be complete until the second half of 2014.

The Corrib gas partners, Shell, Statoil and Canadian-owned Vermillion are now nine years behind the initial target to start generating revenues from the field.

The original estimate for developing the field was €800 million and the final bill for completing the project is now expected to be almost €3 billion.

The documents confirming the cash injection show that the Shell EP Ireland’s Ltd’s capital is now more than €704 million.

A spokeswoman for Shell said yesterday: “The €90 million is to support our ongoing activities on Corrib.”

The partners had hoped that gas would be brought ashore last year – however, this was before An Bord Pleanála ruled that half of the proposed overground pipeline would be unsafe.

This meant that the developers had to apply for permission to place it in a tunnel.

Shell, Statoil and Vermillion are expected to spend a further €378 million on the development this year.

They spent €250 million on the project last year. The total spend for the project at December last was an estimated €2.35 billion.

The 2012 spend estimate arises from Vermillion confirming that it is to spend €70 million on developing the field this year. It owns 18.5 per cent of the field.

Vermillion’s 2012 Capital Programme confirms this and also states that it will cost $135 million to complete the purchase of its stake from the original owner, US group, Marathon Oil.

In a written Dáil response last week on the progress of the field, Minister for Energy Pat Rabbitte, said it is estimated that construction on the onshore section of the pipeline will take in the region of three years. He said: “First gas cannot, therefore, reasonably be anticipated before 2014.”

A spokeswoman for Shell said yesterday: “Work on the onshore pipeline, the final phase of the project to be constructed, is progressing well.

“Preparatory work at the tunnelling site is still under way and tunnelling under Sruwaddacon Bay is expected to start in the second half of 2012. Completion of the tunnel and the laying of the onshore pipeline is estimated to take at least two years to complete.”

About 400 people are working on the project, 350 of whom are based in Mayo.

Shell has 45 per cent of the field and Statoil has 36.5 per cent.

The field has one trillion cubic feet of gas and is expected to meet 75 per cent of Ireland’s peak winter gas needs for up to a decade.

It is now 10 years since the Government approved the Corrib gas project plan.

However, since then, the proposal has become mired in controversy, including the jailing of the “Rossport Five” in 2005 and a number of confrontations between the Garda and protesters at the site of the Bellanaboy terminal in north Mayo.

Separate judicial review proceedings on the onshore pipeline consents were settled in the High Court last year.

SOURCE ARTICLE

Shell Oil Company dumped toxic chemicals into waterway for over 60 yrs

Jan 21st, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

A Shell Oil Co. refinery dumped wastewater into the bayou for more than 60 years, lacing the mucky bottom with toxic chemicals and heavy metals.

DEQ says Bayou Trepagnier, one of state’s most polluted waterways, has been cleaned up

NORCO, La. — The state Department of Environmental Quality says one of Louisiana‘s most polluted waterways has been cleaned up. It’s Bayou Trepagnier (trep-AN’-yay) in Norco.

A Shell Oil Co. refinery dumped wastewater into the bayou for more than 60 years, lacing the mucky bottom with toxic chemicals and heavy metals.

The current owner, Motiva Enterprises LLC, agreed in 2008 to a $10 million cleanup plan.

DEQ says contaminated soil at the end nearest the refinery was removed as an 800-foot-wide “clean zone.”

It says that for another 6,000 feet of the bayou, sediments were solidified and stabilized, then capped with heavy clay. DEQ says about 43,000 yards of clay were used for that and to build access roads.

The bayou is a state scenic waterway.

SOURCE ARTICLE

RELATED ARTICLES

DEQ: cleanup completed at Bayou Trepagnier 21 Jan 2012 09:24 GMT Daily Comet Online

Cleanup of Bayou Trepagnier in Norco is complete, DEQ says 21 Jan 2012 02:33 GMT NOLA.com

Bjorn Edlund and Royal Dutch Shell

Jan 19th, 2012
by John Donovan.
No comments yet

By John Donovan

Late yesterday evening, I sent an email to Mr Michiel Brandjes, Company Secretary and General Counsel Corporate, Royal Dutch Shell Plc and to the CEO of the company, Mr Peter Voser.

The email invited comment and correction in relation to a draft article focused on Bjorn Edlund (above right), who in February 2010 retired as Executive Vice President and Head of Group Communications at Royal Dutch Shell plc.

The draft article headline and content was critical in nature.

Under the circumstances, I also sent an email to Mr Edlund with the same invitation. He provided an initial response taking up the invitation and has now provided a substantive reply from his consultancy Bjorn Edlund Consulting.

It is fair to point out that many people connected with Shell would have some trepidation about replying at all, knowing that we are widely regarded as a long-term thorn in the side of Shell, having issued several high court actions against the company since 1994. The most recent proceedings, instituted by Shell, were in 2005. The acrimony has continued for nearly two decades.

Mr Edlund did not ignore my email, or engage in any prevarication, nor did he duck the issues. All tactics used previously by some of his former colleagues.

Instead, he provided a detailed polite response, with precise information, no threats, and no conditions attached.

His reply struck me as being honest, transparent and helpful. Consequently, I have no problem in accepting that some of the information in our draft was inaccurate. That article will not be published.

Mr Edlund provided a text book example of how to convert a potential critic into an admirer.

This PR guru is worth his weight in gold.

← Earlier Posts