News and information on Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
By Ed Crooks
For decades, America has worried about Saudi Arabia’s plans for oil production; now Saudi Arabia is starting to worry about the US.
In a reversal of roles, US oil production has begun to rise, and expectations are growing that North America (including Canada, where production is growing even faster) will become an increasingly potent force in world oil markets.
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, Dec 05, 2011 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) — There is one year remaining on the B.C. government’s moratorium on coalbed methane drilling in the Sacred Headwaters, and conservation groups ForestEthics and the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition are calling on Christy Clark to institute a permanent ban on drilling in the area.
The request comes as the groups are ramping up their campaign against Shell and the B.C. government, to protect the Sacred Headwaters. A lump of coal and giant greeting card were delivered this morning to Royal Dutch CEO, Peter Voser, at his office in the Hague, Netherlands, issuing a one year ultimatum for Shell to abandon its plans to drill in the headwaters, and reminding the company that 60,000 people have signed a petition opposing its plans.
“Natural gas could face the same backlash as tar sands if Shell’s destructive plans for the Sacred Headwaters are allowed to proceed,” says Karen Tam Wu, Senior Conservation Campaigner with ForestEthics. “What happens in the Sacred Headwaters will determine the image of natural gas development in B.C. Shell and Christy Clark have one year to make sure it’s the right one.”
To illustrate the risk of Shell’s plans, the groups have created a coalbed methane simulation map. Current regulations would allow the drilling and fracking of over 4000 wells, and the clearing of thousands of kilometers of roads in the Sacred Headwaters, the birthplace of three of North America’s most important salmon rivers, and numerous First Nations’ creation stories.
“Four years ago, the B.C. government listened to northwestern communities and pushed pause on drilling in the Sacred Headwaters. Now it’s up to Premier Clark to follow that path to its logical conclusion,” says Shannon McPhail, Executive Director of the Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition. “A permanent ban would indicate to local communities, First Nations and the rest of British Columbia that the government is committed to establishing a truly responsible industry.”
Last week, the groups placed ads at Shell Canada President Lorraine Mitchelmore’s favourite ski hill in the Canadian Rockies, featuring breathtaking photos and reminding her that the Sacred Headwaters are “Out of Bounds”.
The Sacred Headwaters are located in northwest British Columbia, about 600 kilometres north of Terrace, B.C. They are home to grizzly bears, caribou and moose. In 2008, the B.C. government imposed a four-year moratorium on Shell’s activities in the area. The headwaters have been listed on the Outdoor Recreation Council’s Most Endangered Rivers List for the past two years.
Photos of today’s action at Royal Dutch Shell headquarters and copies of the coalbed methane simulation map are available upon request.
Contacts: ForestEthics Karen Tam Wu Senior Conservation Campaigner 778-846-5647
SOURCE: ForestEthics
Copyright 2011 Marketwire, Inc., All rights reserved
DECEMBER 5, 2011
For decades, its main stomping grounds were in the developing world—exotic locales like the Persian Gulf and the desert sands of North Africa, the Niger Delta and the Caspian Sea. But in recent years, that geographical focus has undergone a radical change. Western energy giants are increasingly hunting for supplies in rich, developed countries—a shift that could have profound implications for the industry, global politics and consumers.
Driving the change is the boom in unconventionals—the tough kinds of hydrocarbons like shale gas and oil sands that were once considered too difficult and expensive to extract and are now being exploited on an unprecedented scale from Australia to Canada.
The U.S. is at the forefront of the unconventionals revolution. By 2020, shale sources will make up about a third of total U.S. oil and gas production, according to PFC Energy, a Washington-based consultancy. By that time, the U.S. will be the top global oil and gas producer, surpassing Russia and Saudi Arabia, PFC predicts.
That could have far-reaching ramifications for the politics of oil, potentially shifting power away from the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries toward the Western hemisphere. With more crude being produced in North America, there’s less likelihood of Middle Eastern politics causing supply shocks that drive up gasoline prices. Consumers could also benefit from lower electricity prices, as power plants switch from coal to cheap and plentiful natural gas.
And the change is reshaping the oil companies themselves, as they reallocate their vast resources to new areas and new kinds of fuel. Working in the rich world—with its more predictable taxes and investor-friendly policies—removes some of the risks about the big oil companies that worry investors, making them less vulnerable to the resource nationalism of petrostates like Russia and Venezuela.
“A company like Exxon Mobil can eliminate the technological risk” of developing unconventionals, says Amy Myers Jaffe, senior energy adviser at Rice University’s Baker Institute. “But it can’t eliminate the risk of a Vladimir Putin or a Hugo Chavez.”
This new way of looking at risk is at the heart of the transformation. International oil companies traditionally face a choice: They can either invest in oil that is easy to produce but located in politically volatile countries. Or they can seek opportunities in stable countries where the oil is hard to extract, requiring complex and expensive production techniques.
Now, in a sense, the choice has been made for them. Big onshore fields in the world’s most prolific hydrocarbon provinces are increasingly the preserve of national oil companies, state-owned behemoths like Saudi Aramco and Russia’s OAO Rosneft and OAO Gazprom. For foreign majors like Royal Dutch Shell PLC and BP PLC, their former heartlands in the Gulf sands are now largely off-limits.
Shut out of the Middle East, they have responded with a huge push into new areas, both geographic and technological. Over the past few decades, they have built vast plants to produce liquefied natural gas, or LNG. They have drilled for oil in ever-deeper waters, ever farther offshore. They have worked out how to squeeze oil from the tar sands of Alberta. And they have deployed technologies like hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and horizontal drilling to produce gas from shale rock.
Wood Mackenzie, an oil consultancy in Edinburgh, says that more than half of the international oil companies’ long-term capital investments are now going into these four “resource themes”—a huge shift, considering how marginal the companies once considered them.
There are also drawbacks to the new focus on nontraditional kinds of hydrocarbons. Environmentalists strongly oppose shale-gas extraction due to fears that fracking may contaminate water supplies, the oil-sands industry because it is energy-intensive and dirty, and deep-water drilling because of the risk of oil spills like last year’s Gulf of Mexico disaster.
There are financial considerations, too. While conventional assets are relatively easy to develop and historically have offered good returns, projects in some more technically difficult sectors—like deep-water and LNG—typically take longer to bring on-stream, and are higher cost, meaning returns are lower.
But there is an upside for the majors. “The silver lining is the shape of the profile of these projects, which is different than conventional ones,” says Simon Flowers, head of corporate analysis at Wood Mackenzie. LNG ventures, for example, can deliver contract levels of gas at a steady rate over 20 years. “So the returns may be lower, but overall you have a more dependable cash-flow stream,” he says.
By pursuing these nontraditional fuels, the oil companies are committing themselves ever more deeply to the wealthy nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Wood Mackenzie says $1.7 trillion of future value for all the world’s oil companies—52% of the total—is in North America, Europe and Australia. The consultancy has identified a “significant westward shift” in oil-industry investment, away from traditional areas like North Africa and the Middle East “towards the Brazilian offshore, deepwater oil in the Gulf of Mexico and West Africa and unconventional oil and gas in North America.” And then there’s Australia, far out east, “which is in the early stages of a spectacular growth phase.”
Consider Shell. Seven years ago, the oil giant, synonymous with turbulent hot spots like Nigeria, decided to shift resources to more-developed nations that offered a friendly environment for investors and predictable tax regimes. Shell used to split spending on the upstream—the basic business of exploring for and producing oil and gas—roughly 50/50 between nations in the OECD and those outside of it. It’s now 70/30 in favor of the OECD, with the bulk going to Canada, Australia and the U.S.
“The risks in OECD are technical, but they’re easier to manage than political risk,” says Simon Henry, Shell’s chief financial officer. “In the OECD, you have more control of your operations.”
With the new turf comes a new focus: Shell will soon be producing more natural gas than oil. That might have scared investors a decade or two ago. But with gas demand set to grow strongly, especially in Asia, the future for gas-focused companies is looking increasingly rosy—especially after the Fukushima disaster, which prompted a rethinking of nuclear power in Japan and elsewhere.
Like Shell, Exxon Mobil Corp. is entrenching its position in the Americas, home to just over half its resource base. Its unconventional resources have grown by almost 90% over the past five years to 35 billion oil-equivalent barrels—partly thanks to its 2010 acquisition of XTO Energy, a big shale-gas player. Exxon’s U.S. unconventional production alone is expected to double over the next decade.
Some giants are looking further afield. Chevron Corp.’s three focus areas—the parts of the world that account for the bulk of its exploration budget—are the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, offshore West Africa and the waters off western Australia.
In particular, the company has staked out a huge position in Australian natural gas; its Gorgon LNG project in Australia is one of the world’s largest. The push is based on expectations of surging demand for the fuel in Asia, largely in China, which wants to improve air quality in its heavily polluted cities by switching from coal to gas in power generation and running more commercial vehicles and buses on natural gas.
It “wasn’t a conscious decision” to move into the OECD, says Jay Pryor, head of business development at Chevron. The company doesn’t decide what projects to pursue based on where they are in the world, but on the quality of the resource, the commercial terms and the geopolitical risk. “The best rocks with the best terms are going to get the quickest investment,” he says. Money has flowed into the U.S. and Australia because they offer the best incentives to oil companies, he says.
In recent years, Chevron has also expanded into another promising part of the OECD—Europe, which some estimates suggest has shale-gas reserves comparable to those in the U.S. Chevron has picked up millions of acres of land in Poland and Romania, where it will soon be drilling for shale gas. That’s part of a wider trend: Dozens of companies are now exporting to Europe technologies used to open up shale deposits in the U.S.
Not all oil companies have piled into unconventionals the way Shell and Chevron have. BP, for one, has far fewer investments in tar sands and shale gas than its peers, though it has an unrivaled position in deep-water oil. That means it has less of a presence in the OECD than Shell: Its biggest projects are in poorer countries like Angola, Azerbaijan and Russia, and in recent years it has won a string of licenses and contracts in India, Iraq, Egypt and Jordan.
Yet even BP has been bolstering its position in the OECD. It said recently it was pressing ahead with a £4.5 billion ($7 billion) investment in the North Sea’s Clair oil field, part of a five-year, £10 billion program.
Still, being in the OECD doesn’t guarantee oil companies an easy ride. Operators in the North Sea were shocked earlier this year when the U.K. government suddenly increased taxes on oil producers. In France, authorities recently banned hydraulic fracturing. And in the U.S., the drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico, imposed after the Deepwater Horizon blowout, threw many of the majors’ plans into disarray.
But still, for the most part, the risks are much greater in the non-OECD. “The majors went to Venezuela and lost their property,” says Ms. Myers Jaffe of the Baker Institute. “They went to Russia and had to whisk their CEO off to a safe house. They went to the Caspian and realized they couldn’t get the oil out. I for one would much rather invest in a company that had 70% of its spending in the OECD.”
Mr. Chazan is a staff reporter in The Wall Street Journal’s London bureau. He can be reached at guy.chazan@wsj.com.
Nov. 30 -- Canadian environmental activists demand Royal Dutch Shell puts people first during a protest in Durban, as United Nations climate talks enter their third day. Nick Rowlands reports.
Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:43pm EST
Nov 30 (Reuters) – A Canadian native group is suing Royal Dutch Shell Plc for what it said was a failure by the oil major to live up to environmental funding agreements tied to Shell’s massive northern Alberta oil sands developments.
The Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation seeks C$1.5 million ($1.47 million) from Shell for allegedly blocking requests for money to be used for sustainable development and education initiatives in the community under agreements made in 2003 and 2006.
Shell’s Athabasca Oil Sands project, Canada’s third largest tar sands mining development, is in the aboriginal group’s traditional territory. The Athabasca Chipewyan said the company is trying to change the terms of the funding, meant to ease the impact of tar sands development on the community. The charges have not been proven in court.
“We came in good faith, always willing to talk with them,” Athabasca Chipewyan Chief Allan Adam told Reuters on Wednesday. “Shell played the role of tough guy and refused to deal with us on the terms we negotiated.”
The suit comes amid growing international controversy over the impact of oil sands development on air, land, water and local communities. The Alberta oil sands deposits are the third-largest source of crude in the world, and Canada has made exports of the resource a top national priority.
The community of Fort Chipewyan, located downstream from the oil sands developments, has experienced unusual health problems, including elevated rates of rare cancers. Studies have been unable to definitively rule out a link with the oil projects and controversy remains.
Adam said the lawsuit is unrelated to the health concerns in the community of 963 people.
For its part, Shell said the dispute amounts to a fraction of the more than C$200 million the company has spent on numerous initiatives in the community over the past five years under its “good neighbor” program.
An example of a request that was denied was a bursary in which there wasn’t a student to use it and the first nation wanted cash in lieu, said John Broadhurst, Shell’s vice-president, development, heavy oil.
He said he was disappointed by the lawsuit and hoped the two sides can reach a settlement.
“It’s not that we’re not committed to doing right by the community and following through on our commitments,” Broadhurst said.
8 November 2011
The US state department’s handing of a request to build Keystone XL, a 1,600-mile (2,700km) oil pipeline, will be reviewed for wrongdoing.
Reports have surfaced that a company involved in the environmental review had listed developer TransCanada as a “major client”.
The review decision comes a day after demonstrators protested against the pipeline plans outside the White House.
A review could potentially delay a final decision on the pipeline.
The state department is handling public consultations on the project as the pipeline would cross the US border with Canada, but the White House has made it clear that President Barack Obama will influence the final outcome.
The review request was led by Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Representative Steve Cohen of Tennessee, both Democrats.
“At a time when all credible scientific evidence and opinion indicate that we are losing the battle against global warming it is imperative that we have objective environmental assessments of major carbon-dependent energy projects,” Mr Sanders said.
In an October letter, Mr Sanders and Mr Cohen specifically asked the state department’s inspector general to look at all contractual or financial ties between the consultant, Houston-based Cardno Entrix and TransCanada.
They also asked for a review of state department emails related to a TransCanada lobbyist who had worked in Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.
TransCanada, which is seeking permission to build the pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf coast in Texas, said it welcomed the review.
“We conduct ourselves with integrity and in an open and transparent manner. We are certain that the conclusion of this review will reflect that,” spokesman James Millar told the Associated Press news agency.
Pollution and political risks
Environmentalists are opposed to the Keystone XL project because of the method used for extracting petroleum from Alberta’s oil sands.
They are also concerned by the risk of pollution on the pipeline route.
The proposed pipeline would pass south from Alberta through the US states of Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas and Oklahoma before ending up at refineries in Texas.
Correspondents say the decision to allow the project or not is fraught with political risk for Mr Obama.
If he rejects it, he could be accused of destroying jobs. But allowing it to go ahead could lose him the support of activists who helped propel him to the White House, they note.
On Sunday, protesters formed a human chain around the White House, with some carrying an inflatable replica of a pipeline on their shoulders.
“We have to leave the tar sands oil in the ground. That’s the only solution if we are going to save the planet,” protester Martin Springhetti told AP.
By Emma Rowley
EUROPE’S failure to cultivate growth is a bigger worry for oil and gas major Royal Dutch Shell than the region’s current sovereign debt crisis.
The Anglo-Dutch company has cut its support of European projects to just 15pc of its total investment spend, which it puts at $100bn (£62bn) over four years. Shell expects to keep reducing that share amid longer-term concerns about the region, according to Simon Henry, its chief financial officer.
“Europe’s macroeconomic position can only recover, and the sovereign debt crisis can only be addressed, through underlying economic growth, and we do not see the European Union creating the conditions for that – in fact, quite the opposite,” he said. “Most moves made by the Commission, one way or the other, tend to almost, either directly or indirectly, reduce the competitiveness of European industry.”
The warning came as Shell, Europe’s largest oil company in terms of market value, reported profits had doubled in the third quarter of this year, boosted by the climbing oil price. Earnings were $7.2bn (£4.5bn), up 106pc on a year earlier, on a current cost of supplies (CCS) basis, an industry measure stripping out changes in inventory.
Shell’s overall oil and gas production fell 2pc to 3.01m barrels of oil equivalent a day, but was rising when the impact of its programme to sell off non-core assets was taken out. Several major new projects should come on stream in the next few years.
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) performed well, with sales up 12pc. Shell is working on plans to export LNG from Canada to Asia, where prices are much higher and the problems with nuclear plants following the Japanese earthquake have boosted demand for other energy sources.
BG Group this week announced an $8bn deal to buy LNG to export from the US, a landmark in the country’s shift to becoming an exporter of gas now that technology means it can access its vast shale reserves.
Shell also said that it hoped to be able to return to Libya to resume its exploration programme.
Analysts welcomed the results and said Shell had hit a “sweet spot”. Its “B” shares closed up 11p – O.47pc – at £23.30, as the wider FTSE 100 climbed 2.89pc.
Separately, US rival ExxonMobil said quarterly earnings rose 41pc to $10.3bn as the high oil price offset falling production.
Published in the Business Section of the Telegraph on Friday 28 October 2011
HOUSTON | Mon Oct 31, 2011 7:35pm GMT
Oct 31 (Reuters) – Royal Dutch Shell (RDSa.L) is “very interested” in onshore U.S. shale oil, but the company is focusing on less developed plays to bypass the pricey competitive rush for more established acreage, the head of Shell’s Americas operations said on Monday.
Marvin Odum told Reuters in an interview that oil majors likely will move into shale oil plays faster than they did during the natural gas shale boom.
He also said he expected the Keystone XL Canada-to-Texas pipeline to be approved despite opposition and that Shell’s joint-venture Motiva Enterprises’ refinery in Port Arthur will be well positioned to process heavy Canadian crude transported in the line.
(Reporting by Kristen Hays)
31 October 2011
CALGARY — What should have been business as usual in the Netherlands turned tragic this weekend, as a missing Shell Canada employee has turned up dead.
Barry Maguire, a general manager of design engineering for Shell, was found by the sea early Sunday.
A spokesman for the company confirmed Sunday evening Maguire of Calgary who had died while on a business trip.
He had been reported missing Thursday.
“We understand from the police in the Netherlands that the body of the employee, who previously had been reported missing, was found earlier (Sunday),” spokesman Stephen Doolan said.
“The indication so far from the police is they’re considering it an accidental death by drowning.”
But investigation into the death is ongoing, noted Doolan, and Shell is working with the authorities.
Canada Foreign Affairs is aware of the tragedy.
“Canadian consular officials are monitoring this case and are in contact with Dutch authorities,” spokesman Aliya Mawani said. “We stand ready to provide consular assistance.”
Mawani said her department cannot comment further as a matter of privacy.
Doolan said Maguire’s family has been notified and it has been a very stressful weekend, with the company now focused on doing all it can for those affected by the tragic turn of events.
“We’re doing all we can in an otherwise very difficult time,” he said, noting the company is reaching out to the family to offer them any support they need.
“We’re (also) providing support to staff and will have various support resources internally available in the coming weeks.”
It has been reported Maguire leaves behind a wife and two children.
Doolan couldn’t verify any personal information about Maguire, or how long he had been with the company.
damien.wood@sunmedia.ca
On Twitter: @SUNdswood
MARK WILLIAMSON
28 Oct 2011
ROYAL Dutch Shell said it would curb investment in Europe where it expects the economy to stagnate, but made clear it would still spend in the North Sea.
Announcing bumper profits driven by high oil prices, the oil and gas giant said it will shift a growing share of its investment to places like Qatar, where the launch of huge projects will underpin growth for years.
Noting that Shell only devotes 15% of its investment to Europe, chief financial officer Simon Henry said the continent’s share will shrink amid concerns about the fallout from the debt crisis.
The day after European ministers finally agreed a plan to try to stabilise the eurozone, Mr Henry indicated Shell executives have been unimpressed by the response to the problems.
He told reporters: “Europe’s macroeconomic position can only recover and the sovereign debt crisis can only be addressed through underlying economic growth. We do not see the EU creating the conditions for that – in fact quite the opposite.
“Most moves by the [European] Commission one way or another tend to almost directly or indirectly reduce the competitiveness of European industry.”
Mr Henry said Shell had identified plenty of global opportunities to put its money to good use, including developing 20 major projects in countries such as Canada and Australia that will underpin growth for years. However, Shell still sees scope to invest in the North Sea.
Mr Henry noted Shell recently confirmed it will invest in the £4.5 billion BP-led Clair Ridge project west of Shetland, among the 20 growth projects he cited.
Earlier this year Shell approved plans for the £3bn redevelopment of the Schiehallion and Loyal fields, also west of Shetland.
In May, Shell’s chief executive Peter Voser told The Herald that it could remain in the North Sea for decades.
However, the firm told the Government that tax hikes in the Budget could jeopardise investment in smaller projects.
Shell said it will continue to dispose of non-core assets, although at a slower pace than in the past two years. Shell has already raised $6.2bn (£3.9bn) against a target of $5bn.
Richard Griffith, an oil and gas analyst at Evolution Securities, said Shell’s third quarter results showed the company is in a “sweet spot”.
Stripping out the effect of changes in inventories, the company doubled third quarter profits to $7.2bn, from $3.5bn in the same period last year.
Shell benefited from a 48% rise in oil prices – partly caused by unrest in the Middle East and Africa. Production increased by 2% annually, excluding asset sales, to 3.01 million barrels oil equivalent daily.
Upstream earnings increased 58% annually, to $5.4bn. Profits in the downstream business, which includes forecourt sales increased by 25% to $1.8bn.
Asked what respite Shell would provide to hard-pressed motorists, Mr Henry said: “We do a good job in getting the lowest cost fuel to customers. The Government is probably the first people you should call.”
Mr Henry said the Government takes two-thirds of the price of a litre, adding: “It is a volume business on which we make a very small margin.”
Mr Henry said Shell could not use the profits from its upstream business to subsidise the downstream.
The company announced an unchanged third quarter dividend of $0.42 per ordinary share.
Shares in Royal Dutch Shell closed up 27p at £22.80.
: 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
