Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

Access to over 24,000 articles and documents relating to Royal Dutch Shell

Free Research Access on Royal Dutch Shell Plc (over 24,000 articles and documents)

FREE RESEARCH

We have the worlds largest online library of news articles and documents about the oil giant Royal Dutch Shell and related matters. They are all available FREE for educational and research purposes.

Over 24,000 are stored here and on our sister website: www.ShellNews.net

Over 17,000 articles and documents are available on this website by using our internal Search facility.

For access to over 7,000 further articles/documents, click on the link below…

http://shell2004.com/blog/royal_dutch_shell_plc-news-archive-2004-2005.htm

There are no charges of any kind.

Below are some compilations under various headings. 

Extensive legal documents from the Ken Wiwa v Royal Dutch Shell trial commencing in the U.S.A next month will be added within the next 48 hours. 

Shell Litigation

New York Times: “Shell Oil Shareholders Awarded $110 Million”13 December 1990

New York Times: “Shell Settles Dumping Suit for $3 Million”: 9 February 1995

New York Times: “New Settlement In Plumbing Suit“: 9 November 1995

New York Times: “SHELL SETTLES ROYALTIES CASE FOR $33.5 MILLION”: 21 March 2002

Dow Jones Article: US Court Ruling Paves For Shell Settlement To Proceed: 19 November 2007 (The ruling was first obtained by Shell critics’ WebsiteRoyaldutchshellplc.com, which has posted 2,000 pages of extracts from the case.)

National Paint & Coatings Association: NPCA Victorious in Shell Oil Litigation; Judge Upholds California’s Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act Fee Allocation: 21 March 2008

NPCA scored a victory for industry with a California Superior Court’s tentative decision which rules against Shell Oil in favor of the State of California and intervenor NPCA.

The court’s conclusion was fatal to Shell’s case because Shell failed to present any evidence under the relevant standard.

Plaintiff Shell Oil brought this action (Equilon Enterprises LLC dba Shell Oil Products US vs. California State Board of Equalization and California Department of Health Services) in 2005 seeking a refund of the $3,910,359.10 in Child Lead Poisoning Prevention Act fees assessed against Shell in 2002. NPCA successfully intervened in the suit in order to oppose Shell’s demand that the allocation be changed to place virtually the entire financial burden of the program on the coatings industry.

In particular, in weighing the credibility of the evidence, the Court specifically found that the correspondence and evidence established that the key Shell experts had a “predetermined mindset of the results of the study, prior to engaging in any research.”

allAfrica.com: South Africa: Apartheid Victims to Sue Multinationals: 13 May 2008

Cape Town — Victims of apartheid who are suing 23 leading multinational corporations in American courts on the grounds that the companies collaborated with the policy have been given clearance to take their case forward.

The United States Supreme Court issued an order in Washington, DC, on Monday affirming a decision by a lower court, the effect of which is to allow the case to go ahead.

Khulumani said its case targetted the multinationals “for having aided and abetted the perpetration of gross human rights violations in South Africa under apartheid by equipping and financing the apartheid government’s military and security agencies.”

It said all the defendants had operations in apartheid South Africa, and it was seeking damages for “specific violations of internationally recognized human rights norms… by the apartheid government following the United Nations’ classification of apartheid as a crime against humanity.”

It named the defendants in the case as: Barclay National Bank Ltd., British Petroleum, PLC, Chevrontexaco Corporation, Chevrontexaco Global Energy, Inc., Citigroup, Inc., Commerzbank, Credit Suisse Group, Daimlerchrysler AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Dresdner Bank AG, Exxonmobil Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Fujitsu, Ltd., General Motors Corporations, International Business Machines Corp., J.P. Morgan Chase, Shell Oil Company, UBS AG, AEG Daimler-Benz Industrie, Fluor Corporation, Rheinmetall Group AG, Rio Tinto Group and Total-Fina-Elf.

The Times of Zambia: US firms to pay for apartheid: 14 May 2008

Millions of South Africans are eligible to join a class-action lawsuit against US-based multinational corporations accused of aiding and abetting the apartheid government.

This follows a ruling by the US Supreme Court on Monday, which upheld a lower court’s decision to allow a civil case to proceed.

The civil case against major multinationals includes a damages claim and two class-action suits under the US Alien Tort Claims Act, an 18th century law that allows foreigners to sue in US courts.

“ The case has been hailed as a potential catalyst in advancing international human rights law.” Among the companies that face litigation are IBM, BP, Credit Suisse, Daimler, Deutsche Bank, Exxonmobil , Ford Motor, General Motors and Shell.

A probe by the Securities and Exchange Commission is also under way, it said.

In its annual report with the SEC, the Anglo-Dutch oil company said it was contacted in July by the Department of Justice regarding its use of a unit of Panalpina World Transport Ltd., a Swiss-based shipping and logistics-management company.

Shell said in the filling the Justice Department was looking at potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act as a result of such use. Shell declined to comment beyond the filings Wednesday.

Baltimore Sun: Class action settlements may aid in repairing leaky pipes: 5 September 2008

USAToday: NYC trial date for claims against Shell: 9 October 2008

Times Herald: Coweta files suit against Shell Oil Company: 23 October 2008 (Connected to New Settlement in Plumbing Suit?)

Reuters: Environmentalists, Nigerians plan to sue Shell: 5 November 2008

Wall Street Journal: Chevron Case Weighs Extent of Overseas Liability: 1 December 2008

Shell Oil Company Limestone Township $26 million settlement: December 2007

KANKAKEE CLASS ACTION: Limestone Class Action: December 2008

KANKAKEE CLASS ACTION: REPORT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CLASS SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR AND MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND ORDER OF DISBURSEMENT OF SETTLEMENT FUNDS

 

Shell Safety

Houston firms facing pipeline fines, penalties: Friday 29 June 2001

EXTRACTS

And Houston-based Equilon Pipeline Co. was slapped last week with $10 million in state and federal environmental fines for the 1999 rupture of a gasoline pipeline in Bellingham, Wash., resulting in three fatalities.

Equilon also faces a $3 million fine issued last year by the DOT — the largest penalty ever proposed against a pipeline operator in the history of the federal pipeline safety program. The El Paso penalty is the largest ever proposed against a natural gas pipeline operator.

Equilon, a joint venture of Texaco and Royal Dutch/Shell, was majority owner of Olympic Pipeline Co, operator of the Bellingham pipeline at the time of the accident. Since then, BP has taken control of Olympic Pipeline.

Both El Paso and Equilon were charged with violating numerous safety requirements in the operation of their respective pipelines.

Equilon told the state it was not operating the pipeline at the time of the rupture but had simply loaned Olympic several employees, including Equilon’s president, three vice presidents and the head of environmental compliance.

Reuters: Shell Washington refinery cited for safety violations: 25 June 2008

HOUSTON, June 25 (Reuters) – Washington state’s Department of Labor & Industries said on Wednesday it found 23 serious safety and health violations at Shell Oil Co’s 145,000 barrel per day (bpd) refinery in Anacortes, Washington.

Shell said it was weighing a possible appeal of the agency’s citation, which could lead to fines totaling $109,600.

Among the serious violations found at the Shell Anacortes refinery were failures to identify and control hazards that could lead to releases of highly hazardous chemicals and deficiencies in the development of mechanical integrity programs, the Labor & Industries Department said.

Seattle Times: Safety violations to cost Shell: 26 June 2008

Washington’s Department of Labor and Industries on Wednesday fined Shell Oil $109,600 for multiple safety violations in its Anacortes refinery.

The refinery, the second largest of the four major facilities that supply the Puget Sound region with gasoline and other petroleum products, was cited for 23 violations ranging from inadequately instructing operators on how to deal with emergencies to faulty inspections.

Shell, a unit of Anglo-Dutch oil conglomerate Royal Dutch Shell, is reviewing the citation, said Shell spokesman Brian Sibley. Shutting down the operation is “highly unlikely,” he said.

Royal Dutch Shell PLC is heading up a test venture in Hawaii to turn oil-rich algae into fuel. If the process is found commercially viable, the Anglo-Dutch conglomerate could build algae-processing plants elsewhere.

Bloomberg: Nigerian Oil Pipe Fire Extinguished, 6 Workers Died, Shell Says: 17 November 2008

BBC News: Gas firms fined over worker death: 26 November 2008 (Both Shell and AMEC admitted breaching health and safety rules and were each fined £150,000 plus £41,500 in costs at Norwich Crown Court.)

FT article: Shell deaths higher than other western groups: 30 November 2008 (Royal Dutch Shell last year suffered more workforce deaths than any other large western oil company, with a rate of fatalities twice as high as BP’s.)

upstreamonline: Shell death toll ‘higher than peers’ : 01 December 2008 (Last week Shell and service player Amec were each fined £150,000 ($230,000) after an Amec worker died during operations at Clipper.)

The Times-Picayune: Last weekend’s helicopter crash shakes up offshore workers: 10 January 2009

Reuters: Shell gets tough on costs as oil prices bite: 30 January 2009

(Royal Dutch Shell has intensified its cost-cutting efforts in response to the collapse in oil prices and also plans to step up efforts to improve what it said was a “mixed” safety record. Brinded said Shell had a “dreadful start” to this year after 10 contractors and one third party were killed in three incidents. )

International Herald Tribune: Shell gets tough on costs as oil prices bite: 30 January 2009

Reuters: Oil industry cost, job cuts may hit safety, skills: 3 February 2009

The Herald: ‘They know what they have to do: launch the life rafts and get out‘: 19 February 2009

(In July 2002, a Sikorsky S76 helicopter was ferrying personnel between a platform and a drilling rig, both owned by Shell, when it ditched about 25 miles north-east of Great Yarmouth, killing all 11 on board. It is understood the aircraft remained afloat after ditching. In March 1991, six men were killed when a Sikorsky S61N struck a crane on a Shell oil platform and plunged into the sea 116 miles east of Lerwick in Shetland.)

The Press and Journal: Alarm over hundreds of offshore incidents: 4 March 2009

The Sunday Times: Oil rigs plagued by safety lapses: 12 April 2009

 

Shell Price Fixing

New York Times: Suit by Reserve Oil Charges Violations: 23 September 1977 (Reported legal proceedings had been instituted against General Atomic and its owners, Gulf Oil Corporation and “Scallop Nuclear Inc., part of the Royal/Dutch Shell Group.” The complex lawsuit involving various companies related to alleged price fixing of uranium as part of a secret cartel. The article stated that General Atomic was at one time marketing an advanced form of nuclear reactor, one of which was already on line in Colorado.)

Time Magazine: The Uranium Cartel’s Fallout: 21 November 1977 (reported on the alleged cartel price fixing of uranium case being heard by Judge Edwin Felter. EXTRACT: By a quirk of jurisdiction, Felter is presiding over one of the largest and most complex corporate lawsuits ever filed in an American court-a $2 billion-plus action by a New Mexico uranium mining company, United Nuclear Corp., against General Atomic Co., a 50%-owned subsidiary of Gulf Oil Corp., for fraud, coercion and breaches of the nation’s antitrust laws. Royal Dutch Shell owned the other 50% of General Atomic.)

New York Times: Key Ruling Expected Soon In Uranium Antitrust Suit: 2 January 1978 (reported: “Judge Felter is trying a $2.27 billion damage suit against the General Atomic Corporation of San Diego by the United Nuclear Corporation, a uranium mining company with large holdings in Mexico. Gulf and a subsidiary of the Royal Dutch-Shell Group are equal partners in General Atomic”. The article said that Gulf had conceded that its Canadian subsidiary had been involved in a uranium cartel.)

New York Times: General Atomic Seeking Removal of Judge in Suit Against Gulf Oil: 9 January 1978 (reported that General Atomic had petitioned the New Mexico Supreme Court in an attempt to have Judge Felter removed from hearing the cartel case on the grounds that he was prejudiced.)

New York Times: Nuclear Protest in South Carolina Ends in 3rd Day With Arrest of 250: 2 May 1978 (article reporting an anti-nuclear protest at the Barnwell, S.C. nuclear waste reprocessing plant in which Royal Dutch Shell Group was a partner. About 250 protestors were arrested. Extract: “Eventually the venture, operated jointly by Allied Chemical, Gulf Oil, and Royal Dutch Shell Group, was to process waste material from nuclear power plants along the Eastern Seaboard.”

Time Magazine: Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery: 12 June 1978 (Article about Gulf Oil under the headline Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery. It said in relation to Shell, “General Atomic, a joint Gulf-Royal Dutch/Shell venture, pulled out of the production of high-temperature nuclear gas reactors after heavy losses.” Article also mentioned the cartel litigation. EXTRACTS: “Gulf is also enmeshed in a web of lawsuits growing out of allegations that it secretly participated in a worldwide cartel to manipulate supplies and raise the price of uranium. Last week the company pleaded no contest in the U.S. Government’s case growing out of the cartel arrangement…”.)

New York Times: The Great Uranium Flap: 9 July 1978 (Further report of the litigation over an alleged cartel. The article stated: “Everyone agrees there was a cartel; whether it did anything illegal is in dispute.” The Royal Dutch Shell Group was named in the article as being an owner of General Atomic. The uranium price fixing was described by one participant in the litigation as “…one of the massive rip-offs of all times…”

New York Times: Gulf Pact Set With Scallop: 19 March 1979 (The first paragraph stated: “The Gulf Oil Corporation said it had reached an agreement with Scallop Nuclear Inc., a unit of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, under which the uranium supply and light water reactor fuel fabrication activities of the General Atomic Company would be operated for the account and benefit of Gulf Oil. Gulf and Scallop jointly own General Atomic.”)

New York Times: United Nuclear Wins Court Round: 3 September 1980 (Extracts: “The New Mexico Supreme Court has upheld a lower court decision voiding any obligation by the United Nuclear Corporation to deliver nearly $1 billion worth of uranium to the General Atomic Company.” “The case – the largest in the history of the state – arose out of agreements in the early 1970’s that called for U.N.C. to deliver 27 million pounds of uranium to General Atomic, which is a joint venture of the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. Arguing that General Atomic was part of an international cartel that was trying to corner the uranium market, U.N.C. sued to have those contracts overturned. In 1978, a New Mexico state court rendered a default judgment against General Atomic on the ground that the company refused to supply certain information during the discovery process.”)

New York Times: Exxon and Gulf End Uranium Suit: 8 May 1981 (Reported the settlement of a uranium contract lawsuit between Exxon Corporation and Gulf Oil Corporation relating to the alleged uranium cartel. The price of the uranium was “revised” as part of the settlement. EXTRACTS: “Gulf later assigned the contract to the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Scallop Nuclear, which was to receive the uranium.” “Litigation began in early 1978, when Exxon declared the agreement null and void because of Gulf’s alleged participation in an international uranium cartel, Exxon said.”)

New York Times: Gulf to Obtain General Atomic: 22 December 1981 (Reported that Gulf Oil Corporation would become the full owner of the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Royal Dutch/Shell Group’s Scallop Nuclear Inc., under a tentative agreement between the partners. The article reported that Gulf would take over Scallop’s high temperature, gas-cooled reactor program, its fusion program and the special products division.)

New York Times: “Shell to Pay $180 Million” (Price fixing case): 3 Jan 1987

New York Times: “California Oil Price-Fixing Case Settled”: 17 August 1991

New York Times: Settlement for Coral Power: 15 November 2003

Bloomberg: Shell, Unipetrol, Bayer Are Sued Over Rubber Cartel (Update2): 20 May 2008

May 20 (Bloomberg) — Cooper Tire & Rubber Co., the second- largest U.S. tiremaker, and 25 other companies sued Unipetrol AS, units of Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Bayer AG, and as many as 20 others over an alleged rubber cartel in Europe.

Unipetrol and units of Shell, Dow Chemical Co., Eni SpA and Trade-Stomil Sp were fined a total of 519 million euros ($813 million) in a 2006 European Union antitrust case over material used to make tires and shoes. The companies are appealing.

The Times: Supermarkets and tobacco firm are fined £173m for price fixing: 12 July 2008

Asda and Somerfield have admitted fixing the price of cigarettes and overcharging customers under a secret deal with the manufacturer of brands including Benson & Hedges and Silk Cut. The Office of Fair Trading said that a total of £173.3 million in fines and costs had been agreed in one of the biggest settlements of its kind.

Other firms that admitted colluding in the pricing scam include the owner of Threshers, the off-licence chain, and One Stop convenience stores, which must contribute towards the settlement. But the lion’s share of the fine — £93 million — will be paid by Gallaher, owned by Japan Tobacco.

Other accused firms are fighting the allegations. These are Imperial Tobacco, which owns the Embassy, John Player and Golden Virginia brands, Tesco, Morrisons, Safeway (now taken over by Morrisons), the Co-op and Shell, for its petrol station stores. If they are found guilty of collusion they face serious penalties under the Competition Act.

Reuters: EU fines “paraffin mafia” wax makers’ cartel: 1 October 2008

The Times: ‘Paraffin mafia’ comes unstuck after €676m fines: 2 October 2008

Guardian: ‘Paraffin mafia’ firms given £500m fines for price-fixing: 2 October 2008

Financial Times: Brussels fines paraffin wax cartel: 2 October 2008

The Wall Street Journal: Wax Price-Fixing Is Alleged: 2 October 2008

Occupational Health & Safety: Merit Energy and Shell to lower emissions after clean air violations: 4 October 2008

Financial Post (Canada): GREECE FINES BP, SHELL $80M FOR PRICE-FIXING: 26 November 2008

ChannelNewsAsia: Greece fines BP, Shell for price-fixing: 26 November 2008

International Herald Tribune: Greece: BP, Shell fined for competition breaches: 25 November 2008

Bloomberg: Chevron, Total, Exxon, Shell Fined on Air France Fuel: price fixing cartel: 4 Dec 2008 (Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Chevron fined 41.1 million euros ($52 million) by the French antitrust authority for fixing the price of fuel for certain Air France-KLM Group flights.)

 

Assorted

New York Times: Fining Shell, U.N. Concludes That Tanker Carried Iraq Oil: 26 April 2000 (IRAQ SANCTIONS BUSTING)

EXTRACTS:

A Russian tanker chartered by one of the world’s largest oil companies, Royal Dutch/Shell Group, was carrying Iraqi oil on April 5 in violation of the international embargo against Iraq when it was stopped by American sailors, American and company officials said today.

The United Nations has fined the company $2 million, after determining that some of the 78,000 metric tons of oil aboard the tanker came from Iraq. The tanker, the Akademik Pustovoit, was boarded by American-led naval forces in the Persian Gulf three weeks ago.

Having traced the oil to Iraq, United Nations officials stopped short of seizing the cargo and will allow Royal Dutch/Shell to load the oil onto other ships.

Royal Dutch/Shell has maintained that the tanker carried only Iranian oil, loaded at the port in Bandar Mahshur. But the Pentagon’s spokesman, Kenneth H. Bacon, said today that tests on the cargo determined that 20 percent was from Iraq.

A spokeswoman for Royal Dutch/ Shell, Kate Hill, said the company agreed to pay the fine, even though its officials had not been shown evidence proving that the oil was Iraqi, because of the value of the entire shipment. ”It was a very valuable cargo,” Ms. Hill said in an interview from the company’s headquarters in London.

She did not specify the value of the entire cargo, but Pentagon officials said the $2 million fine was based on the market value of the percentage of the cargo that was Iraqi. Ms. Hill said the company did not knowingly violate the embargo when it bought the oil, which was bound for Singapore.

The Times: A word in your Shell-like – it’s all gibberish: 5 January 2008

Wall Street Journal: Shell will outsource jobs as part of cost shake-up: 12 January 2008

The Times: Demand for oil and gas will outstrip supply within 7 years, says Shell chief: 25 January 2008

Wall Street Journal: Shell Investigated for Corruption By Department of Justice, SEC: 26 March 2008

EXTRACTS

LONDON — The U.S. Department of Justice is examining corruption allegations in the use of a freight-forwarding firm by Royal Dutch Shell PLC, the company said in regulatory filing published last week

Reuters: Shell, BP win big from volatile energy markets: 29 April 2008

EXTRACT

While trading has boosted profit in the last few months, it has also brought BP and Shell under the scrutiny of regulators.

In 2004, Shell’s U.S. gas and power trading arm Coral Energy paid $30 million to settle charges it reported fake natural gas trades. Coral did not admit or deny wrongdoing.

The Times of Zambia: US firms to pay for apartheid: 14 May 2008

Millions of South Africans are eligible to join a class-action lawsuit against US-based multinational corporations accused of aiding and abetting the apartheid government.

This follows a ruling by the US Supreme Court on Monday, which upheld a lower court’s decision to allow a civil case to proceed.

The civil case against major multinationals includes a damages claim and two class-action suits under the US Alien Tort Claims Act, an 18th century law that allows foreigners to sue in US courts.

“ The case has been hailed as a potential catalyst in advancing international human rights law.” Among the companies that face litigation are IBM, BP, Credit Suisse, Daimler, Deutsche Bank, Exxonmobil , Ford Motor, General Motors and Shell.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Bad gas causes local cars to stall: 26 May 2008

Two Safeway gas stations were shut down Sunday evening after contaminated gas filled at least nine vehicles, causing them to break down on a day of record gas prices statewide.

The Safeway gas station in Maple Valley had gas mixed with water, and company spokeswoman Cherie Myers said the contaminated fuel came about 5 p.m. from Shell.

“When they called the refinery, Shell said, ‘Yes, they have contaminated fuel,’ ” Myers said. “But we were able to get rentals for customers.”

Brian Sibley, a spokesman for Shell Puget Sound Refinery in Anacortes, said the refinery was not shut down and that he believed the contaminated fuel was delivered from Harbor Island.

Addis Fortune: Shell Ethiopia Employees Demonstrate: 28 July 2008

Employees of Shell Ethiopia demonstrated at the gate of their head office on July 23, 2008, expressing disappointment with the decision by Shell to sell its interests in Ethiopia to OilLibya. They have threatened to strike, demanding much better treatment from the oil franchise.

theage.com.au: Downer joins Eddington at ‘spy’ company: 14 October 2008

theage.com.au: Eddington quits British intelligence firm over ‘conflict’: 15 October 2008

Guardian: The National Theatre should clean up its act and ditch Shell: 8 January 2009

TampaBay.com/St PerFlorida’s troubled state pension fund dumped $1 billion “prohibited” stocks (Iran): 25 January 2009

The Bakersfield Californian: Californian exclusive: State investigating Shell over refinery trouble: 27 January 2009

SUNDAY MONITOR: Shell Uganda caught with ‘unmarked’ fuel: 8 February 2009

BusinessInquirer.net: Shell owes P21B in taxes — BOC: 10 February 2009

Covalence Ethical Ranking 2008: Press Release: 20 January 2009 (Contains link to detailed results)

 

SHELL UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR ALLEGED CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA

The Guardian: Shell shares hit by news of US inquiry: 17 March 2009

Reuters: Shell says being investigated in US bribery probe: 17 March 2009

The Wall Street Journal: UPDATE: Shell: Co Still Under Investigation By US DOJ, SEC: 17 March 2009

The Times: Shell investigated by SEC over bribery claims: 17 March 2009

Daily Telegraph: Shell offers reassurance on dividend policy: 17 March 2009

citywire: Shell bribery probe overshadows plans to lift divi: 17 March 2009

The Guardian: Shell wants to produce five times more oil from tar sands: 18 March 2009

Daily Mail: Nigerian oil probe traps Shell in net: 18 March 2009

The Independent: Shell warns of US probe into corruption claims: 18 March 2009

 

SHELL EXECUTIVE PAY     

CNNMoney.com: UPDATE: Shell To Pay $10 Bln Of Dividends; Production Not Replaced: 17 March 2009

Financial Times: Shell pay packages defy poor stock performance: 18 March 2009

 

Reuters syndicated articles

Shell gets tough on costs as oil prices bite” published on 30 January 2009

Shell eyes Mideast growth, to cut some jobs” published on 9 February 2009

Shell to stall hires, and get “ruthless” on contractors published on 12 February 2009

 

WWF Evidence submitted in 2008 to House of Commons Select Committee quoting from a John Donovan Sakhalin II article published on royaldutchshellplc.com

(1): The UNITED KINGDOM PARLIAMENT Hansard Archives Research Uncorrected Evidence: 20 June 2008

(2): Memorandum submitted by WWF to inquiry by House of Commons Select Committee: Quotes Sakhalin II corruption allegations from royaldutchshellplc.com article: 20 June 2008

(3): House of Commons Environmental Audit – Minutes of Evidence ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 14 October 2008 (RELATED LINK IS IMMEDIATELY BELOW)

(4) www.parliament.uk: Evidence submitted by WWF to Select Committee on Environmental Audit: Evidence submitted 20 June 2008: (SAKHALIN II BACKGROUND INFORMATION: — Allegations have been made by a whistleblower of inappropriate relationships between SEIC management and its contractors, in particular Starstroi and its subcontractor SU4.[22])

Backup webpages 123, 4

 

Sakhalin Evidence

Boston Globe: The Russian power play on oil, natural gas reserves: 23 August 2008

(In one of the most blatant instances, Shell Oil was forced to yield control of its operations off Sakhalin Island in exchange for a payment of $7.4 billion from state-dominated Gazprom. Most outside analysts estimate that Shell’s share was worth $15 billion to $17 billion.)

The Observer: Shell comes under fire for role in Sakhalin audit: 31 August 2008

BusinessGreen.com: Shell accused of manipulating environmental report: 1 September 2008

Environmental Leader: Shell Criticized for Manipulating Environmental Audit Report: 2 September 2008

Ethical Corporation: Shell’s Sakhalin influence: October 2008

 

Shell Pension Schemes

Personal Finance: Adjudicator tells pension funds, employers to play by the rules: July 29, 2005

Personal Finance: Shell ‘improperly used’ surplus pension money: January 28, 2006

(In the first ruling of its kind, a tribunal appointed by the Registrar of Pension Funds has found that the Southern African arm of petroleum giant Shell should repay millions of rands to its staff defined benefit pension fund.)

Personal Finance: Shell bid to grab R184m surplus stopped: 9 February 2008
(Mentions Jonathan Mort, so called “independent” Trustee of Shell Southern Africa Pension Fund)

Shell Contributory Pension Fund Winter 2008 (“Clive Mather, chairman of the trustees of the Shell Contributory Pension Fund (SCPF) has written to all members following the recent extraordinary events in the world’s financial markets.”)

FT Article: Shell pension scheme value falls 40% (Online article): 12 December 2008

FT Newspaper article, front page lead in (under “News Briefing” – “Shell’s pension dip”) plus main article on page 15 (“Shell pension scheme value fall 40%): 13/14 December 2008

Guardian.co.uk: Shell pension underfunded, contributions to raise: 12 December 2008

Daily Telegraph: Shell’s Dutch pension fund tumbles by 40pc: 12 December 2008

International Herald Tribune: Shell’s pension underfunded: 12 December 2003

Yahoo News: Shell’s pension underfunded: 12 December 2008

Reuters: UPDATE 4-Shell’s pension underfunded, contributions rise: 12 December 2008

Tiscali.co.uk/news: Shell’s pension underfunded:12 December 2008

Scottish Television (stv): Shell’s pension underfunded: 12 December 2008

Forbes.com: Shell’s pension underfunded, contributions rise: 12 December 2008

Reuters: NEWS UPDATE 3-Shell pension underfunded, contributions to rise12 December 2008

Trading Markets: UPDATE 3-Shell pension underfunded, contributions to rise: 13 December 2008

The Times: HSBC hit by fear factor as downturn spreads to Asia:13 December 2008 (“Royal Dutch Shell A fell 49p to £17.50 after reports that its Dutch pension fund has fallen into deficit, with stock market turmoil knocking 40 per cent off its value.”)

The Times: Need to Know: Royal Dutch Shell: 13 December 2008 (The oil company’s Dutch pension fund has fallen into deficit as share market turmoil knocked 40 per cent off the fund’s value, forcing the oil major and employees to increase contributions. The fund said that its funding ratio was 85 per cent at the end of November, down from 180 per cent at the end of 2007. A Dutch pension fund manager estimated the company would need around €2 billion to bring the funding ratio to 100 per cent.)

Daily Mail: Shell OAPs are latest victims of disgraced billionaire Madoff: 17 December 2008

The Times: Allegations in America pose threat to UK funds: 18 December 2008

Reuters: Shell says pension funds underfunded by $12 bln: 29 January 2009

Financial Times: Virtues of protection strategy spreading: 1 March 2009

Reuters: Shell says faces $8.3 bln pension hole: 18 March 2009

Bloomberg: Shell Reports $8.3 Billion Pension Deficit, Plans Payments: 18 March 2009

These links on separate webpage

 

Royal Dutch Shell initiatives

Wall Street Journal: Alternative State: 30 June 2008

Sunday Times: Shell goes to paradise in search of cheap biofuel: 22 March 2009

BusinessWeek: Public-Private Alliances to the Rescue: 7 July 2008

Put bluntly, a company can’t fully bounce back unless its customers and employees do. The connection wasn’t lost on Shell Exploration & Production in the months following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. About 70% of Shell’s oil and gas production occurs off the U.S. Gulf Coast, and in the interest of helping revive the region, the company began a multimillion-dollar social investment program called the Coming Home Campaign. The company sponsored the 2006 New Orleans Jazz & Heritage Festival, which it says resulted in $250 million in economic activity; it donated more than $750,000 to help police officers and volunteers obtain housing; and gave employees as much as $1,000 apiece to support neighborhood rebuilding and recovery efforts.

Daily Telegraph: Shell Guides: No stone was left untold: 29 August 2008

is4profit.com: Green pioneers pitch for £40,000 of Shell funding (Shell Springboard): 2 September 2008

(Related: is4profit.com: Climate–conscious firms urged to apply for Shell funding: 19 October 2008

The Earth Times: Shell and Motiva Contribute $4M to Recovery Efforts in the Gulf Coast: 18 September 2008

Webwire: American Red Cross Receives $1 million from Shell Oil Company and Motiva Enterprises LLC: 26 September 2008

FT: Investors let down by online reports: 29 September 2008 (Associated Rankings)

Convenience Store News: Shell Helps City Become “Green”: 6 October 2008

Reuters: Shell has planted 1 million trees with Tree Canada: 2 October 2008

(Related: Shell Canada: Shell and Tree Canada plant more than 700,000 trees: 12 October 2006

VANGUARD (Nigeria): University lecturers get Shell’s sabbatical research grant: 6 October 2008

Colorado State University: COLORADO STATE RECEIVES RESEARCH GRANT FROM SHELL OIL COMPANY TO STUDY REVEGETATION ON OIL SHALE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LEASES IN NORTHWESTERN COLORADO: 7 October 2008

International Herald Tribune: Companies with poor records on environmental damage try for change: 13 October 2008

Bloomberg News: Shell Quadruples Renewable-Energy Project Spending (Update1): 16 October 2008

auto123.com: Shell brings Urban Concept to Eco-marathon: 21 October 2008

Convenience Store News: Shell, Redner’s Markets Give Back: 3 November 2008

CNW: Government of Saskatchewan, Royal Dutch Shell and University of Regina establish international CO(2) storage assessment centre: 6 November 2008

Wikipedia plus CO2: 7 November 2008 ( Government of Saskatchewan, Royal Dutch Shell and University of Regina establish international CO(2) storage assessment centre)

BruDirect.com: Royal Check On Health Centre: 14 November 2008

BruDirect.com: HM Visits State-Of-The-Art Health Promotion Centre: 14 November 2008

Reuters: The Salvation Army Joins 3 Major Motor Oil Brands to Help Others During Holiday Season: 18 November 2008

Houston Chronicle: Volunteers in Houston honoring MLK by helping out: 18 January 2009

(Among them are about 150 volunteers from Hope Worldwide, an international humanitarian organization, and 500 holiday workers from Shell Oil Co. and its Motiva Enterprises subsidiary who will sort and pack groceries at Houston Food Bank, tutor a children’s literacy program and plant dozens of trees.)

The Wall Street Journal: A Gamble in Qatar: 8 February 2009

Austin Business Journal: Shell makes donation to UT’s McCombs school: 19 February 2009

startups.co.uk: Shell LiveWire: 2 March 2009

( LiveWIRE Website launched 2002)

FT: Senior Lib Dems plot ‘auction for power’: 9 March 2009

Gulf Times: Qatargas, Shell sign supply research deal: 15 March 2009

Shell Education Services: The Times: How to inspire the next generation to do well: 18 March 2009

Shell Education Services

Fox Business: 2009 Shell Eco-marathon Americas: 27 March 2009

 

 

Environment

New York Times: “Shell Loses Suit on Cleanup Cost” (Rocky Mountain Arsenal): 20 Dec 1988

New York Times: “Wide Impact Expected In Shell Pollution Case” (Rocky Mountain Arsenal): 21 December 1988

The Independent (front page story) Government’s green agency invests millions in companies that pollute: 7 January 2003

Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute: August 2005

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection: SHELL AND MOTIVA AGREE TO PAY $1.2 MILLION FINE: 25 January 2007

WWN: Shell Pays $1.2 Million Fine for Contaminating Water In New Jersey: 1 February 2007

The Guardian: Shell hires Bush’s environmental adviser: 5 February 2007

New York Times: Settlement for Coral Power: 15 November 2003

Environmental Leader: Shell Sued Over Texas Refinery Emissions: 8 Jan 2008

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Shell Chemical fined $166,530: 28 January 2008

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Shell Chemical LP and Shell Oil Company fined $345,744 Deer Park Refinery unauthorized emissions: 2 April 2008

TheTelegraph.com: Two refiners settle with Hartford residents: 17 July 2008

The Times-Picayune: Protesters call for Shell to pay La. $362 million: 20 August 2008

Carrying signs in a driving rainstorm demanding that Shell Oil Co. “fix the coast you broke,” about 25 environmental activists on Tuesday attempted to deliver a bill for $362 million to the corporation’s New Orleans headquarters.

Environmental Leader: Shell Criticized for Manipulating Environmental Audit Report: 2 September 2008

Contra Costa Times: Shell pays fine for 2006 spill: 25 September 2008

UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs: SOUTH AFRICA: Community takes on big polluters: 26 September 2008

The Guardian: Reviled firms lead responsibility list: 28 October 2008

Seattle Times: Shell to clean up 83 gas stations in W Wash: 18 November 2008

Department of Ecology News Release: Shell-Ecology multi-site cleanup agreement is state’s first: 18 November 2008

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Shell Chemical fined $345,744: 19 November 2008

The Guardian: Shell fined £18,000 for polluting ground waters in Grimsby: 26 November 2008

Radio New Zealand “Shell fights Commerce Commission action”:18 December 2008

New Zealand Herald: Watchdog says Shell Fuel ads misleading: (Front Page Story) 18 December 2008

New Zealand Herald: Watchdog says Shell fuel ads misleading: (Internet Version) 18 December 2008

New Zealand Herald: Open Letter from Shell to all New Zealanders: 18 December 2008

AlterNet: “Shell Monbiot Grills Shell Oil CEO: Is There Any Investment You Would Not Make on Ethical Grounds?: 8 Jan 2009

Environmental Protection Agency: Shell to Pay $1 Million Penalty, Enhance Pollution Controls for Clean Water Act Violations in Puerto Rico: 12 January 2009

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality: Chevron Phillips fined $168,416 and Shell Chemical fined $166,530: 28 January 2009

TheTelegraph.com: Shell to check for benzene: 20 February 2009

(Groundwater contamination: “A total of 8,400 gallons of benzene leaked from an underground pipeline that was used by Wood River Refinery while it was owned and operated by Shell Oil Co.”)

New York Times: Supreme Court considers who gets the tab for toxic cleanups: 24 February 2009

Environmental impact of Oil Sands Extraction

Daily Express: ENERGY FIRMS THREATEN POOR – OXFAM: 6 October 2008

United States Environmental Protection Agency: Shell to Pay $1 Million Penalty, Enhance Pollution Controls for Clean Water Act Violations in Puerto Rico: 12 January 2009

(Related Article: Washington Post: Obama compares oil sands to coal: 17 February 2009)

Convenience Store News: Ethanol Lawsuit Proceeds against Oil Companies: 4 March 2009

Daily Express Dirty Dozen List Most Energy-Inefficient London buildings: Shell Centre at No 5: 11 March 2009

FT: Emissions disclosure study puts Shell bottom of the big oil class: 16 March 2009

 

 

Shell Greenwash Section (and misleading advertising)

Environmental Leader: Shell Catches Flak Over Green Ad, Releases Sustainability Report: 8 May 2007

New York Times: Shell and ‘Flower Power’: 31 May 2007

The Independent: Inside Story: Advertising environmentalism – Is it just greenwash?: 31 March 2008 (GREENWASH)

HEADLINE ON SHELL ADVERT POSTER: DON’T THROW ANYTHING AWAY THERE IS NO WAY

They say: Shell’s “Don’t throw anything away – there is no away” campaign features an ad with a cartoon oil refinery emitting flowers, accompanied by the claim that Shell uses its waste CO2 to grow flowers, and waste sulphur to make concrete.

Behind the greenwash: It turned out that Shell only recycled 0.325 per cent of its CO2 emissions in this way, and barely more of its waste sulphur. In November, the ASA welcomed Shell’s assurance that the ad would no longer be used. Shell is less keen to tell us all about its project to extract oil from the Canadian tar – just about the most climate-wrecking form of fossil fuel extraction one could imagine.

Telegraph.co.uk: Record complaints over ‘greenwashing‘: 25 April 2008

EXTRACTS

Lord Smith of Finsbury, chairman of the ASA, said it was one of the fastest-growing areas of complaint and now formed a significant part of the watchdog’s role.

We have come across quite a number where claims are exaggerated or misleading or, in some cases, severely exaggerated.”

A number of the complaints against national and international advertisers were upheld, including Ryanair and Toyota, with Shell identified as one of the worst offenders.

It placed a series of newspaper adverts featuring an oil refinery with flowers emerging from the chimneys and the claim “we use our waste CO2 to grow flowers”.

However, Friends of the Earth complained that it implied most or all emissions were used, whereas the true figure was just 0.325 per cent of its CO2 output. The ASA upheld the complaint.

“This is an extreme example but what they were doing was taking their bit of good environmental practice and making a big claim about themselves and their products,” said Lord Smith, the former culture secretary.

Where a complaint is upheld the ASA can force the offender to change an advert or withdraw it altogether, which could result in a company losing a multimillion pound advertising campaign while gaining a mountain of bad publicity.

“Any misleading in advertising is bad for the consumer and not particularly helpful for the company because they will be found out,” said Lord Smith.

“I suspect Shell are somewhat embarrassed by their ‘we grow flowers’ claim because it’s such a ridiculous claim.”

Environmental Leader: Advertising Watchdog Sees Big Jump In Green Ad Complaints: 5 May 2008

Daily Telegraph: Shell adverts ‘misled’ consumers over environmental claims: 12 August 2008

Calgary Herald: WWF targets oilsands after court rules Shell ad is misleading: 13 August 2008

Campaign Magazine (BRAND REPUBLIC): Shell ad banned over ‘greenwashing’ claims: 13 August 2008

Financial Times: Complaint upheld over Shell advert: 13 August 2008

The ASA will announce today that it has upheld a complaint against Shell by WWF, the environmental charity, about the oil company’s claims that oil sands in Canada were a “sustainable” energy source.

Shell’s Canadian oil sands projects have proven controversial because they require much more energy and water than in traditional extraction and refining.

The ASA ruling says: “Because ‘sustainable’ was an ambiguous term, and because we had not seen data that showed how Shell was effectively managing carbon emissions from its oil sands projects in order to limit climate change, we concluded that on this point the ad was misleading.”

Under the ruling Shell cannot reproduce the advertisement, which appeared just once, in the Financial Times in February this year.

Shell said in a statement: “We accept the adjudication of the ASA.” It declined to comment on how many of

its advertisements contain claims about its environmental credentials, nor whether it would moderate the use of such terms in future marketing campaigns.

The Guardian: Shell rapped by ASA for ‘greenwash’ advert: 13 August 2008

Oil company’s claim that its work in Alberta’s tar sands was ‘sustainable’ is branded ‘misleading’ by Advertising Standards Authority.

The Guardian: WWF advert attacks Shell’s claims: 13 August 2008

The Independent: Shell rebuked for ‘greenwash’ over ad for polluting oil project: 13 August 2008

Environmental Leader: ASA: Shell Environmental Claims Violate Advertising Rules: 14 August 2008

The Independent: Time for multi-dimensional communication with oil companies: 15August 2008

For the second time in the last couple of years the Anglo-Dutch oil giant Shell has found itself at the heart of the debate about greenwash in advertising.

In 2007 Shell ads suggested rather bizarrely that it had been using its waste CO2 emissions to grow flowers: the ad was condemned by the British Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). One year later another Shell ad has been banned. This time for suggesting that the company’s Canadian oil sand extraction operation was sustainable. Shell does not appear to have learnt its lesson.

Financial Post (Canada): Sustaina-bull: 16 August 2008

This week, petroleum giant Royal Dutch Shell had its knuckles rapped by the U. K.’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) over claims that its Canadian oil sands operations were “sustainable.” There is a certain rich irony in Shell being hoist by its own environmental petard. The company’s former CEO, Sir Philip Watts, once claimed that Shell’s commitment to sustainable development and corporate social responsibility were what elevated it above its rivals. That was before he was thrown out of the company for cooking the books.

For years, Shell has been kowtowing to the environmental movement, and has featured a rogues’ gallery of board members and executives who ranged between green radicalism and abject appeasement. Typically, as it groveled to defend itself in the ASA case, it quoted a report by the World Wildlife Fund, the very organization that had challenged its ad in the first place. One can’t help conjuring up the image of a dog licking the hand of its vivisectionist.

Blogger News Network: The origins of Shell’s “Greenwash” were back in 1997: 16 August 2008

The Guardian: Climate controls: The chairman of the ASA on the problems of greenwash…: 18 August 2008

EnvironmentalLeader: Shell Criticized for Manipulating Environmental Audit Report: 2 September 2008

Calgard Herald: Shell to pull ‘greenwash’ ad on Canadian oilsands projects: 24 September 2008

The ASA upheld a high-profile complaint against Royal Dutch Shell for an ad that ran, just once, in the Financial Times in February, claiming that oil sands in Canada’s wilderness were a “sustainable” energy source.

The Guardian: The great green swindle: 23 October 2008

The Guardian: It will take more than goodwill and greenwash to save the biosphere: 6 January 2009

AlterNet: Monbiot Grills Shell Oil CEO: Is There Any Investment You Would Not Make on Ethical Grounds?: 8 January 2009

The Wall Street Journal: Shell’s Green Ads Take New Tack: 2 February 2009

The Times: Advertising regulators get tough over “greenwash”: 3 February 2009

Environmental Leader: Shell Accused of Greenwashing, Again: 4 February 2009

Convenience Store News: Green Shell Ads Stress Innovations to Increase Oil Supply: 4 February 2009

Financial Times: Emissions disclosure study puts Shell bottom of the big oil class: 16 March 2009

The Guardian: Shell dumps wind, solar and hydro power in favour of biofuels: 17 March 2009

Reuters: Shell goes cold on wind, solar, hydrogen energy: 17 March 2009

The Guardian: Shell’s subtle switch from renewables to the murky world of ‘alternative’ energy: 18 March 2009

The Times: Anger as Shell reduces renewables investment: 18 March 2009

The Guardian: Shoppers need clear labels to put a stop to ‘greenwash’: 23 March 2009

Financial Times: Clampdown on greenwash: 25 March 2009

The Guardian: Greenwash: Shell betrays ‘new energy future’ promises: 26 March 2009

SEPARATE WEBPAGE FOR SHELL GREENWASH SECTION

 

 

Alleged Royal Dutch Shell Tax Avoidance

The Guardian: Shell: 3 February 2009

The Guardian: Offshore – and out of reach to the Revenue: 3 February 2009

 

Royal Dutch Shell Adolf Hitler / Nazi Connection

Time.com: “Co-ordination”: 17 April 1933 (While still in Nazi good graces he went to London” called according to rumor by Sir Henri Deterding who was currying favor with Adolf Hitler in the hope of winning oil contracts for Royal Dutch-Shell.)

New York Times: “REICH OIL MONOPOLY SOUGHT BY DETERDING”: 26 October 1934 (“LONDON, Oct. 25.-It is reported confidentially from Berlin that the object of Sir Henry Deterding’s recent visit to Chancellor Hitler at Berchtesgaden, where he stayed for four days, was to discuss the conditions for granting a monopoly to the Royal Dutch and Shell Companies of petrol distribution in Germany for a long period of years.)

New York Times: Powerful Henri Deterding, Who Rivals Standard Oil: 12 June 1938 (A Left-Wing Historian Surveys the Life and Activities of The Petroleum Baron THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD: The Life of Sir Henri Deterding.)

Time Magazine: Ruddy Old Gent: THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN THE WORLD: THE LIFE OF SIR HENRI DETERDING—Glyn Roberts—Covici-Friede ($3): 27 June 1938 (“Author Roberts thinks his backing of Hitler and his admiration for Mussolini are based on his hatred of Communism, which was born of frustration when he lost the oil of the Caucasus. And his second wife was a White Russian, his third a German.”)

Time Magazine: Royal Dutch knight: 13 February 1939 (He backed Hitler in Germany, added a German residence to his English, Dutch and Swiss homes.)

New York Times: Herman Rauschning’s Talks With Hitler: 18 February 1940 (“…Henri Deterding had told Hitler that Mexico had the laziest population in the world, and rich prizes for Germany to grasp.”)

New York Times: Propaganda Success in Britain Vaunted by Rosenberg to Hitler: 10 January 1946 (“NUREMBERG, Germany, Jan. 9- One of Alfred Rosenberg’s reports to Adolf Hitler on his work in winning friends for nazism in foreign countries came to light today”: Later Extract: ‘Rosenburg also told Hitler that “a firmer bond” had also been established between Rosenberg’s British division and Sir Henri Deterding, the oil magnate, and his associates’)

The Seven Sisters: By Anthony Sampson: 1975 (He died six months before the outbreak of war: memorial services were held in all Shell offices in Germany and Hitler and Goering both sent wreaths to the funeral on his estate.)

The Prize: By Daniel Yergin: Published 1992

New York Times: Review/Television; The Epic Of Oil, Catalyst Of Conflict : 11 January 1993 (“It concentrates especially on the unlikely partnership, out of which was born Royal Dutch Shell, between Marcus Samuel, the Jew from the East End of London who became the Lord Mayor of London, and Henri Deterding, the dashing Dutch oil man who turned into a Nazi supporter in his old age.”)

A Century In Oil: By Stephen Howarth: 1997

SKY NEWS: ADOLF HITLER AND ROYAL DUTCH SHELL: December 2008

SKY NEWS: ADOLF HITLER AND ROYAL DUTCH SHELL (Expanded): JAN 2009

USAToday: Royal Dutch Shell, Tom Cruise, YouTube and Hitler: (More than 60 years after the demise of Nazi Germany, people apparently remain fascinated by the evil deeds of Adolf Hitler and his equally evil henchmen. The new movie ‘Valkyrie‘ tells the story of the well-documented bomb plot against Hitler. )

Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com: Royal Dutch Shell and the Nazi (updated with report of 4 day meeting between Deterding and Hitler): 5 January 2009

 

Sex and Drugs Scandal

U.S. Department of The Interior: Office of Inspector General: Investigative Report of Gregory W. Smith (Redacted) 7 August 2008 Pages 1 to 22 (By accepting the Shell gratuities in fiscal years 2003, 2004, and 2005, and by accepting the GWEC . 
gratuities in 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005, Smith violated federal ethics regulations that prohibited accepting 
items valued in excess of either $20 per occasion or $50 in total from one source in a given year. )

U.S. Department of The Interior: Office of Inspector General: Investigative Report of MMS Oil Marketing Group – Lakewood (Redacted) 19 August 2008 Pages 1 to 31

Denver Post: Sex, drugs alleged in oil deals: 10 September 2008 (Many of the alleged misdeeds occurred when Gale Norton was secretary of the interior. Now a general counsel with Shell in Denver, Norton declined to comment, even when asked to address the portion of the reports dealing with the department she headed.)

The Denver Post: Interior Dept, scandal: Sex, Drugs alleged in oil deals: 10 September 2008

CNN: Sex, drugs, gifts uncovered in government oil probe: 10 September 2008

The New York Times: Sex, Drug Use and Graft Cited in Interior Department: 10 Sept 2008

Reuters: US gov’t workers in oil industry sex, drug scandal: 10 September 2008

Forbes.com: Sex, Drugs and Oil: 10 September 2008

Wall Street Journal: Federal Oil Officials Accused In Sex and Drugs Scandal: 11 September 2008 (The report named four companies — Chevron Corp., a U.S. unit of Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Gary-Williams Energy Corp. and Hess Corp. — as gift givers.)

BBC News: US oil agency rapped over conduct: 11 Sept 2008

Reuters: US Interior Secy ‘outraged’ by oil-sex scandal: 11 September 2008

USAToday: Oil brokers sex scandal may affect drilling debate: 11 September 2008

CBS News: Sex Scandal Taints Oil Drilling Debate: 11 September 2008

Daily Telegraph: US government staff ‘had sex and drugs with energy firm employees’: 12 Sept 2008

Baltimore Sun: Viewpoint: Sex, drugs and natural gas royalties: 17 September 2008

Reuters: US House hearing looks into gov’t oil-sex scandal: 18 September 2008

The Wall Street Journal: Lawmakers Assail Interior Over Scandal: 19 September 2008

Investigative Report of MMS Oil Marketing Group -Lakewood (Redacted) for U.S. Department of the Interior: Office of the Inspector General: 19 August 2008

Investigative Report of Gregory W. Smith (Redacted) for U.S. Department of the Interior: Office of the Inspector General: 19 August 2008

CNN: Whistleblower: Oil watchdog agency ‘cult of corruption’: 14 October 2008

New York Times: Eight Years of Madoffs: 10 January 2009

Shell in U.S. Gov. Sex, Drugs and Corruption Scandal: 24 January 2009 (John Donovan article)

 

Corrib Gas Project

Irish Times: Mayo family complains over Shell surveillance: 14 July 2008

EXTRACTS

A NORTH Mayo family has made a formal complaint to the Garda about constant surveillance of their movements by security staff attached to the Corrib gas project.

Colm Henry, resident of Glengad, says that he and his grandchildren have been filmed by security staff with video cameras every time they walk across family land to a local beach.

Shell EP Ireland has confirmed that surveillance is taking place in Glengad, landfall for the Corrib gas pipeline, but has denied that any film of the children exists.

Shell EP Ireland says the security personnel do not turn on their cameras until an incident has happened, or they believe an incident is “going to take place”.

The company’s external affairs manager, John Egan, said at the weekend the surveillance was needed because of “criminal activity” close to the point where the gas will come ashore. He said that since April there had been six serious incidents involving the burning of nets which had been erected by the company on a cliff to prevent sand-martins nesting there during construction work.

The MayoNews: Family ‘tormented’ by surveillance: 15 July 2008

Irish Times: Corrib security company’s alleged surveillance ‘a civil matter’: 17 July 2008

The Mayo News: Priest’s Shell claims: 22 July 2008

A PARISH PRIEST in north Mayo claims he has been monitored by Shell’s extensive security arrangements at a location where work on the controversial project is ongoing.

Irish Times: RNLI denies Shell donation will compromise service: 4 February 2009

 

Shell Nuclear Secrets (Articles File)

New York Times: DUTCH ANNOUNCE URANIUM PROCESS: 1 March 1968 (Article said Royal Dutch Shell had refused to comment on reports that Shell, Philips Electronics and the Werkspoor Company of Amsterdam were all in discussions with the Dutch Government on a prototype ultra-centrifuge based nuclear reactor. According to the article: “Dutch political sources said the reason for the secrecy was the extreme sensitivity of the nuclear-proliferation issue. They said the centrifuge process presented the possibility that even small nations could manufacture weapons in factories so small than planes or satellites could not distinguish them from normal industrial plants.”)

New York Times: Shell Group Joins Gulf in Nuclear Unit: 5 June 1973 (Article reported on a joint venture between Gulf Oil Corporation and companies of the Royal Dutch Shell Group designed to exploit advanced nuclear reactor technology.

New York Times: GULF OIL TO DIVEST A LIGHT-WATER UNIT: 4 December 1973 (Article reported that after consultation with its partner in the nuclear business, Scallop Nuclear, Inc., a Royal Dutch-Shell Group company, Gulf planned to divest its lightwater reactor fuel fabrication operations of a wholly owned subsidiary company. Gulf said the action would permit the partnership to concentrate on the high-temperature gas-cooled reactor and the reprocessing of light-water reactor fuel.)

New York Times: Gulf Oil’s Directors Approve Record 1974 Capital Budget: 18 December 1973 (Extract: “Gulf and Shell Nuclear, Ltd., a company of the Royal Dutch Shell Group, said it had completed arrangements to establish two joint ventures in the nuclear power industry. The ventures will be the General Atomic Company, for activities in the United States, and General Atomic International, for activities outside the United States.”

New York Times: Shell Loses $290-Million In Joint Nuclear Venture: 19 April 1975 (Extract: “General Atomic is mainly engaged in the design, development, manufacture and marketing of the high temperature gas-cooled reactor and its associated fuel.”

New York Times: VENTURE IS HALTED BY GULF AND SHELL: 25 October 1975 (Reported that General Atomic “was quitting production of high-temperature nuclear gas reactors.”

New York Times: Four Big Electric Utilities Have Joined Dispute Over Future Uranium Supply: 2 March 1976 (reported on litigation in state and federal Court in New Mexico involving charges of alleged fraud and misconduct on the part of Gulf Oil “and the General Atomic Company, a joint venture owned by the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Scallop nuclear unit of the Royal Dutch Shell Group.”)

New York Times: Amid Confusion, A Primer On Nuclear Energy Policy: 9 April 1977 (reported on Carter Administrations nuclear energy plans. Article discussed Shell’s expected withdrawal from a plant at Barnwell, S.C. designed to reprocess used fuel from nuclear reactors and turn by-product uranium into a solid. Article posed the question “Is most of the world’s plutonium created in power plants?” The answer being that most of it was being produced in reactors such as Windscale in Britain, specially designed to turn out plutonium for weapons.

New York Times: TOO HOT TO HANDLE: 10 April 1977 (Article covered contamination, technical and other issues associated with the sensitive and controversial subject of recycling nuclear fuel. The article mentioned that the $250 million plant built at Barnwell S.C. by Allied General Electric Nuclear Services, in which General Atomic was a joint owner, had not been granted a license to operate and faced considerable opposition.)

New York Times: Suit by Reserve Oil Charges Violations: 23 September 1977 (Reported legal proceedings had been instituted against General Atomic and its owners, Gulf Oil Corporation and “Scallop Nuclear Inc., part of the Royal/Dutch Shell Group.” The complex lawsuit involving various companies related to alleged price fixing of uranium as part of a secret cartel. The article stated that General Atomic was at one time marketing an advanced form of nuclear reactor, one of which was already on line in Colorado.)

Time Magazine: The Uranium Cartel’s Fallout: 21 November 1977 (reported on the alleged cartel price fixing of uranium case being heard by Judge Edwin Felter. EXTRACT: By a quirk of jurisdiction, Felter is presiding over one of the largest and most complex corporate lawsuits ever filed in an American court-a $2 billion-plus action by a New Mexico uranium mining company, United Nuclear Corp., against General Atomic Co., a 50%-owned subsidiary of Gulf Oil Corp., for fraud, coercion and breaches of the nation’s antitrust laws. Royal Dutch Shell owned the other 50% of General Atomic.)

New York Times: Key Ruling Expected Soon In Uranium Antitrust Suit: 2 January 1978 (reported: “Judge Felter is trying a $2.27 billion damage suit against the General Atomic Corporation of San Diego by the United Nuclear Corporation, a uranium mining company with large holdings in Mexico. Gulf and a subsidiary of the Royal Dutch-Shell Group are equal partners in General Atomic”. The article said that Gulf had conceded that its Canadian subsidiary had been involved in a uranium cartel.)

New York Times: General Atomic Seeking Removal of Judge in Suit Against Gulf Oil: 9 January 1978 (reported that General Atomic had petitioned the New Mexico Supreme Court in an attempt to have Judge Felter removed from hearing the cartel case on the grounds that he was prejudiced.)

New York Times: Nuclear Protest in South Carolina Ends in 3rd Day With Arrest of 250: 2 May 1978 (article reporting an anti-nuclear protest at the Barnwell, S.C. nuclear waste reprocessing plant in which Royal Dutch Shell Group was a partner. About 250 protestors were arrested. Extract: “Eventually the venture, operated jointly by Allied Chemical, Gulf Oil, and Royal Dutch Shell Group, was to process waste material from nuclear power plants along the Eastern Seaboard.”

Time Magazine: Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery: 12 June 1978 (Article about Gulf Oil under the headline Gulf Oil’s Painful Surgery. It said in relation to Shell, “General Atomic, a joint Gulf-Royal Dutch/Shell venture, pulled out of the production of high-temperature nuclear gas reactors after heavy losses.” Article also mentioned the cartel litigation. EXTRACTS: “Gulf is also enmeshed in a web of lawsuits growing out of allegations that it secretly participated in a worldwide cartel to manipulate supplies and raise the price of uranium. Last week the company pleaded no contest in the U.S. Government’s case growing out of the cartel arrangement…”.)

New York Times: The Great Uranium Flap: 9 July 1978 (Further report of the litigation over an alleged cartel. The article stated: “Everyone agrees there was a cartel; whether it did anything illegal is in dispute.” The Royal Dutch Shell Group was named in the article as being an owner of General Atomic. The uranium price fixing was described by one participant in the litigation as “…one of the massive rip-offs of all times…”

New York Times: Gulf Pact Set With Scallop: 19 March 1979 (The first paragraph stated: “The Gulf Oil Corporation said it had reached an agreement with Scallop Nuclear Inc., a unit of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group, under which the uranium supply and light water reactor fuel fabrication activities of the General Atomic Company would be operated for the account and benefit of Gulf Oil. Gulf and Scallop jointly own General Atomic.”)

New York Times: United Nuclear Wins Court Round: 3 September 1980 (Extracts: “The New Mexico Supreme Court has upheld a lower court decision voiding any obligation by the United Nuclear Corporation to deliver nearly $1 billion worth of uranium to the General Atomic Company.” “The case – the largest in the history of the state – arose out of agreements in the early 1970’s that called for U.N.C. to deliver 27 million pounds of uranium to General Atomic, which is a joint venture of the Gulf Oil Corporation and the Royal Dutch/Shell Group. Arguing that General Atomic was part of an international cartel that was trying to corner the uranium market, U.N.C. sued to have those contracts overturned. In 1978, a New Mexico state court rendered a default judgment against General Atomic on the ground that the company refused to supply certain information during the discovery process.”)

New York Times: Exxon and Gulf End Uranium Suit: 8 May 1981 (Reported the settlement of a uranium contract lawsuit between Exxon Corporation and Gulf Oil Corporation relating to the alleged uranium cartel. The price of the uranium was “revised” as part of the settlement. EXTRACTS: “Gulf later assigned the contract to the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Scallop Nuclear, which was to receive the uranium.” “Litigation began in early 1978, when Exxon declared the agreement null and void because of Gulf’s alleged participation in an international uranium cartel, Exxon said.”)

New York Times: Gulf to Obtain General Atomic: 22 December 1981 (Reported that Gulf Oil Corporation would become the full owner of the General Atomic Company, a partnership of Gulf and Royal Dutch/Shell Group’s Scallop Nuclear Inc., under a tentative agreement between the partners. The article reported that Gulf would take over Scallop’s high temperature, gas-cooled reactor program, its fusion program and the special products division.)

Royal Dutch Shell Nuclear Subterfuge 2 January 2009

 

 

STANDARD OIL DECLARES WAR ON ROYAL DUTCH SHELL:

New York Times: N.Y. STANDARD OIL DECLARES WAR UPON DUTCH SHELL GROUP:16 January 1928 (The military tone continued in the sub-headlines: “FIGHT TO FINISH LOOMS”; “Conflict already on in India and Is Expected to spread to Other World Markets”; The opening paragraph of the New York Times article said: “The Standard Oil Company of New York broke a long silence in the controversy over the purchase of Russian oil products by issuing yesterday what amounts to an open declaration of war against the powerful Royal Dutch-Shell group of Europe.”: NY SO accused Royal Dutch-Shell Group of seeking a monopoly of Russia’s oil products and engaging in price-cutting tactics in India. The article said that Sir Henri Deterding, Managing Director of Royal Dutch Shell, had accused NY SO of purchasing “stolen oil” and had announced his intentions “of invading the markets which have been more or less controlled by Standard of New York”.)

New York Times: ROYAL DUTCH READY TO BATTLE STANDARD:18 January 1928 (Extract: “In language as emphatic as that in which the Standard of New York set forth its position in the Russian oil controversy, the Royal Dutch announced its intention to continue the competitive struggle that has started in the oil markets of India and which threatens to spread elsewhere.” The statement repeated the allegation made by Sir Henri Deterding that NY SO was “trafficking in stolen goods”. The NY Times article included an Associated Press report that the price-cutting war between SO NY and Royal Dutch-Shell “will continue without quarter…”

New York Times: MOVE FOR OIL PEACE GAINS IMPETUS HERE: 7 February 1928 (Sub-headline: “Leaders in the Industry Unite to Adjust Row Between N.Y. Standard and Dutch Shell.”

New York Times: STANDARD ENDS WAR WITH SHELL OIL: 3 July 1928 (reports SO NY and Royal Dutch Shell had agreed to bury their differences in relation to Russian oil products.)

New York Times: SOVIET REPARATION FOR OIL FORECAST: 8 July 1928 (Sub-headline: “Wall Street Understands Standard of New York and Royal Dutch Shell Have Agreement.”: Article quoted the remarks made by Viscount Bearsted, Managing Director of the Shell Transport and Trading Company at the annual general meeting in London in which he acknowledged that the “Russian question” had “given rise to many heated arguments which led to further misunderstandings.)

New York Times: OIL INTERESTS PLAN WORLD CONFERENCE: 14 July 1928 (Reports plan by American interests for an international oil conference to “prevent further overproduction”. Representatives from Royal Dutch and the Anglo-Persian Oil Company – owned by the British government and later to become BP – were invited to attend the setting up of an oil cartel similar to OPEC. The publicly stated objective was an international accord on oil conservation. The end of the war between SO NY and Royal Dutch-Shell removed a block to the cartel plan.)

New York Times: TEAGLE OFF TO DEAL WITH SOVIET ON OIL: 2 August 1928 (The war between SO NY and Royal Dutch Shell was over without either protagonist emerging as a clear winner. The conflict had ended in a draw.)

 

 

 

Groundwater MTBE contamination settlements

Wall Street Journal: Oil Firms Settle Claims In MTBE Leak Cases: 8 May 2008

About a dozen of the nation’s largest oil companies agreed to pay $423 million in cash to settle litigation with 153 public water providers in 17 states that sued over groundwater contaminated by the gasoline additive MTBE.

The companies also agreed to pay cleanup costs that arise in the next 30 years. Terms of the deal were submitted for court approval Wednesday in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York.

The companies in the settlement include BP America Inc., a unit of BP PLC; Chevron Corp.; ConocoPhillips; Shell Oil Co., an arm of Royal Dutch Shell PLC; Marathon Oil Corp.; Citgo Petroleum Corp.; Sunoco Inc.; and Valero Energy Corp.

Bloomberg: Chevron, 11 Oil Firms Pay $423 Million in MTBE Suits: 8 May 2008

Chevron Corp., BP Plc and about 10 other oil companies tentatively agreed to pay $423 million to settle lawsuits in 17 states over contamination claims involving the gasoline additive MTBE, once used to reduce air pollution.

Estimates of the cost to treat MTBE contaminated water in the U.S. have reached $30 billion. Wells and aquifers were poisoned when the burned additive, methyl tertiary butyl ether, returned to the ground in rainwater. The plaintiffs said the firms hid data showing MTBE causes “massive” contamination.

The settling companies include units of Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Europe’s biggest oil company, ConocoPhillips, the second- largest U.S. refiner, Marathon Oil Corp., the fourth-largest U.S. oil company, Valero Energy Corp. and Sunoco Inc. Chevron is the second-largest U.S. oil company. BP is Europe’s second-largest oil company.

New York Times: Oil Giants to Settle Water Suit: 8 May 2008

EXTRACTS

The defendants that agreed to the settlement include BP, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Marathon Oil, Valero Energy, Citgo and Sunoco.

In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs, which include 153 public water systems in New York, California and 15 other states, claimed that the additive, a chemical called methyl tertiary butyl ether, or M.T.B.E., was a defective product that led to widespread contamination of groundwater. The suit contended that the chemical was used by oil companies, even though they knew of the environmental and health risks that it posed.

Low levels of M.T.B.E. can make drinking water supplies unpalatable because of its “offensive taste and odor,” according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The agency has also found that the compound caused cancer in laboratory rats that were exposed to high doses.

Denver Business Journal: Shell, Army reach $35M Arsenal settlement with state: 29 May 2008

Shell Oil Co. and the federal government have agreed to a $35 million payout to settle the state of Colorado’s quarter-century-old lawsuit over pollution at the Army’s former Rocky Mountain Arsenal on the outskirts of Denver.

An agreement in principal was announced Thursday by Gov. Bill Ritter and state Attorney General John Suthers in a news conference at the state Capitol.

Under the settlement, Shell will provide $21 million in cash and land and the federal government the equivalent of $14 million, including credit for past construction of a water-treatment plant.

“The funding contained in this settlement will provide long-term compensation to the citizens along the South Platte who have been affected by the natural resource damages at the arsenal,” Ritter said at the news conference.

Part of the site was leased in 1952 to Shell, which for three decades made pesticides, insecticides, herbicides, and other chemicals there.

Under the settlement, $10 million from Shell will be administered by the state’s Natural Resource Trustees for restoration projects in the arsenal area.

The Denver Post: Shell, Army OK $35M arsenal-pollution settlement: 29 May 2008

Colorado’s quarter century-long legal tussle over groundwater pollution at Rocky Mountain Arsenal ended today with the announcement of a $35 million settlement.

Shell Oil and the U.S. Army — which produced all manner of nasty chemicals from 1942 until 1982 at the arsenal, northeast of downtown Denver — have agreed to pay the state $35 million in damages for polluting groundwater at the arsenal, state Attorney General John Suthers said today.

San Diego Union-Tribune: Colo. gets $35 million from Army, Shell for arsenal cleanup: 29 May 2008

Shell Oil Co., which made pesticides and other chemicals at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, will provide $21 million in cash and land under an agreement announced Thursday to settle a 25-year-old state lawsuit. The Army and the federal government are providing the rest.

Thousands of birds were affected by pesticides at the site. Some 4,100 acre feet of groundwater was contaminated. Badgers and prairie dogs had to be killed because their high levels of poisoning posed a danger to bald eagles that fed on them, said Vicky Peters, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office.

John Hofmeister, president of Shell Oil Co., praised the settlement agreement, saying his company was proud to be a part of it.

 

 

ROYAL DUTCH SHELL RESERVES FRAUD

Daily Telegraph: Shell drops ‘bombshell’ on reserves: 9 January 2004

The Times: How Shell blew a hole in a 100-year reputation: 10 January 2004

The West Australian: Investors howl for Shell’s blood: 12 January 2004

London Evening Standard: Shell bosses lied to the City: 19 April 2004

(Former executives, led by ex-chairman Sir Philip Watts, admitted they had repeatedly lied to investors about the true level of Shell’s oil and gas reserves.)

Houston Chronicle: ‘Sick and tired about lying’ at Shell: 19 April 2004

Bloomberg: Shell Loses AAA Credit Rating: 19 April 2004

Shell bosses ‘fooled the market’: 19 April 2004

The Independent: Lies, cover-ups, fat cats and an oil giant in crisis: 20 April 2004

The Scotsman: Shell admits reserve ‘lies’: 20 April 2004

The Scotsman: Shell implodes as e-mails provide damning evidence: 20 April 2004

The Times: Deceitful Shell ‘needs ten years’ to rebuild exploration business: 20 April 2004

Financial Times: Observer Column: Shell-shocked: Corporate slogans consigned to the dustbin of history no. 94: “You can be sure of Shell.”: 20 April 2004

Minneapolis Star Tribune: Dutch/Shell Group exec was ‘sick and tired’ of lying: 20 April 2004

Daily Telegraph: Memos expose Shell’s years of lying: 8 May 2004

The Scotsman: Shell’s reputation left in tatters: 21 April 2004

TheStarOnline: Shell report exposes lies, CFO sacked: 21 April 2004

Daily Telegraph: Shell suffers second cut to credit rating: 21 April 2004

Daily Telegraph: Sacked Shell boss ‘escorted from HQ’: 22 April 2004

The Times: A very British kind of scandal: why Shell is no Enron: 23 April 2004

Daily Telegraph: Shell’s lies over reserves spark FSA investigation: 24 April 2004

Times: “Shell is a disreputable company in need of a strong injection of ethics”: 25 April 2004 “

(“an audience with Sir Phillip Watts”)

The Mail On Sunday: Shell’s top bosses named in £8 billion lawsuit after being spared the sack: 25 April 2004

Daily Mail: Shell attacked from all sides: 26 April 2004

(OIL giant Shell urgently needs to embark on a damage limitation offensive with investors before regulatory probes and lawsuits send the crisis spiralling out of control.)

Daily Telegraph: Shell gives Watts a £1m golden farewell: 23 May 2004

Daily Telegraph: Shell slices still more off proven reserves: 25 May 2004

Daily Telegraph: Watts’ pension pot tops £10m: 28 May 2004

London Evening Standard: Shell ‘has lied for 10 years’: 26 June 2004

ShellNews.net webpage containing links to thousands of pages of U.S. court documents and reports relating to the U.S. consolidated class action in respect of the Shell Reserves Fraud

royaldutchshellplc.com and its sister websites royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, shellnews.net, shell2004.com, shellshareholders.org, don-marketing.com and cybergriping.com are all owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia article: royaldutchshellplc.com

0 Comments on “Access to over 24,000 articles and documents relating to Royal Dutch Shell”

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: