Business Principles

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 3 OCTOBER 2026

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 3 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-076

The Sakhalin Papers LXVI: “Strategic Global Cooperation” — Four Years After the Kremlin Crisis, Shell Signs a Worldwide Pact with Gazprom

On 30 November 2010, Royal Dutch Shell chief executive Peter Voser and Gazprom chairman Alexey Miller signed a “Protocol on Strategic Global Cooperation”. The language was striking. Shell and Gazprom would examine exploration and production opportunities in western Siberia and the Russian Far East, downstream cooperation in Russia and Europe, and even Gazprom participation in Shell projects outside Russia. Shell described the relationship as a “strong partnership”. This was less than four years after Gazprom had taken control of Sakhalin II during one of the most contentious episodes in Shell’s modern history. The protocol did not erase what had happened at Sakhalin. It showed what Shell decided to do afterwards.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-076
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated records: Royal Dutch Shell plc Form 6-K filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, December 2010; Royal Dutch Shell fourth-quarter and full-year 2010 results; Royal Dutch Shell plc Form 6-K of December 2006
Contemporaneous reporting: The Guardian; Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal reporting preserved in the Donovan archive; Bloomberg
Judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: The 2010 protocol, its stated scope and the parties’ public statements are treated as established corporate facts. Contemporary descriptions of the 2006 Sakhalin ownership transfer as forced or Kremlin-driven remain attributed descriptions. No court identified here found that Shell entered the 2010 agreement because of coercion, a secret bargain or an earlier promise of access to Russian resources. read more

^*This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, shellnews.net, and shellwikipedia.com, are owned by John Donovan - more information here. There is also a Wikipedia segment, the Shell DPA Files, "Shell and the Spies", the Shell Leaks files, as well as books written and published by John Donovan - Kindle eBooks. Timeline of the Donovan Shell Feud. Toxic History of Royal Dutch Shell Group. Shell and the Donovans: The Full Media Record — 550+ Articles, 110 Books, 40 Years. ^*All created and supported by internet wizz, Nick Gill.

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 2 OCTOBER 2026

Oct 2nd, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 2 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-075

The Sakhalin Papers LXV: The “New Heartland” — Why Shell Deepened Its Gazprom Partnership After Losing Control

In December 2006 Shell agreed to surrender control of Sakhalin II. By April 2007 Gazprom owned 50 per cent plus one share. Yet within two years Shell was not retreating from Russia. It was signing twenty-year gas agreements with Gazprom, discussing Sakhalin III, exploring Yamal LNG opportunities and establishing a working group to pursue additional Sakhalin resources. Shell’s 2009 Annual Report went further still: Russia had become a new corporate “heartland.” The documents establish the expansion of the relationship. They do not contain a single internal memorandum explaining why Shell chose that course. But Shell’s public statements, Gazprom’s records and the commercial structure make the strategic calculation unusually visible.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-075
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated records: Royal Dutch Shell plc Annual Report and Form 20-F 2009; Shell SEC filings; Gazprom corporate releases of 8 April and 18 September 2009
Contemporaneous reporting: Reuters, Bloomberg, Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal, UPI, AFP and The Times
Judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: The agreements, meetings, ownership interests and Shell’s description of Russia as a new “heartland” are treated as established documentary facts. Contemporary descriptions of Shell having been forced or pressured to surrender control remain attributed to journalists and other observers. No public court judgment identified here determined that Gazprom’s acquisition resulted from an unlawful bargain. Explanations of Shell’s strategic motives are commentary unless explicitly attributed to Shell. read more

OPL 245 Twist: Italy’s Supreme Court Says Shell-Eni Prosecutors Did Not Breach Their Legal Duties

Oct 2nd, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

The extraordinary legal afterlife of the Shell-Eni OPL 245 affair has produced another important development.

The detailed judgment behind the acquittal of former Milan prosecutors Fabio De Pasquale and Sergio Spadaro has now been published—and it overturns the proposition that their handling of potentially favourable material in the Shell-Eni Nigeria prosecution amounted to a criminal refusal to perform their duties.

The extraordinary legal afterlife of the Shell-Eni OPL 245 affair has produced another important development.

Italy’s Court of Cassation has published the reasoning behind its decision to clear former Milan prosecutors Fabio De Pasquale and Sergio Spadaro, who had themselves been convicted after the collapse of the enormous corruption prosecution involving Shell, Eni and Nigeria’s controversial OPL 245 offshore oil licence. read more

Shell’s $5.2 Billion Kashagan Battle Collides With Its C$33 Billion LNG Canada Bet

Oct 1st, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

Within 24 hours, Shell found itself on opposite sides of the risk ledger: Kazakhstan resumed enforcement of a huge disputed environmental penalty while the Shell-led LNG Canada venture committed billions to doubling its export capacity.

Shell has just provided an unusually vivid illustration of the risks and rewards inherent in operating one of the world’s largest energy portfolios.

On one side of the globe, Kazakhstan has restarted proceedings aimed at collecting a 2.3 trillion tenge—approximately US$5.2 billion—fine from the international consortium operating the giant Kashagan oil field. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 1 OCTOBER 2026

Oct 1st, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 1 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-074

The Sakhalin Papers LXIV: The Kremlin’s LNG Prize — Russia’s First LNG Plant Opens After Shell Loses Control

Two years after Gazprom took control of Sakhalin II, President Dmitry Medvedev inaugurated Russia’s first liquefied natural gas plant. Shell was no longer the controlling shareholder, but it had not disappeared: it retained 27.5 per cent, remained a technical participant and would soon be buying Sakhalin LNG under long-term arrangements. On 29 March 2009 the first Russian LNG cargo left for Japan. Shell’s own annual report later called Russia a new “heartland.” The project had survived cost escalation, environmental controversy, litigation, political pressure and a forced change in ownership. The strategic prize was finally producing — under Russian control.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-074
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated record: Royal Dutch Shell plc Annual Report and Form 20-F 2009
Contemporaneous corporate record: Sakhalin Energy statement, 18 February 2009
Contemporaneous reporting: Reuters, Financial Times, Oil & Gas Journal, Offshore, New Europe
Judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: Production, ownership, capacity and Shell accounting statements are treated as established where recorded in Shell or Sakhalin Energy documents. Contemporary descriptions of the 2006–07 ownership change as coercive or politically driven remain attributed assessments rather than judicial findings. The plant’s successful commissioning is not treated as proof that earlier environmental concerns were unfounded or that every environmental obligation had been satisfied. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 30 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 30th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 30 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-073

The Sakhalin Papers LXIII: The Reserves Ledger — Did Shell Really Lose 1.06 Billion Barrels?

In March 2008, the consequences of Shell’s surrender of control at Sakhalin II surfaced in the language oil companies understand best: proved reserves. Contemporary reports said roughly 1.1 billion barrels of oil equivalent were disappearing from Shell’s books. Shell’s own annual report contained two striking figures — 658 million boe and 402 million boe — which, when added together, appeared to support that conclusion. But they did not describe the same thing. One figure represented minority interests disappearing from a consolidated subsidiary; the other represented reserves being transferred into the equity-accounted investment column. Shell’s actual reduction in proved reserves attributable to its shareholders from the Sakhalin transaction was approximately 402 million boe. The distinction is accounting — but it is not merely cosmetic.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-073
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated records: Royal Dutch Shell plc Annual Report and Form 20-F 2006; Royal Dutch Shell plc Annual Report and Form 20-F 2007
Contemporaneous reporting: Financial Times; JP Morgan/Hemscott; The Observer; Bloomberg; Thomson Financial/AFX; Energy Intelligence
Judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: Shell’s reserve figures and accounting classifications are treated as corporate facts. Contemporary descriptions of a 1.1-billion-barrel “loss” are attributed to the analysts and journalists who used them. No accounting reclassification is treated as a physical disappearance of hydrocarbons. The distinction between reserves surrendered economically and reserves merely moved between reporting categories is maintained throughout. read more

Marketing Week Magazine Shell/Donovan Archive Articles

Sep 30th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

1995

Irate Don hits Shell investors

By Marketing Week 27 Jan 1995 Shell UK dealers and institutional shareholders have received letters from sales promotion company Don Marketing accusing Shell of a cover-up involving a “flawed” promotion.

Don and Shell are involved in a long-running legal dispute, due to come to court in February. Don has issued three high court writs and county court proceedings against Shell, alleging the wrongful use of retail promotions developed by Don Marketing. Shell has settled one of the three writs out of court.

Now Don has formed the Shell Corporate Conscience Pressure Group, put ads in the petrol trade press rallying support from others who have had dealings with the firm and written to institutional investors. Those who have received a letter include the pension fund manager of The Equitable Life Assurance Society, a heavy investor in Shell. read more

Suing Shell: What It Takes to Hold a Polluter to Account

Sep 30th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

This is an in-person event if something of interest. Ticket details are here:
https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/suing-shell-what-it-takes-to-hold-a-polluter-to-account-tickets-200048499747

byPrimrose Hill Lecture Series Part of the Primrose Hill Lecture Series 2026 collection Church of St Mary the virgin Primrose HillLondon, Greater London Wednesday 30 September • 7 PM – 9 PM Overview

Environmental lawyer Dan Leader in conversation with author & journalist Steve Crawshaw

Suing Shell: What It Takes to Hold a Polluter to Account

7pm, Wednesday 30th September

Environmental lawyer Dan Leader in conversation with author & journalist Steve Crawshaw

Q: WHAT HAPPENS, when ordinary people demand that one of Britain’s largest companies, Royal Dutch Shell, cleans up its pollution? read more

Shell doubles down on Canada: LNG Canada Phase 2 turns Kitimat into a 28-million-tonne export hub

Sep 29th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

Shell doubles down on Canada: LNG Canada Phase 2 turns Kitimat into a 28-million-tonne export hub

Shell has taken the final investment decision on LNG Canada Phase 2, committing with its partners to double the capacity of the Kitimat, British Columbia, export terminal from 14 million to 28 million tonnes of LNG a year. The decision substantially deepens Shell’s exposure to Canadian natural gas only weeks after it completed its acquisition of ARC Resources, adding roughly 370,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day of Canadian production. Shell Canada

For Shell, this is not a peripheral investment. The company owns 40% of LNG Canada, alongside PETRONAS with 25%, PetroChina 15%, Mitsubishi 15% and KOGAS 5%. Phase 2 will add two further liquefaction trains, an additional LNG storage tank, condensate storage, another loading berth and expanded utilities. The 670-kilometre Coastal GasLink pipeline will also be expanded through five new compressor stations. Commercial operations are expected in the early 2030s. Shell Canada read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 29 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 29th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 29 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-072

The Sakhalin Papers LXII: The Fine Print — $4.1 Billion, a $19.4 Billion Budget and the “Economic Balance” Agreements

The Kremlin agreement of December 2006 determined who would control Sakhalin II. The transaction completed on 18 April 2007 determined what that change meant in money, accounting and project economics. Shell received approximately $4.1 billion, surrendered half its interest, stopped consolidating Sakhalin Energy as a subsidiary and accepted Gazprom as majority shareholder. On the same day, Russia approved the revised Environmental Action Plan, the project’s amended development budget was approved, and Shell later disclosed that additional agreements had been signed with the Russian Government “addressing the economic balance of the project.” Those facts are documented. The surviving public record is much less explicit about what those additional agreements contained.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-072
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated records: Royal Dutch Shell plc Form 20-F for 2007; Shell SEC-filed 2007 interim financial statements; Shell announcement of 18 April 2007
Government/project record: approval of the amended Sakhalin II development budget and revised Environmental Action Plan
Contemporaneous reporting: Reuters; Oil & Gas Journal; contemporary project and financial reporting
Later judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: transaction figures and accounting treatment are treated as established corporate facts. Statements concerning Russian motives or coercion remain attributed assessments. The phrase “economic balance of the project” is Shell’s own description; no interpretation of undisclosed agreement terms is presented as fact. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 28th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-071

The Sakhalin Papers LXI: The Kremlin Deal — $7.45 Billion and the Day Shell Agreed to Give Up Control

On 21 December 2006, after months of environmental enforcement, permit uncertainty, cost disputes and negotiations with Gazprom, Shell and its Japanese partners signed a protocol inside the Kremlin. Gazprom would pay $7.45 billion for 50 per cent plus one share of Sakhalin Energy. Shell’s 55 per cent interest would be halved. President Vladimir Putin described Gazprom’s entry as a corporate decision and, at the same meeting, said the project’s fundamental problems could be considered resolved. The timing generated immediate allegations that regulatory pressure had been used as commercial leverage. Shell did not adopt that interpretation. Nor did any court identified in this archive adjudicate such a bargain. What the documents do establish is unusually stark: the ownership dispute, the project-budget dispute and the environmental crisis converged on the same day.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-071
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated record: Royal Dutch Shell plc Form 6-K filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, December 2006; Royal Dutch Shell plc Annual Report and Form 20-F 2007
Corporate environmental record: Shell Sustainability Report 2006
Government and institutional record: contemporaneous Kremlin statements; later House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee report
Contemporaneous reporting: The Guardian, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Oil & Gas Journal
Later judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Additional contemporary record: Shell’s January 2007 response to the Donovan account, subsequently preserved by Legal 500
Evidence standard: transaction terms are treated as corporate facts; Russian environmental allegations as allegations; descriptions of administrative pressure are attributed to journalists or Parliamentary findings; the coincidence of regulatory and commercial events is not treated as proof of a secret quid pro quo. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 27 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 27th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 27 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-070

The Sakhalin Papers LX: The Permit War — When Shell’s Internal Emails Reached Russia’s Environmental Watchdog

In September 2006, Russia moved against the environmental approval underpinning Sakhalin II Phase 2. Shell-led Sakhalin Energy said the approval had survived a Russian court challenge only weeks earlier and denied there were lawful grounds for revocation. Then another evidential strand entered the dispute. Internal Shell emails from 2002 — expressing concern about seismic faults, well design and a project being “schedule driven” — were supplied by John Donovan to Russian environmental official Oleg Mitvol. Contemporary Interfax and Argus reporting independently recorded that Mitvol received the material and sought answers from Sakhalin Energy. The emails did not prove environmental catastrophe, nor has any court identified here adjudicated their technical implications. But they became part of the regulatory confrontation at precisely the moment Shell was fighting to retain control of its largest Russian investment.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-070
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal corporate records: Shell/Sakhalin Energy statements; Shell internal Bouman–Van Spronsen emails; Royal Dutch Shell SEC filing of 21 December 2006
Regulatory record: Russian Ministry of Natural Resources/Rosprirodnadzor statements as reported contemporaneously
Contemporaneous reporting: Reuters, Interfax, Oil & Gas Journal, The Guardian, Dow Jones/MarketWatch and Argus
Archive correspondence: John Donovan communications with Oleg Mitvol, August–November 2006
Later judicial context: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: Russian allegations, Sakhalin Energy responses, internal technical concerns, Donovan commentary and journalistic interpretation are kept separate. The transmission of the Shell emails to Rosprirodnadzor is documented; it is not inferred that those emails caused the Russian regulatory campaign or the subsequent transfer of control to Gazprom. read more

Shell Monaca Gets New Air Quality Approval — Weeks After $15 Million Pollution Settlement

Sep 26th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

Shell Monaca Gets New Air Quality Approval — Weeks After $15 Million Pollution Settlement

Shell’s giant plastics complex in Pennsylvania has received another significant environmental approval — just weeks after the company agreed to a $15 million settlement over air-quality violations at the same facility.

The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection has issued Air Quality Plan Approval PA-04-00740D for Shell Polymers Monaca, the huge ethane-cracker and polyethylene complex in Beaver County.

On its face, this is a permit story.

Placed alongside the plant’s recent history, however, it becomes rather more interesting. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 25 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 25th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 25 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-068

The Sakhalin Papers LVIII: The Audit After the Spill — What Shell’s Lenders Were Being Told About Sakhalin II

In December 2005, an independent lenders’ audit of Sakhalin II Phase I entered the documentary record. A later German parliamentary motion, citing the report by name, said that two-thirds of 90 matters examined produced negative results concerning compliance with environmental standards. A separate submission by WWF, Friends of the Earth and The Corner House said the same audit criticised management of oil-spill response equipment and found that materials used after the Cristoforo Colombo accident had not been replaced. The audit itself has not been located in the publicly accessible sources reviewed for this file. Those descriptions must therefore remain attributed. But Shell’s own 2005 Sustainability Report independently acknowledges another serious compliance problem: contractors had not always followed the agreed safeguards for environmentally sensitive river crossings, forcing Sakhalin Energy to halt its winter work programme, retrain contractors and tighten monitoring.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-068
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal audit cited in the record: 2005 Lenders Tier III HSE Audit for Phase One, RSK ENSR, December 2005
Authenticated corporate source: The Shell Sustainability Report 2005
Lender records: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development Phase I project record and 2005 Annual Report
Contemporaneous reporting: The Observer, June 2005; Financial Times, December 2005
Parliamentary records: German Bundestag Drucksache 16/1668; UK House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee evidence
Judicial record: Export Credits Guarantee Department v Friends of the Earth [2008] EWHC 638 (Admin)
Evidence standard: The underlying RSK ENSR audit has not been located in the publicly available record examined here. Statements about its findings are therefore attributed to the organisations and parliamentarians who cited it. Shell and lender statements are identified as such. No court ruled on the findings of the December 2005 audit. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 24 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 24th, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 24 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-067

The Sakhalin Papers LVII: The Spill Before the Whale Fight — Cristoforo Colombo, Kholmsk and Shell’s Emergency System Put to a Real-World Test

On 8 September 2004, Typhoon Songda drove the dredger Cristoforo Colombo aground only metres from the shore at Kholmsk. The vessel was working within the Sakhalin II construction chain. Fuel tanks ruptured, oil reached the sea and shoreline, Russian prosecutors opened a criminal investigation, and environmental organisations demanded that Shell halt marine work. Sakhalin Energy insisted that the vessel was neither owned nor directly contracted by the company and that its emergency organisation responded rapidly. A later company presentation provides something unusually valuable: an hour-by-hour response chronology. It also revises the amount of oil said to have escaped dramatically downward from the roughly 190–200 tonnes reported at the time to a final company estimate of 28 tonnes.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-067
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal authenticated records: Sakhalin Energy 2004 Annual Review; Sakhalin Energy presentation, Cristoforo Colombo Incident — 8th September 2004
Contemporaneous reporting: Energy Intelligence, Kommersant and contemporary Russian reporting
Legal record: Sakhalin environmental prosecutor’s criminal investigation under Article 252(2) of the Russian Criminal Code; subsequent civil claim against European Dredging Company
Related archive evidence: Rick Steiner’s 1999 Sakhalin oil-spill recommendations and the 2004–2005 environmental controversy
Evidence standard: Initial spill-volume estimates are distinguished from Sakhalin Energy’s later estimate. Statements by environmental organisations are attributed to them. Company response claims are tested where possible against Sakhalin Energy’s own detailed incident chronology. read more

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 23 SEPTEMBER 2026

Sep 23rd, 2026

by John Donovan.

Comments are off for this post

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 23 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-066

The Sakhalin Papers LVI: Before the Whale Panel — Rick Steiner, Exxon Valdez and the 78 Warnings Shell Faced Before Sakhalin II Phase 2

Yesterday’s file ended with Rick Steiner walking away from the scientific process surrounding Sakhalin II in August 2005. But that was not the beginning of his involvement with Sakhalin. Six years earlier, before Shell became the dominant shareholder and before the enormous Phase 2 development was sanctioned, Steiner and two fellow specialists had already examined the island’s oil industry. Their 1999 report contained 78 recommendations concerning public oversight, environmental monitoring, tanker safety, spill prevention, emergency response and liability. Steiner also delivered a separate warning based on a disaster he knew at first hand: Exxon Valdez.

Archive reference: SLF-2007-066
Collection: The Sakhalin Papers
Principal historical record: Dan Lawn, Rick Steiner and Jonathan Wills, Sakhalin’s Oil: Doing It Right, 1999
Supporting contemporary record: Rick Steiner, Oil Spills: Lessons from Alaska for Sakhalin, Hokkaido University Slavic Research Center, July 1999
Corporate context: Shell held 25% of Sakhalin Energy in 1999; it subsequently acquired Marathon’s 37.5% interest and became the dominant shareholder
Later corroborating records: UK House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee evidence; environmental-finance assessments; contemporary academic and industry records
Evidence standard: The criticisms and risk assessments made by Steiner, Lawn and Wills are attributed to their authors. They were expert recommendations, not findings by a court or regulator. Later events are not presented as proof that any particular warning would necessarily have prevented a particular incident. read more

30 November 2023: Posted by John Donovan

The content below is sourced from current verifiable customer reviews of Shell Energy published on Trustpilot.
Extremely slow broadband for 10 months, not fixed. I have had slow broadband well below the guaranteed speed for 10 months and Shell Energy have not been able to fix it. They have tried sending about 4 or 5 engineers but have not fixed the problem. Gurps, who I have been dealing with most recently, has been friendly and polite, alth… Read more

Extremely Slow Shell Broadband

Business Principles

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 3 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-076

The Sakhalin Papers LXVI: “Strategic Global Cooperation” — Four Years After the Kremlin Crisis, Shell Signs a Worldwide Pact with Gazprom

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 2 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-075

The Sakhalin Papers LXV: The “New Heartland” — Why Shell Deepened Its Gazprom Partnership After Losing Control

The extraordinary legal afterlife of the Shell-Eni OPL 245 affair has produced another important development.

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 1 OCTOBER 2026

SLF-2007-074

The Sakhalin Papers LXIV: The Kremlin’s LNG Prize — Russia’s First LNG Plant Opens After Shell Loses Control

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 30 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-073

The Sakhalin Papers LXIII: The Reserves Ledger — Did Shell Really Lose 1.06 Billion Barrels?

1995

Suing Shell: What It Takes to Hold a Polluter to Account

7pm, Wednesday 30th September

Shell doubles down on Canada: LNG Canada Phase 2 turns Kitimat into a 28-million-tonne export hub

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 29 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-072

The Sakhalin Papers LXII: The Fine Print — $4.1 Billion, a $19.4 Billion Budget and the “Economic Balance” Agreements

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-071

The Sakhalin Papers LXI: The Kremlin Deal — $7.45 Billion and the Day Shell Agreed to Give Up Control

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 27 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-070

The Sakhalin Papers LX: The Permit War — When Shell’s Internal Emails Reached Russia’s Environmental Watchdog

Shell Monaca Gets New Air Quality Approval — Weeks After $15 Million Pollution Settlement

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 25 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-068

The Sakhalin Papers LVIII: The Audit After the Spill — What Shell’s Lenders Were Being Told About Sakhalin II

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 24 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-067

The Sakhalin Papers LVII: The Spill Before the Whale Fight — Cristoforo Colombo, Kholmsk and Shell’s Emergency System Put to a Real-World Test

THE SHELL LEAKS FILES: 23 SEPTEMBER 2026

SLF-2007-066

The Sakhalin Papers LVI: Before the Whale Panel — Rick Steiner, Exxon Valdez and the 78 Warnings Shell Faced Before Sakhalin II Phase 2

Sir Henri Deterding, resurrected!

JOE LYCETT DISCUSSES SHELL WITH JOHN DONOVAN

Meta

John Donovan’s ebooks

JOHN DONOVAN TV DOCUMENTARY INTERVIEW

SHELL EXECUTIVES AT THE CENTER OF A SCHEME TO STEAL $1.3 BILLION FROM NIGERIA’S PEOPLE

SHELL ADMITS DEALING WITH NIGERIAN MONEY LAUNDERER – BBC NEWS

SHELL, ENI AND NIGERIAN OFFICIALS IN OPL 245 CORRUPTION SCANDAL

INVESTIGATION OF OPL 245 NIGERIAN OIL CORRUPTION SCANDAL

DUTCH EARTHQUAKES CAUSED BY SHELL/EXXON

SHELL KILLS FOR OIL IN NIGERIA

SHELL LIED ABOUT CLEANING UP OIL IN NIGER DELTA

SHELL SPIES INFILTRATED NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT

LEGO DROPS SHELL OVER GREENPEACE OIL SPILL VIDEO

SHELL ARCTIC DRILLING ACCIDENTS

SHELL KNEW ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE DECADES AGO

ROYAL DUTCH SHELL FOUNDER SIR HENRI DETERDING, NAZI FINANCIER

JOHN DONOVAN PROMOTIONAL GAMES FOR SHELL AND OTHER CLIENTS

Archives

SHELL OFFICIAL ENDORSEMENT OF THIS WEBSITE

Critic’s corner

The worst ever

30 November 2023: Posted by John Donovan

The content below is sourced from current verifiable customer reviews of Shell Energy published on Trustpilot.

The worst ever

OVER 500 EXTERNAL PUBLICATIONS CITING OUR SHELL WEBSITES

DISCLAIMER

Categories

SHELL PROPPED UP APARTHEID

Royal Dutch Shell plc .com Cookies Policy