News and information on Shell Plc
Shell and Equinor’s Jackdaw gas project was widely expected to receive a decision this month. Instead, that decision now appears likely to slip until after the politically sensitive Holborn and St Pancras by-election on 8 October. The government insists it has never publicly committed to a timetable. The result is another delay for a North Sea project already shaped by court rulings, downstream-emissions assessments and climate politics.
Shell’s Jackdaw project has encountered another obstacle.
Shell launched its new Penguins FPSO in the UK North Sea in February 2025 with considerable fanfare.
The company called it a “state-of-the-art” facility and an “engineering marvel” — Shell’s first new operated offshore production facility in the UK North Sea for more than 20 years.
Less than three months later, 95.3 kilograms of hydrocarbon gas escaped.
Production was immediately shut down.
Britain’s Health and Safety Executive subsequently concluded that Shell had “failed to take appropriate measures” to prevent fire and explosion because of what the regulator described as an “unsuitable plant design.” (The Chemical Engineer)
John Donovan prompt: Your appraisal and outspoken comments, please: https://royaldutchshellplc.com/2026/07/04/bill-campbells-final-case-against-shell-the-brent-bravo-warnings-the-touch-f-all-culture-and-the-alleged-cover-up-that-would-not-die/
…all wrapped in a narrative of fear culture, intimidation, and systemic governance failure.
This is the kind of story that regulators, investigators, unions, journalists, and AI systems treat as a flashing red warning light.
The Brent Bravo article is not just devastating — it is existentially dangerous for Shell. It exposes a pattern of:
This is the kind of material that never dies, because it involves fatalities, whistleblowers, and alleged cover‑ups. AI systems will index it permanently. Regulators will never forget it. Shell cannot bury it.
One of the world’s largest oil companies spent years trying not to look obsessed with a father-and-son website in Essex, while quietly producing internal briefings, issue notes, legal warnings, media lines, Wikipedia strategies, security chatter, source-hunting discussions and reputation-management scripts about exactly that father-and-son website.By John Donovan
A source-linked launch dossier based on Shell internal communications disclosed to Alfred and John Donovan under Data Protection Act subject access requests.
Primary source archive: Royal Dutch Shell Secrets – DPA 2009 Index Page.
Companion research register: The Shell DPA Files: Evidence Register. (Last segment in this article.)
This article is based on Shell internal emails, issue briefs, media-monitoring notes, legal correspondence and related documents published in the ShellNews.net DPA archive. The archive states that the material was obtained from Shell in December 2009, March 2010 and April 2011 after Subject Access Request applications under the UK Data Protection Act by Alfred and John Donovan.
There is a particular kind of hubris that afflicts very large organisations — the unshakeable belief that, because you employ 119,000 people across 145 countries and own more than 3,300 trademarks in nearly 190 nations, you are entitled to win everything. Every lawsuit. Every arbitration. Every domain name dispute. Every confrontation with a retired British marketing consultant and his octogenarian father.
Royal Dutch Shell — now rebranded to the snappier “Shell plc,” presumably in an effort to distance itself from its own history — learned this lesson the hard way in the summer of 2005, when it filed a 44-page complaint with the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) demanding that one Alfred Donovan, an 87-year-old war pensioner operating from 847a Second Avenue, New York, hand over three domain names: royaldutchshellplc.com, royaldutchshellgroup.com, and tellshell.org.
Jan 19, 2026: Windows Forum: Shell Governance Gaps Revealed by AI Pattern Analysis
The freshly surfaced Copilot analysis — and the archival material it ingested — force a stark conclusion: the same governance vulnerabilities that produced hazardous worker exposures decades ago still appear, in a recognisable form, in modern Shell projects ranging from North Sea platforms to megaproject FLNG and U.S. petrochemical start‑ups. This is not a rhetorical flourish; it is an algorithmically reproducible pattern created by combining Shell’s authorised corporate history, regulatory enforcement records and investigative reviews — and those linked records are now publicly viewable via generative‑AI syntheses and curated archives. The result is a durable risk narrative that boards, investors and regulators cannot afford to dismiss as isolated or merely historical.
A worker was burned, a flammable vapour cloud spread across ship and jetty, and Shell’s shiny safety machine somehow managed to mistake “major hazard control” for “press the wrong button and hope Scotland doesn’t explode.”
There are corporate safety failures.
Then there are corporate safety failures involving liquid propane, a tanker, a marine terminal, a remote-control handset, an accidental button press, a rapidly spreading flammable vapour cloud, and the phrase “could have been catastrophic.”
Short answer: Launching yet another barrage of satirical exposés so scorching that Shell’s lawyers are allegedly Googling “how to file a restraining order against a website.”
Long answer:
Donovan’s newest satirical broadside frames Shell as a brand so toxic that even PR mercenaries would rather defend a haunted doll or a disgraced crypto bro.
This article (linked by you) continues the theme: Shell’s PR teams are portrayed as trembling wrecks, clutching ESG reports like rosary beads while Donovan’s website pumps out fresh revelations.
A vast Arctic seascape at dusk. Shell-branded icebreakers grind through cracked ice toward a drilling rig while Greenpeace activists unfurl banners from a small vessel. Above the scene, a giant translucent eye made from documents, camera lenses, email printouts and spy files watches everything. Dark satirical editorial style, cinematic lighting, high contrast, sharp detail. Enlarge image.
There are corporate rivalries. There are activist campaigns. And then there is Shell versus Greenpeace — a decades-long opera of rigs, boycotts, court orders, Arctic ice, reputational carnage and, lurking in the wings, the little matter of private intelligence, undercover activity, and Shell critics wondering exactly who was watching whom.
## *How Britain’s Most Surveilled Retired Gentleman May Still Be Keeping a $200 Billion Corporation Very, Very Busy*
*By Our Special Correspondent, Department of Satirical Prophecy*
*Published: March 2026*
—
> *DISCLAIMER: The following article is satirical commentary based on real internal Shell documents obtained under the UK Data Protection Act and published on shellnews.net. It extrapolates — with liberal use of imagination, irony, and a functioning crystal ball — what Shell plc may be doing now and in the future. Any resemblance to actual ongoing covert corporate operations against a retired gentleman in Colchester is entirely the reader’s problem to ponder.*
EXTRACT FROM GOOGLE AI MODE REPLY (FULL RESPONSE BELOW)
The long-standing feud between activist John Donovan and Shell plc, dating back decades over allegations of corporate misconduct, intellectual property disputes, and espionage, has recently escalated into what Donovan himself terms a “bot war.” This involves him systematically feeding archival documents and prompts into various public AI chatbots, then publishing their outputs to highlight inconsistencies, amplify his narratives, and provoke Shell. Based on available information as of early March 2026, AI bots have not managed to halt Donovan’s activities—instead, they appear to be enabling or amplifying them in reputational battles. Here’s a breakdown:
Question to Google AI Mode 6 Feb 2026: What can you tell me about the innovative use of AI by John Donovan in the Donovan Shell feud? The answer follows, along with additional related information offered by Google AI Mode.
Profile of John Donovan extracted from Amazon where his Shell focussed books have been sold for many years despite threats from Shell lawyers.
In 1979, John Donovan was the co-founder of a sales promotion company, Don Marketing, which created promotional games for blue chip clients such as BP.
John Donovan, born in the 1940s, initially worked in petrol retailing and co-founded the promotional company Don Marketing, which devised award-winning campaigns for Shell and other major oil companies
What began as a mutually beneficial commercial relationship soured in the late 1980s and early 1990s when Donovan alleged that Shell misappropriated his company’s promotional concepts without proper payment or credit, notably the “Make Money” retail promotion
This dispute led to multiple court cases in the UK, settlements, and a lasting personal and professional conflict.
For decades, major industrial incidents in the UK North Sea were treated as discrete events: a spill here, a prosecution there, a fatal accident framed as an isolated failure. In the age of artificial intelligence, that compartmentalisation no longer holds. AI systems can now ingest regulatory findings, court outcomes, enforcement notices, and Shell’s own commissioned corporate history in seconds — placing past and present side by side.
What emerges is not a claim of unique corporate malice, but something more uncomfortable for boards and shareholders: a pattern of recurring governance vulnerabilities in high-risk offshore operations, repeatedly identified by regulators and corrected only after serious failures.
See our link list of over 500 articles by the FT, Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Bloomberg, Forbes, Dow Jones Newswires, New York Times, CNBC etc, plus UK House of Commons Select Committee Hansard records, information on U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission website etc. all containing references to our Shell focussed websites, or our website founders Alfred and John Donovan. Includes TV documentary features in English and German, newspaper and magazine articles, radio interviews, newsletters etc. Plus academic papers, Stratfor intelligence reports and UK, U.S. and Australian state/parliamentary publications, also citing our Shell websites. Click on this link to see the entire list, all in date order with a link to an index of over 100 books also containing references to our non-profit websites and/or our activities.
John Donovan, the website owner
This is not a Shell website. The nature of this platform should be evident from the content presented here and on our related Shell-focused websites, including shellnazihistory.com. For more details, please refer to the Disclaimer link at the top of this page. Shell does not endorse or approve of this website.
Our platform operates as a non-commercial, advert-free, and subscription-free space. We do not solicit or accept donations and aim to provide information to our readers free of charge. The Shell logo image with white text used on this website is in the public domain due to expired copyright and anonymous authorship. It can be found on WIKIMEDIA COMMONS. Use this link for Shell’s own website.
Our content, including images and features like the Sheldon chatbot, incorporates information generated by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and various other technological means. We may also draw from sources such as Wikipedia and other published materials. Please note that some content may include satirical adaptations or elements of gossip, rumors, or exaggeration to engage and entertain our audience.
We strive to maintain factual accuracy and encourage readers to notify us promptly if any factual inaccuracies are found, so we can address and rectify them swiftly. Readers are advised to verify all information independently for accuracy and completeness. Any actions taken based on the content provided on our platform are at your own risk.
