Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

Sakhalin II

Shell was squeezed out of the Sakhalin-2 project precisely five years ago

By Motley Fool Staff Posted 9:58PM 11/03/11


Last week, my Foolish colleague Alex Planes wrote a superb article offering the conclusion that “Cheap Oil Isn’t Coming Back,” an assessment with which I completely agree. Beyond that, though, I’d add, “And Cheap Gas Has a Brief Future, Too.” With that in mind, it’s crucial to look back at the recent earnings season to garner what we can about which major oil companies appear to offer the biggest boosts for our portfolios.

Shell’s full of LNG
Royal Dutch Shell also doubled its earnings in the past quarter, chalking up a growth rate that one advertisement used to refer to as “a silly millimeter” beneath Chevron’s. The company is casting a major lot with LNG, where it leads the world in production and distribution. That’s a sufficient reason for placing the Anglo-Dutch giant next to Chevron as another member of Big Oil’s most promising trio.
read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Will Malcolm Brinded be attending the funeral of his friend Gaddafi?


Interested in the report on this leak they are trying to stop in Athabasca…

Oilsands leak turned mine to pond

Few people probably realise this is a nightmare and very likely unstoppable until the whole aquifer runs out of energy. Compare it with a blow-out.  I think it is a major mishap but have no other info then what I read in the article.

And the oilwells in Sakhalin going to sand is a disaster of great magnitude.

6 Oil Wells On Sakhalin Go Offline

With winter starting they presumably cannot re-enter the wells and try to fix it. It also shows the original design was flawed. I bet that even those atheist Russians (and the secular Shell folk as well)  are praying the same will not happen on the gaswells because then they really are f*cked! read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Can BP’s investors give oil giant the time to learn from Shell’s mistakes?

Results clouded by rivals and identity crisis! Titanic court battle looms for oil company! Executives may face charges!

By Rowena Mason: 9:33PM BST 30 Jul 2011

If those headlines were meant for readers in 2011, the subject could be only one sorry corporate story: BP and its $40bn (£24bn) Gulf of Mexico oil disaster.

However, the real answer lies six years earlier in another just as painful oil scandal that hit BP’s nearest rival, Royal Dutch Shell. This was the heated reaction to news that Shell had over-stated its oil reserves by a third in the years leading to 2004.

Downgrade after downgrade kept hitting the company’s share price until matters came to a head over an email from Shell’s head of exploration to the chief executive. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Gazprom Seeks LNG Deals Abroad That May Involve Asset Swaps

By Anna Shiryaevskaya and Caroline Connan – Jun 16, 2011 5:53 PM GMT+0100

OAO Gazprom, Russia’s gas export monopoly, is seeking liquefied natural-gas deals outside of Russia that may involve asset swaps.

“We are looking at new projects,” Deputy Chief Executive Officer Alexander Medvedev said today in an interview at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. “In possible asset swap deals we will be interested to include existing LNG assets that our potential partners have.”

Medvedev declined to identify possible partners, though he said that talks with Royal Dutch Shell Plc include an “LNG element.” read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Shell’s intent to lean on the Financial Times

By John Donovan

This is the first story arising from the 2010 crop of Shell internal communications Shell was legally obliged to supply to us following a further application under the Data Protection Act.

It provides evidence of Shell’s intent to lean on a major newspaper publisher in connection with an article published on this website:

Previous Shell internal emails provided proof of Shell’s intent to pressurize The Sunday Times to “kill” a story about us and our website. The half-page article which revealed how our intervention in the Sakhalin2 project had cost Shell £11 billion was read to me over the telephone by the Sunday Times journalist, but the story was killed hours before publication It contained an interview with the so-called Kremlin Attack dog, Oleg Mitvol, who confirmed our pivotal role and made a most unflattering comment about Shell management.
read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Pirates of the Intranet

Working in internal communications is hard enough – but it just got tougher with the arrival of pirate sites that can sink your company intranet. Marc Wright offers some useful tips to ward off the invasions.

by Marc Wright

Internal communications is facing its greatest threat ever. The rise of low-cost websites created by employees for employees means that your own intranet, forums and newsletters run the risk of being bypassed and rendered obsolete. In this article I explore the history of pirate sites; look at some examples of ‘gripe’ sites that have cost companies dearly; and suggest some steps you can take to protect yourself and your channels from these marauding invaders.

A short history of Pirates read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Shell Said to Offer Gazprom Assets to Gain LNG Plant Expansion

By Anna Shiryaevskaya – Feb 7, 2011 9:00 PM GMT+0000

Royal Dutch Shell Plc may offer OAO Gazprom assets in Asia in exchange for a deal to expand Russia’s only liquefied gas export plant, part of talks on a wider global alliance, said people with knowledge of the negotiations.

Shell wants to add a third liquefied natural gas production unit at the $22 billion Sakhalin-2 venture north of Japan, raising output 50 percent. The Hague-based company is selecting overseas assets to win support from Gazprom, said three people, declining to be identified because the plans are private. Shell may gain access to new offshore blocks to supply the plant. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

BP’s Exploration Plans in the Arctic of Russia Draw Opposition From Partners

A version of this article appeared in print on January 19, 2011, on page B3 of the New York edition.


MOSCOW — The British petroleum giant BP’s new deal to explore the Russian Arctic in partnership with a state-owned oil company has drawn protests from a group of private Russian investors with whom BP has a separate partnership.

The Russian private partners of BP’s separate and longstanding joint venture here, TNK-BP, say they were not adequately consulted about the Arctic exploration agreement that BP announced on Friday with the state-owned Rosneft.

On Tuesday, a representative of the TNK-BP partners said the Rosneft deal violated a 2003 shareholder agreement that required BP to first consult the management of that joint venture before negotiating new business with others in Russia or Ukraine. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Shell led Sakhalin II construction threatens endangered gray whales

The multi-billion-dollar project, led by Royal Dutch Shell, has also been accused of inflicting large-scale damage on Sakhalin’s ecosystem, including illegal deforestation, the dumping of toxic waste, and soil erosion.

The construction of a third oil platform for the Shell-led Sakhalin II energy project may threaten a critically endangered population of gray whales off Russia’s eastern coast, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) said on Monday.

The company, which already has two platforms in the Russian Far East, announced in December its plans to build another one near the crucial feeding habitat of the gray whale population.

“The construction and operation of an additional off-shore platform could have numerous negative impacts on the whales, potentially disrupting feeding behavior and increasing the chance of fatal ship strikes,” WWF said in a statement. “Also, a third platform heightens the risk of an environmentally catastrophic oil spill in this sensitive habitat.” read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Shell, Gazprom May Expand Sakhalin LNG by 2015, Governor Says

By Ilya Arkhipov and Stephen Bierman – Dec 29, 2010 5:18 PM GMT

OAO Gazprom, Russia’s gas export monopoly, and Royal Dutch Shell Plc may build a third train to produce liquefied natural gas at their $22 billion Sakhalin-2 venture by 2015, the regional governor said.

The two companies may alternatively build a new LNG plant, Alexander Khoroshavin, the governor of the Sakhalin region, told Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin in a meeting today, according to Khoroshavin’s press service. A third train at the Sakhalin-2 project may boost capacity by 5 million metric tons, he said. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Royal Dutch Shell Arctic Issues

Article by a former employee of Shell Oil USA


December 4, 2010

I would like to point out that Shell Oil USA (and other operators) safely drilled a number of exploratory wells in the Arctic waters of offshore Alaska in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s without mishap. These wells were drilled in areas Shell now wants to drill. In some cases, these new wells will be delineation wells for discoveries already made by Shell and others.
However, RD Shell’s contentions that they are drilling in shallow water, not mile deep water, and that drilling is therefore much safer, ring hollow given Shell’s past and ongoing record in the shallow Gulf of Mexico, and even onshore. If water depth was the critical criteria Shell’s shallow water and onshore drilling operations worldwide should be ‘defect free’. They are far from that. Safety issues continue even onshore. And we only need to recall the Bay Marchand blowout in 1970 in very shallow Gulf of Mexico waters to understand that water depth is no guarantee of either safe drilling or production. That blowout was due in large part to an effort by Shell USA to develop that field as cheaply and quickly as possible.
However, given all the scrutiny that has fallen upon the oil industry for its slipshod ‘safety culture’ (if any real ‘safety culture’ actually exists) since the BP disaster, Shell and their partners could most probably be trusted to safely drill their desired exploration wells in both the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas.
Actually, the US government is legally obligated to let Shell and its partners drill at some point in time. If just cause is found that would prohibit that exploratory drilling, then Shell, et al, should be refunded their lease payments, with interest. The government must act in good faith in this regard.
Clearly, any mishap/screw-up by RD Shell or others that caused any sort of ‘significant’ release of hydrocarbons into the fragile Arctic environment would doom any further drilling in those regions for decades to come. RD Shell along with the rest of the industry are well aware of that reality. In fact, drilling in the Alaskan Arctic must be a ‘mishap free’ affair, for there will now be no tolerance for ‘typical’ industry conduct after the BP Affair.
Exploratory drilling is a very short term endeavor. The bigger concern, and one that has yet to be adequately addressed, is how to exploit any significant reserves that may be discovered without serious risk and damage to the very fragile Arctic environment. That is by far the more serious and more problematic issue the government, RD Shell and the oil industry face. RD Shell and the oil industry have yet to demonstrate they can meet the technical challenges and operate safely.
One need only look at how BP and their partners (Exxon, et al) have operated on the North Slope and have maintained the Alaska pipeline over the years to see where the industry has placed and continues to place its priorities. And we only need to look to the Russian Arctic to see what the consequences of serious releases of hydrocarbons will be. That is not a matter of speculation. And Shell USA’s past operational record in Alaska, RD Shell’s environmental record in the Arctic in Russia are indicative of the company’s attitude toward environmentally safe operations in the Arctic. Shell USA had diesel fuel spill issues associated with the improper abandonment of discovery wells (induced by improper internal ‘reserve bookings’ issues) at a prospect called Seal Island (now renamed Northstar by BP I believe). And recently the Russian government took harsh action against Shell as a consequence of environmental issues at Sakhalin II. How RD Shell operates and has operated in the Alaskan and Russian Arctic are very relevant because this conduct is indicative of Shell’s corporate attitude regarding environmental issues. And this is senior level management’s attitude. After all, they lead that company.
While Shell and others may indeed be allowed to drill exploratory wells, there is absolutely no guarantee that they will be allowed to develop any reserves that may be discovered. Any such effort will ultimately end up in US courts and face legal challenge after legal challenge. I question whether they would ever be allowed to exploit those discoveries at anytime in the near future. It could take decades, literally, for the resulting political and legal challenges to be overcome.
Given the continuing development of massive gas reserves in the lower 48 States, and the rather limited potential for oil in the Alaskan Arctic offshore, estimated to be around 20 billon bbls, I don’t see any real imperative to develop those known gas and oil reserves given the potential ecological damage that could occur from slipshod industry operating practices. These oil reserves are spit in the bucket compared to the exploitable onshore oil sand reserves in Alberta and Venezuela. And there are serious environmental damage issues associated with the development of those reserves as well.
To further exacerbate the problem of drilling in the Alaskan Arctic is the fact that the US government has no agency capable of regulating the oil industry effectively. The Dept. of the Interior has been and is completely compromised by the coziness between the oil industry, politicians, and senior bureaucratic leadership. A great example of this completely improper relationship is the Gale Norton affair, and the other associated ‘sex and drug’ scandals that rocked MMS in recent years. DoI operates more like the corrupt bureaucracy of a third world country than they do of a modern democracy based upon the rule of law. And Shell has had a big hand in the deliberate corruption of that bureaucracy.
The modern US Republican party was born in large part in Harris County, Texas, home to Houston, Texas, the one-time capital of the world wide oil industry and still the capital of the US and North American/South American oil industries. The coziness between the oil industry and the modern Republican party is legendary. However, large sums of oil industry money flow to both political parties and to lobby organizations who effectively gut the regulatory power of governmental agencies and prevent the establishment of an effective regulatory agency.
Until the impotence of the US government to effectively regulate the oil industry is remedied, I see no possibility of development of hydrocarbon reserves in the Alaskan offshore, regardless of how much oil and gas may be discovered. The arrogance and corrupting influence peddling of the large major oil companies, which ultimately led to/contributed to BP’s latest offshore disaster have doomed that possibility.
read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Gazprom and Shell to develop energy projects together

The Telegraph: Gazprom and Shell to develop energy projects together

A new “special relationship” between Royal Dutch Shell and Russian state gas giant Gazprom will see the two companies develop more energy projects together.

Shell has agreed to let Gazprom share some of its projects abroad if it is allowed to help develop the third and fourth stages of the Sakhalin project Rowena Mason By Rowena Mason 8:31PM GMT 30 Nov 2010

Four years after Russia forced Shell to cede control of its $22bn (£14bn) Siberian field, Sakhalin-2, to Gazprom, it appears that cordial relations have been re-established.

As part of the deal Shell has agreed to let Gazprom share some of its projects abroad if it is allowed to help develop the third and fourth stages of the Sakhalin project.

Deals could even take the form of asset swaps, as Gazprom seeks to increase its presence on the international stage.

The agreement appears to continue a remarkable turnaround in historically strained relations between Shell and Russia. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Gazprom and Shell To Expand Cooperation – Medvedev

MOSCOW -(Dow Jones)- Russia’s state-run gas firm OAO Gazprom (GAZP.RS) and Royal Dutch Shell PLC(RDSA.LN) are to sign a memorandum on the expansion of their cooperation in and outside Russia, Gazprom Deputy Chief Executive Alexander Medvedev said Monday.

Gazprom’s cooperation with Shell could expand in Sakhalin, Medvedev said, without giving any more details on the memorandum.

“We are happy to invite foreign partners to develop our upstream reserves, but only if in exchange we get the access to their first class projects somewhere in the world,” Medvedev said. “We do know Shell has good assets, which could be of interest for us.” read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Regal Falls to Record on Greer Exit, Ukraine Gas Flow Failure


By Eduard Gismatullin – Sep 30, 2010

Regal Petroleum Plc, the U.K. explorer focusing on natural-gas projects in Ukraine, fell to the lowest share price on record after Chief Executive Officer David Greer quit and as gas wells failed to stabilize output.

Regal dropped as much as 31 percent to 18.25 pence in London trading, the lowest price since Sept. 27, 2002. The stock was at 21 pence at 10:03 a.m. local time, valuing the company at 66.86 million pounds ($106 million). The shares have fallen about 80 percent in the last year. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Putin meets with Royal Dutch Shell CEO Peter Voser

????????????? ?????????? ?????????

Mr Putin cited the successful participation of Shell in the Sakhalin-2 project, as well as its cooperation with Gazprom, Gazpromneft, Rosneft and other Russian companies. In turn, Mr Voser called Russia a key investment partner and expressed satisfaction with the results that have been achieved through cooperation with Russia in a variety of sectors.

17 Sept 2010: Transcript of the beginning of the meeting:

Vladimir Putin: Mr Voser, Shell has been operating in Russian for a long time and with good results. You have several major joint ventures with local partners, including the ambitious Sakhalin-2 project. Last year, we launched the first Russian gas liquefaction company as part of this project. And I must say that in this area, in hydrocarbons, in particular for the production and sale of gas, we have our own plans, which are to increase the production and export of LPG – up to 10% of our total exports by 2020 and up to 15% by 2030. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.

Allegation of death threats surrounding leaked Shell emails

By John Donovan

As prominent Internet based critics of Shell senior management, we have received a large number of Shell internal emails over several years. Some have been leaked to us by our network of Shell insiders while countless others, spanning several years, have been obtained from Shell after we made applications to the company as provided under the UK Data Protection Act.

I would now reveal for the first time that our Shell insider sources of leaked internal emails have over the years received alleged threats, including alleged death threats. I have evidence from our sources confirming alleged threats. One such threat for example relates to the Sakhalin2 project. Evidence I provided to the Russian government supplied to me by an insider, cost Shell billions of dollars and also resulted in the resignation of a Shell Managing Director David Greer, who was Project Director of Sakhalin2 and Deputy Chairman of Sakhalin Energy Investment Company Limited. The last message received from the source informed me that they had received a credible serious threat. The source disappeared without trace. read more

This website and sisters,,,, and, are owned by John Donovan. There is also a Wikipedia segment.