Prelude a giant production and processing barge masquerading as a ship
By John Donovan
A parliamentary inquiry into the safety of floating LNG (FLNG) processing plants is underway in Western Australia this week.
On 28 December 2013, I published an article revealing that a whistleblower inside the Shell Prelude project – the first of these gigantic processing plants, had contacted me. The person in question supplied me with internal information and photographic evidence supporting his anxiety about potentially dangerous, shoddy workmanship.
The whistleblower was intimately involved in the project at a high level and had deep concerns that warnings issued to Shell (and other parties) were ignored and financial considerations were taking priority over safety issues. He was particularly anxious about alleged use of totally unqualified personnel.
One of our contributors has aptly commented about Prelude, which is destined for Australia:
“Shell’s Prelude LNG ‘ship’ is not really a ship, per se, because it has no means of self propulsion. It will be towed to location and anchored, supposedly for the life of the gas field exploitation project. This vessel is nothing more than a giant production and processing barge masquerading as a ship.”
I published a further piece on 10 January 2014, followed by a series of related articles by experts.
According to the article published today about the parliamentary inquiry, it will consider evidence presented by the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority and Shell Australia.
Extract
Last week the Maritime Union of Australia said that the safety of such vessels is untested, “as there are no such facilities operating anywhere in the world,” and as such was not covered by existing international and national safety regulations.
Their comments reinforce the warnings contained in the articles we have published.
Sunday Times Article: Shell Prelude a potential white elephant
By John Donovan
According to an article by Dominic O’Connell published in a whole page article in The Sunday Times on 9 November 2014, Prelude is in danger of becoming a white elephant. (See page 5 of the Business Section)
The article correctly describes Prelude as the brainchild of Royal Dutch Shell (unless it turns out that Shell pirated the technology).
Shell is described as a venerable oil and gas company said to have a history of making big plays that might not generate dividends for decades.
Dominic O’Connell correctly points out that the shale boom in the USA has driven down the price of gas – hence the danger to Prelude.
The references to Prelude are contained within an article about the “best value-for-money Chief Executives.”
According to research revealed in the article, Royal Dutch Shell over the past four years, has had the best value-for-money chief executive in the FTSE 100.
Extract
For every pound paid in compensation to Ben van Beurden and his predecessor Peter Voser, shareholders have received £3,803 – narrowly beating Nicandro Durante at British American Tobacco (BAT), who returned £3,737.
There is some more promising news, not from the article, but from information I have received.
Shell insiders have made increasingly positive comments about Ben van Beurden.
It seems Shell may have its best leader for a long time.
Shell Defamation Suit
In 2007, the Department of Justice confronted Shell about its work in Nigeria, and at the time, investigators suspected that there may have been bribery of foreign officials that would allow Shell to get better access to various goods and services.
From a JD Supra Press Release
The Texas Supreme Court recently agreed to hear Shell Oil Co.’s pending defamation case. Robert Writt, a former Shell employee, sued the company for defamation after Shell submitted a report to the Department of Justice about his alleged involvement in committing numerous violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practice Act (FCPA).
It’s an interesting case — can internal investigation reports really be considered defamation? It’s just one question the court will have to consider as it makes its decision. It will depend largely on the truth of some of the allegations included in the DOJ report.
What appears to be indisputable is that Shell’s overseas contractors were suspected of FCPA violations. In 2007, the Department of Justice confronted Shell about its work in Nigeria, and at the time, investigators suspected that there may have been bribery of foreign officials that would allow Shell to get better access to various goods and services. Shell then agreed to voluntarily conduct an internal investigation of its corporation.
A year and a half later, when Shell submitted its investigation report to the DOJ, it had also prepared a clear plan for the prevention of future violations through discipline of certain staff. Writt was implicated in the report as being part of these FCPA violations, which means that Shell accused Writt of a crime.
Writt denies these claims, saying he did not commit any violations and actually reported the bribes to his superiors within the company. He filed the lawsuit against shell alleging defamation and wrongful termination. The trial court sided in favor of Shell, and then the appeals process began. Now, the Texas Supreme Court has the opportunity to hear the case. The decision will definitely be of interest to other companies looking to fire employees after alleged FCPA violations.
RELATED
Shell to pay $48m Nigerian bribe fine: Daily Telegraph 4 November 2010
Extract
These companies, including Shell, admitted they “approved of or condoned the payment of bribes on their behalf in Nigeria and falsely recorded the bribe payments made on their behalf as legitimate business expenses in their corporate books, records and accounts”.
SHELL IN BRIBERY FINE: Daily Express 6 November 2010
Extract
Shell must pay a $30million “criminal penalty” over charges it paid $2million to a sub-contractor “with the knowledge that some or all of the money” would be used to bribe Nigerian officials to allow equipment into the country without paying duty. Shell, which has not admitted guilt, must pay a further $18million to repay profits and interests.
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
Ben Levisohn has written an article for Barron’s stoking up further the persistent speculation about the prospect of a takeover bid for BP. He quotes from an 
