Wednesday, November 12, 2014
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
Shell’s Prelude LNG ‘ship’ is not really a ship
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.
The Choice of the Century
source article from
The President blames himself for the Democrat’s big losses Election Day.
And hold their tongues about the economic slide of the majority, and the drowning of our democracy.
And for getting big money out of politics, and thereby saving our democracy.
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
| ||||
|
The Choice of the Century
Robert Reich: Why DID Democrats losE big on Election Day 2014? Median household income continues to drop. This is the first “recovery” in memory this has happened. Jobs are coming back but wages aren’t.
READ MORE
The Choice of the Century
The President blames himself for the Democrat’s big losses Election Day.
“We have not been successful in going out there and letting people know what it is that we’re trying to do and why this is the right direction,” he said Sunday.
In other words, he didn’t sufficiently tout the Administration’s accomplishments.
I respectfully disagree.
If you want a single reason for why Democrats lost big on Election Day 2014 it’s this: Median household income continues to drop.
This is the first “recovery” in memory when this has happened.
Jobs are coming back but wages aren’t.
Every month the job numbers grow but the wage numbers go nowhere.
Most new jobs are in part-time or low-paying positions. They pay less than the jobs lost in the Great Recession.
This wageless recovery has been made all the worse because pay is less predictable than ever.
Most Americans don’t know what they’ll be earning next year or even next month. Two-thirds are now living paycheck to paycheck.
So why is this called a “recovery” at all? Because, technically, the economy is growing.
But almost all the gains from that growth are going to a small minority at the top.
In fact, 100 percent of the gains have gone to the best-off 10 percent. Ninety-five percent have gone to the top 1 percent.
The stock market has boomed. Corporate profits are through the roof. CEO pay, in the stratosphere.
Yet most Americans feel like they’re still in a recession.
And they’re convinced the game is rigged against them.
Fifty years ago, just 29 percent of voters believed government is “run by a few big interests looking out for themselves.”
Now, 79 percent think so.
According to Pew, the percentage of Americans who believe most people who want to get ahead can do so through hard work has plummeted 14 points since 2000.
What the President and other Democrats failed to communicate wasn’t their accomplishments.
It was their understanding that the economy is failing most Americans and big money is overrunning our democracy.
And they failed to convey their commitment to an economy and a democracy that serve the vast majority rather than a minority at the top.
Some Democrats even ran on not being Barack Obama.
That’s no way to win. Americans want someone fighting for them, not running away from the President.
The midterm elections should have been about jobs and wages, and how to reform a system where nearly all the gains go to the top.
Democrats have a choice. They can come out swinging. Not just for a higher minimum wage but also for better schools, paid family and medical leave, and child care for working families.
Democrats have a choice. They can come out swinging. Not just for a higher minimum wage but also for better schools, paid family and medical leave, and child care for working families.
It was an opportunity for Democrats to shine. Instead, they hid.
Consider that in four “red” states — South Dakota, Arkansas, Alaska, and Nebraska — the same voters who sent Republicans to the Senate voted by wide margins to raise their state’s minimum wage.
Democratic candidates in these states barely mentioned the minimum wage.
So what now?
Republicans, soon to be in charge of Congress, will push their same old supply-side, trickle-down, austerity economics.
They’ll want policies that further enrich those who are already rich.
That lower taxes on big corporations and deliver trade agreements written in secret by big corporations.
That further water down Wall Street regulations so the big banks can become even bigger – too big to fail, or jail, or curtail.
They’ll exploit the public’s prevailing cynicism by delivering just what the cynics expect.
And the Democrats? They have a choice.
They can refill their campaign coffers for 2016 by trying to raise even more money from big corporations, Wall Street, and wealthy individuals.
And hold their tongues about the economic slide of the majority, and the drowning of our democracy.
Or they can come out swinging. Not just for a higher minimum wage but also for better schools, paid family and medical leave, and child care for working families.
For resurrecting the Glass-Steagall Act and limiting the size of Wall Street banks.
For saving Social Security by lifting the cap on income subject to payroll taxes.
For rebuilding the nation’s roads, bridges, and ports.
For increasing taxes on corporations with high ratios of CEO pay to the pay of average workers.
And for getting big money out of politics, and thereby saving our democracy.
It’s the choice of the century.
Democrats have less than two years to make it.
Robert Reich
Republished with permission from Robert Reich’s blog.
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
SYNDICATED ESTAFA
MY QUEST FOR SWINDLED
RETIREMENT PAY BY SHELL
 
SWINDLING ITO, SYNDICATED ESTAFA
HOT PURSUIT
DUTY OF LAW ENFORCEMENT ENTITIES
SHELL SWINDLING OF RETIREMENT PAY 5TH YEAR
|
