UK Government must defend against big oil and mining dirty tricks

UK Government must defend against big oil and mining dirty tricks

Mar 24th, 2015 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

UK Government must defend against big oil and mining dirty tricks

Oil and mining bodies together with companies such as BP and Royal Dutch Shell have drafted industry compliance guidelines that weaken the impact of new UK anti-corruption laws.

21st March 2015

Anti-corruption campaigners urge the UK Government to divorce itself from industry guidelines that would create transparency black-holes

Oil and mining bodies together with companies such as BP and Royal Dutch Shell have drafted industry compliance guidelines that weaken the impact of new UK anti-corruption laws. (1) A coalition of over 800 organisations including Global Witness, CAFOD, Oxfam, Christian Aid and ONE are urging the Government to reject industry’s proposed guidelines which suggest that the law allows companies to keep certain payments secret. (2)

The UK transparency law aims to cut corruption by forcing UK-based extractive companies to publish highly detailed reports of their payments to governments – such as taxes, royalties and licence fees – broken down by each of their projects worldwide; these payments are worth billions of pounds each year. Disclosure provides citizens in resource-rich but impoverished countries with the means to “follow the money” and hold governments and companies to account.

However, the draft industry guidelines suggest that companies can lump projects together when they report, and withhold from public view certain crucial payments they make as part of joint ventures. The result is that billions of pounds worth of payments will remain hidden from view and vulnerable to corruption.

Industry claims that their guidance is a reasonable interpretation of regulations; however, Global Witness believes that the draft industry guidelines go against the letter and intent of the law (3). EU legal expert Paul Lasok QC, Head of Monckton Chambers agrees, calling the guidelines “highly unsatisfactory … to the extent of being positively misleading” and states that they guide companies to report in a manner that could be “in breach of the regulations”. (4)

In addition, this week’s disclosures by Norwegian oil major Statoil under a similar law show that the UK industry guidelines are not fit for purpose. “Statoil’s highly detailed report puts the UK industry’s approach to shame,” said Dominic Eagleton, Senior Campaigner at Global Witness. (5)

Global Witness applauds the UK Government’s record for leading on extractives transparency up to this point. Lib-Dem Business Minister Jo Swinson and Department for Business officials championed the law, and the Prime Minister made the issue a top priority during his G8 Presidency in 2013. (6) “The UK has established a strong transparency law. The Government must stand firm against big business and divorce itself from industry guidelines that would allow companies to continue making payments in secret” says Eagleton.

Ends

Contact: Dominic Eagleton – +44 7738 713 016 /deagleton@globalwitness.org

FULL ARTICLE WITH NOTES

RELATED

Statoil’s historic disclosures blow holes in Exxon and Shell’s campaign for secrecy

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: BP, Bribery, Business Principles, Corruption, Oil, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell,Statoil.
Tagged: BP · Corruption · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Global warming is now slowing down the circulation of the oceans — with potentially dire consequences

Global warming is now slowing down the circulation of the oceans — with potentially dire consequences

Mar 24th, 2015 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

FROM AN ARTICLE BY CHRIS MOONEY PUBLISHED BY THE WASHINGTON POST ON 23 MARCH 2015

Global warming is now slowing down the circulation of the oceans — with potentially dire consequences

According to a new study just out in Nature Climate Change by Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and a group of co-authors, we’re now seeing a slowdown of the great ocean circulation that, among other planetary roles, helps to partly drive the Gulf Stream off the U.S. east coast. The consequences could be dire – including significant extra sea level rise for coastal cities like New York and Boston.

FULL ARTICLE

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Climate Change.
Tagged: Global Warming

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Here’s Why Shell Drilling Proposition In Arctic Is Facing Opposition

Here’s Why Shell Drilling Proposition In Arctic Is Facing Opposition

Mar 24th, 2015

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

By: MICHEAL KAUFMAN
Published: Mar 23, 2015 at 10:54 am EST

According to the Guardian, Royal Dutch Shell plc (ADR) (NYSE:RDS.A) will most probably get an approval by the US government to drill in the Arctic. An approval last month was given by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BEOM).

A formal statement is expected to come from the US interior Secretary Sally Jewel. The decision might spark opposition from environmentalist groups that are not in favor of Shell operating in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas of Alaska.

Earlier, the US federal court had allowed Shell to operate in Alaska, but the environmentalists believed that drilling in the Arctic would have adverse environmental effects. Hence, after a lot of persistence, the US Interior department was forced to revise its decision-making process, assessing the viability of drilling in the Arctic.

The BOEM after reconsidering the process approved Shell’s drilling plan in the Arctic. What was the most surprising was that the decision came ahead despite the BOEM disclosing that a chance for one or larger oil spills to occur would be 75%. This was revealed by the BOEM in its Environmental Impact Statement.

As reported by the Guardian, Professor Robert Bea, one of the faculty members at the University of California, has expressed his concerns over the approval by BOEM for Shell to operate in the Arctic. Crude oil price since the last six months has fallen over 50%. Hence, energy companies are exploring different ways to save on costs and maintain liquidity.

Mr. Bea believes that these cost cutting strategies could make it difficult for energy companies to comply with safety standards and could increase the probability of a spill occurring.

In a statement reported by Guardians, Mr. Bea said: “We should all be concerned about tradeoffs between production and protection…With the significant reduction in the price for oil; there are equally significant pressures to reduce costs so that acceptable profitability can be maintained.”

Mr. Bea has worked as a consultant for BP and Shell. He initially was brought in by Shell in 2004 to review the risks that came up with drilling in the Arctic. The conclusion drawn by Mr. Bea was operating in the Gulf had many risks involved and disapproved Shell’s plans to drill in the region.

An environmental group Greenpeace has expressed similar concerns as Mr. Bea. One of the campaigners of Greenpeace claimed that the contractors of these energy firms do not have good track records, and with crude oil price around $50 per barrel and high emphasis on cutting costs, the risk seems to be very high.

He further claimed that the move goes against the need to curb global warming. Regarding the issue as reported by the Guardian, he said: “if we want to avoid catastrophic climate change we can’t even burn all the fossil fuels we already have; we definitely don’t need to trash what’s left of the melting Arctic looking for more.”

He asked the Obama administration to show some responsibility by not allowing the energy companies to operate in the Gulf. He exclaimed that if President Obama agreed to this, it would seriously undermine the credibility of his leadership.

CEO Ben van Beurden according to the Guardian in a financial results conference indicated that the company is more than ready to go ahead with the Arctic project drilling this year. Shell spokesman indicated that the company has set high standards when it comes to maintaining adequate safety.

Shell since a very long time has been working on the Arctic project, but has seen many obstacles in terms of legal challenges. Though the company remains optimistic on its drilling proposition, it is likely to face a lot of opposition from the major environmentalist groups. Shell would have to take the risks head on, and would have to adopt a business model that complies with safety standards.

SOURCE

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Alaska, Arctic, Beaufort Sea, Bidness Etc, Chukchi Sea, Environment,Greenpeace, Litigation, Oil, Oil Spill, Pollution, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, United States.
Tagged: Alaska · Arctic Ocean · Beaufort Sea · Chukchi Sea · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Why The Oil Price Could Fall Even Further

Why The Oil Price Could Fall Even Further

Mar 24th, 2015 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

From an article by Prabhat Sakya published 24 March 2015 by The Motley Fool under the headline:

BP plc And Royal Dutch Shell plc: Why The Oil Price Could Fall Even Further

The oil price has fallen dramatically since last summer. This has meant difficult times for the oil producers, including companies such as BP and Royal Dutch Shell.

…people have been buying more fuel-efficient cars, and there has been huge investment in technologies such as hybrid, electric and fuel cell vehicles.

So supply has been steadily increasing, and demand has been falling, and the world now has too much oil. Oil prices have begun a downtrend; and I don’t think that this fall will just last a few months, before bouncing back.

You see, commodity markets are not just about supply and demand. They are about momentum. That’s why I think this new era of low oil prices could last another decade. All those wells that have been drilled won’t suddenly run dry, and production won’t suddenly end.

This is the oil industry’s ‘new normal’

This is why I think that the oil price could fall even further over the next few years. And I think companies like BP and Shell realise this.

They are now adjusting to the new reality of low commodity prices.

FULL ARTICLE

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Alternative Energy, Alternative Fuels, BP, Oil Company Profits, Oil Prices,Royal Dutch Shell Plc.
Tagged: BP · Oil Prices · Royal Dutch Shell Plc · The Motley Fool

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Money Talks

Money Talks

Mar 24th, 2015 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

By Seattle Times editorial board published 23 March 2015 under the headline:

Terminal 5 Shell lease is not the right arena to debate climate change

SOON, two huge oil rigs will be parked at the Port of Seattle, preparing for a summer sailing to the Alaskan Arctic and for exploratory drilling.

The Port’s decision in February to lease Terminal 5 to Foss Maritime, which will service the Royal Dutch Shell rigs, was appropriate because facilitating the maritime economy is what the Port does.

Environmental activists are arguing — loudly — that the Port should scuttle that lease as part of a proxy war over climate change. A coalition of groups have sued and on Friday learned their lawsuit will go forward.

And Seattle Mayor Ed Murray, with backing of the Seattle City Council, has ordered a belated review of city-issued permits for the Terminal 5 lease, apparently with similar intentions.

Climate change is a real threat. But blocking those rigs at Terminal 5 wouldn’t stop Arctic drilling nor alter the course of climate change. Instead, undoing the Port lease would be a symbolic victory at the expense of the region’s vital maritime economy.

If the lease were killed, Shell would likely divert operations to another Pacific port. Prince Rupert in British Columbia or Dutch Harbor in Alaska could step in.

Environmentalists suggest that diverting those operations elsewhere could somehow change the fundamental economics of Arctic drilling. That ignores the $5 billion already invested in Arctic drilling efforts by Shell, as well as new regulations proposed by the Obama administration last monththat would allow oil exploration in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, with stringent environmental protections.

While the focus has been on unsightly rigs to be parked on the waterfront, Seattle’s attention should also be on the estimated 500 to 700 jobs that will be supported by the lease.

“The City of Seattle needs to decide if it wants to be a global player or to chase away family-wage jobs,” said Paul Stevens, chief executive of Foss Maritime, which holds the Terminal 5 lease to service the Shell rigs.

The lease will also help the Port of Seattle in the pitched battle for future maritime traffic. The two-year lease will generate about $13 million, which could expedite the Port’s plan to renovate Terminal 5 to accommodate behemoth next-generation cargo ships.

In other words, the Shell rigs are short-term parkers.

Efforts to block this new business — including the lawsuit filed in King County Superior Court by a coalition of environmental groups — focus on the Port’s internal processes, which authorized staff to negotiate the comparably small contract.

Those are micro-aggressions against a mega-problem.

The real fight should be over the oil leases themselves, which are issued by the U.S. Interior Department, led by Seattleite Sally Jewell, and for a new national energy policy that better addresses humankind’s role in changing our planet.

Seattle has been the gateway to Alaska since the city was founded. That vital economic link should not be broken for the symbolism of diverting a few oil rigs to another port.

Editorial board members are editorial page editor Kate Riley, Frank A. Blethen, Ryan Blethen, Mark Higgins, Jonathan Martin, Thanh Tan, Blanca Torres, William K. Blethen (emeritus) and Robert C. Blethen (emeritus).

SOURCE

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Alaska, Arctic, Beaufort Sea, Business Principles, Chukchi Sea, Climate Change, Environment, Litigation, Oil, Oil Spill, Pollution, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell,United States.
Tagged: Alaska · Arctic Ocean · Beaufort Sea · Chukchi Sea · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.