ROYAL DUTCH SHELL NEWS......

Royal Dutch Shell News Roundup 25 August 2014

Aug 25th, 2014 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

RUSSIA

Jeroen van der Veer, the former Royal Dutch Shell CEO who evaded responsibility for his role in the cover-up of the Shell reserves fraud, claims that the sanctions against Russia are not working and are counter-productive. This analysis comes from the man who badly misjudged the Putin regime in 2006 and as a result, ended up meekly surrendering Shell’s majority stake in the Sakhalin 2 project. 

• RELATED: Jeroen van der Veer: a candid assessment by Paddy Briggs
• RELATED: Jeroen van der Veer: Hypocrite Supreme

UK

The British government has just introduced a rule requiring oil, gas and mining companies registered in the UK to disclose all payments made to the governments of countries in which they operate. The new rule, which comes into force in 2015, is designed to result in greater transparency, something alien to oil companies such as Shell. Problems may arise in relation to Nigeria where Shell has a decades long history of corruption involving a succession of odious regimes.

AUSTRALIA

Woodside Petroleum boss Peter Coleman has indicated that Woodside will not help Shell reduce its stake in the company. Coleman says there is no plan B and the next move is up to Shell. A recent buyback plan embarrassingly failed to receive shareholder approval so Shell is stuck with its unwanted reduced stake in Woodside. And Woodside is stuck with Shell.

Share this:

• Facebook1
• Twitter2
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Australia, Corporate Governance, Corruption, Gas, GoogleNews, Jeroen van der Veer, John Donovan, Nigeria, Oil, Paddy Briggs, President Putin, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Russia, Sakhalin II, Shell, Shell Oil Reserves Scandal.
Tagged: Australia · Gas · Jeroen van der Veer · John Donovan · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc · Russia · Shell · Woodside Petroleum

Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia?

Aug 25th, 2014 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

“Printed below is an email received from a Mr Bruce Hubbard. Does Shell wish to comment? If you tell me that its is all false, or contains false information, then I will not publish it. If I receive no response within 7 days I will assume Shell does not take issue with the allegations and has no comment to make.”

By John Donovan

I have printed below the content of an email I received from Mr. Bruce Hubbard together with a related email I sent to Mr. Michiel Brandjes, Company Secretary and General Counsel Corporate, Royal Dutch Shell Plc. As can be seen, I gave Shell the opportunity to deny the allegations. I have not received any response. 

EMAIL RECEIVED BY JOHN DONOVAN FROM BRUCE HUBBARD

From: Bruce Hubbard
Subject: Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia
Date: 6 August 2014 04:32:17 BST
To: john@shellnews.net

Corporate crime by Shell, its solicitors and the Government of South Australia.

I destroyed the Shell company right across Adelaide.

Treasurer Stephen Baker shut the lot down.

Shell were asked to return the service station they stole from my father Colin Hubbard and his widow Mrs Lucy Hubbard at 422 Pulteney Street.

In a meeting at Shell office Hindmarsh Square with Leon Holmes chairman’s representative, and Richard Osmotherly “network development” manager, they were demonstrated Shell’s fraud.

Richard Osmotherly found that he no longer had a “network” to develop.

Leon Holmes found himself working at the RAA.

Shell lawyers came into court off the street without summons and took $500 from my mother Mrs Lucy Hubbard, her pension money, thanks to the magistrate.

It cost Shell 10 site closures and more, estimated value and site pollution remediation $10 million.

Estimated revenue loss for Royal Dutch Petroleum for the past 17 years for these 10 sites plus others across Adelaide is well in excess of $1 billion.

You don’t mess with me.

RELATED EMAIL FROM JOHN DONOVAN TO MICHIEL BRANDJES

From: John Donovan
Subject: Fwd: Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia
Date: 6 August 2014 15:51:32 BST
To: michiel.brandjes@shell.com

Dear Mr Brandjes

Printed below is an email received from a Mr Bruce Hubbard.

Does Shell wish to comment?

If you tell me that its is all false, or contains false information, then I will not publish it.

If I receive no response within 7 days I will assume Shell does not take issue with the allegations and has no comment to make.

Yours sincerely
John Donovan

THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SUPPLIED TO ME BY MR HUBBARD WERE ALSO FORWARDED TO MR BRANDJES

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter1
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Australia, Business Principles, Corporate Governance, GoogleNews, Human Rights, John Donovan, Litigation, Michiel Brandjes, Oil, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell.
Tagged: Australia · John Donovan · Litigation · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Shell smashed to bits ......

Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia?

Aug 25th, 2014 

by John Donovan. 

No comments yet

“Printed below is an email received from a Mr Bruce Hubbard. Does Shell wish to comment? If you tell me that its is all false, or contains false information, then I will not publish it. If I receive no response within 7 days I will assume Shell does not take issue with the allegations and has no comment to make.”

By John Donovan

I have printed below the content of an email I received from Mr. Bruce Hubbard together with a related email I sent to Mr. Michiel Brandjes, Company Secretary and General Counsel Corporate, Royal Dutch Shell Plc. As can be seen, I gave Shell the opportunity to deny the allegations. I have not received any response. 

EMAIL RECEIVED BY JOHN DONOVAN FROM BRUCE HUBBARD

From: Bruce Hubbard
Subject: Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia
Date: 6 August 2014 04:32:17 BST
To: john@shellnews.net

Corporate crime by Shell, its solicitors and the Government of South Australia.

I destroyed the Shell company right across Adelaide.

Treasurer Stephen Baker shut the lot down.

Shell were asked to return the service station they stole from my father Colin Hubbard and his widow Mrs Lucy Hubbard at 422 Pulteney Street.

In a meeting at Shell office Hindmarsh Square with Leon Holmes chairman’s representative, and Richard Osmotherly “network development” manager, they were demonstrated Shell’s fraud.

Richard Osmotherly found that he no longer had a “network” to develop.

Leon Holmes found himself working at the RAA.

Shell lawyers came into court off the street without summons and took $500 from my mother Mrs Lucy Hubbard, her pension money, thanks to the magistrate.

It cost Shell 10 site closures and more, estimated value and site pollution remediation $10 million.

Estimated revenue loss for Royal Dutch Petroleum for the past 17 years for these 10 sites plus others across Adelaide is well in excess of $1 billion.

You don’t mess with me.

RELATED EMAIL FROM JOHN DONOVAN TO MICHIEL BRANDJES

From: John Donovan
Subject: Fwd: Shell smashed to bits across Adelaide, South Australia
Date: 6 August 2014 15:51:32 BST
To: michiel.brandjes@shell.com

Dear Mr Brandjes

Printed below is an email received from a Mr Bruce Hubbard.

Does Shell wish to comment?

If you tell me that its is all false, or contains false information, then I will not publish it.

If I receive no response within 7 days I will assume Shell does not take issue with the allegations and has no comment to make.

Yours sincerely
John Donovan

THESE PHOTOGRAPHS SUPPLIED TO ME BY MR HUBBARD WERE ALSO FORWARDED TO MR BRANDJES

Share this:

• Facebook
• Twitter1
• Email
• Print

Like this:

Loading...

Posted in: Australia, Business Principles, Corporate Governance, GoogleNews, Human Rights, John Donovan, Litigation, Michiel Brandjes, Oil, Royal Dutch Shell Plc, Shell.
Tagged: Australia · John Donovan · Litigation · Oil · Royal Dutch Shell Plc

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

FAILON NGAYON..ANAK...AUDIO CLIP

The TRUTH will set you FREE.

Big Frackin’ Deal: The Money...from LA Progressive

Big Frackin’ Deal: The Money

BY JOHN MACMURRAY

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Servic

This is Part III of a three-part series. Go here for Part I andhere for Part II.

It wasn’t that great a movie, but the one line, “Show Me The Money” has become part of our national conversation.

And now it’s “Show Us The Money” time for fracking. And here we find some surprises.

Talking about the money involved in the fracking equation takes us in three directions: the money it costs to do it, the money to be made from it, and the money it costs to clean up afterwards.

What fracking is not:

To be clear about the subject of fracking. Fracking does not exist to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It does not exist to help our State Department so we won’t have to keep sending money to governments who don’t like us. It does not exist to keep jobs, which would otherwise be lost. Fracking exists to make the maximum amount of profit for the oil and gas companies. Period.

Consider: Jobs? Green Energy (wind, solar, tidal, geothermal) creates and sustains more jobs than oil or coal. A recent UC Berkeley report noted that, “Across a broad range of scenarios, the renewable energy sector generates more jobs per average megawatt of power installed, and per unit of energy produced, than the fossil fuel-based energy sector. “

Dependence on foreign oil? The United States produces enough oil and natural gas to export some, but we import far more.

Driving down the costs of energy? Oil and gas prices are dependent on world prices at the time of sale. No guarantees on price.

But first let’s look at the costs to get the oil. They vary, as you would expect. Drilling an oil/gas well in the New Mexico plains runs about $4 to $5 million dollars. An offshore well, depending on how deep it is, can run $500,000 a day.

And as we should all know by now, oil obtained from hydraulic fracturing and from Canada’s tar sands is very expensive oil, and will get more expensive. The reason, simply, is that the best spots have already been exploited. Everything from that point on costs more money.

The phenomenon of Peak Oil:

To understand the rationale and costs connected with fracking, we need to take a quick look at a concept called Peak Oil.

Peak Oil is a concept proposed by Shell Oil geologist M. King Hubbert, back in the 1950s. His mathematical model predicted that for any given geographical area in the world, the rate of petroleum production over time would resemble a bell-shaped curve. So if we measured production volume from the beginning of the drilling to the end, it would start slowly, rising to a peak volume, then decline until the petroleum was no longer cost effective to extract; the well would then be abandoned.

In the United States, according to economists and geologists, we have mostly seen Peak Oil. Any petroleum we get from here on will require drilling deeper, and fracking.

And in the United States, according to economists and geologists, we have mostly seen Peak Oil. Any petroleum we get from here on will require drilling deeper, and fracking. The National Petroleum Council estimated that 60 percent to 80 percent of all the wells drilled in the US will require fracking. And the decline in Peak Oil also means that more wells have to be drilled to get the same amount of oil out.

Return on Investment:

Obviously, the oil companies need to make more money than they’re spending. That’s the Return on Investment (ROI). There is also a factor of EROI (Energy Return on Investment) to consider.

Obviously, it takes energy to make energy. The efficiency of the energy production process is known as the Energy Return on Investment (EROI). It now takes more energy put into an oil or gas well to get the same amount of energy out; EROI has been falling for several decades.It’s worth noting that while the EROI of fossil fuels such as oil, gas, and coal have been falling, the EROI for renewables such as wind and solar are rising; currently they are five to twenty times higher than their fossil fuel counterparts. So what drillers are facing is less oil and gas available, and higher costs to get what they can.

And, now two more revelations enter, just to complicate the picture some more.

Fracking’s true Return on Investment is largely a myth.

This observation comes from Canadian Geoscientist J. David Hughes, who claims that production estimates are historically overestimated; sometimes by governments looking to boost their Gross Domestic Product figures; and sometimes by energy and oil-producing companies looking to attract investors.

Both sides tend to ignore the rate of production (how long will it take to get the oil or gas out), and the world price of petroleum on the day of the sale.

Fracked wells leak.

A lot of wells, leaking a lot.

Nationally, 6% to 7% of the wells leak soon after they’re brought on line. Considering over 100,000 wells in the US, that’s a lot of leaky wells. Further, nearly 50% of the wells will leak during their lifetimes, including those that have been abandoned. Abandoned wells may be no longer any good for making money, but they’re still under pressure. Recall that in 1963, the dam containing the Baldwin Hills Reservoir collapsed, flooding the area below. It killed five people and destroyed 60 homes. Geologists concluded that decades of extraction in the neighboring oil field led to the rupture in the dam. The dam and reservoir were part of what is now the Kenneth Hahn Recreation Area, mentioned in the second part of the story.

The costs to clean up.

This brings in the third factor: cleanup cost. This includes wear and tear on our roads (recall the 400 trucks hauling water and equipment for each well); air, water, and soil contamination cleanup; species extinction; ozone depletion; climate change; treating residents for asthma, cancer, immune system diseases, cognitive deficiencies, and birth defects.

And while the profits from fracking go to the oil and drilling companies, the cost and consequences of fracking are borne by the communities.

So you would think that after putting up with the earthquakes, the mess, the poisoned air and water, the sick people, that fracking is really worth it because we can finally become self-sufficient for the natural gas we need.

You would think. But, the US is still a net importer of natural gas. The Government Energy Information Administration predicts that we will be self-sufficient by about 2017. In the meantime, we import to meet our needs.

And so it seems odd, since we need to import so much, that we export a lot of the natural gas we produce. Last year US companies exported 1,572,413 mcf (million cubic feet) of natural gas, at an average price of $4.06/tcf (thousand cubic feet). After all, the gas belongs to the energy companies that drilled for it, so they can do pretty much what they want with it. And what they are doing is building huge facilities in Texas, Louisiana, and Oregon to liquefy the gas so they can export more of it.

A barrel of oil is 42 gallons, 160 liters.

Same picture with oil. Last year the US imported 11.4 MMbd (million barrels per day) of crude oil and refined petroleum products in 2011. We also exported 2.9 MMbd of crude oil and petroleum products, so our net imports (imports minus exports) equaled 8.4 MMbd.

Are we over a barrel?

So, this is where fracking has taken us. Our air and water poisoned, our houses ruined, and all for the short-term monetary gains for the oil and gas companies, so they can get cheaper oil and gas to sell to other countries.

Leaving us, the taxpaying public, to clean up the mess.

And it does all this behind veils of secrecy and obfuscation, in some cases daring the public to do anything about it. Unless we speak up.

And if we don’t, in the words of David Letterman: “Ladies and gentlemen—we’re screwed!”

More Info:

• Drilling Info: 10 Reasons Fracking Improves American Lives
• California Halts Injection of Fracking Waste, Warning it May Be Contaminating Aquifers
• Energy Return on Investment (EROI) for U.S. Oil and Gas Discovery and Production
• Frackwire: Fracking & well casing failure
• Fracking’s Return on Investment is a Myth
• Investment in renewable energy better for jobs as well as environment
• David Letterman show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGEc8KBKO8I&sns=fb
• U.S. Energy Information Administration: Most of the Petroleum We Use Is Produced in the United StatesNew US
• Energy Secretary will Make a Decision on LNG Exports by December
• Recent Events in the Battle to Export US LNG
• Our Finite World: The Absurdity of US Natural Gas Exports
• U.S. Shale Boom Not Enough to Remove the Threat of Peak Oil
• U.S. Natural Gas Exports by Country

John MacMurray  

The TRUTH will set you FREE.