Thanks to everyone who took part in the Shell webchat. We’ll be analysing Shell’s responses over the next few days, so watch this space!
If you were involved, please add your thoughts as a comment below.
The background
Thanks to you, and the hundreds of messages you sent to Shell via Twitter, we got them listening.
Shell agreed to host a webchat on their site Shell Dialogues about the Niger Delta. We took this opportunity to ask tough questions about Shell’s human rights and environmental practices in the Niger Delta.
We pulled together a bunch of information, from key facts all the way through to our full report to help you ask some hard questions, like “Will Shell commit to cleaning up all oil spills in the Delta?‘
Full Report (PDF) | Summary (DOC)
NEW: 20 questions Shell won’t answer (DOC)
Find out more about our campaign
Shell seem to be blaming everything on militant groups, without accepting any responsibility for what is going on. No doubt they’ll go on about how complicated everything is
I think it’s really important that we ask questions that put them on the spot about committing to clean up the Niger Delta. If they don’t answer we can take it as their refusal to address the problems, and if they do, well, great!
The Earth does not belong to us,
We belong to the Earth.
Chief Seattle
Get your act together Shell the worlds watching!
You are happy to extract oil and make massive profits
Now its payback time-sort it out.
Dont just do this for public image,do it because you care!
Ken Robbins.
GRATITUDE FROM SHELL
Wouldnt it be great if Shell got their act together and gave peolple t shirts in the area with this slogan
Then do the right thing
Really no need to explain they know!
Take the hell out of Shell.
Ken.Glastonbury.
Dear friends, I have today sent these questions to Shaun Wiggins at the Shell communications dept in preparation for tomorrow’s web dialogue. I am not sure that I will be able to log on to the web dialogue due to another commitment, but anyway Shell is aware of the questions. Best wishes, Simon Pirani.
Questions to Shell re. Nigeria
1. Umuechem.
I put to you that the situation in Umuechem, Rivers State (popn 10,000), is a concrete example of the failure of Shell’s various initiatives in the Niger Delta (“corporate social responsibility”, “community relations” etc) aimed at improving relations with local people.
Shell has produced a substantial quantity of oil in the Umuechem area over the last several decades. However, certainly up until 2003 and to my knowledge until today, the community has no fresh running water, no hospital and lacks other basic amenities.
In October 1990, under military rule, following a disputed series of events at the Shell flow station near Umuechem, security forces were called to protect Shell installations. These forces killed 80 people and destroyed 495 homes. An inquiry held under the dictatorship recommended the payment of compensation, but up to 2003 none had been paid.
In addition, Umuechem has been the scene of spectacular failures of Shell’s “corporate social responsibility” projects. In 2002 the Centre for Social & Corporate Responsibility, an NGO linked to various Ecumenical NGOs based in the UK, reported that a programme of community projects had been a “100 per cent failure”.
I visited Umuechem in 2003 and observed that six “community projects” funded by Shell, and two funded by the Niger Delta Development Corporation (i.e. a water supply system and a hospital), were not operational. I observed that because the water supply system was not operational, women from Umuechem spent much of their time walking to and from a polluted stream nearby, the only available water source. I also observed a gas flare near the village.
I had visited Nigeria on behalf of the UK charity Christian Aid, and information that I compiled on Umuechem was included in a published report (see Christian Aid, Behind the Mask (2004), pages 24-26). Shell indicated at that time that it was negotiating an agreement with the Umuechem community that would include the provision of fresh water.
In 2006 the German parliamentary deputy Ute Koczy visited Umuechem and reported that the hospital had “never opened” and that the gas flare continues to burn.
I have been in email correspondence with NGO representatives in the Niger Delta this month. They said that to their knowledge the situation in Umuechem had not changed, i.e. fresh water supply is still not available.
My questions are: Do you think this reflects well on Shell’s policies? Why is fresh water available to the Shell flow station employees at Umuechem but not to the villagers? What is your comment on the lack of fresh water, hospital services and other amenities in an area that produces so much oil and suffered so horribly under the dictatorship?
2. Oil spills and pipeline management.
It is obvious that many of the most serious problems between the oil companies and communities in the Niger Delta arise from oil spills. These in turn raise the question of pipeline management.
You are no doubt aware of the recent report by Professor Richard Steiner of the University of Alaska, comparing Shell’s practices in the prevention and mitigation of oil spills with international standards and practices.
Professor Steiner shows that the rate of spills from Shell Nigeria’s pipelines are significantly higher than e.g. those across Shell companies internationally. He concludes that “Shell Nigeria continues to operate well below internationally recognised standards”, and in particular that Shell Nigeria’s pipeline integrity management “is not consistent with international standards of API and ASME”.
Among the more striking of the many facts he mentions are that Shell did not begin a comprehensive programme of corrosion inspection until 2005, that in 2007 the pipeline replacement programme was far behind schedule. What are the reasons for this? Can you comment on the obvious incompatibility between these breaches of standards and Shell companies’ policy of applying best international practice in all companies of operation?
Professor Steiner refers to the lack of transparency in pipeline integrity management. As a recognised expert on pipeline management, he requested copies of the Shell Nigeria Oil Spill Contingency Plan, the Joint Operating Agreement and the Shell Nigeria Asset Integrity Review. The company has refused to provide him with these documents. How does this square with the company’s professed transparency principles?
What is your response to Professor Steiner’s call for a thorough independent analysis of the standards of pipeline integrity in its Nigerian operations?
Simon Pirani
Senior Research Fellow
Oxford Institute for Energy Studies
Dr Simon Pirani,
Senior Research Fellow,
Oxford Institute for Energy Studies,
OIES web site: http://www.oxfordenergy.org
Shell impacts positively on the Federal Government of Nigeria with loyalities and other rent collected by the Government. Shell impacts positively on its Shareholders’ with handsome dividends. But impacts negatively on Niger Delta; People and Environment. The people are impoverished – dislocated from their traditional occupations of fishing and farming because of the degraded environment from oil spills – through exploration and exploitations by Shell and sister companies. Niger Delta is bleeding gradually to eventual death; can the international community help and can the Shell Shareholders’ listen and act. Shell has the capacity to turn things around in the Niger Delta, if the Company choose to behave responsibly. Shell attitude of not responsibly addressing negative impacts of oil exploration brought about militancy in the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria.
What are you going to do about the issue of gas flaring?
As a Shell customer, I would like to ask you a question regarding the welfare of the localities (people and environment) of the oil fields and processing areas for your products. Do you take or intend to take full responsibility for leaving these places better than or at least in as good condition as you found them? If so how will you do this?
Yours sincerely,
Louise Brookes
(I have emailed this as suggested)
In November 2005,a high court sitting in Benin city Nigeria, delivered a landmark judgement in a case between Shell and Jonah of Iwherekhan community in Delta state, against continuous flaring of gas in Nigeria. Why has Shell continued to flare gas even when this judgement has never been challenged? Also on Thursday, 2nd July, 2009, Nigerian Senate passed a bill that ends gas flaring by December 2009, what is your comment on this?
Among the many demands of the Ogoni people in Nigeria, was that Shell pays for what they call “35 years of oil theft” from their land. In one of his many speeches, Ken Saro-Wiwa urged the Ogonis to demand for this money as precondition for commencing further oil exploitation in Ogoni. When will Shell pay this money?
At present, what is the proposed structure of the Kiisi Trust (to which the recent settlement money will be directed)? Is there a model for this kind of undertaking in Nigeria? How will progress be measured?
Shell’s purpose includes the statement: “We aim to work closely with our customers, partners, and policy-makers to advance more efficient and sustainable use of energy and natural resources.” Was it a conscious decision not to include other stakeholder groups (employees, communities, etc.) in this statement?
Aside from the settlement money, how much of Shell’s community development contribution ($240 million in total, $82 million from Shell in 2008) has directly benefitted the Ogoni? What programs have been implemented?
Is the continued use of Ogoni land for pipelines a point of contention with the Ogoni? Does Shell directly compensate the Ogoni for this right to operate?
Sustainable economic growth in Nigeria depends on economic diversification (promoting manufactured exports and supporting agricultural development). Shell can’t necessarily set Nigerian economic policy, but it has already contributed millions to small businesses and job training. Has Shell considered increased investment in cleaner biofuels and green technology in the Delta?
I have just sent them the following questions:
Will Shell commit to stopping all gas flaring in the Niger Delta?
Will Shell commit to conducting reports into the human rights impact of their work in the Niger Delta and ensure this is made available to local and international communities?
Will Shell commit to acting to stop all oil spills in the Niger Delta promptly, followed by a swift and thorough clean up?
Clean up your act! Message from Ceri Jones, Anglesey!!!!
Why don’t you inform the communities on the impacts of oil operations
in the Niger delta?
Why don’t you clean up oil pollution?
I was stuck by this sentence in the ‘Independent’ on 1 July: “Independent auditors estimate that up to 13 million barrels of oil have been spilt in the Delta, an amount equivalent to an Exxon Valdez disaster every year for 40 years”. What steps are Shell taking to clean up the environmental pollution caused by what seem to be lower working standards than those that operate in the UK?
An oil spill occurred at Kira Tai in Ogoniland on 12 May 2007. What steps have been taken to clean up the pollution caused and have the communities adversely affected received any form of compensation? Why has Shell ignored the investigation’s finding that corrosion was the cause of this spill?
My message for Shell was :
First of all, thank you for accepting this web chat.
I have always wondered : have you ever thought of the consequences of some of your activities, like polluting the living place of thousands of people?
Like the example given in the montly journal of Amnesty France :
burning gas => air pollution => acid rains => health problems + deterioration of soils for agriculture.
Don’t you think it is YOUR responsability?
Dear Bjorn
I would like to discuss the following question
How often do you remind your majority partner in Nigeria to honour its commitments to “mitigate any negative inputs from your joint activities” (Shell Business Principle 6)?
I look forward to the discussion this afternoon
Why is Shell not disclosing the information they have related to assessment of the environmental, social and human rights impacts of all oil and gas projects in non-technical language?
Communities likely to be affected by oil operations should be given information on health and environmental risks as well as meaningful access to regulatory and decision-making.
Hello,
I hope that yourselves, Shell, understand that value of such public consultations as this. We are not crazy anti-Shell activists, but people who are aware and concerned about the real problems which exist as a result of your corporate strategies.
Could I ask, how seriously do you take the extremely well described/researched issues in the Niger Delta as a consquence of your exploration and extraction of the natural resource? I ask because the lack of real recompense and investment to the area for the people who are genuinely suffering, portrays you in extremely bad light. Do you genuinely not feel that truly addressing these issues would benefit your company profile and mark you as responsible idustry leaders?
Yes, those are corporate selfish reasons to address the real suffering, but I am pragmatic enough to realise you won’t do anything without it being self-beneficial to yourself.
Thanks for your time and I hope we have a constructive inetraction at 14:00.
Cheers
Andy
Why does Shell find it impossible to admit it is one of the principal contributors to pollution and human rights abuse in the Niger Delta?
Why won’t Shell disclose information on the negative impact of their oil operations in the Niger Delta, such as volume and location of oil spills, to local communities and those living with the results of their operations?
Why does Shell continue to gas flare in the Niger Delta, despite court rulings demanding that it stop and it being ruled illegal?
Why does Shell resist compliance with the demand to stop gas flaring in Nigeria when it has stopped in other countries?
Why does Shell put profits earned in the Niger Delta before fulfilling its responsibilities to own up and clean up the part it has played in polluting the Niger Delta?
Why won’t Shell disclose information such as social and environmental impact assessments in non-technical language to communities covered by the assessments?
With billions of pounds available to it why won’t Shell, in conjunction with the Nigerian government, clean up its oil spills and waste in the Niger Delta?
Why won’t Shell seek genuine independent oversight of its operations in the Niger Delta?
Why won’t Shell live up to its business principles in the way that it runs its operations in the Niger Delta?
Why won’t Shell undertake a comprehensive clean-up of oil pollution in the Niger Delta, in consultation with affected communities, and report on this publicly and regularly?
Why won’t Shell ensure that all contractors are fully aware of its policy on human rights, environment and gender issues, and are given training to ensure they act in accordance with these principles?
When starting a new project in the niger Delta why doesn’t Shell ensure that the affected community is fully aware of the project, is able to participate in a social and human rights impact assessment, and is given full information on the project any other relevant data held by Shell?
Shell is currently constructing an experimental pipeline through a residential area in Co. Mayo, Ireland. The local residents object to this, and as such, there has been a campaign against Shell. Shell has retaliated by employing security forces from right-wing eastern european groups, fishermens boats have been sunk, and locals attacked by masked ’security’. Does Shell condone these practices from it’s subcontractors?
Per section 3.2 of the Amnesty report about damage to fisheries, How do you respond to the UN FAO statement that, “Oil pollution further complicates the scenario, with the devastation of aquatic life in the area”?
It’s perhaps a small thing when compared to the human rights abuses, but it illustrates why so many Nigerians are angry. It’s not just that their oil is being taken without fair recompense – its also the poisoning of their country, which is hurting people and making their lives more un-livable.
Sorry I can’t make the chat myself. I’ve got work commitments. Glad you all will be there.
I have two questions:
1. What is Shell’s view on the way that the Chinese National Oil Companies are now operating in Nigeria (with respect to Corporate Social Responsibility)? Are there any discussions between the NOCs and the IOCs re the collaborative development responsibilities of oil companies?
2. In a rentier state environment, where (very simplistically) the state becomes separated from its civil society, and therefore does not achieve development at the rate that it should with the funds that it has, should the oil companies, as supplier of those funds take on the responsibility for development (e.g provision of health care, utilities, and education)?
Can you explain your level of implementation of the Voluntary Principles
on Security and Human Rights (VPs)and its impact at the community level in
the Niger Delta?
What is Shell’s position on the military attack on ordinary citizens in the
creeks of the Nger Delta?
What is Shell doing to ensure that the Nigerian Government respect, protect
and fulfill her obligation under international human rights instruments and
international humanitarian law, including her constions and legislations on
human rights as regards the people in the creeks of the Niger Delta?
How does shell explain the fact that, there is always conflict in all the
areas of its operations in Nigeria?.
Shell says it wants to look to the future. What, specifically, will it do to address what’s happened in the past and to restore people’s faith in Shell going forward?
Has the site of the oil spill in Bodo Creek, which, according to the Bodo community, took place on 28 August 2008, been cleaned up yet? According to the Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industriy in Nigeria, issued by the Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR), clean-up should commence within 24 hours of the occurence of the spill. These government guidelines also stipulate that for all waters ‘there shall be no visible sheen after the first 30 days of the occurrence of the spill no matter the extent of the spill’. TShell reports that they were informed of the spill on 5 October 2008, but the leak was not stopped until 7 November, and by May 2009 the site had still not been cleaned up. This delay has caused even more dire environmental consequences – the Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development reported that ‘the creek is dead’ on viewing the damage caused – damage recorded by video footage they took. Children report lesions and sore eyes from the creek water. Why, then, has Shell not taken further action to fully clean the site?
Shell team member 1
We’re getting a few off-subject questions on fuels, on Shell activities in European countries, etc. We’ll not respond to those now, but will pass them on to our appropriate colleagues so they can get back to you.
I also adressed them about how or whether they will clean up the water supplies affected by their pollution which they did not answer, other than as a general answer to my other questions. Their answer was always about how much money they have put in (which is a drop in the ocean from what they get out) and the programes etc they have done, and how they work with the government but they didn’t ‘answer’ to my satisfaction. Understanding that the oil industry has plans well into the future ( buying oil fields which will be ready in twenty-fifty years time) I can see they have only the intention to do what they can to minimise risks to health (environmental and physical), but that they will not have this as a priority, their priority will always be profit as that is the nature of business. they have been acting with impunity for fifty years, can we stop this? Yes.