Art Not Oil

Climate Change - Shell’s role in one of the biggest threats to biodiversity

As one of the world’s major oil companies, Shell has a significant role in causing - and therefore responsibility for - man-made climate change. Although Shell has gained high profile publicity for its statements on climate change and lobbying of Tony Blair for tougher action on climate change, the company’s own figures tell a different story. Indeed, Shell is explicit about how much fossil fuel it extracts and is in fact aggressively pursuing a policy of increasing the rate of extraction year on year:

In 2005, Shell produced 3.518 million barrels of oil equivalent (boe) per day. Production is expected to grow and reach 3.8-4.0 million boe per day by 2009, which is an increase of between 8 and 13%.
Earnings in Shell’s exploration and production division - the division that explores for and extracts oil - increased by 45% in 2006.

Also in 2006, Shell added 160,000 square kilometres of exploration acreage to its portfolio, with new exploration licences in 14 countries and says it “will pursue an exploration programme to add more new acreage”.

Meanwhile, Shell’s investment in renewable energy amounted to $1 billion between 2001 and 2006. This may sound impressive, but an investment of $15.6 billion in production and refining in 2005 alone puts it into context.

Climate change was described by the Natural History Museum in its exhibition The Ship as “one of the most pressing issues of our time”. This is a view that concurs with that of leading politicians, including our own Prime Minister, and of leading scientists.

Average global temperatures have risen by 0.6°C since 1900. The ten warmest years on record have occurred in the last seventeen years. Climatologists say these increases in global temperature can best be explained as the impact of man-made pollution and predict that if urgent action isn’t taken average global temperatures could rise by almost 6ºC by 2100.

Temperature increases of this scale would have a devastating effect on animals and plants around the world.  A study, published in ‘Nature’ in 2004, of six wildlife-rich parts of the world suggests that a quarter of land animals and plants, altogether one million species, could become extinct if average global temperatures rise by just 2ºC. The authors used computer models to simulate how the ranges of 1,103 species - plants, mammals, birds, reptiles, frogs, butterflies and other invertebrates - are expected to move in response to changing temperatures and climate. They also assessed whether or not animals and plants would be able to move to new areas. They concluded that 15 to 37 per cent of all the species in the regions studied could be driven to extinction by the climate changes likely between now and 2050.
 
Computer models also suggest that large areas of tropical moist forest, the most bio-diverse habitat in the world, could turn to savannah as a result of man-made climate change. The Amazon region is expected to suffer a particularly sharp warming and a large decrease in rainfall, and the Hadley Centre warns that the region would be able to support only shrubs or grass at most.
 
The full impact of forecast climate change on UK wildlife is unclear. The Environment Agency is already talking of beech woods dying and heaths burning due to hot dry summers. Many of Britain’s most special animals and plants, such as the Snow Bunting and Snowdon Lily, are confined to high mountains and could be crowded out if lowland species spread higher due to the warmer weather. Others may be unable to move in response to a changed climate because they are hemmed in by built-up areas or farmland. Already, there is clear evidence that spring is arriving earlier here. Trees, such as oak, are coming into leaf, and birds, such as chaffinch and robin, are breeding earlier in the year than previously. Also, some common butterflies, such as the peacock and comma, have extended their ranges northward.
 
An impact of climate change that can be predicted is sea-level rise. The warming of the oceans expands the volume of water, causing levels to rise around the world. Melting of glaciers and ice caps on land adds to this. Britain’s mudflats, salt marshes, shingles and sand dunes are all at risk. These are home to special flowers such as the oyster-plant and internationally significant populations of migratory birds, including oystercatcher, knot and redshank. They are particularly vulnerable because many abut sea defences that prevent their spreading inland.

Direct Impacts - Shell projects’ impact on wildlife, communities & ecosystems

Although Shell has a commitment not to drill for oil and gas in natural World Heritage Sites, it continues to explore and operate in protected and sensitive wildlife areas. Shell is involved in many projects around the world which are directly threatening and damaging wildlife, as well as blighting the lives of people who live alongside them. Here is information on three of the most current and pressing cases, (though there are many, many more):

Sakhalin II, Russia

Environmental campaign groups including Campaign Whale, Environmental Investigation Agency, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace UK, International Fund for Animal Welfare UK, Marine Connection, Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, and WWF UK have warned that Shell’s Sakhalin II project off the coast of Sakhalin Island, Russia, is in grave danger of pushing the Western Pacific Grey Whale into extinction.
The project significantly adds to the pressures on the critically endangered Western Grey Whale. Only around 100 of these creatures remain, with just 20 breeding females. Their summer feeding grounds are in the vicinity of the off-shore oil and gas platforms and associated pipelines. Risks created by the project include the threat of oil spills (including in frozen seas), noise from construction and ship collisions.
Shell’s mitigation measures for protecting the whales are woefully inadequate and the company chose to ignore scientific advice and continued with construction of an off-shore platform base in summer 2006. This was despite the concerns of an independent scientific review panel set up to work with Shell and resulted in one panel scientist resigning in protest.

County Mayo, Ireland

‘Small Family Farms, Big Oil Interests: The small, sparsely populated farming community of Rossport in North Mayo County is a beautiful, unspoiled part of Ireland’s western seaboard. Since 1996, the discovery of the Corrib gas field off the nearby coast has brought a group of committed activists from Rossport into the public eye as they oppose the construction of Shell Oil’s illegally-approved pipeline through their land.
Leading this fight is Willie Corduff, a lifetime resident of Rossport who still lives on the farm passed down to him by his father. The proposed pipeline would cut directly through Corduff’s land, jeopardizing the delicate bog ecosystem and threatening both the safety of Rossport’s citizens and the local farmers’ way of life.
Shell Oil planned to start production in 2003, bringing the toxic, unrefined gas ashore at Rossport via a high pressure pipeline stretching six miles to a refinery to be constructed in neighbouring Bellanaboy. Despite objections by many Rossport citizens, Shell was granted permission by the Irish government to run the pipeline across the property of more than two dozen farmers and landowners. By granting Shell permission to construct the pipeline, the Irish government violated federal environmental and development laws requiring local participation and review.
In response, Corduff and his neighbors began a grassroots campaign to rally the support of his fellow Rossport residents in challenging the pipeline. In June 2005, after refusing Shell access to their property, Willie Corduff and four other men were jailed. Known as the “Rossport Five,” they were released after spending 94 days in jail. Protests ensued throughout western Ireland and since their release, the campaign to stop the pipeline and refinery has continued, with hundreds of people joining in the protests at the Shell refinery site, forming blockades. Due to these efforts, construction on the pipeline has been halted. In August 2006 Shell agreed to re-route the pipeline, although the changes are said to be minor and the new route is yet to be publicized. However, in October 2006, Shell broke ground on the refinery in Bellanaboy, making it clear that the pipeline project will continue despite daily protests at the construction site, where state supplied police guard the gates.
(Text from http://www.goldmanprize.org/node/605)

September ’08 update:

The world's biggest pipe-laying ship, the Solitaire, arrived in Mayo, triggering retired local teacher Maura Harrington to begin a hunger strike, which she was able to end 9 days later when the Solitaire left Irish waters. Local fisherman Pat O'Donnell was arrested whilst trying to defend his lobster pots, which were in the path of the ship. He was in the process of taking legal action against Shell as he has the right to leave his pots there. For an interview with hunger striker Maura Harrington, see:
http://jasonnparkinson.blogspot.com/2008/09/county-mayo-at-war-with-shell-over.html

Arctic National Wildlife Refuge - Shell acquires leases

In March 2005, Shell acquired rights to explore for oil off the coast of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is truly one of America’s last wild places. It contains no roads, trails, or structures and is a pristine habitat which supports large populations of caribou, muskoxen, all three species of bear, wolves, dall sheep, and snow geese. Thousands of migratory birds inhabit the Refuge.

Drilling in or transporting offshore oil through the coastal plain of the Refuge would be ecologically damaging. The coastal plain is the biological heart of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The U.S. Department of Interior estimates that oil and gas drilling in the coastal plain would result in major adverse impacts to the vast Porcupine River caribou herd, damaging or displacing up to forty percent of the herd. Development would threaten denning areas for polar bears and disturb the fragile ecosystem of the coastal plain, which also serves as crucial habitat for musk oxen and at least 135 bird species that gather there for breeding, nesting and migratory activities.

Similarly, drilling off the coast of the Arctic Refuge would threaten the habitat of the endangered bowhead whale. Offshore drilling creates loud industrial noise, and ice and ice flow make it difficult if not impossible to clean up oil spills. Bowhead whales cannot detect oil in the water and therefore cannot avoid contaminated areas.

Update, November 2007:

‘Shell is the only company that has been investing hundreds of millions of dollars to open up for oil exploration the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas of the American Arctic, endangering marine ecology and the indigenous Inupiat culture. This year I wrote a 14-page declaration as part of a major lawsuit filed by conservation groups and indigenous communities against Shell Oil and The United States Department of the Interior. We miraculously won this case in the 9th Circuit Court of San Francisco, a resounding victory stopping all Shell operations for this year in the American Beaufort Sea. But it is only the beginning of a long struggle - Shell is not only spending money, but also hiring some of the most influential people in politics, including Gale Norton, once George W. Bush’s environment minister.’ This comes from acclaimed photographer and campaigner Subhankar Banerjee, who has worked extensively in the area, (www.subhankarbanerjee.org)

Nigeria's gas profits 'up in smoke' by Andrew Walker, BBC News, Nigeria, 13.1.09

The latest deadline set by the Nigerian government to stop flaring natural gas from oil wells in the Niger Delta has passed without stopping the flames, which campaigners say are poisoning local people.
"Sometimes you can't tell whether it's the dawn breaking or the flame," says activist Vivian Bellonwu, the frustration clear in her voice, after seeing nothing change despite the 1 January target.
"It's a history of shifting goal posts, missing deadline after deadline".
Everyone agrees gas flaring wastes billions of dollars in useful gas.
Campaigners say it causes huge environmental damage and according to doctors, it is responsible for causing chronic health problems among people who live in the Delta.
But the government and the oil companies are blaming each other.
"It's all insincerity from the government and the companies -they're destroying lives and livelihoods," says Mrs Bellonwu.

Blighted

Nigeria flares the second largest volume of gas of any producer, behind Russia.
Communities who live near Nigeria's more than 1,000 onshore well heads are blighted by gas plumes that rise from the ground, spreading toxic smoke and chemicals over their farms.
Social Action, the organisation Mrs Bellonwu works for, has been representing the communities who live near the many gas flares that light up the watery marshland and mangrove swamps of the Delta.
"When you approach a gas flare, the first thing you notice is the heat, the villages around the flares are all very hot."
The flames also light up the sky 24 hours a day, and the noise that comes from them is a continuous roar like a jet aircraft taking off.
She says doctors have reported higher rates of cancer, children with asthma and a suggestion the burning gasses may be making residents infertile.
"The smoke in some places is overpowering. It can't be good."
Royal Dutch Shell, the largest operator of onshore wells, has not commented on the claims that gas flaring affects the health of local residents.

Not profitable

Nigeria's onshore oil production started in the 1950s.
As the oil comes up through the well head, it emerges with little bubbles of gas.
But until the 1980s with no way to store or transport it, there was little market for natural gas produced in Nigeria.
The operating oil companies simply burned it off.
Since then the price of gas has risen, transportation techniques have developed and drilling technology has improved allowing more oil, and consequently more gas, to be drawn through a single well.
Now experts believe Nigeria is burning billions of dollars of gas from its aging wells, letting potential profits go up in smoke.
Even more ironically, campaigners say, the biggest need for that gas is in Nigeria.
Nigeria is in the grip of a power generation crisis and the gas that is being burned could go a long way towards providing the electricity the country desperately needs in order to develop its economy.

Blame game

The government and the oil companies agree they want to end gas flaring.
Shell says it has reduced the amount of gas flared by more than 30% since 2000.

Some links you might find interesting and, with any luck, inspiring:

www.artnotoil.org.uk/gallery/v/Shell/ - for Shell’s Wild Lie online. The site also hosts the online Art Not Oil galleries from the last three years. Art and culture playing its part in the very necessary dismantlement of the oil industry!

www.shelloiledwildlife.org.uk - spoof site set up by London Rising Tide

http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/corporates/case_studies/shell/index.html -
Friends of the Earth UK’s take on Shell, ‘Wildlife Destroyer of the Year’

www.shellfacts.com - Shell’s neighbours tell the truth about the company

www.WiwavShell.org 

www.carbonweb.org - PLATFORM’s authoritative fossil fuel resistance resource

www.remembersarowiwa.com - keeping the spirit of Ken Saro-Wiwa alive

www.corribsos.com - Shell to Sea, County Mayo, Ireland

www.struggle.ws/rsc - Supporting Shell to Sea in resisting Shell’s plans for County Mayo

www.groundwork.org.za - groundWork, South Africa, campaigning for environmental justice

www.gcmonitor.org - polluted communities fighting back

www.eraction.org - Environmental Rights Action, Nigeria

www.risingtide.org.uk - helping build a movement for climate justice across the UK

www.climatecamp.org.uk - the crew that took its summer holiday in 2007 at Heathrow Airport, and its 2008 holiday at Kingsnorth coal-fired power station in Kent, also happens to be a thriving UK-wide network committed to taking direct action to save the climate

www.permaculture.org.uk - get your hands in the ground and plant the future!