Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ellisonz

(27,711 posts)
Sun Mar 11, 2012, 05:34 AM Mar 2012

For a Shell Executive, Much Head-Scratching Over U.S. Energy Policy

March 9, 2012, 4:00 pm
By CLIFFORD KRAUSS

Europe is generally considered greener than the United States, but its oil executives certainly share American oil executives’ enthusiasm for drilling.
Peter Voser, chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, in Houston.ReutersPeter Voser, chairman of Royal Dutch Shell, at the conference in Houston.

I caught up with Peter Voser, the chief executive of Royal Dutch Shell, this week at the IHS Cera annual energy conference in Houston, and he gave me an earful about what he characterized as America’s lack of direction when it comes to having a national energy policy.

Royal Dutch Shell is getting closer to winning approval to drill in Alaska’s Arctic waters after several years’ and more than $4 billion worth of efforts. But for the Swiss-born executive, it is bewildering to watch the Obama administration withhold approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry crude from oil sands in Canada to refineries on the gulf coast. (Shell is a big investor in the Canadian oil sands.)

Nor does Mr. Voser understand why there is no consensus on embracing the development of natural gas from new shale fields through hydraulic fracturing (Shell is also a global leader in gas production.)

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/for-a-shell-executive-much-head-scratching/?partner=rss&emc=rss


Legal Strategy Taken by Shell Is Rarely Successful
By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: March 4, 2012

WASHINGTON — The oil giant Shell filed suit in federal court in Alaska last week against a dozen environmental groups, employing a rare — and rarely successful — legal gambit in an effort to pre-empt anticipated legal challenges to its plans to begin exploration in the Arctic Ocean this summer.

Was the unusual maneuver an act of bravado, even desperation, by a company fearful that it might be thwarted again in its efforts to begin drilling in the seabed off Alaska’s North Slope?

Or was it, as Shell contends, a mark of confidence that the company had finally put in place a plan that could satisfy all the legal, regulatory and environmental requirements to start exploiting one of the last great untapped oil and gas reservoirs in North America?

--------

“We just got the spill plan and are reviewing it,” said Whit Sheard, a lawyer for Oceana, one of the environmental groups named in the Shell lawsuit. “It’s based on technology that doesn’t exist and on faith that a spill won’t happen. What we’ve seen in the Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea, of course, is that spills do happen.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/us/shell-files-pre-emptive-lawsuit-over-alaska-drilling.html


1. Will Shell prevail in it's preemptive legal attack against the environmental community?

2. Will Shell get to drill in the Chukchi Sea (due North of the Bering Strait)?

3. Is Shell CEO Peter Voser being sensible in stating "China’s energy policy is much clearer” or is this statement absurd in comparison to the United States?

4. Do you trust the Obama administration to fairly evaluate these issues? Do you approve or disapprove of the President's energy policies?

5. Do you think the Deepwater Horizon disaster and its implications are receiving enough attention this election cycle?

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
For a Shell Executive, Much Head-Scratching Over U.S. Energy Policy (Original Post) ellisonz Mar 2012 OP
The answer to all of your questions is 'no' Owlet Mar 2012 #1
Neither Deepwater nor Fukushima are receiving enough attention. nt bananas Mar 2012 #2
So emphatically NO jsmirman Mar 2012 #3
We're like an addict needing their next fix. n/t ellisonz Mar 2012 #4
Kick. ellisonz Mar 2012 #5

Owlet

(1,248 posts)
1. The answer to all of your questions is 'no'
Sun Mar 11, 2012, 07:45 AM
Mar 2012

Leopards don't change their spots, and multi-national corporations don't change their ways of doing business.

Evening Post (New Zealand): 3 September 1938, page 26

"A life of Sir Henri Deterding has been written by Glyn Roberts, and to this biography, which is published by Convici Frieda, of New York, he has given the title of “The Most Powerful Man in the World.”

<snip>

Foreseeing the role that oil was to play in the world, he is 'the oilman whose major policy is to conserve reserves abroad while draining those of the United States-for which he is well loved by the British Admiralty.'

We are also told that he finances Hitler, backs Franco, and admires Mussolini. He is the man who, although still a Dutch citizen, is a major factor in the foreign policy of the country upon which the peace of’ the world depends -Great Britain."

http://royaldutchshellplc.com/1938/09/

jsmirman

(4,507 posts)
3. So emphatically NO
Sun Mar 11, 2012, 09:16 AM
Mar 2012

Deepwater should have shut this crap down for a decade.

It seems like a testament to how fucked up our politics are that it was merely a "speed bump" to offshore drilling and has been accompanied by new environmental disasters, like fracking-caused earthquakes and pipeline spills.

It's got to be great to suddenly live in an earthquake zone because politics dictated that this would all be a great thing.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»For a Shell Executive, Mu...