Corrib Gas Go Ahead Granted to Shell

by karen fallon Sat Nov 13, 2004 21:05

It is disgusting that SHELL are getting away with this. Apart from causing more instability in the bog/ marsh area (especially as there has already been a lanslide!), this developement will destroy the irish western marine enviroment. There will be a rapid decline in marine life and the waters will become even more polluted.
SHELL also has a terrible reputation in many places due to the heavey handed manner in which it treats the local communities, sometimes resulting in one or more deaths on the civi side.
This shamefull act of greed and hypocrypsy of the irish government will destroy life in a most obscene manner and must not be tolerated.

by pete Sun Nov 14, 2004 19:55

I think its great for an area with high unemployment and for the economy of the country, the more gas we use the less oil,and oils getting way too expensive, the OBJECTORS, well if they were around when the wheel was invented they would most definately have objected, its very easy for the dublin 4 and cursties to preach but they dont give a shit about the local people in north mayo and what they might want, the objectors buy their holiday homes and immediatley set obout objecting to everything, yet they forget real people with lives to lead inhabit these areas and want progress and oportunity. The west has been neglected since the state was founded and its because of people like the objectors who only have themselves in mind

by john paul Mon Nov 15, 2004 19:17

agreed with peter,bad as shell are in nigeria if it means jobs for the west coast and revenue for the state then it can only be good news

by Terry Mon Nov 15, 2004 22:23

Do people actually bother to read what they are commenting on (one) article detailing the objections of locals and (two) article detailing the lack of jobs, revenue, etc... from the cushy deal Shell are getting.

by john paul Mon Nov 15, 2004 22:26

but im pretty certain when things happen like this development then related industries will certainly pop up,the bmw region as a whole badly needs developments like this

by Rachael Wallace Fri Nov 19, 2004 07:54

I am sorry to read of the newly approved refinery on your coast. I am a resident of the greater San Francisco Bay (California, USA) area where the breast (and other) cancer rates are among the highest in the world. This in the area of the U.S. with the greatest emphasis on healthy eating, exercise and weight control!

It is now a widely accepted theory here that the inflated cancer rates are a direct result of the long-term pollution effects from the refineries.

I encourage any concerned citizen to oppose this project in whatever way he can.

Please see the articles in the following links for more information.

http://www.womensfoundca.org/basupp10_7.pdf

by barry Fri Nov 19, 2004 19:29

I think its a disgrace that our natural resources are being plundered by foreign capitalists. If the free-state govt had a swinging pair of balls between the lot of them they would nationalise this gas project immediately for the benefit of the Irish nation, not some gang of multi-national robbers.

Why should Irish people have to pay through the nose for their own natural resources to a gang of multinational scumbags who are going to take not only our resources but the profits made out of this country.

A nations sovereignty extends to its natural resources and wealth making processes.
No doubt Shell paid for this in a brown envelope.

I look forward to a cell of the Baader-Meinhof faction emerging on the west coast and teaching the thieves from Shell a much needed and much overdue lesson.

Remember Ken.

by Maura Harrington - none Tue Dec 21, 2004 15:37 maurah.ias at eircom dot net Doohoma, Ballina, Co. Mayo 087 9591474

It is incredible that some of the people can be fooled ALL of the time!
There will be NO long term jobs for local people and there will be very few short term jobs either for the following reasons:
Shell are NOT the employers; the construction contracts with SIAC, Allseas etc. would be filled by the companies OWN crews - that is the nature of things, skilled workers from all over Europe fill these jobs and Shell don't give two damns who does it as long as it's completed in the minimum time and the contractor takes the blame when Carrowmore Lake becomes a giant silt pond.
I refuse to accept the stupid comment that 'objectors' are taking the bite out of local peoples mouths; it wasn't Maura Harrington who was to blame for generations of emigration from Erris - it was the neglect and contempt of successive governments who, when industrial jobs would have made a difference to so many families, left Erris out of the reckoning because they didn't have meas mhadaí on it or its people.
The same contempt still reigns - the despicable suits now think that Erris and North Mayo are ideal for jobs in the Dirty, Dangerous and Diseased sectors.
Dream on suits.....

by clem Wed Jan 19, 2005 14:51

we have given away the gas now lets let them polute our bays and waters , where have all the real politians gone . clem

by redjade Fri Jan 21, 2005 00:08

Shell consider court injunction
http://www.mayonews.ie/current/news.tmpl$showpage?value1=3315140596560272

AFTER trying unsuccessfully to persuade landowners to allow them access through their lands, Shell E & P Ireland may have to seek a court injunction to access land for the Corrib Gas pipeline.

Talks with local landowners over access to the land broke down at the week-end.

The company is now examining a High Court injunction as one of the few options remaining to it after attempts at friendly persuasion were unsuccessful.

by John D Etherington Wed Feb 02, 2005 19:39 jdetherington at eircom dot net Keelogues Old, Ballyvary, CASTLEBAR 0949031552

Most of the points raised on the website are not valid.
Fishermen will not suffer - most sub-sea development attracts fish, fishermen also receive attractive compensation packages and are involved in the construction.
Burning peat creates more pollution than burning gas. Burning peat creates '00's square miles of depleted bog, try flying over Mayo, Roscommon and other counties which feed the polluting peat burning stations which are still being built. Build them now before Katyo qualification seems to be the plan.
The government in the last four years through its bodies such as BGE have spent some €700 million of your money to date on this and other gas projects. Divide by about 4 million to see how much you have already paid. The scheme is called Gas 2025.
By the way Shell purchased Corrib from Enterprise.

Best regards,

John E

by J Cashin Tue Feb 15, 2005 14:48

Get your facts right before you publish. "Massive Refinery" NO, it's a gas processing/conditioning facility, you won't see large refining towers! By all means voice concerns and ask quality questions. We all care.

by *** Thu Jun 30, 2005 01:15

i would just like to say that it is not only the people of ballinaboy and rossport that should be up in arms about this but also the people of erris, these strangers have come in here taken over our place and now think that they can turn our natural beauty in to discust. the high flyers from dublin and shell have no right to tell us we are safe, they dont no that and we certinally dont no that. it is so dangerous and scarey for young and old.
shell have no consideration for peoples lives, homes or families. we wait and wounder as shell flood our town with money, paying off those who are to weak to speak out, what is our childrens lives going to be like is it going to be another national disaster.

by Terry Thu Jun 30, 2005 13:00

Just to remind readers that we should all recall that it was Ray Burke and Bobby Molloy (with I am sure a little bit of help from others) who gave away our natural resources to the oil companies and signficantly lowered the royalities / taxes that they would have to pay.

From the article in the URL below it says
:
"Ray Burke, against the advice of senior officials in his department, held a meeting on his own with the oil companies after which the terms and conditions previously attached to licenses were changed dramatically in favour of the companies".

See ref 'Burke blamed for Corrib Gas giveaway' at
http://republican-news.org/archive/2002/December05/05corr.html

But there's more; Bobby Molloy (I think he was elected in Mayo??) helped greatly in the giveaway too, as according to: "The Great Oil and Gas Rip Off" at http://republican-news.org/archive/2002/March14/14grea.html
said:

"In 1992, Bobby Molloy, after being lobbied again by the oil companies, reduced the oil/gas tax rate to 25%, the lowest in the world. 100% write -offs were introduced for the oil companies and so-called "Frontier Licenses" were introduced that allowed the oil companies up to 20 years to hold a license on a particular offshore block, i.e. a designated drilling location."

But there's more.... In Norway the oil companies have to pay 78% tax compared to the almost nothing here.....

"In the 2001 Budget, 25% Corporation Tax was reduced to 16.5% which will finally be reduced to 12.5% at the behest of the oil industry! Norway`s oil/gas rate is 78%, with a 7% royalty rate. There is a 50% automatic state stake in any discovery. The oil companies have to use Norwegian jobs, goods and services. The oil companies must also contribute to an oil savings fund for future generations of Norwegian people. And the oil companies still find worth their while to operate in Norwegian waters!"

Tell that to the people in Mayo and elsewhere!

by Dismayed Sun Jul 17, 2005 09:37

Having just read a Sunday Independent article regarding the issue of death threats to Shell and Statoil contract employees, I am appalled and shocked at these actions.

How dare these people issue such threats to people. It is sad to see that some Irish people are locked in a time warp. The quest for a proverbial ''cause'' continues in Ireland with this issue. The Rossport Five being so-called martyrs to this particular progress halting cause.

Being an Irishman and working in an oil and gas environment, on contract to Shell, believe it or not! I am very dismayed at the very particular Irish habit of halting progress. Having worked in this industry for 19 years I am well aware of hazards associated with gas production. I can guarantee that no Company, even Shell wishes to put any life at risk. I can also guarantee that the safety measures put in place on this project would be substantial. Nothing would be left to question.

Come on people, wake up and ''smell the coffee'', people in Scotland have had buried North Sea gas pipelines in their back gardens since the 70's for Christs sake!!! There has been no incidents, no leaks and no bloody hazard!!

This halt of progress using threats of mindless violence by bored, backward yobs does not make good for Irelands future as a place of investment by multi-national companies (the reason why our present economy is so buoyant).

by Smidín Céille Sun Jul 17, 2005 22:58

With all due respect to your knowledge and experience, the people of Scotland have not been living with a pipeline of the pressure range of the proposed upstream pipeline in Rossport for years as you suggested in your comment. This pipeline is totally unprecedented in many ways. Moreover, it will be installed in an area of unstable bog, and there were catastrophic landslides in the area almost two years ago, in September 2003. I think that slightly increases the risks.

I am disappointed when you talk of halting progress - you should define what progress is, before you start attacking people for "halting" it, as you suggest. If you are talking about providing employment to the local people, you are wrong there. There will be no substantial posts provided, and those that will, will hardly be available to the local population. If you are talking about bringing money into the area via the money which outside workers will spend, again you are wrong. The workers mostly stay outside the area and are brought in every day by minibus, thereby contributing nothing to the local economy. If by progress, you mean that Bord Gáis (taxpayers) will be building a pipeline which will ensure that the people of Galway and Ennis will have gas in their homes, while people in Mayo, who will be taking all the risks in this project, receive no gas, then you may be right. "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" seems to me to be the crux of your argument.

Furthermore, did you not notice in the Sunday Independent article today that the only source who cited intimidation of Shell workers which was named or cited was Shell E&P Ireland itself? It was like reading the National Enquirer - "a source close to Julie Robert said...." etc. This article is a disgusting attempt to undermine the real fears and concerns which the people of Erris have. It's just comic journalism and I'm surprised that you would take it seriously. A college student would be failed if they presented an essay that lacked evidence or references to such an extent as this. Also note, that in the Shell E&P Ireland statement released to the Sindo, that the type of intimidation described was not of the type or level which the Sindo took it upon itself to print on Page 1 and again on Page 2. Brilliant propoganda, where the author can say what he or she likes, be it true or not, but by using the passive voice can avoid taking responsibility for it. A brilliant device, but hardly a new one.

The only people who are being intimidated here are the local people, who have had Compulsory Acquisition Orders issued against them, forcing them to hand over their land to a corporation (not to the State). This is daylight robbery. Also being intimidated are the people who are now behind bars, and their families, and whom the judge threatened with the compensation of all their assets, for taking a stand about the health and safety of the people. This has nothing to do with progress; no-one had any interest in investing in or in the development of the area before. It is quite clear that they thought they could just dump this project on the area and that they would get away with it. I could refer to the proposed plant for the processing of asbestos which they tried to push through in Killala nearby, but that would take too long...

by * Mon Jul 18, 2005 00:33

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=70888

by Mr Reality - Informed Oil & Gas Professional Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:47

Dear Terry,

I wish to correct you on your comments and investigate further the technical justification behing your supositions;

1. "Shell have been given permission to build a massive refinery" - WRONG - it is a gas terminal, NOT a refinery. In simple terms, gas comes in, gas is dryed and compressed and then it leaves said gas terminal
2. "posing a danger to the local community from landslides..." Just how does a gas terminal, on flat level ground, inside a concrete bund, create landslides?
3. "traffic and water supply pollution, and threatening the marine ecology, including whale and dolphin populations..." Terry, you obviously have no knowledge or experience of the upstream or downstream oil and gas industry with statements like these.

Next please.

by Mr Unreality - Jack White's Shell Watch Sun Aug 27, 2006 15:01

I have no reason to doubt your deep knowlegde of the oil and gas industry. Perhaps you could evolve futher you piont about the differences between a terminal and a refinery Dont think your piont one does any justice to your argument at all

" In simple terms, gas comes in, gas is dryed and compressed and then it leaves said gas terminal"

I could equalling point out that Royal dutch Shell have consistently lied about its accounts, its estamated reserves, have been involved with funding armed groups to suppress localised resisitance to pollution and it one of the worlds biggest and ongoing polluters in the history of humanity

"traffic and water supply pollution, and threatening the marine ecology, including whale and dolphin populations..." Terry, you obviously have no knowledge or experience of the upstream or downstream oil and gas industry with statements like these."

Sorry but peppereing your statement with words like up stream and downstream belies the fact that the above statement is factually meaningless and ultimately dishonest

Try googling the words Royal Dutch Shell Pollution both as web seach and as news

One of the first things you will come across is How the company is refusing to pay a fine of $1.5 BILLION, to to the local IJaw population.

"Royal Dutch Shell PLC skipped a Nigerian court deadline Monday to pay $1.5 billion as compensation for alleged environmental pollution in the country's oil-rich Niger Delta, choosing instead to wait for an appeal court ruling.

A federal court in the country's main oil industry center of Port Harcourt on Friday gave Shell until noon Monday to make the payment to a group of delta communities.

"It will not be appropriate to make the payment since we had appealed against the decision," said Bisi Ojediran, Shell spokesman in Lagos. The company will wait for the higher court ruling before making a payment, he said.

In February, the court ordered Shell to compensate the ethnic Ijaw communities for environmental problems caused by oil operations it runs in collaboration with the Nigerian government, France's Total and Italy's ENI."
Link
http://finance.myway.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt.jsp?section=new...60522

For a more recent court action against Shell for polluting in the USA check out

http://royaldutchshellplc.com/2006/08/26/st-louis-daily...-oil/

“The federal government and Shell Oil are close to settling a lawsuit related to the cost of cleaning up hazardous materials found at the Great Lakes Container Corp. at 42 Ferry St. in St. Louis.
Under the settlement, Shell would pay $228,630 to the Environmental Protection Agency Hazardous Substance Superfund for past and future costs to clean up lead-related contamination.
Shell has 30 days after entry of the consent decree to pay the EPA. If the company fails to make the full payment in that time period, it must pay interest on the unpaid balance as well as a $2,500 penalty for “each and every day that the full payment owed is late.”
The cleanup site was used as a drum reclamation business beginning in 1949. In 1975, the facility was bought by Great Lakes Container Corp., which continued the drum reclamation business until 1985, when it abandoned the facility, according to an EPA fact sheet.
In 1995, a fire alerted officials to the potential dangers of the 11-acre site, and environmental investigations turned up buried drums of hazardous materials, asbestos and high levels of lead and polychlorinated biphenyls, according to EPA information.
According to the consent decree, 61,650 tons of soil contaminated with PCBs and lead was removed from the site as were more than 800 buried drums.”

So as you can see there is more at stake here than the mere clarification of technical specifics. Whilst important, they are certainly no more important that trusn, past experience, democracy and facing the real ‘reality’