Multinational oil companies such as Shell, Chevron, Eni, Total, Addax-Sinopec and Exxon Mobil, and the state owned NNPC continue to flare gas 24 hours a day, seven days a week, causing environmental damage as well as health and human rights impacts for local residents. Shell has flared gas for over five decades and according to official statistics, is still among the worst offenders, along with Exxon-Mobil, Chevron and Eni. 

Platform gave its analysis of flaring trends to IRIN. The IRIN report also quotes Nnimmo Bassey from Environmental Rights Action / Friends of the Earth Nigeria and Shell official Tony Attah, who blames the problem on militancy and claims that gas flaring will “take a few more years to end”.

NIGERIA: Gas flares still a burning issue in the Niger Delta

DAKAR/PORT HARCOURT, 8 March 2012 (IRIN) -

Despite longstanding laws against gas flaring – the burning of natural gas during oil extraction – in Nigeria, and shifting deadlines to end the practice, the activity continues, with serious health consequences for people living nearby.

In the Niger Delta, where most of the flaring takes places, residents living near gas flares complain of respiratory problems, skin rashes and eye irritations, as well as damage to agriculture due to acid rain.

They are also forced to live with constant noise, heat and light that can lead to sleep deprivation which can degenerate into systemic insomnia. Since flaring involves carbon dioxide and sulphur outputs, in the longer term the heart and lungs can be affected leading to bronchitis, silicosis, sulphur poisoning of the blood, and cardiac complications, said a Port Harcourt doctor, Nabbs Imegwu.

“Extreme long-term exposure can predispose one to, or cause, skin cancer,” he added.

Continue reading here.

According to reports in This Day, it could take 30 days before Chevron drills a relief well to put out the fire. In this video, Chevron Nigeria’s Executive Director Supo Shadiya refuses to provide even an estimate of when the disaster will end:

“I can’t give you a guess as to when we will be able to put out the fire.”

Chevron’s casual attitude towards the ecological impact of the disaster has been widely criticised. Chevron has dismissed local environmental concerns:

“There’s no known scientific basis to really talk about damage to the environment.”

However, the dead fish washing up on the nearby beach is one indication of a potentially serious environmental impact from the explosion and fire. Locals also report that 82 people have been poisoned from eating contaminated fish. There is an urgent need for independent and transparent monitoring of the disaster.

Chevron says it is providing “food” to the local community in Bayelsa State. Yet this is a poor substitute for proper environmental management and mitigation measures.

“NEITI does not see the rationale for passing a bill that is designed to reduce government revenue from petroleum operations by a minimum of $3 billion annually through inappropriate and unfavourable adjustments to the fiscal provisions,” the agency said in a statement.

“Sadly, the House of Representatives Report establishes fiscal terms with a government share of oil revenues below internationally competitive levels and with a structure that will result in a rapid erosion of government petroleum revenues during the next 5 years.”

Here’s some background to the story.

This chart shows the split of revenues under Joint Venture oil agreements in Nigeria. Oil companies claim costs, (often at inflated rates) and cash flow (C/Flow), while the government claims Tax, Royalty and NNPC cashflow.

The PIB, presented to the National Assembly in2008,  is Nigeria’s attempt to re-structure its embattled oil industry, primarily to resolve long-standing funding issues and incorporate NNPC, the national oil company. However, the Bill has been subject to substantial mission creep, and could eventually affect a wide range of issues from fiscal terms, gas flaring to host community rights.

Earlier drafts of the PIB included a proposal to increase in the taxes and royalties due to the state, (known as state “take”). Oil companies such as Shell, Exxon Mobil and Chevron have fought long and hard to defeat such an increase in taxes. Anne Pickard, the top Shell executive in West Africa, boasted of infiltrating government ministries, and spoke of using the US Embassy as a “silver bullet” to kill off offending terms in the PIB. Companies argued that the increase in taxes would make Nigerian oil industry uncompetitive, and drive business elsewhere. Uncertainty over the new fiscal terms in the PIB was said to be blocking $60 billion in oil investment.

In a country dependent on oil for 85% of total government revenues, oil companies wield immense power and influence. Under such pressure, lawmakers at the House of Representatives are now proposing to downgrade Nigeria’s tax regime below internationally competitive rates. Far from increasing taxes on oil companies, they now plan to drop taxes even lower.

For those following the oil industry, it’s a familiar story. A host country attempts to change the rules governing its oil industry to increase the state share of profits from its natural resources. Deals signed under dictatorship or occupation, are seen in the cold light of day to be unfair and exploitative. But multinational companies unanimously oppose any changes. Heavy political  lobbying, scare tactics and histrionics follow, with companies claiming that even minor increases in the state’s take will lead to the industry crumbling and a massive exodus of foreign investors.

Ultimately, when the rules do change and the taxes on oil companies rise, everybody returns to business as usual and profits remain high. The exodus never seems to get off the ground so long as there’s crude oil beneath it.

Raymond Anyadike, a professor of climatology at the Department of Geography of University of Nigeria, Nsukka, told journalists on Thursday… that acid rain could only fall within the Niger Delta region because of the huge quantity of sulphuric dioxide and methane in the air as a result of gas flaring.

“The government should direct oil companies to embrace gas re-injection in which gas is capped instead of flaring,’’ Anyadike advised.

Gas flaring creates thick plumes of smoke across the Niger Delta region, releasing over 250 identifiable toxins, and contributing more CO2 to the atmosphere than the whole of sub-Saharan Africa combined. The question of who should pay for the widespread environmental and health costs of gas flaring is yet to be determined. Some communities in Nigeria have lived beside flares for over three decades, and many people have no choice but to use water that is contaminated by acid rainfall and other pollutants to drink and bathe.

Professor Anyadike, who is one of the founders of the Nigerian National Committee on Climate Change, also warned that climate change is inducing freak weather patterns in Nigeria that could disrupt this year’s harvests.

Shell, the largest oil company in the region, continues to deny that the wasteful practise of gas flaring is linked to anything but the slightest environmental damage. Nick Wood, Vice President of Communications at Shell says:

The World Bank has reported that the environmental and health significance of gas flaring in the Niger Delta was low. Any negative effects of flaring are confined to the immediate vicinity of the flare and will have little or no impact on the health of the local populations.

Local communities and environmental rights groups including activists from the Ogoni people have long been calling for an end to gas flaring as one of the major grievances against oil multinationals such as Shell and Chevron. Thus far, the oil companies have made little progress, blaming a lack of funding on the Nigerian government, which is a partner in the joint-ventures.

Gas flaring has been outlawed in Nigeria since 1984, but it is currently cheaper for oil companies to pay the insignificant fines than to invest in stopping the practice.

Oil contracts signed secretly in Uganda and exposed by PLATFORM will allow major oil companies to flare gas with impunity in the country’s Lake Alberta region on the border with Congo. As the New York Times reports:

“Production is going to start in 2010 with no environmental assessment having yet been carried out,” said Platform’s researcher in Uganda, Taimour Lay. “Once we move to major production, the legal rights given to the companies to flare gas will lead to pollution, carbon emissions and local conflict, as has happened in Nigeria.” Mr. Lay added, “Under these Ugandan contracts, the government won’t even have the right to ask them to stop flaring.”

“There are no provisions for fines or penalties in the event of an oil spill or other problems,” Mr. Lay said. “This is extraordinary given that companies will be operating in one of the regions with the greatest biodiversity in Africa.”

The contracts, known as Production Sharing Agreements, were kept secret until they were leaked to PLATFORM, and analysed in a new report produced by the Civil Society Coalition on Oil in Uganda.

Read more coverage of the report’s findings on the BBC News website and visit PLATFORM’s Carbon Web project for the full press release and further analysis.

‘Shaping the Future’: a PLATFORM residency programme of art, activism and education launched with a fiery spectacle at 5pm on Tuesday 10^th November at the Stephen Lawrence Centre in Lewisham, London. ‘Shaping the Future’ is led by the arts and ecology group PLATFORM, and speakers at the launch included the Mayor of Greenwich, Doreen Lawrence, (mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence), and Maria Saro-Wiwa, (widow of the Nigerian writer and activist Ken Saro-Wiwa).

The ground breaking Living Memorial to Ken Saro-Wiwa lit up the night sky with a burst of fire, to highlight the ongoing campaign to stop oil companies, in particular Shell, flaring gas in Nigeria.

The Living Memorial takes the form of a two-tonne steel Bus, created by Sokari Douglas Camp CBE. It is the centrepiece of a new, year-long PLATFORM residency at the Stephen Lawrence Centre, that commences in 2010 and aims to inspire young people to learn creative ways of campaigning for change through workshops and collaborations with established global artists.

Doreen Lawrence of the Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust said, “Stephen Lawrence dreamed of becoming an architect, and making a positive impact on his community and the wider world. The Trust aims to empower young people to change their communities, both locally and globally. We are delighted to welcome the arts and campaigning group PLATFORM to take up a residency that will promote global awareness about environmental and social issues, and explore the vital role of creativity in bringing about social change.”

Ben Amunwa from PLATFORM said, “The oil fields of Nigeria are notorious for decades of pollution and toxic gas flaring on a massive scale. Fourteen years ago Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight others were executed for their campaigning against those gas flares. We now know that gas flaring in Nigeria affect us all, by destroying the global climate. We are launching ‘Shaping the future’ to keep alive the struggle for justice, and to inform young people about their role as global citizens and about responding creatively to these urgent issues.”

For the past few months, the Nigerian military has waged war on the Niger Delta in a desperate attempt to restore Nigeria’s faltering oil production, which has almost halved due to security concerns.

Tuesday 15th September is due to be the last day of the ceasefire observed by MEND, the main group of insurgents in the oil-rich Niger Delta. The Federal Government’s amnesty for militants expires on 4^th October, and beyond it the prospects for a peaceful resolution to the crisis will be remote unless the long-standing grievances of the region are addressed.

Daniel Volman, director of the African Security Research Project writes in a new blog, Niger Delta Rising:

It is clear, that the Nigerian government is getting ready to mount a massive military offensive in the Niger Delta…Despite all the firepower and sophisticated weaponry that it has acquired in recent months, there is no reason to believe that this offensive will be any more successful in bringing the insurgency to an end than any of its previous military operations.

Evidence of the Nigerian government stockpiling arms includes recent international deals with Israeli, Malaysian, Singaporean, Dutch, and Russian companies. And some of these lethal imports have been paid for by Shell Nigeria’s largest business partner and shareholder, the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation:

The Nigerian Navy also recently procured 35 new machine-gun equipped fast patrol boats in a deal that was paid for by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, reportedly on the instructions of President Yar’adua.

Yar’adua appears to be preparing for a major civil conflict, despite admissions from retired Nigerian General Victor Malu, that there is no military solution to the Niger Delta crisis.

While the crisis is complex, much of the blame falls on the multinational oil companies and their accomplices, the Nigerian Government. Village communities are infuriated by the many broken promises and ongoing neglect and undevelopment of the Niger Delta region, which provides the bulk of the nation’s wealth. As Volman points out:

Most members of MEND say that the government’s amnesty was not made in good faith and that they have no confidence that that the government will honor its promises to improve the lives of the Delta impoverished residents or to fix the massive environmental damage caused by decades of unregulated oil production.

Decades of pollution and gas flaring by oil companies like Shell, aided by a succession of corrupt Nigerian regimes has left the once fertile Niger Delta one of the worst oil-affected ecosystems on the planet, according to a 2006 report by WWF.

The ongoing Nigerian military offensive in the Delta confirms the unacceptable human cost of Nigerian oil. It means extra-judicial killings, routine human rights abuses, torture and imprisonment for any person the Joint Task Force labels a ‘militant’. The military’s objective is to increase oil production. But military crackdowns do not make the region more secure, nor do they address the injustices of decades of pollution and neglect.

Any oil companies with a serious commitment to human rights would refuse to operate behind such a brutal military shield. The Nigerian government must stop its lethal spending spree, and instead invest in protecting its people from the impact of the oil industry by stopping the gas flares and oil spills that are destroying the Delta region.

As Peter Voser becomes Shell’s new CEO on 1st July, his inbox is already feeling the weight of a 143-page report from Amnesty International, and a critical report from the ShellGuilty coalition. The reports document Shell’s appalling impact on the human rights of oil-producing communities in Nigeria and Shell’s impact on the global climate, respectively. They will make unsettling reading for Shell, the largest operator in Nigeria’s oil fields, and campaigners are urging the company to address the social and environmental injustices occurring daily in the oil-rich Niger Delta.

Audrey Gaughran, author of the Amnesty International report said:

Despite its public claims to be a socially and environmentally responsible corporation, Shell continues to directly harm human rights through its failure to adequately prevent and mitigate pollution and environmental damage in the Niger Delta.

These conclusions back up recent findings of ‘Shell’s Big Dirty Secret’, a report launched yesterday by the ShellGuilty coalition, Friends of the Earth, Oil Change International and PLATFORM. Shell’s operations in Nigeria are marred by persistent oil spills and gas flaring, where the gas that comes mixed with oil is simply burnt off.
One of the disturbing findings of Amnesty’s report is the unmonitored impact of waste water and effluent that Shell and other companies keep dumping in the fishing waters of the Niger Delta. Amnesty International cite a Shell publication that

SPDC’s environmental programme aims to progressively reduce emissions and effluents and discharges of waste materials that have a negative impact on the environment.” Petroleum, Pollution and Poverty in the Niger Delta

Internal Shell documents seen by the authors of ‘Shell’s Big Dirty Secret’ point to a more damaging picture of deception and negligence on the dumping of waste by-products.

Although Shell’s PR documents would say the environment was “central” to its activities, as international pressure grew against the company, the Shell Group lowered its environmental standards. One confidential Environmental Management Audit for Shell Expo, written in June 1994, noted that Shell’s “policy aim ‘To eliminate emissions, effluents and discharges that are known to have a negative effect on the environment’ has been abandoned.” Shell’s audit team said it could be “interpreted as a retrograde step”. Shell’s Big Dirty Secret

The human impact of Shell’s negligence is hard to imagine, but in Audrey Gaughran words:

People living in the Niger Delta have to drink, cook with and wash in polluted water. They eat fish contaminated with oil and other toxins – if they are lucky enough to be able to still find fish. The land they farm on is being destroyed. After oil spills the air they breathe smells of oil, gas and other pollutants. People complain of breathing problems and skin lesions – and yet neither the government nor the oil companies monitor the human impacts of oil pollution.

The high level of toxins in the environment can be traced to gas flaring, which also accounts for a substantial portion of Shell’s colossal contribution to climate change.  Shell refuses to take decisive action to halt this toxic and wasteful practise. At a time when the world needs urgent reductions in carbon emissions, Shell’s impact on the global climate is only set to increase. Under Jeroen Van der Veer, Shell expanded its investment into Canada’s tar sands, one of the most carbon intensive forms of fossil fuel, second only to Nigerian oil.

Shell aggressively increased its position in Canada’s oil sands industry through three major strategic moves. Throughout 2006 the Shell Group began buying out the minority shareholders in Shell Canada. The deal, concluded in March 2007, at a cost of $7.4 billion, put Shell in full control of the group’s most significant oil resource. Shell’s Big Dirty Secret

The upshot is that in years to come, Shell will be producing the most carbon. At precisely the time that the world needs urgent reductions in carbon emissions.

…based on reported total resources – Shell’s production of oil and gas will become the most carbon intense of its peers. It will rise by 85 per cent from today’s figure – an increase markedly greater than its competitors. This sharp rise is due to Shell’s total resources being dominated by unconventional oil [tar sands], as well as Shell’s ongoing reliance on Nigerian crude with its associated gas flaring. Shell’s Big Dirty Secret

When Shell CEO Jeroen Van der Veer retires on 1st July, he leaves behind a legacy on the environment so disastrous that Peter Voser will face enormous challenges in turning the company around. Whether Voser can put a stop to Shell’s trail of destruction in Nigeria and sabotage of the climate depends on our ability to take action and demand change, by sending Voser a strong message.

Environment groups criticize Shell CEO van der Veer for undermining Climate Policies

Brussels, Amsterdam, London, Washington – 29th June 2009

Fresh evidence of oil giant Shell’s colossal contribution to global climate change and its continued investment in carbon intensive fossil fuels has been revealed today in a new report.[1] The report also reveals new internal documents that show that Shell knew of the environmental dangers of gas flaring in Nigeria more than fifteen years ago, but chose not to stop for purely financial reasons.

As Shell’s new Chief Executive, Peter Voser, takes charge this week, Friends of the Earth, Oil Change International and PLATFORM have released new research showing that despite attempts by outgoing CEO, Jeroen van der Veer, to portray a green image, the company has opted for a way forward that is in stark contradiction with the need to reduce CO2 emissions. Shell’s heavy investments in the most carbon-emitting energy sources, such as tar sands, liquefied natural gas and crude oil from Nigeria – which is associated with huge levels of gas flaring – make it the dirtiest of all major oil companies with regard to CO2 emissions.

The three campaign groups call on the EU and the US to stop listening to Shell in discussions of how to tackle climate change. They say van der Veer has personally led lobby efforts in Brussels against improvements to the EU’s Emission Trading System, and threatened to move refineries out of Europe if Shell and other oil companies were made to pay for their emissions.

Paul de Clerck from Friends of the Earth International said: “Shell attempts to paint itself as a sustainable company when in reality it is the dirtiest oil producer of all. It continues to make huge profits but still argues that it cannot afford to pay for effective CO2 reduction measures. The EU should no longer listen to Shell in talks about tackling climate change.”

Since 1996 Shell has promised to stop gas flaring in Nigeria – the biggest contributor to climate change in sub-Saharan Africa. But the company has repeatedly broken its promises and rejected statements by the Nigerian government that flaring should be stopped. Shell refuses to implement the 2011 deadline imposed by the Nigerian government for phasing out gas flaring and is now speaking about a 2013 phase out.

Steve Kretzmann from Oil Change International said: ‘Shell could stop flaring gas in Nigeria for only 10% of last years’ profit for the company. The company’s new head, Peter Voser, has the power to stop gas flaring, spare Nigerians from inhaling deadly toxins, and help to curb climate change in one stroke. The question is: will he?”

Today’s report, ‘Shell’s Big Dirty Secret’, comes after a global backlash against the energy giant’s abuses of human rights and the environment. On June 8, Shell was forced to pay $15.5 million to settle an embarrassing lawsuit in the US for human rights abuses in Nigeria. The company is also facing legal action in The Hague concerning repeated oil spills which have damaged the livelihoods of Nigerian fisherfolk and farmers.

CONTACT:

Belgium: Paul de Clerck, Friends of the Earth International:
+32-494-38-09-59 or paul@milieudefensie.nl

Netherlands: Anne van Schaik, Friends of the Earth Netherlands,
+31-20-5507387, +31-6-21829589, anne.van.schaik@milieudefensie.nl

U.S. (DC): Steve Kretzmann, Oil Change International, +1-202-497-1033;
steve@priceofoil.org

U.K. (London): Ben Amunwa, PLATFORM, +44-207-357-0055, +44-7891-454-714,
ben@remembersarowiwa.com

NOTES:
The report, ‘Shell’s Big Dirty Secret’ is available HERE.

# # #

Visit www.ShellGuilty.com for more information. The ShellGuilty campaign is a global coalition including Friends of the Earth (www.foei.org), Oil Change International (www.priceofoil.org), and PLATFORM’s remember saro-wiwa project (www.remembersarowiwa.com), with support from environmental and human rights groups in Nigeria, North America, and Europe.

Photos below: Campaigners outside Shell’s headquarters in London make sure Shell staff know their company is on trial. Photos courtesy of Martin Le Santo Smith. Click on the images for a larger version. [Journalists, to download the below photos at high-resolution, click here].