Nigerians seek $1 billion from Shell for oil spills

By Mira Oberman | AFP – Thu, Oct 20, 2011

Re-posted from AFP

A Nigerian tribal king filed a lawsuit in a US court seeking $1 billion from Royal Dutch Shell to compensate for decades of pollution that sickened his people and damaged their lands, his lawyer said.

The suit was filed a day after the US Supreme Court said it will consider a lawsuit accusing Shell of human rights abuses in Nigeria in a landmark case that could make companies liable for torture or genocide committed overseas.

That case will assess the potential liability of corporations — including multinationals with a US presence — under the Alien Tort Statute, a US law dating back to 1789 that scholars say was meant to assure foreign governments that the United States would help prevent breaches of international law.

The latest case alleges that Shell’s Nigerian operations are “well below internationally recognized standards to prevent and control pipeline oil spills” because the Anglo-Dutch company “has not employed the best available technology and practices that they use elsewhere in the world.”

It cited a recent United Nations report that found that contamination was widespread in the Nigerian Delta after 50 years of oil extraction left groundwater badly contaminated and the soil soaked with hydrocarbons to depths of five meters.

The suit was brought on behalf of the people of Ogale in the Eleme local government area, where the UN team found the most serious groundwater contamination and people drinking water laced with cancer-causing benzene at 900 times World Health Organization guidelines.

Scientists found an eight centimeter layer of refined oil floating on the groundwater that served the wells. The oil was linked to a spill that had occurred six years earlier and was not properly cleaned up.

Full article

photo credit: © Kadir van Lohuizen/NOOR

From the website of Amnesty International: http://blog.amnestyusa.org/business/shell-accused-over-misleading-figures-on-nigeria-oil-spills/

Amnesty International Press Release
For Immediate Release
Thursday, August 4, 2011

Amnesty International, Responding to United Nations Report on Disastrous Oil Pollution in Nigeria, Demands Accountability from Shell Oil Company

Reposted from Amnesty International

Urges Institutional Investors to Urge Shell To “Clean Up Its Act” in Niger Delta

Contact: Suzanne Trimel, 212-633-4150, strimel@aiusa.org

(New York) – Amnesty International said today that Shell oil company has had a disastrous impact on the human rights of people living in the Niger Delta and must be held to account.  The organization was responding to a United Nations report – the first of its kind in Nigeria — on the severe and widespread effects of oil pollution in Ogoniland in the Delta region.

The report from the United Nations Environment Program is based on two years of in-depth scientific research. It found that oil contamination is widespread and severe, and that people in the Niger Delta have been exposed for decades.

“This report proves Shell has had a terrible impact in Nigeria, but has got away with denying it for decades, falsely claiming they work to best international standards,” said Amnesty International Global Issues Director, Audrey Gaughran, who has researched the human rights impacts of pollution in the Delta and is the author of a groundbreaking 2009 report, “Petroleum, Pollution and Poverty in the Niger Delta.”

The U.N. report, which was conducted at the request of the Nigerian government and paid for by Shell, provides irrefutable evidence of the devastating impact of oil pollution on people’s lives in the Delta – one of Africa’s most bio-diverse regions.  It examines the damage to agriculture and fisheries, which has destroyed livelihoods and food sources. One of the most serious facts to come to light is the scale of contamination of drinking water, which has exposed communities to serious health risks. In one case water was found to contain a known carcinogen at levels 900 times above World Health Organization guidelines. The U.N. Environment Program has recommended emergency measures to alert communities to the danger.

“This report should also be a wake-up call to institutional investors. In the past they’ve allowed Shell’s public relations machine to pull the wool over their eyes, but they will now want to see the company cleaning up its act in the Niger Delta – that means putting real pressure on Shell to avoid spillages, compensate those already affected and disclose more accurate information on their impacts,” said Gaughran.

The report reveals Shell’s systemic failure to address oil spills going back many years and  describes how sites that Shell claimed were cleaned up were found by UNEP experts to be still polluted.

Full press release

Shell accepts liability for two oil spills in Nigeria

By John Vidal

Wednesday 3 August 2011

Reposted from guardian.co.uk

Oil giant faces a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars following class action suit brought on behalf of communities in Bodo, Ogoniland

The impact of an oil spill near Ikarama in the Niger delta. Photograph: Amnesty International UK

Shell faces a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars after accepting full liability for two massive oil spills that devastated a Nigerian community of 69,000 people and may take at least 20 years to clean up.

Experts who studied video footage of the spills at Bodo in Ogoniland say they could together be as large as the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska, when 10m gallons of oil destroyed the remote coastline.

Until now, Shell has claimed that less than 40,000 gallons were spilt in Nigeria.

Papers seen by the Guardian show that following a class action suit in London over the past four months, the company has accepted responsibility for the 2008 double rupture of the Bodo-Bonny trans-Niger pipeline that pumps 120,000 barrels of oil a day though the community.

Ogoniland is a small region of the Niger delta which threw out Shell in 1994 for its pollution but then saw eight of its leaders, including the writer Ken Saro-Wiwa, executed by the government.

The crude oil that gushed unchecked from the two Bodo spills, which occurred within months of each other, in 2008 has clearly devastated the 20 sq km network of creeks and inlets on which Bodo and as many as 30 other smaller settlements depend for food, water and fuel.

No attempt has been made to clean up the oil, which has collected on the creek sides, washes in and out on the tides and has seeped deep into the water table and farmland.

According to the communities in Bodo, in two years the company has only offered £3,500 together with 50 bags of rice, 50 bags of beans and a few cartons of sugar, tomatoes and groundnut oil. The offers were rejected as “insulting, provocative and beggarly” by the chiefs of Bodo, but later accepted on legal advice.

Shell’s acceptance of full liability for the spills follows a class action suit bought on behalf of communities by London law firm Leigh Day and Co, which represented the Ivory Coast community that suffered health damage following the dumping of toxic waste by a ship leased to multinational oil company Trafigura in 2006.

Many other impoverished communities in the delta are now expected to seek damages for oil pollution against Shell in the British courts. On average, there are three oil spills a day by Shell and other companies working in the delta. Shell consistently blames the spills on local youths who, they argue, sabotage their network of pipelines.

“The news that Shell has accepted liability in Britain will be greeted with joy in the delta. The British courts may now be inundated with legitimate complaints,” said Patrick Naagbartonm, coordinator for the Centre of Environment and Human Rights in Port Harcourt.

Full article

From our friends at Platform and their Remember Saro Wiwa program:

remember saro-wiwa UNEP Report: Analysis & action Following coverage in The Guardian today of UNEP’s outrageous decision to “exonerate” Shell over oil spills in Nigeria, we present analysis of this controversial issue. Read on and take action below. Global Outrage at UN Report The UNEP’s report is in direct conflict with local environmentalists and communities who have witnessed and monitored spills for many years. We take a look at the manipulative PR and politics behind Shell’s ‘exoneration’. Read more. What’s Shell & UNEP Trying to Hide? Any child educated in Nigeria knows that oil was discovered in Oloibiri, Nigeria in 1956, and that the history of oil spills is almost as long. So why does UNEP think otherwise? Read more. More Harm Than Good? There are some things the debate over oil spills in Nigeria cannot change. Shell must clean up all oil spills. But the UNEP could undermine the pressure on Shell to take action. Read more. Take Action You can help hold Shell to account: email Mike Cowing , (head of the UNEP study) and cut and paste the following questions. Please personalise, share and add your own views. 1. Why has the UNEP decided to echo Shell’s widely disputed analysis of the number and causes of oil spills in Ogoni? 2. How does UNEP justify announcing its findings on the causes of oil spills when this is not the subject of the study? 3. Why does UNEP claim that oil spills in the Niger Delta have been occurring for only 9 years? 4. What guarantees can UNEP give that its study will not be subject to undue influence from either Shell or the Nigerian government, since both are funding the project?

Read the reaction to UNEP’s report on JINN ally website remember saro-wiwa

By Ben Amunwa on August 24, 2010

Today Amnesty International joined the chorus of disapproval and outrage at UNEP’s decision to clear Shell of all responsibility for oil spills in Nigeria. UNEP has been widely criticised for recently using Shell data to announce that the company is only 10% responsible for the causes of oil spills.

“Relying on these figures would be a serious misjudgement, with potentially significant ramifications for those living in the Niger Delta,” said Audrey Gaughran, Director of Amnesty International’s Global Thematic Issues Program. “UNEP must be aware that the figures have been strongly challenged for years by environmental groups and communities. They are totally lacking in credibility.”

Amnesty went on to highlight how UNEP’s use of Shell data raises serious anomalies:

Between 1989 and 1994 Shell itself estimated that only 28 percent of oil spilt in the Niger Delta was caused by sabotage. In 2007 Shell’s estimate had risen to 70 per cent. The figure now given by Shell has increased to more than 90 per cent. Amnesty International has repeatedly asked Shell to produce evidence to support these figures. Shell has been unable to do so.

Friends of the Earth International, the worlds largest network of environmentalists, also condemned UNEP’s uncritical announcement of the disputed Shell data. Nnimmo Bassey, chair of Friends the Earth International and director of Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria said:

We monitor spills regularly and our observations often contradict information produced by oil companies and Nigerian regulatory agencies. If the UNEP team would ask community monitors it would avoid falling into the trap of spinning Shell’s figures. The UN assessment is being paid for by Shell so we are not surprised that it tells Shell’s version of the facts. But the reality is that several studies have placed the bulk of the blame for oil spills in the Niger Delta on the doorsteps of the oil companies; particularly Shell.

Link to article on .

Read JINN ally Nnimmo Bassey’s powerful piece from the Guardian UK on the UNEP report financed by Shell:

Report blaming 90% of spills in Ogoniland on locals stealing crude from pipelines allows companies to shirk responsibility

Outrage at UN decision to exonerate Shell for oil pollution in Niger delta

Nnimmo Bassey
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 25 August 2010 15.13 BST

Oil leaks from the Shell flow station in Eriemu, Nigeria Oil leaks from a Shell flow station in Nigeria. The claim that pipelines have been sabotaged is particularly attractive to oil companies. Photograph: George Osodi/AP

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is preparing to issue a report announcing that 90% of the oil spills in Ogoniland, Nigeria, are caused by the locals stealing crude from pipelines – and that Shell’s aged pipelines and ill maintained installations account for a mere 10% of the spills. Why so little, we might ask?

The UNEP has now admitted this figure is based on data from the oil industry and the Nigerian government. It’s not surprising that this is in line with what Shell used to claim in the 1980s – that about 80% of the oil spills were caused by vandalism or sabotage. This claim that infrastructure has been sabotaged is particularly attractive to oil companies, because they are then exempted from paying compensation for any resulting spills. Why accept responsibility for polluting the locals’ creeks, swamps and farmlands and destroying their livelihoods when you can blame the very same people for the mess now coating their own backyards with a toxic gloss?

Yet crucial expertise which could have painted a very different picture was sidelined. Prof Richard Steiner, an international expert on oil spills, was contracted to write the manual on oil damage assessment and restoration by the UNEP in 2004. But when Shell hired the agency to carry out the present study, Steiner’s offer to provide scientific advice and guidance to the Ogoniland report was declined.

Steiner has already said that the findings now uncovered are incorrect, and has gone on to say: “Our earlier results suggest that much of the oil spilled there was due to poor practice by Shell, rather than bunkering and sabotage… it is entirely implausible that 90% of the oil spilled was due to bunkering [the act of criminal gangs stealing oil].” In short, his opinion is that this is not an independent, credible assessment.

The report does indeed rely heavily on figures produced by oil companies and Nigerian state statistics rather than on testimonies from those most affected – the communities in Ogoniland.

The National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency of Nigeria has reported a total of 3,203 oil spills in the Niger Delta region in the last four years alone.

That list lengthens every day. The records of the Nigerian Directorate of Petroleum Resources show that nearly 2.5m barrels of crude oil were spilt between 1976 and 1996. Most damning of all, 77% of this oil was not recovered and contaminated the local environment. This is an environmental catastrophe which has a long history – some notable past spills include the Escravos spill of 1978 in which 300,000 barrels of crude oil was spilled into the coastal waters and another, in the same year, caused by tank failure at Forcados Terminal in which 580,000 barrels were spewed into the environment.

It is in this polluted environment that the people of Ogoniland have had to live for decades with spill after spill. The UNEP must be, and be seen to be, an independent arbiter of what has really happened there. There should be no room for suspicion that the $10m (£6.5m) Shell paid the agency for this report will influence the outcome.

Nnimmo Bassey is chairman of Friends of the Earth International