Shell, gas production, carbon taxes and greenhouse gases...And who pays

by Flynn - agrescon@agrescon.nl Wed Oct 18, 2006 15:11

Great article Hedgehog, you,ve got it in one, its their Oil and Gas, but its Eires responsibility for the clean up, the Fishermen and the Farmers are heading for the Barracade, and we must support them too, as they are the best Custodians of the Land and the Sea, Read Maritime Law it will be Eire that is brought to Book, it will be Eire that will have to clean up the inevitable mess, dont let them turn Old Erin into a Toxic cesspit, Shell is like a Giant Slug you can see where its been. Their profits wil be Banked Offshore in places like the Caymans,the Mauritias, the Channel Islands,there they will hand out Political Funds to the Politicians who do their bidding, supported by their thugs, and of course Sandline, Mark Thatcher,and old Etonians, who have been in the game too long. they wont stop untill the seas are all poisoned,or the fish are dead,or the Earth is a Dessert , and the Politics are all finally corrupted,then it will be too late!. Whoever was responsible should be IMPEACHED! under Maritime Law, Irish Constitutional Law, or even under European Law, and if that doesnt work try International Law, the Hague has just slapped their wrists,Shell only have to call up the Gnomes of Zurich and the fine is paid.Its time that the Judges , The Army. The Navy. The Garda, The Ecconomists, realized its their Constitution Too,and do something about it before the people do, one thing for certain is that its on the cards. Flynn O Flynn

by a plain man Wed Oct 18, 2006 15:34

What paranoid drivel.

Our fishermen have vacuumed our coastal and offshore waters to the extent that the only thing preserving several species of pelagic and coastal saelife is the zoning imposed by Brussels and the draconian laws necessary to enforce fish conservation laws against one of the least environmentally observant sectors of our economy.

On the other hand, Shell is owned, not by robber-barons, but by the pension funds ordinary people depend upon for security in their old age.

Not even 1% of Shell is owned by private trusts or individuals.

The current agitation against the pipeline is a grim and regressive coalition of private land-owners and the trots and other usual suspects who protest against everything.

The victim of this reactionary coalition is the wider community interest and the pensioners who own Shell.

Go out and get a real job.

by Joe Wed Oct 18, 2006 15:57

Not even 1% of Shell is owned by private trusts or individuals.

Bzzzt - Wrong

In fact the largest single shareholder is the Dutch Royal family. It is not clear how much of the company they currently own but in the past it has been as high as 25%.

by Cynic Wed Oct 18, 2006 16:41

God created the prehistoric microscopic sea animals and the forests and jungles whose fossilised remains became oil and coal and allowed human beings evolve so that they had huge brains and no fur which drove them to go look for fuel to burn and keep themselves warm in the first place.

I think we should tax the Catholic Church.

by hedgehog Wed Oct 18, 2006 16:42

So, let me get this straight:
if anyone says anything against shell they are hurting old age pensioners.
That has to be the best one yet!!

by To hedgehog Wed Oct 18, 2006 18:46

.

by The Envoy Wed Oct 18, 2006 19:40

Thought I'd add a couple of things as explanation:

Any gas or oil installation in Europe will come under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, since they generate power and/or emissions of CO2 or other greenhouse gases throuigh combustion.

So this new Erris platform, once it's built, will come under the same law.

Under the EU scheme, each installation has calculated its total emissions of greenhouse gases, and is given a certain proportion of that total (its "cap") in the form of EU Allowances. 1 EUA = 1 mt of CO2 equivalent.

At the end of the year, each installation must surrender as many EUAs as it has emitted tonnes of CO2e.

Most power stations, for example, have been given a lot fewer EUAs than they actually emit in tonnes of CO2 each year.

So those installations have a choice: they can either work/invest to reduce their overall emissions in order to reach their "cap", or they can buy however many EUAs from other installations in Europe to cover their actual emissions.

You can actually download the verified data for every one of 11,500 installations in Europe that have been participating in this scheme since 2005 from the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ets/registrySearch.do
though it's not very user-friendly unless you know what you're looking for.

You can find what the emissions "caps" are for comparable UK oil and gas platforms by looking up the UK's allocation of allowances here: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/tradi...d.htm.

A point about costs to the taxpayer: The EU emissions trading scheme costs some money to administer across 25 (and soon 27) member states. The allowances are handed out for free at the moment to the installations, but it's hoped that one day there'll be auctions each year and every installation will have to pay up front to get their allowances. That cost will end up coming through to us consumers in the form of higher gas and electricity bills; in many cases, it already is.

About methane: yes, methane is 23 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. And yes, methane emissions (as opposed to CO2 ones) are taken into account and multiplied appropriately into CO2 terms.

Kyoto refers to Greenhouse Gases, all of which are measured and espressed in terms of their CO2 equivalent. There are 6 major greenhouse gases that come under Kyoto: CO2, methane, nitrous oxide (296 times worse than co2) hydrofluorocarbons (anywhere from 500-3000 times worse than co2), perfluorocarbons (up to 11,000 times worse) and sulphur hexafluoride (23,500 times!!!!).

Methane is also generated at rubbish tips and landfills, on pretty much every farm, and in coal mines.

Ireland actually has a pretty tough limit on greenhouse gas emissions. Under the Kyoto agreement, Irish emissions can go UP by no more than 13% from their levels in 1990, which is the base year for the whole treaty. (But think of the economic development that's gone on since 1990 and you'll understand why Irish CO2 emissions are already way over that cap!)

The UK has a target of a 12.5% cut from 1990 levels, and it's at around 10-11% under at the moment.

About methane "leakage", which you also mention: methane leakage from pipelines and other infrastructure does offer the opportunity to make savings in emissions (Russia could save million of tonnes of CO2 equivalent by patching up its pipelines, for example). But methane leakage from undersea structures does not count in Kyoto. In fact, Kyoto is considering adopting Carbon capture and storage technology as a way to reduce emissions: by gathering and storing CO2 in oil deposits underland or water, you prevent it from being vented into the atmosphere....

Apologies for the long-winded reply.

by a plain man Wed Oct 18, 2006 23:16

Dear Joe,

Shell used to be called Royal Dutch Shell - about a million years ago....

However, it was not called that because of some supposed ownership by royalty - anymore than the Imperial Tobacco Co. was ever owned by Liz Windsor and her disfunctional family!

The Dutch Royal Family havn't held a shareholding in the company for at least fifty years. Probably never.

Yup. The fact is that Shell and most of the 'evil' multinationals who oppress the poor workers by employing millions worldwide are nowdays owned primarily by huge pension-funds.

Sorry about your misconceptions.

Wealth produced by Shell doesn't just go to pay its employees. Taxes on that wealth, and on the income accruing to Shell workers, helps pay for the dole which supports the fringe protestors who have have the luxury of being able to spend their days protesting their exploitation by Shell instead of having to get a job.

by cool j Thu Oct 19, 2006 03:33

Mr Plain man! - Queen Beatrix of Holland is still a majour share holder in Shell - Please check your facts before you start telling lies on behalf of Shell's evil empire.

As for you pig ignorant comments about protestors and tax's don't make me laugh, This governemnt has allowed Shell to rob the country of its natural resources to the tune of billions of euros. The income tax form the Shell PR team is very small beer indeed!!.

PS - For Mr Plain and other slow learners, the majority of protestors disperse between 9 and 10am to go to their places of employment, the people that are left are mainly the self employed, shift workers (like myself), farmers, housewives and others who happen to have some free time to help out their under-siege community.!!

by gníomhaí Wed Oct 25, 2006 13:17

Not only Shell is to blame for our Kyoto targets not being met - the era of 'cheap air travel' is proving very detrimental to the planet. Chief among the culprits is Michael O'Leary and Ryanair with their dirt cheap air fares - highly subsidised of course.

Air travel is 'taking off' as it were - year on year more people travel.
Difficult as it may be for all us with itchy feet, we should all travel less....

see: http://hummingbird.typepad.com/hummingbird/2006/09/fryi....html