DOCSLIB.ORG

Shell to Sea Report for the People's Permanent Tribunal Lima May 2008 -.: ENLAZANDO ALTERNATIVAS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shell to Sea Report for the People's Permanent Tribunal Lima May 2008 -.: ENLAZANDO ALTERNATIVAS Shell to Sea Report for the People’s Permanent Tribunal Lima May 2008 1 Report compiled by Eve Campbell and Niall Harnett Mark Garavan Thanks to Pepe Special thanks to volunteer translators: Rosario de Zayas Rueda, Italy. Nancy Serrano, (Gluaiseacht), Co Limerick. Martina Hemmersbach, Ennistymon, Co Clare. Martha Fabregat Carceller, Gort, Co Galway. Photo credits Terry Dunne Jan Pesch Eve Campbell Franc Myles 2 Table of contents RESUMEN DEL INFORME 4 IDENTIFICATION OF THE MAIN IMPACTS 6 ON PEOPLE'S AND HUMAN RIGHTS: Introduction 6 Overview of the Corrib Project 7 Pollution 8 • The refinery • Carrowmore Lake • Broadhaven Bay Health and Safery 10 • The Refinery • The Pipeline Livelihoods 10 Lack of Democracy in the Planning Process 11 • The Systematic Blocking of Public Participation 13 CASE STUDY: The TNCs and the Irish State Forestry Company in Corrib 15 CASE STUDY: The TNCs and the Irish State Forestry Company in Corrib IN 19 SPANISH INSTRUMENTS AND ACTORS THAT EXPLAIN 22 THE SYSTEMATIC DIMENSIONS OF THE CASE Introduction 22 Ownership and Control: Fiscal and Licensing Terms Governing Oil and Gas 22 Exploitation and Production Changing Laws for the Oil Companies 23 Jailing : The Rossport 5 25 Political Policing: Shell’s Cops 26 ACCUSATION 28 Environmental Impact Assessment 30 Seveso 2 Directive 30 The Water Quality Directive 30 Various Public Consultation Directives 30 The Habitats Directive 30 ACCUSATION IN SPANISH 32 RESISTANCE AND ALTERNATIVES AND HOW THE TRIBUNAL CAN CONTRIBUTE 38 TO THIS APPENDIX 40 Report of an International Fact Finding Delegation to Co. Mayo, Ireland 40 February 23-27, 2007 Executive Summary of the Centre for Public Enquiry Report 45 Key findings of the Accufacts report 47 BIBLIOGRAPHY 48 3 RESUMEN DEL INFORME El Campo Corrib es una reserva de gas natural situado a 80 kilometros de la costa oeste del condado de mayo, que contiene 11 trillones de pies cubicos (TCF) de gas natural. El Proyecto de Gas del Campo de Corrib, compuesto por un consorcio de empresas lideradas por Royal Dutch Shell, tiene la intención de traer el gas a tierra cerca de Rossport en la región de Erris en el noroeste de Mayo y bombear el gas sin refinar 9 kilometros tierra adentro a través de una tierra poblada a una refineria ubicada en una colina de turba, donde el gas seria limpiado y despresurizado para la venta y la exportación. El proyecto se ha encontrado con la oposición de la comunidad local desde que los detalles del proyecto salieron a la luz por primera vez en el aňo 2000. Activistas de la comunidad argumentan que si la refineria se contruye tendrá un efecto en detrimento del medio ambiente local y por tanto su comunidad, con la contaminación del agua y del aire actualmente limpios, con un efecto negativo sobre la salud, la economía familiar, la fauna y constituyendo un riesgo inaceptable para su seguridad. Activistas locales han seňalado la falta de democracia que ha rodeado el proyecto Corrib, el hecho de que nunca fueran consultados de una forma significativa y que el proyecto opera actualmente sin el consentimiento de la comunidad. La propiedad y el control del Gas de Corrib ha llegado a ser uno de los enfoques de la campaňa; la gente en Irlanda se beneficiará poco del Gas, que pertenece al Consorcio de Gas de Corrib que no pagará derechos al estado y poco o nada en impuestos sobre los beneficios. El proceso por el cual las empresas petroleras consiguieron el permiso de obras para el Proyecto de Corrib subraya la manera en la que el gobierno hizo caso omiso al proceso de planificación como un mero detalle, y la forma fundamentalmente antidemocrática en la que el Proyecto de Corrib a sido impuesto. No hubo una consulta significativa con la comunidad local en la etapa de planificación del proyecto. El grado en el que el Proyecto ha sido dado por sentado es evidente en los comentarios hechos por el primer ministro Bertie Ahern en la celebración del vigésimoprimero aniversario del instituto nacional de gas a principios de octubre del aňo 2000. En la celebración, el seňor Ahern anunció que el instituto y el consorcio Enterprise financiarían y construirían un gaseoducto de connexión desde la refineria de Ballinaboy a la red nacional de gas en Galway. Esto fue incluso antes de que las compaňias petroleras solicitaran permiso de obras para la refineria. Las actividades del Consorcio del Gas Corrib en Irlanda, la manera en la que han enfocado el Proyecto de Corrib y las relaciones con la comunidad en Erris estan enmarcadas por el estado irlandes. En este contexto el caso ilustra la subordinación del estado irlandes al poder corporativo, visible en la manera en la que el estado a facilitado a las compaňias petroliferas toda la coyuntura necesaria prioretizando sus demandas sobre las necesidades de las comunidades en Irlanda. Esta facilitación y prioridad de las comaňias petroleras es visible en varios aspectos del Proyecto Corrib, desde el regimen de impuestos y 4 las licencias que gobiernan los hidrocarburos hasta la manera en la que las leyes se han ido cambiando especificamente para el Proyecto; el proceso por el cual las compaňias petroleras consiguieron el permiso de obra; y el papel que la policia ha Jugado en asegurar que el trabaJo continuase en el Proyecto a pesar de la masiva oposición de la comunidad, activistas locales y otros partidarios que han apoyado la campaňa. El regimen de impuestos y las condiciones de las licencias relacionadas con Gas Corrib además de todo el resto del gas y petroleo que hay en los mares de Irlanda son muy favorables para las empresas petroleras. El campo del Gas Corrib, por eJemplo, pertenece enteramente al Consorcio Corrib que no pagará derechos y podrá deducir los costes de instalación de sus beneficios finales para efectos de hacienda. El estado Irlandes ha dado efectivamente el campo de gas al consorcio por poco o nada. Entre mediados de los ochenta y mediados de los noventa el regimen de impuestos y las condiciones de licencias fueron reducidos para permitir la apropiación de grandes areas de territorio submarino a las compaňias petroleras por periodos de tiempo largos con mínimos impuestos sobre los beneficios. Las condiciones irlandedas identificadas como las meJores en el mundo por el director irlandes de Statoil Mike Cunningham deben ser vistas en el contexto de la presión eJercida por los Jefes la industria petrolifera a los politicos irlandeses desde que el gas irlandes fuera por primera vez encontrado en los setenta en la costa oeste, pero mas recientemente en relación con el Proyecto de Corrib y la apertura del margen Atlántico como una area viable para la explotación del gas y petroleo. 5 IDENTIFICATION OF THE MAIN IMPACTS ON PEOPLE'S AND HUMAN RIGHTS: “Shell’s only reason for being in Erris is to make profit. They will maximize that profit by taking whatever shortcuts official Ireland will allow them” Erris Inshore Fisherman’s Association 1 “In the context of this community Shell E&P Ireland and its government protectors will be here for a short time only. In that time they will have destroyed the potential of the area for sustainability, for the continued survival of the community into the future.” Niall King, Aughoose 2 INTRODUCTION: The Corrib Gas Field is a reserve of natural gas situated 80 km off the west coast of County Mayo containing 11 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of natural gas. The Corrib Gas ProJect, directed by a consortium of companies led by Royal Dutch Shell, seeks to bring the gas ashore near Rossport in the Barony of Erris in North West Mayo and to pump the unrefined gas 9km inland through an inhabited area to a refinery located on a boggy hill where it would be cleaned and depressurized for sale and export. The proJect has been opposed locally since the details first came to light in 2000. Community campaigners argue that if built the refinery would have a detrimental effect on the local environment and their community which it sustains resulting in pollution of the currently clean air and water, negatively affecting health, livelihoods, wildlife and posing an unacceptable safety risk. Local campaigners have highlighted the lack of democracy surrounding the Corrib ProJect, the fact that they were never meaningfully consulted and that the proJect is currently without community consent. Ownership and control of the Corrib Gas has become one of the foci of the campaign; people in Ireland will benefit little from the Corrib Gas which is owned by the Corrib Gas consortium who will pay no royalties and little or no tax on profits . Impacts of the TNC: • Health and safety • Pollution • Livelihoods • Democracy, lack of local consent • Ownership and control of natural resources 1http://www.epa.ie/downloads/shell/thirdpartysubmissions/oral%20hearing%20subm.%20no.%209a%20erris%20i nshore%20fishermen’s%20associa.pdf 2http://www.epa.ie/downloads/shell/thirdpartysubmissions/oral%20hearing%20subm.%20no.%209a%20erris%20i nshore%20fishermen’s%20associa.pdf 6 Overview of the Corrib Gas Project: The Corrib Gas Field is a reserve of natural gas situated 80 km off the west coast of County Mayo containing 11 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of natural gas. The gas field was discovered in 1996 by Enterprise Oil, operating in a consortium with Saga Petroleum. Enterprise Oil drilled appraisal wells in 1998 and declared the field commercial in early 2001. The Enterprise consortium drew up plans to bring the gas ashore at near Rossport in the Barony of Erris Co. Mayo processing the gas at a refinery located 9km inland in the townland of Bellanaboy. In 1998 the Corrib Enterprise Oil consortium employed consultants to survey the Connacht coast to find a suitable place to bring the gas ashore.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shell E&P Ireland
    Shell E&P Ireland Ltd Offshore Supplementary Update Report 3 CONSTRUCTION 3.1 Construction Methods and Sequence The Construction Strategy for the offshore field and pipeline is described in the 2001 Offshore EIS. Some construction activities have taken place since 2001, including the installation of the export pipeline from the Corrib Field to the landfall at Glengad, however there are still a number of outstanding activities to be completed. Installation of the pipeline commenced in 2008 using methods described in the 2001 Offshore EIS. Further details of installation methods for a number of components yet to be installed are now available and are described below, along with an updated schedule. 3.2 Construction Sequence Activities carried out since 2001 on the offshore pipeline route, including the landfall, include the following: • 2002: Glengad Headland landfall site: Most of the topsoil stripping (approximately 80%) undertaken, to a distance of 50m landward of the cliff. A section of the cliff was cut to access the beach and intertidal zone. Following suspension of construction work, the landfall site and the cliff were reinstated. Nearshore and intertidal trench Broadhaven Bay: Intertidal causeway was constructed. Part of the trench was excavated and subsequently reinstated using the extracted rock and sand. Causeway was removed. • 2005: Glengad Headland: Temporary construction site established. Following suspension of works the area was reinstated. Nearshore Trench: The outer reinstated section of the near-shore trench was excavated and later backfilled. • 2006 – 2008: Corrib Field: Wells completed and Christmas trees installed, new wells drilled, well protection structures and infield flowlines installed, pipeline manifold protection structure installed.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Dutch Shell and Its Sustainability Troubles
    Royal Dutch Shell and its sustainability troubles Background report to the Erratum of Shell's Annual Report 2010 Albert ten Kate May 2011 1 Colophon Title: Royal Dutch Shell and its sustainability troubles Background report to the Erratum of Shell's Annual Report 2010 May 2011. This report is made on behalf of Milieudefensie (Friends of the Earth Netherlands) Author: Albert ten Kate, free-lance researcher corporate social responsibility Pesthuislaan 61 1054 RH Amsterdam phone: (+31)(0)20 489 29 88 mobile: (+31)(0)6 185 68 354 e-mail: [email protected] 2 Contents Introduction 4 Methodology 5 Cases: 1. Muddling through in Nigeria 6 1a) oil spills 1b) primitive gas flaring 1c) conflict and corruption 2. Denial of Brazilian pesticide diseases 14 3. Mining the Canadian tar sands 17 4. The bitter taste of Brazil's sugarcane 20 4a) sourcing sugarcane from occupiers of indigenous land 4b) bad labour conditions sugarcane harvesters 4c) massive monoculture land use 5. Fracking unconventional gas 29 6. Climate change, a business case? 35 7. Interfering with politics 38 8. Drilling plans Alaska’s Arctic Ocean 42 9. Sakhalin: the last 130 Western Gray Whales 45 10. The risky Kashagan oil field 47 11. A toxic legacy in Curaçao 49 12. Philippines: an oil depot amidst a crowd of people 52 3 Introduction Measured in revenue, Royal Dutch Shell is one of the biggest companies in the world. According to its annual report of 2010, its revenue amounted to USD 368 billion in 2010. Shell produces oil and gas in 30 countries, spread over the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Not Learned the Other Shell Report 2004 Dedicated to the Memory of Ken Saro-Wiwa
    Lessons Not Learned The Other Shell Report 2004 Dedicated to the memory of Ken Saro-Wiwa “My lord, we all stand before history. I am a man of peace. Appalled by the denigrating poverty of my people who live on a richly-endowed land . anxious to preserve their right to life and to a decent living, and determined to usher into this country . a fair and just democratic system which protects everyone and every ethnic group and gives us all a valid claim to human civilization. I have devoted all my intellectual and material resources, my very life, to a cause in which I have total belief and from which I cannot be blackmailed or intimidated. I have no doubt at all about the ultimate success of my cause . Not impris- onment nor death can stop our ultimate victory.” —Ken Saro-Wiwa’s final statement before his execution on 10 November 1995 Guide to contents 1 Guide to contents 2 Foreword from Tony Juniper & Vera Dalm This report is based largely on evidence from people Tony Juniper, Executive Director, Friends of the Earth (England, around the world who live in the shadows of Shell’s vari- Wales & Northern Ireland) & Vera Dalm, Director, Milieudefensie ous operations. This report is written on behalf of (Friends of the Earth Netherlands) Friends of the Earth (FOE); Advocates for Environmental Human Rights; Coletivo Alternative Verde; Community In- 3 The Year in Review power Development Association; Concerned Citizens of Norco; Environmental Rights Action (FOE Nigeria); 4 Niger Delta, Nigeria Global Community Monitor; groundWork (FOE South Injustice as a Shell Trademark Africa); Humane Care Foundation Curacao; Louisiana Bucket Brigade; Niger-Delta Project for the Environment, 7 Durban, South Africa Human Rights and Development; Pacific Environment Communities Doomed with Aging Refinery Watch; Sakhalin Environment Watch; Shell to Sea; South Durban Community Environmental Alliance; and 10 Sao Paulo, Brazil United Front to Oust Oil Depots.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Action Plan
    CORRIB DEVELOPMENT BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN 2014-2019 Front Cover Images: Sruwaddacon Bay Evening Lady’s Bedstraw at Glengad Green-veined White Butterfly near Leenamore Common Dolphin Vegetation survey at Glengad CORRIB DEVELOPMENT BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN 1 Leenamore Inlet CORRIB DEVELOPMENT 2 BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN LIST OF CONTENTS 2.4 DATABASE OF BIODIVERSITY 39 3 THE BIODIVERSITY A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4 ACTION PLAN 41 FOREWORd 5 3.1 ESTABLISHING PRIORITIES FOR CONSERVATION 41 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 3.1.1 HABITATS 41 1 INTRODUCTION 8 3.1.2 SPECIES 41 1.1 BIODIVERSITY 8 3.2 AIMS 41 1.1.1 WHAT is biodiversity? 8 3.3 OBJECTIVES AND acTIONS 42 1.1.2 WHY is biodiversity important? 8 3.4 MONITORING, EVALUATION 1.2 INTERNATIONAL AND NATIONAL CONTEXT 9 AND IMPROVEMENT 42 1.2.1 CONVENTION on BIODIVERSITY 9 3.4.1 MONITORING 42 1.2.2 NATIONAL and local implementation 9 3.4.2 EVALUATION and improvement 43 1.2.3 WHY A biodiversity action plan? 10 TABLE 5 SUMMARY of obJECTIVES and actions for THE conservation of habitats and species 43 3.4.3 Reporting, commUNICATING and 2 THE CORRIB DEVELOPMENT VERIFICATION 44 AND BIODIVERSITY 11 3.4.3.1 ACTIONS 44 2.1 AN OVERVIEW OF THE CORRIB 3.4.3.2 COMMUNICATION 44 DEVELOPMENT 11 3.5 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND FIG 1 LOCATION map 11 PARTNERSHIPS FOR BIODIVERSITY 44 FIG 2 Schematic CORRIB DEVELOPMENT 12 3.5.1 S TAKEHOLDER engagement and CONSULTATION 44 2.2 DESIGNATED CONSERVATION SITES AND THE CORRIB GaS DEVELOPMENT 13 3.5.2 PARTNERSHIPS for biodiversity 44 3.5.3 COMMUNITY staKEHOLDER engagement 45 2.2.1 DESIGNATED
    [Show full text]
  • The Corrib Debacle
    1. THE CORRIB DEBACLE – WHY IRELAND IS COMPLETELY OFF LIMITS FOR INVESTMENT 1.1 The background to the debacle Natural gas generates over 60% of the electricity in Ireland and fuels homes and industry. While the Kinsale Field was discovered and developed in the early seventies, gas from the European network is currently pumped into the reservoir there over the summer and drawn out over the winter months. Very little is drawn any more from the field itself. Indeed a single gas pipeline from the European grid goes to a compressor station in South Western Scotland and then is routed under the Irish Sea to North of Dublin. The country is hanging off that pipe! Ireland has not had a good innings with petroleum exploration. About 150 exploration wells have been drilled in the Irish Sector, outside of Kinsale Field we had to wait until 1996 until Enterprise Energy Ireland finally hit pay dirt with the Corrib Natural Gas Field. Note: Shell Exploration and Production Ireland Ltd (SEPIL) acquired Enterprise Energy Ireland in 2002. A pretty poor run from exploration in Irish waters, in particular given that a drilling rig costs about €0.6 million per day and the success ratio in the North Sea sector is about one producing field for every four exploration wells drilled. 1 Bit of a difference in petroleum finds in North Sea and Irish waters. However, many Irish are insistent that the same exploration terms should apply in both jurisdictions. The Corrib field is marginal by international standards; the well head is 80 km off the exposed North Western Coast and at a depth of 300 m.
    [Show full text]
  • WHO's WHO Shell Brian Foley, Contracts Manager, Corrib Project
    OSSL SHELL CORRIB SAGA - WHO'S WHO Shell Brian Foley, Contracts Manager, Corrib Project: [email protected] Julia Busby, Head of Shell Legal: [email protected] Frances van Dam, from Shell's business integrity department: [email protected] Charles Hornsby, Ethics and Compliance Officer at Shell Downstream [email protected] Bridgit Lowe, head of Shell Legal, Ireland [email protected] John Gallagher: [email protected] (Exec VP Shell Global Upstream) Alan Mee: Assistance Mayo Manager: [email protected] Ann Hamilton, Shell Corrib Financial Director: [email protected] Wim-Peter Vanbel, [email protected] (regional head Business Integrity Dept Europe & Russia Christy Loftus, Shell Ireland Communications: Christy Loftus [email protected] Michiel Brandjes, Company Sec. & General Counsel: [email protected] Agnes Mclaverty, Permits and Consents Manager for Shell E&P Ireland Limited: [email protected] Mary Barrett, Emergency Response Co-Ordinator Shell [email protected] Peter Voser, RDS PIc CEO: [email protected] Conner Byrne, Shell EP Ireland" (said to have demanded that invoices be falsified and diverted to Roadbridge to avoid any direct connection with Shell - also said to have threatened that OSSL would never work again in oil and gas industry if it revealed any of the activity) Terry Nolan, former CEO, Shell E&P Ireland Michael Crothers, CEO Shell E&P Ireland: [email protected] (said to have "personally felt some moral obligation ..." ) Roadbridge (Main Contractor on Corrib Project?) OSSL people Desmond Kane: [email protected] Amanda Kane Neil Rooney: [email protected] OSSL Supporter/agent/employee? - GEORGE HAMILTON George Hamilton: georgehamiltoneollve.ie Sent email in support of OSSL to Shell to Sea, also made several postings on our "Shell Blog", all supportive of OSSL.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Fuel Subsidies in Ireland Financing Climate Chaos
    Fossil fuel subsidies in Ireland Financing Climate Chaos Citizens for Financial Justice project March 2020 Author: Clodagh Daly 1 Table of Contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………….8 1. Natural gas 1. ‘Meet the new boss, same as the old boss’: the myth of natural gas as a transition fuel……………………………………………………………………………….10 2. Box 1: Shaping transition narratives……………………………………………..12 3. A ‘leisurely’ climate emergency? Natural gas in the Irish policy context……….13 2. Subsidies 1. What is a ‘subsidy’? Overcoming ambiguous definitions……………………….18 2. The case for removing natural gas production subsidies……………………...…20 3. Case studies 1. Public finance as a pillar for natural gas infrastructure………………………….25 2. Tax exemptions, i.e. ‘fossil fuel welfare’………………………………………..31 3. Investments by State-owned enterprises…………………………………………35 4. Fiscal support…………………………………………………………………….41 4. Conclusion and recommendations……………………………………………………….45 5. Annex…………………………………………………………………………………….47 Executive summary Natural gas is a highly potent fossil fuel consisting of mostly methane gas that can trap heat up to 86 times more efficiently than carbon dioxide in a 20-year period. According to the IPCC, there is no pathway to remain within 1.5°C that is compatible with natural gas expansion.1 However, the fossil fuel industry presents energy interests as a critical element of Ireland’s transition. Irish energy and climate policy describe gas as a ‘transition’ fuel whose share in the energy mix is consistent with Ireland’s climate objectives.2 Conversely, a central element of a transition underpinned by science and climate justice requires governments to make financial flows and energy investments ‘consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development’ in accordance with Article 2.1c of the Paris agreement.
    [Show full text]
  • E Corrib Gas Project: the Deposition of 450,000 Tonnes of Peat
    PEAT IN ENERGY e Corrib gas project: the deposition of 450,000 tonnes of peat B. Moyles Bord na Móna Energy Ltd, Leabeg, Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Ireland Phone: +353-87-9612077, e-mail: [email protected] Summary As part of Shell’s Corrib gas project to construct an onshore gas terminal at Bellanaboy, North-west Mayo, Ireland it was necessary to remove approximately 450,000 m³ of peat from the terminal footprint. The excavation works were carried out by a civil engineering contractor (Roadbridge Ltd.) and this excavated peat was then transported by a road haulier (Iggy Madden Transport Ltd.) a distance of 11km by road to a specially constructed deposition site owned and operated by Bord na Móna. This peat deposition site, where the removed peat was received, re-loaded for internal site haulage and finally placed, is located on industrial cutaway peatlands in Srahmore, near Bangor-Erris in Co. Mayo, Ireland. The peat deposition process was included as part of the planning application for Shell E&P Ireland Ltd (SEPIL) to construct a gas terminal for the reception and separation of gas from the Corrib gas field. The deposition was governed by numerous planning conditions, also separate conditions imposed as part of the waste licence as issued by the EPA. The peat was received at Srahmore and spread over low areas (bays) to depths of on average 1.4m - 1.8m. The deposited peat was then profiled allowing for water run off. Following deposition activities and the im - plementation of the agreed monitoring programme vegetation was allowed to establish naturally, primarily soft rush ( Juncus effusus ) as well as other native peatland species.
    [Show full text]
  • Blacksod Bay Broad Haven
    Blacksod Bay/Broad Haven Special Protection Area (Site Code 4037) ≡ Conservation Objectives Supporting Document VERSION 1 National Parks & Wildlife Service November 2014 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S SUMMARY PART ONE - INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... 1 1.1 Introductiion to the desiignatiion of Speciiall Protectiion Areas ........................................... 1 1.2 Introductiion to Bllacksod Bay /Broad Haven Speciiall Protectiion Area ............................. 2 1.3 Introductiion to Conservatiion Objjectiives ....................................................................... 3 PART TWO – SITE DESIGNATION INFORMATION .................................................................... 5 2.1 Speciiall Conservatiion Interests of Bllacksod Bay/ Broad Haven Speciiall Protectiion Area 5 PART THREE - CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES FOR BLACKSOD BAY/BROAD HAVEN SPA ... 8 3.1 Conservatiion Objjectiives for the non-breediing Speciiall Conservatiion Interests of Bllacksod Bay/Broad Haven SPA ........................................................................................ 8 PART FOUR – REVIEW OF THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF WATERBIRD INTEREST FEATURES ................................................................... 12 4.1 Popullatiion data for non-breediing waterbiird SCI speciies of Bllacksod Bay/Broad Haven SPA 12 4.2 Waterbiird popullatiion trends at Bllacksod Bay / Broad Haven SPA............................... 13 4.3 Bllacksod Bay /Broad Haven SPA – siite conservatiion status
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Corrib Gas Controversy: Beyond ‘David and Goliath’ Analyses of a Resource Conflict
    Assessing the Corrib gas controversy: Beyond ‘David and Goliath’ analyses of a resource conflict Slevin, A. (2019). Assessing the Corrib gas controversy: Beyond ‘David and Goliath’ analyses of a resource conflict. The Extractive Industries and Society, 6(2), 519-530. https://doi.org//10.1016/j.exis.2018.11.004 Published in: The Extractive Industries and Society Document Version: Peer reviewed version Queen's University Belfast - Research Portal: Link to publication record in Queen's University Belfast Research Portal Publisher rights © 2018 The Authors. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/,which permits distribution and reproduction for non-commercial purposes, provided the author and source are cited. General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Queen's University Belfast Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy The Research Portal is Queen's institutional repository that provides access to Queen's research output. Every effort has been made to ensure that content in the Research Portal does not infringe any person's rights, or applicable UK laws. If you discover content in the Research Portal that you believe breaches copyright or violates any law, please contact [email protected]. Download date:26. Sep. 2021 Assessing the Corrib gas controversy: Beyond ‘David and Goliath’ analyses of a resource conflict Abstract Since its discovery offshore Ireland in 1996, Corrib gas has become synonymous with controversy and social- ecological upheaval.
    [Show full text]
  • Info Pack Nov 09
    The €420 billion giveaway How Ireland is losing its valuable natural resources An information pack on Ireland’s offshore oil and gas and the Corrib Gas controversy, prepared by Dublin Shell to Sea November 2009 PHOTO: WILLIAM HEDERMAN INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND TO THE Natural resources are the primary wellspring of the world’s CONTROVERSY wealth. Oil and gas in particular have played a central role in economic development since the early 20th century. When news of the Corrib gas field first emerged, many Erris residents who are today critical of the project were Ownership and control of these resources have been con- excited by the prospect of local jobs. However, concerns tested at many historical junctures. The discovery – recent about the location of the refinery and the safety of the raw and ongoing – of rich deposits of oil and gas off the west gas pipeline soon emerged.1 coast of Ireland has visited a conflict on a remote Co Mayo community since the year 2000. Events since then have Residents learned that the pipeline was unique for a popu- made this a national issue. lated area: as a new cost-saving measure, the gas would not be processed on a platform at sea, as is standard practice The aim of this pack is to provide information for journal- in other countries. Instead, the oil consortium would lay a ists, public representatives and others about Ireland’s off- high-pressure pipeline to carry raw, odourless gas, contain- shore oil and gas and, in particular, the Corrib Gas contro- ing an unpredictable mix of corrosive chemicals, through versy.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloads/2004/Press 09-04.Html)
    Corporate Engagement Review Shell February 2007 This is the third Corporate Engagement Review of Shell. In 2005 we reviewed Shell prior to their sponsorship of WPY (Appendix II), and the earlier one was done in 1997 prior to the start of our relationship with Shell (Appendix III) This review is intended to update the 2005 review, and includes major issues raised, or continuing to dominate the press since they began their sponsorship, changes in their CSR & environmental policies and new major gifts/sponsorships/awards of other organisations. About the company Royal Dutch Shell and Shell Transport and Trading were unified on 20th July 2005 under a single new parent company, Royal Dutch Shell plc. Previously the company group was 60% owned by the Royal Dutch Petroleum Company and 40% by the Shell Transport and Trading Co. plc. The major issues currently surrounding Shell which need to be considered are: Sakhalin – this was raised in the 2005 review. Shell no longer has a controlling stake since Gazprom took over control in December 2006, but they do remain a major shareholder. Nigeria – this was raised in both the earlier reviews, and still remains a serious issue. Ireland – the Corrib field, a proposed development subject to much protest at the moment. This is a newer development, and so wasn’t raised in the earlier reviews Charity Commission complaint against the Shell Foundation Shell’s profits Negative press surrounding Shell’s sponsorship of WPY (Appendix I) Sakhalin Shell has bowed to pressure from the Russian government to allow state-owned energy company Gazprom to take a controling interest in the Sakhalin-2 oil and gas field.
    [Show full text]