A group of institutional investors want Shell to review the commerical and environmental viability of its oil sands project. Photograph: John Vidal
Apr 13, 2010
Shell has dismissed shareholder calls for a review of its controversial oil sands developments.
A group of institutional investors, led by campaign group FairPensions,
had tabled a special resolution ahead of the Anglo-Dutch company's
annual meeting next month. They want Shell to review the commercial and
environmental viability of going ahead with its new projects in
Canada's boreal forests.
But the Anglo-Dutch oil company today
urged other investors to vote down the resolution. "Whilst the issues
raised by the group of shareholders ... are valid and appreciated ...
it would set a precedent which, if applied more generally to the
company's major investment opportunities, would add unnecessary costs
and duplication of effort."
The letter to shareholders, giving
notice of the meeting in the Hague on 18 May, added that the company
had already provided all the non commercially sensitive information to
shareholders about its oil sands projects. BP, whose annual meeting
takes place on Thursday, is facing similar pressure from shareholders over its own oil sands activities.
Shell's
next development phase of its Athabasca joint venture will soon add
100,000 barrels per day. This will take production from oil sands
mining to 4% of its total production. About 0.6% of its current
production comes from in situ operations, where the oil is recovered
from beneath the ground by drilling.
The campaign led by
FairPensions, whose supporters include the Co-operative and trade union
Unison, argue that the projects are too big an environmental and
economic liability. They also argue that climate change caused by oil sands development could put at risk shareholders' other investments.
The
issue of oil sands has soared up the political and environmental agenda
since the Copenhagen summit highlighted the need for a clampdown on
carbon-intensive activities.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Shell has dismissed shareholder calls for a review of its controversial oil sands developments.
A group of institutional investors, led by campaign group FairPensions,
had tabled a special resolution ahead of the Anglo-Dutch company's
annual meeting next month. They want Shell to review the commercial and
environmental viability of going ahead with its new projects in
Canada's boreal forests.
But the Anglo-Dutch oil company today
urged other investors to vote down the resolution. "Whilst the issues
raised by the group of shareholders ... are valid and appreciated ...
it would set a precedent which, if applied more generally to the
company's major investment opportunities, would add unnecessary costs
and duplication of effort."
The letter to shareholders, giving
notice of the meeting in the Hague on 18 May, added that the company
had already provided all the non commercially sensitive information to
shareholders about its oil sands projects. BP, whose annual meeting
takes place on Thursday, is facing similar pressure from shareholders over its own oil sands activities.
Shell's
next development phase of its Athabasca joint venture will soon add
100,000 barrels per day. This will take production from oil sands
mining to 4% of its total production. About 0.6% of its current
production comes from in situ operations, where the oil is recovered
from beneath the ground by drilling.
The campaign led by
FairPensions, whose supporters include the Co-operative and trade union
Unison, argue that the projects are too big an environmental and
economic liability. They also argue that climate change caused by oil sands development could put at risk shareholders' other investments.
The
issue of oil sands has soared up the political and environmental agenda
since the Copenhagen summit highlighted the need for a clampdown on
carbon-intensive activities.
Shell has dismissed shareholder calls for a review of its controversial oil sands developments.
A group of institutional investors, led by campaign group FairPensions,
had tabled a special resolution ahead of the Anglo-Dutch company's
annual meeting next month. They want Shell to review the commercial and
environmental viability of going ahead with its new projects in
Canada's boreal forests.
But the Anglo-Dutch oil company today
urged other investors to vote down the resolution. "Whilst the issues
raised by the group of shareholders ... are valid and appreciated ...
it would set a precedent which, if applied more generally to the
company's major investment opportunities, would add unnecessary costs
and duplication of effort."
The letter to shareholders, giving
notice of the meeting in the Hague on 18 May, added that the company
had already provided all the non commercially sensitive information to
shareholders about its oil sands projects. BP, whose annual meeting
takes place on Thursday, is facing similar pressure from shareholders over its own oil sands activities.
Shell's
next development phase of its Athabasca joint venture will soon add
100,000 barrels per day. This will take production from oil sands
mining to 4% of its total production. About 0.6% of its current
production comes from in situ operations, where the oil is recovered
from beneath the ground by drilling.
The campaign led by
FairPensions, whose supporters include the Co-operative and trade union
Unison, argue that the projects are too big an environmental and
economic liability. They also argue that climate change caused by oil sands development could put at risk shareholders' other investments.
The
issue of oil sands has soared up the political and environmental agenda
since the Copenhagen summit highlighted the need for a clampdown on
carbon-intensive activities.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.