Documents filed at London high court suggest Shell didn’t act on advice to fix aged pipeline and underplayed magnitude of two spills in Nigeria in 2008





Internal Shell Nigeria documents show that the company was advised by its own staff in 2002 to immediately replace a 30-year-old pipeline passing through impoverished delta communities because it continually leaked and was a major risk.

But it was not until the key 24-inch trans-Niger pipeline burst twice within a few days in November 2008, spilling thousands of barrels of oil over nearly 1,000 hectares of mangroves and wrecking the livelihoods of up to 15,000 villagers, that the company admitted publicly that it was at fault.

Other Shell documents, filed with the London high court and obtained by Amnesty International, suggest that the company underplayed the magnitude of the two spills that occurred near Bodo in Ogoniland.

Shell investigation reports done in conjunction with others for the two spills claim that only about 4,000 barrels of oil were spilt in total. However, an independent assessment published by US firm Accufacts Inc calculated that the amount spilt exceeded 100,000 barrels.

Shell admits in the documents that its figure for both spills was wrong, saying: “The total volume of oil released … exceeded the contemporaneous estimates.”

This, says Amnesty, throws doubt on the company’s assessment of hundreds of other spills in the delta because all spill investigations are conducted in the same manner.

The admissions in the documents are important because the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) is being sued by 15,000 villagers living near Bodo. The company admits fault for the two 2008 spills but has repeatedly blamed oil thieves for the many others that have occurred along its pipelines and has declined to pay more than £15m compensation.

A preliminary judgment in the case, which is expected to be start in May, suggested that the company could be legally liable for all illegal activity on its pipelines if it is shown that it failed to take reasonable steps to protect its infrastructure.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Niger delta oil spills: the real cost of crude

One document, an internal Shell project report dated February 2002, said the company should “initiate an immediate replacement” of the trans-Niger pipeline.

A second, dated 2001, says: “A series of spills have occurred in recent times due in most cases to sabotage and in some cases to technical failure of pipelines resulting in major losses, environmental pollution and serious damage to the company’s image.

“A [technical] study … indicates that the remaining life of most of the SPDC oil trunklines is more or less non-existent or short, while some sections contain major risk and hazards.”

Another email sent after the two spills in 2008 said the company had failed to maintain its pipelines across Ogoniland. “We are also corporately exposed the pp lines [sic] in Ogoni have not been maintained properly … in over 15 years.”

“Amnesty International firmly believes Shell knew the Bodo data were wrong. If it did not it was scandalously negligent – we repeatedly gave them evidence showing they had dramatically underestimated the spills,” said Audrey Gaughran, director for global issues at Amnesty International.

“Shell has refused to engage with us and only now that they find themselves in a UK court have they been forced to come clean. These spill investigation reports have cheated whole communities out of proper compensation.”

A spokesman for the SPDC said the company had alwaysaccepted responsibility for the two “deeply regrettable” spills in Bodo. “We want to compensate fairly and quickly those who have been genuinely affected and to clean up all areas where oil has been spilled from our facilities,” he said.



“Following the 2008 spills, as part of a statutory process overseen by the regulator, a team including relevant government agencies, SPDC and representatives of the Bodo community visited the spill sites and completed a joint investigation visit report. They estimated that the total volume of oil spilled was in the region of 4,144 barrels.

“As part of the litigation process, we asked satellite remote sensing experts, hydrologists and specialists in mangrove ecology to assess how the Bodo waterways and mangroves were impacted and other relevant information addressing the question of the volume of these spills, and the extent of the damage. Having reviewed their findings, we accept that the total volume of oil released as a result of the two operational spills is likely to have exceeded the joint investigation visit estimates.

“While, naturally, the findings in relation to the Bodo joint investigation visit and the volume of oil from these spills are of concern to us, it’s not the key issue for the purpose of determining the appropriate level of compensation. SPDC is prepared to compensate all members of the Bodo community who have been genuinely affected by the spills, taking account of the entire area which has been impacted.”

According to Nigerian government figures, there were more than 7,000 spills between 1970 and 2000, and there are 2,000 official major spillage sites, many going back decades, with thousands of smaller spills still waiting to be cleared up.





