To: Bruce Ramsey
Editorial Writer

cc:Diane Albert, James F. Vesely
cc:opinion@seattletimes.com , dalbert@seattletimes.com

Bruce Ramsey, You wrote: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 a.m.

(source) http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002216132_rams23.html

Sometime in the next few years we will need to drill in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. I suggest this even though so many consider it a sacrilege, like digging for treasure in a church.

The most eloquent local proponent of the sacrilege view is Joel Connelly at the Seattle P-I. Connelly writes of his trip to the tundra, where he saw some caribou and musk oxen and heard the trilling notes of a golden plover. He quotes Justice William O. Douglas on the Arctic as a setting for a "restless soul" to "behold with wonderment." That setting must exist, the justice said, "without molestation by man.”

These are religious sentiments. I hesitate before asking to drill in the other fellow's church, but it is my oil at least as much as it is his church. And our civilization needs the oil.

The disruption from drilling would not be large. The footprints would be, together, some 2,000 acres — about three times the size of the University of Washington's Seattle campus in the midst of a wildlife refuge nearly one-half as big as the state of Washington.

It is said the oil is six months' supply for the whole United States. That is somebody's estimate. It could be more or less. But suppose the figure is correct: "Six months' worth" is a political formulation like "a tax that costs no more than one latte a day." It is meant to minimize something that is probably the largest untapped field in the United States. In reality, six months' worth of oil is a whole lot. Blended in with our other supplies, it would last for decades.

Those supplies are none too robust. America was the first country to drill for oil, and as late as World War II we were the world's largest producer. (One of the reasons Japan attacked us was that we refused to sell it any.) American oil production peaked in 1970. Alaskan production peaked in 1988. Oil moving through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline has fallen to one-third its peak rate, and gradually declines. Sometime in the first half of this century, that 800-mile pipeline will be shut down.

Want a practical reason to drill in the Arctic reserve? Because the pipeline is there. Sometime in the future, it won't be there. Let's get the oil out while we have a pipeline with which to do it.

Opponents, who want us to abandon this oil, retort that it will not "solve" our energy problem — that it will not give us "energy independence." They are right about that, but our problem is so great that no single project will do that. Making the most of Alaska will reduce our dependence by a few percentage points for a few decades. It will buy time to solve bigger problems.

Opponents say we should focus on renewable energy. They have been saying this since the 1970s, but the results have not been encouraging. We have built some high-tech windmills that work when the wind blows, and that produce a tiny percentage of our electricity. But solar electricity has colonized only the calculator, and solar heating remains an oddity. The hydrogen car would be nice if we didn't have to manufacture the hydrogen. The electric car has the same problem and some other ones, besides. Alcohol from corn consumes more energy than it produces, and exists only by federal subsidy.

Energy efficiency is fine, and we are pursuing it. But we do need fuel.

Over the whole topic looms The Environment. It is an elusive concept. Sometimes it means human health, sometimes animal survival, sometimes our spiritual and esthetic feelings. On the matter of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it is mostly the latter.

The animals will not be threatened by our extraction of oil. What threatens animals is human habitation — farms and subdivisions and shopping centers and newspaper offices. No one will be putting those along the Arctic Ocean. All we need is the oil. Let's get it out, cleanly and carefully, and we can leave the tundra for the muses, musk oxen and mosquitoes.

Bruce Ramsey's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is bramsey@seattletimes.com. Look for more of his thoughts on the STOP blog, our editorial online journal at www.seattletimes.com/stop

Bruce Ramsey, please let me introduce myself and another perspective and opinion that is from myself and the Gwich’in Nation. This is a response to the article you published in today’s Seattle Times & I have highlighted trigger words that prompted me to submit this “other side” viewpoint, I know there is a word limit to Letters to the Editor, so I have highlighted the parts of my response letter in hopes you can at least print this. I will dedicate a page in it’s entirety to my website, http://mysite.verizon.net/res7dwhg/ including the background research and links that I have provided you with+some interesting photos and anti-oil drilling propaganda.Readers are welcome to look there for more conversation about this topic at my website. I will continue to follow this breaking news about ANWR, as I am sure the Nation will as well!

My name is Robin Carneen(Swinomish) and I host a Native American bi-weekly Public Affairs and music program for KSVR 91.7 FM in Mt Vernon, WA. We broadcast from the Community radio station at Skagit Valley College. Our program, called “NAMAPAHH, First People’s Radio” that I produce, has been in existence since last May of 2004. Locally, listeners can tune in from 7-8pm PST, while others who are not within our signal can listen online (best with Broadband) at www.ksvr.org

Last week, my co-host Jerome Edge (Upper Skagit) and myself, bumped a previously scheduled topic, to give voice to the Gwich’in people who happen to live in the Porcupine Caribou Region that is once again under attack and consideration by those in government and corporate positions affiliated with life changing decision making. According to Gwich’in Nation spokesperson Sarah James, 8 times this has been brought to the “proverbial table”, and 8 times, ANWR was protected by legislation and concerned people to keep it designated and established as a National “treasure”.

ANWR hosts oil reserves, according to studies and reports from all sides, that is a given. It is one of the most sought after sources of “new gold”. Due to this fact, this would not be the first time that certain Native Americans would obviously stand in the way of progress and would once again be pushed aside, for the sake of “America”.

Many, like myself, view this as a “corporate genocidal act”, Chevron Texaco Corporation and others like them, are big time players fostering “bad blood” relationships. ChevronTexaco Corporation, claims “social, economic and environmental responsibility. * The decision to drill in ANWR seems to be in direct conflict of what lip service they are reiterating to the American public. If they truly were thinking of the American people, they have sure left the Gwich’in people out of the loop, as well as those concerned with environmental impacts of this proposed project. I am curious about your comment “And our civilization needs the oil.” Please define civilization and who qualifys as being “civilized?”

This seems to be an ongoing saga, once again spilling more than 500 years worth of tears and frustration from our people. One generation after the other has had to fight continually for their rights, land care taking responsibilites, and protection of the resources. We are not a perfect people though, we have failed in some instances, but in this case, the Gwich’in people are not guilty of anything else, but wanting to be left alone with the Porcupine Caribou and continue their 20,000 year old “ways of being”.

This ongoing battle over ANWR, has been waged between Environmental protection organizations, Alaskan Natives, such as the Gwich’in, other Alaskan Natives who are pro-drilling, government officials(i.e Senator Barbara Boxer and Senator Maria Cantwell), and the Oil and Gas Corporations (who would just love to get the oil and gas out of this region.*) . The “Indian Wars” and “Relocation” does not seem to be over yet. It continues to this day and the weapon of choice is the stroke of a pen: Cantwell’s amendment to remove ANWR oil drilling from the proposed Budget, failed 49-51, too close for comfort. Once again we are a country divided. I think this is dangerous, we have been here before, in times past. It is dividing our communities in some cases and threatening the feeling of stability and future for our youth, the seventh generation. There are alternative sources of energy, why not experiment & explore those possibilities? What is going to happen when the gas & oil runs out?

In the past and even presently, United States governmental decisions, like this one that is trying to be slide through the approval process, have impacted and changed the landscape, culture, and lives of Native America forever. If the civilization, assimilation, and re-education processes did not strip away what was left of our people after the Indian Wars, Massacres, and mass die off, due to small pox, starvation, mal-nutrition, lack or minimal health care or adequate services for Native Americans, and flat out poverty ; then today we have toxic waste, mercury poisoning, diabeties, HIV, alcoholism, drug abuse, violence, lack of recognition for tribes that are waiting for that, limited health care services, lack of telephones, adequate water supplies, mal-nutrition (USDA commodities vs. original sustenance and food sources), poverty, and lawsuits that hang us up in courts, all which are taking their toll on our people.

History demonstrates that wild buffalo herds, for example, dwindled due to past sport and trophy hunters. As fences were put up all over Indian country, the cattle industry encroached and competed with the land that once exclusively supported the majestic buffalo for countless years. Today, there are buffalo herds here and there, even a small herd of a half dozen buffalo behind my residence in Bow, WA. I purposely drive home that way, just to catch a glimpse of this herd, in order to feel an old and multi-generational understanding of how sacred these buffalos are to our people to this day and how missed some of those old days are.

In those days, we didn’t have to depend on vehicles for transportation and put gas and oil in them to make them run. As Native American people, we have had to compromise and assimilate in some instances, or be left behind. The world and modern technology is advancing faster then our ancestors could ever have imagined. However, some Indigenous people, like the Gwich’in have choosen to “go without” many of these modern convienices, “opting out” from having to depend on so much materialism and modernizations. If oil drilling happens though, in ANWR, they will be forced to fully assimilate and/ or will have to relocate from their homeland, giving up a culture and way of life that is 20,000 years old.

I am always grateful to the KSVR radio station and Skagit Valley College for the air time we are being gifted with in order to discuss these issues, hear from the people involved in them, both Native American and others. I wish to share these words and concerns of Elder Gwich’in spokesperson, Sarah James, shared with our listeners, last Thursday from 7:55-8:05pm, on behalf of her people and the wildlife, especially the porcupine caribou:

Sarah James: “ I am Gwitch’in/ Athabascan Indian, interior Alaska, were about living in Artic Village, which is 110 miles North East of Arctic Circle. We do hunting and fishing and maybe 75% of our diet is wild meat: most of it is Caribou, moose, dahl sheep, birds and dogs, and small animals and that is how we live up there.

Where they want to do gas and oil development is the Coastal Plain of the Artic National Wildlife refuge. We’re only trying to save 1/10^th of the Artic Coastline. The risk is from Pudah Bay on the way over to the West, my Gwich’in People, there are 15 Villages, and there’s 7000 of us left, north of Yukon Territory, part of McKenzie Area of NW territory and NE Alaska.

We are all against the oil gas development within the coastal plain of ANWR since 1988. We are united on this issue, Elders directed us to do it in a ‘good way’ and ‘no compromise’. It has worked, for 8 times we won this battle, this is a Public Interest Land, this is a National Issue, this is the last stand, because we are the last people to be contacted before Columbus discovery.

It is very important area, 150 species of birds nest there from all over the world, it is a birth place, it is a birthplace. Any birthplace should not disturbed by development and as a birthplace for the porcupine caribou that we depend on. We’re a caribou people, us Gwich’in People. It is our clothing, it’s our food, it’s our tools, our shelter, everything to us is caribou: stories, caribou bands, caribou food, we’re caribou people, just like the Plains People used to be with Buffalo. And if they disturb it it’s going to kill off the calves, it is going to disturb a lot of life there, a lot of life that is formed there.

And it’s not only the Gwitch'in people that we’re trying to do it for, for all the caribou. It is for our children and for their children too, to keep something like that sacred. It is sacred ground, we call that place, ‘where the life begins(she says this in her language too)’ and it is sacred to us, we are connected that way.

They just had a vote, the fate of the Gwitch’in has been voted on, in the Congress, they left it up to the Congress. As Americans they spoke up 8 times, and we won this 8 times, you have to remind your Congress that the Americans already spoke up on this and they just bringing it back up, still getting into it, they don’t care. Anyway, yesterdays vote is a small margin of what we can do, we lost by 2 votes, which is very ,very good for this kind of case, national issue and budget, and Republican control, all that, that is very good, so we did good work, but it is in the budget right now, Nat’l Budget right now.

There is a lot in the budget right now, like social security, war expense, all other stuff that is not good, so maybe the Congress might decide not to deal with Budget, it’s so bad, they might throw it out, not even deal with it, then ANWR is not going to get the vote. There a lot of other channels they have to show respect to, there is a treaty with Canada, country of Canada with US, treaty on Migratory on birds & ducks, treaty signed on that one. We need Hawaii, both of the Senator, more from Hawaii, we need more from Louisiana, we need Florida, Idaho and Ohio.”

Sarah gave contact info for the Gwich’in and ways the public can help their voice be heard. One way is to contact the Gwich’in Steering committee: gwichin1@hotmail.com or gwichin1@alaska.net

She said to call your Congressional people directly, write letters to newspaper, presentations at colleges, talk about it in your living room. They also have a website: : http://www.alaska.net/~gwichin/index.html

http://www.saveourenvironment.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=13161

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Phone: (202) 456-1111
Fax: (202) 456-2461

president@whitehouse.gov

http://www.whitehouse.gov/

She ended with a plea at 8:05pm, March 17^th, 2005: “The fate of the Gwich’in Nation is in your hands, because we all have the right to Public interest land. Global warming and climate changes is real in the North and it’s going to be more real everywhere, because of how much we burn fossil fuel. We can always change it to alternative energy, do something differently, and committed to ourselves to help this Earth, and for our children and for their Children. Women are very important in this issue, we’re talking about nursing ground, we’re talking about Birthplace that we can relate to as a woman. So we need the women to speak up for this birthplace this sacred place where the life begins.She ends in her language, then in English, “All my relations”.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>more anti drilling>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Another enlightening source: Rhino’s (Exerpts)log is always posted at: http://www.rhinosblog.info

TODAY’S FEATURED ARTICLES

- Senate Votes to Keep Arctic Drilling Language in Budget!, Alaskan Wilderness League
- Letter From Barbara Boxer Regarding the ANWR Vote

QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"In 1988, our people became aware of oil companies trying to gain access to the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Oil development there would harm the caribou and threaten our future. So we gathered for the first time in over a hundred years in Arctic Village . The Gwich'in Nation was reborn. Everyone spoke resolutely about how important the caribou are to our culture. At the end of the gathering, we spoke with one voice, one mind and one heart with a renewed commitment to protect our way of life for future generations. We came up with the Gwich'in Nintsyaa-a unified standing resolution calling for permanent protection of the Porcupine Caribou Herd birthplace. The Gwich'in Steering Committee was created. The elders said, 'Go and tell everyone how we live, and why we take this position. Do it in a good way, and we will be successful.' "
- - Faith Gemmill (Executive Director of the Gwich'in Steering Committee)
Visit The Gwich'in Steering Committee AT:

http://www.alaska.net/~gwichin/index.html

Senate Votes to Keep Arctic Drilling Language in Budget!
Cantwell Budget Amendment Fails 49-51 Vote

Alaskan Wilderness League, 3/17/05
Today an amendment to keep oil drilling out of the Arctic Refuge was narrowly defeated in the Senate by a vote of 49 to 51. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) offered the amendment, cosponsored by Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME), to reject a sneak attack on the Arctic by burying drilling language in the federal budget. This battle is far from over. This is just the beginning, and there is a long way to go before the drilling rigs make it into the Arctic Refuge. Alaska Wilderness League will be working with members of both parties in both Houses of Congress to keep Arctic drilling out of the final budget...

MORE INFO & RESOURCES AT :
http://www.alaskawild.org/campaigns_arctic_hellweek_alert.html

Top 10 Distortions of the Senate Floor Debate AT:
http://www.alaskawild.org/campaigns_arctic_top10.html

(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)

Letter From Barbara Boxer Regarding the ANWR Vote
Today, my heart is heavy. By just two votes, we came up short in our effort to prevent oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, home to over 150 wildlife species. ... I want you to know that I won't give up in our fight to stop the drilling. And neither should you. I'm going to use every legislative tool at my disposal to reverse this vote and prevent this terrible policy from going into effect. But we can do more -- today. I'm planning to organize a consumer boycott of any oil company that decides to drill in this pristine Alaskan wilderness area. If, through our pocketbooks, we can convince these companies to do the right thing, we can still save the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from the destruction that would be wrought by the oil drilling rigs.

Send an email to the CEOs of ExxonMobil, BP, ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch/Shell, and ChevronTexaco now and tell them to stay out of ANWR!
And then invite everyone you know to join us. This battle is not over -- not by a long shot.

In Friendship, Senator Barbara Boxer
SEND LETTERS EASILY AT: http://ga4.org/campaign/boycott/3k8ub84vjkj3dw

(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)(\o/)

Rhino's Other Web Sites:
http://www.dreamcatchers.org (Indigenous Assistance & Intercultural Dialog)
http://www.kifaru.com (Native American Relations Video Documentaries)
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-
Articles are reprinted under Fair Use Doctrine of international copyright law.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html All copyrights belong to original publisher.
-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-=+=-

Tell the oil companies to stay out of ANWR!

March 18, 2005
US Senator Barbara Boxer

What's At Stake: Protecting 19 million acres of pristine Alaska wilderness from oil drilling. Campaign Expiration Date: June 29, 2005

http://ga4.org/campaign/boycott/d5dng64hjkj3dw

Today, my heart is heavy. By just two votes, we came up short in our effort to prevent oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, home to over 150 wildlife species. In the end, over 90% of Senate Democrats voted to stop this madness -- we just didn't have the votes to overcome the Republican majority in the Senate.

But I want you to know that I won't give up in our fight to stop the drilling. And neither should you. I'm going to use every legislative tool at my disposal to reverse this vote and prevent this terrible policy from going into effect. But we can do more -- today.

I'm planning to organize a consumer boycott of any oil company that decides to drill in this pristine Alaskan wilderness area. If, through our pocketbooks, we can convince these companies to do the right thing, we can still save the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from the destruction that would be wrought by the oil drilling rigs.

Send an email to the CEOs of ExxonMobil, BP, ConocoPhillips, Royal Dutch/Shell, and ChevronTexaco now and tell them to stay out of ANWR!

This battle is not over -- not by a long shot.

In Friendship,

(This was signed by Senator Barbara Boxer)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Oil corporate people to express your views to:

http://www.kintera.org/siteapps/advocacy/index.aspx?c=irKQL0NSE&b=477875&action=2009&template=x.ascx

*Mr. David O'Reilly, ChevronTexaco CEO:

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of ChevronTexaco Corporation

General Questions and Comments

comment@chevrontexaco.com

(source) http://www.chevrontexaco.com/social_responsibility/ (excerpt) “At ChevronTexaco, we know that success demands the highest standards of social, economic and environmental responsibility across our operations worldwide. Our approach to corporate responsibility is rooted in our core values, known as The ChevronTexaco Way: "to conduct business in a socially responsible and ethical manner… support universal human rights… protect the environment, benefit the communities where we work… learn from and respect cultures in which we work.

ChevronTexaco's commitment to corporate responsibility is reflected in our support of the Global Sullivan Principles, a voluntary international code of conduct championed by the late Reverend Leon Sullivan. We are engaged on a daily basis with our business partners and non-government organizations (NGOs) to advance this commitment in a variety of ways.

By turning these values into concrete actions in our business, we build value for our shareholders and customers, trust with our partners and help improve the quality of life in the communities where we operate. For us, corporate responsibility means being responsible stewards of the environment and constructive partners in the communities where we do business. It means respecting human rights, valuing people and embracing diversity in its broadest sense. It means investing in innovative technologies and solutions to meet the world's need for reliable energy and helping spur economic growth.

Corporate responsibility is not new to ChevronTexaco. For nearly 125 years, Chevron, Texaco and Caltex have supported social and environmental initiatives in the Americas, Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia. We have touched millions of people positively through our sponsorship of environmental and health-care initiatives as well as cultural and educational programs. We are proud of our legacy, and are working to reach further. We are building on the experience we have gained around the world to engage in activities such as helping victims of disasters, giving humanitarian relief in the United States and worldwide, investing in mobile health care in Kazakhstan, or working to address the scourge of AIDS in Africa.

Whether we are working with commercial partners and employees around the world or with NGOs like the World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, or the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, ChevronTexaco knows that partnerships help turn values into value for all of us.”

http://www.usatoday.com/money/companies/management/2004-10-03-insana_x.htm (excerpt)

Question: Ron Insana: Describe the world oil market right now:

Answer: David O'Reilly: "From a global perspective, the oil markets are quite tight, and the reason for this is that the extra capacity relative to demand has narrowed considerably in the last couple of years. We're seeing fairly robust growth (in demand) on a global basis for oil. Asia, particularly China, has been growing, but the North American market in the U.S. has been quite strong this year. So the overhang of supply relative to demand has narrowed considerably. That's showing up in oil prices today."

Mr. James Mulva, ConocoPhillips CEO:

(source) http://www.earthtones.com/data/138/pages/NovemberGA.asp (excerpt) “ConocoPhillips is a member of Arctic Power, the single-issue lobbying group that promotes allowing oil and gas drilling on the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, and drilling in sensitive areas within the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska.”

ConocoPhillips at

Public Affairs CC: Mr. James J. Mulva, CEO
ConocoPhillips
600 North Dairy Ashford
P.O. Box 2197
Houston, TX 77252-2197

1-888-327-8486

(source) http://english.sinopec.com/en-newsevent/943.shtml (Excerpt)

Significant Events in 2003

December 6^th to 14^th

Mr. Wang Jiming headed a delegation of Sinopec to attend the 2^nd regional meeting of the World Petroleum Congress (WPC) held at Doha, Qatar. In the evening of the 8^th day and the morning of the 9^th day, Mr. Wang Jiming met and conversed with Mr. Abd Allah S. Al-Saif, Senior Vice President for Saudi Arabia Aramco Petroleum Company and Mr. Mulva, President & CEO for US Conoco Phillips Petroleum Company respectively.

Jeroen van der Veer: Shell's new chairman:

(source): http://www.sans.org/newsletters/auditbits/auditbits.php?vol=2&issue=6

(This time last year…Shell Execs Faced With Sarbanes-Oxley Law (28 March 2004)(excerpt) A provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act calls for company directors to face criminal charges, as well as civil liability, for knowingly filing false accounts. This provision places Shell's new chairman Jeroen van der Veer and finance director Judy Boynton in a position to face criminal charges that could result in fines up to 2.8 million pounds and twenty years in jail, despite the fact that they both had been exonerated of blame in the overbooking of reserves by Shell. Van der Veer and Boynton both signed off on Shell's 2002 annual report in the U.S., despite the fact that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is said to be in possession of an internal memo sent to all senior executives, including van der Veer and Boynton, regarding discussion of problems with reserve accounting. The SEC is currently at the beginning stages of their investigation into the matter.

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/story.jsp?story=505681

(source) http://www.shell-me.com/english/feb2000/news-world1.htm (exerpt)

exerpt)

Shell contributes to UN's global business principles

A set of global business principles, known as the Global Sullivan Principles (GSP) and developed in part by senior Shell executives, was launched at a function at the United Nations headquarters in New York in November.

Reverend Leon Sullivan, who has spearheaded the project, jointly launched the landmark principles with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan before a gathering of international government and business leaders.

The GSP objectives are:

to support economic, social and political justice by companies where they do business...
to support human rights and to encourage equal opportunity at all levels of employment...
to train and advance disadvantaged workers for technical, supervisory and management opportunities...
to assist with greater tolerance and understanding among peoples, thereby helping to improve the quality of life for communities, workers and children with dignity and equality...

Shell's involvement came about following discussions between Shell Group Senior Advisor Alan Detheridge and United States rights campaigner Reverend Leon Sullivan at the US Embassy in London more than three years ago.

Speaking at the launch, Clive Mather, Chief Executive of Shell Services International, said, "Shell's own Business Principles already broadly reflect the Global Sullivan Principles but Shell hopes that through its involvement with this initiative, Shell will learn from others and so continue to improve its own performance."

Mr. John Browne, BP CEO:

(source) http://english.sinopec.com/en-newsevent/en-news/2003/1696.shtml (excerpt)

Home> News and Events> News> 2003News

Chairman of Sinopec Corp. Met with CEO of BP Group

On Oct.29, Mr. Chen Tonghai, Chairman of Sinopec Corp., met with Lord John Browne, CEO of BP Group. Mr. Chen introduced production and reform of Sinopec Corp. to Lord John Browne. Lord John Browne much appreciated the friendly cooperation between the two parties in Shanghai Secco Ethylene Project. Both parties exchanged views on strengthening bilateral cooperation.

Mr. Lee Raymond, ExxonMobil CEO

http://www.srimedia.com/artman/publish/article_605.shtml

SRiMedia BREAKING NEWS

Wednesday March 23rd 2005

ExxonMobil's Chairman Lee Raymond reckless disregard of European Regulations

Posted by London on May 28, 2003, 18:57

ExxonMobil Chairman Lee Raymond's defence of the Oil giant's environmental record in today's AGM- denying data on global warming and the growth of the renewable energy sector - would be laughable were it not for his reckless disregard for upcoming European Regulations "capping" greenhouse gas emissions. Institutional shareholders may or may not be interested in whether Mr. Raymond personally believes in global warming, that surely is his business. However, shareholders sure ought to be interested in the whopping bill ExxonMobil will incur if the corporation fails to take action to comply with EU law in 2005.

Make that a mind-boggling bill if the Kyoto Protocol is ratified by Russia. You see, the problem is that ExxonMobil operates outside of the United States, a fact which its Chairman should know.

The European Union, along with other tiny economies such as Japan and Canada, are currently negotiating regulatory "caps" on Greenhouse Gas Emissions thought by scientists to contribute to global warming. These "cap and trade" schemes would, presumably, subject ExxonMobil subsidiaries such as ESSO and others, to reduce GHG emissions from renewable sources such as wind power, make major capital investments in re-tooling, or buy offsetting credits, in cash, from other producers. Yes, comply or pay cash.

Mr. Raymond further predicted in his comments to shareholders that wind and solar power will constitute only 1% of the world's energy supply by 2020.

The Brits certainly disagree. In a report published by the DTI, the U.K. government estimated renewable energy will constitute a £600 billion ($980 million) market by 2020. Well, Mr. Raymond apparently doesn't believe the British Government studies or similar research by investment banks (who believes their research these days anyway?) so how can he explain to ExxonMobil shareholders the $110 million commitment by the corporation to Stanford University to study....wait for it...global warming!

Mr. Raymond, by his public comments to shareholders, is exposing himself and ExxonMobil to unnecessary contingent liability. As Chairman and CEO of a publically listed company, Mr. Raymond has to personally vouch for the consolidated accounts of the global operations of ExxonMobil. So says section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act. He further has to vouch for contingent environmental liabilities pursuant to the same legislation.

Counsel for the corporation may wish to advise the Chairman that disclosure, in SEC filings, of any material costs of the compliance by subsidiaries with European regulations in 2005, is a good idea.

Thus, Mr. Raymond can trash global warming in public all he wants - his views are protected by the First Amendment - whilst the corporation can mitigate its litigation risk by recognizing other countries do believe in this phenomenon, and are going to regulate it.

Perhaps Mr. Raymond's statements provide support for corporate governance advocates to separate the Chairman and CEO role, to avoid such schizophrenia between the personal views of the steward of a corporation and the policy of the body corporate itself.

Oh, what about D&O premiums tied to global warming? Ask Swiss Re...

(source) http://www.srimedia.com/artman/publish/article_455.shtml

Shell Evacuates Staff from Niger Delta as Five Die in Clashes

Posted by on Mar 18, 2003, 22:39(Excerpt)

“Activists of the Federated Niger Delta Ijaw Communities (FNDIC) group said that the civilians died when troops raided an Ijaw town called Okerenkoko, on Thursday. The soldiers had accused community members of planning to disrupt the operations of Royal Dutch Shell. The Ijaw claim their fishing communities have been polluted by the oil industry. They also have a long-standing grievance over lack of compensation from Shell and the US oil company Chevron Texaco. “

>>>>>>>>World relationships with Shell & Indigenous people>>>>>>>>>>

Shell Game

by Stephanie Boyd

New Internationalist magazine, November 2000

(source: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Oil_watch/Shell_Game.html exerpt: “ Rivera recalls a Shell executive patting him on the shoulder after the company lost the bid, saying: 'Hey, look, it was worth the trouble fighting all the time because now we have a plan for working with indigenous communities worldwide.'”:

Transnationals everywhere are attempting to recast themselves as eco-friendly. But, as Stephanie Boyd discovers, sometimes it's not the way companies behave but the nature of the business itself which is at issue.

They promised this time it would d be different. 'Health, safety and environment' was their motto. A 'green' Shell. A friendly Shell. And even after losing a bid to f develop the Camisea gas fields in the Peruvian Amazon, Shell claimed the experience gave them a revolutionary guide for environmental regulations and social relations that would 'transform mineral exploration in the new century'.

Not surprisingly, both indigenous communities and environmentalists are uneasy about the legacy of Shell's brave new world in the Camisea concessions of the Lower Urubamba Valley - virgin rainforest just 100 kilometres from the famed Manu National Park. Machiguenga, Nahua and Kugapakori natives still lead a semi-nomadic life in this lush and isolated region of biodiversity. Their leaders are not certain whether a transnational giant like Shell can be trusted, but at the same time they feel they have little choice.

Camisea's estimated 600 million barrels of liquid natural gas are worth billions and communities say working with foreign companies is their only chance to get money for social projects. Peru's central government has ignored native people in the Urubamba Valley for centuries - leaving them without schools, health centres or other services. But environmental groups, like the San-Francisco-based Rainforest Action Network (RAN), want gas companies out of the Amazon. They urge Peru to develop alternative energy resources instead.

RAN claimed victory when Shell Oil and its partner Mobil Corp pulled out of Camisea in 1998 after investing $Y.7 billion over two years of exploration. But the real reason the company left was because of a dispute with the Peruvian Government over gas distribution rights and tariffs. Finally last February the contract was awarded to PlusPetrol, an Argentine-led consortium with a bleak environmental record and neither the interest nor the money to invest in social or ecological concerns.

Lelis Rivera, director of the Centre for the Development of Amazon Indigenous Peoples, has worked in the Urubamba Valley with the Machiguenga for 20 years and says local people are prepared for an uphill battle with the new company.

Rivera recalls a Shell executive patting him on the shoulder after the company lost the bid, saying: 'Hey, look, it was worth the trouble fighting all the time because now we have a plan for working with indigenous communities worldwide.'

Rivera says Shell first came to the region in the 1980s, with disastrous consequences. Whooping cough and influenza decimated previously uncontacted groups and sexual relations with indigenous women, including many rapes, left sexually transmitted diseases and the ironically named 'baby Shells'. So when Shell returned in 1996 the communities were prepared. By then nearly all the land under exploration had been legally titled to the Machiguenga and they were well versed in their rights under Peruvian and international law.

Still smarting from the public outcry over its alleged human-rights violations in Nigeria, Shell decided to engage in a little image polishing. Big shots like Washington's Smithsonian Institute were hired, along with a team of Peruvian anthropologists, to handle contact between the company and native people. Shell promised no other company employees would come in contact with locals and agreed not to build major roads, thus preventing an invasion from land-hungry peasants eager to turn the forest into farmland or deal in tropical hardwoods. Everything in and out of Shell's camps, from drill rigs to garbage, was supposed to be transported by air or water.

But the Machiguenga and their advisors were not so easily fooled. They chronicled a series of abuses that first year - including garbage left behind in campsites, abandoned airstrips that were never reforested and dangerous levels of hydrocarbons, cadmium and mercury in local water samples. The study convinced a shame-faced Shell to tighten up monitoring and Rivera says there was marked improvement during the second year.

But there were still unresolved issues. Shell wanted the Government to close a reserve protecting Kugapakori and Nahua peoples and title their land so it could be sold to Camisea. Rivera says this would have been impossible because, in the Nahua and Kugapakori cultures, land is shared among semi-nomadic groups and 'ownership' is not recognized. A sudden introduction to the outside world would also have been devastating.

Shell's belief that everything and everyone is negotiable is wrong, says Rivera: 'There are still places in the world that are not ready to be explored by oil and gas companies.'

Jesus Castro, a young anthropologist who worked as a Shell community-liaison officer, shares many of Rivera's opinions. 'And this was just the exploration phase,' says Castro, pointing out that the construction and operation of natural-gas pipelines have even greater potential for damage. Shell planned to build a massive pipeline snaking through virgin rainforest, ending up in Lima.

'One leak in a pipeline and everything within ten kilometres disappears,' he says. One pipeline explosion in 1989 in Russia, between the towns of Ufa and Asha, blew up two railroad trains and killed 575 people.

The harsh reality facing indigenous groups within the Camisea concession is that although Shell was far from perfect they had a better plan than other companies - including the Argentine consortium now in charge.

Pragmatists applaud Shell's attempts, saying environmentalists need to work with companies in developing greener technology. But in r the case of fossil fuels, even 'green' extraction, production and refining can't ameliorate oil's deadly long-term impact on the planet's environment. And although natural gas may be more ~ environmentally 'friendly' than coal or oil, it's still a non-renewable resource.

In a just world the Machiguenga would not have been forced into a position where selling their land - and threatening their way of life - was their only option. And if environmental and social damages were added to the cost (say in some form of tax), projects like Camisea would suddenly seem less profitable and more attention could be focused on developing real green technology.

Wipe away the rhetoric and Shell is still one of the world's top three oil and gas companies and co-owner of such controversial projects as the Bolivia-Brazil natural-gas pipeline which traverses important South American wetlands and forests.

The simple capitalist truism - that corporations exist to make profits - means companies like Shell will invest in the environment and social relations only as long as the game remains profitable. Pragmatists say it doesn't matter as long as the end result is positive. But a false conversion to the faith of sustainable development is as fragile as the Amazon, and likely to be blown away whenever the next consumer fad comes along.

Stephanie Boyd (stephtito@chavin.rcp.net. pe), a former editor with Latin America Press, now works as a freelance journalist in Lima.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not familiar with oil & gas drilling projects? (source for pics, videos, info: http://www.northstarenergyinc.com/)

Old native news about ANWR:

9-27-03 Announcements from:

Chickaloon Village
PO Box 1105
Chickaloon, Alaska 99674
907-745-0707

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

The fate of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is the fate of the Gwich'in Nation. If the Arctic Refuge is sacrificed to meet the high energy consumption needs of the US, the Gwich'in will not be able to continue our ancestral way of life and pass it on to our future generations as we have since time immemorial.

The Gwich'in need your help now to defend this sacred place from the desperate attempts of industry and the White House to violate the birthplace and nursery of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The Energy Conference Committee is currently deliberating a National Energy Bill; which includes a provision for oil development and extraction in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., leads the Senate Republicans in a House-Senate energy conference committee that is writing a final draft of a national energy bill. Republican leaders who favor oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge unveiled the language they will pursue on Monday. Release of the draft ANWR provision was not intended to signal that Republicans had secured the 60 votes necessary to overcome a threatened Senate filibuster of such language. Including the Arctic Drilling provision in the draft, makes it clear that this is in the chairman's mark, and that it is the wish Chairman Domenici R-N.M that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge be developed. Senator Domenici R-N.M has stated that the ANWR-opening language will be removed if it threatens passage of the overall energy bill

The drilling proposal revealed Monday would:
~Open the 1.5-million-acre coastal plain of ANWR to federal leasing by the Department of the Interior. Fifty percent of the leasing and royalty revenue would go to the state, a reduction from current law, which would send 90 percent to the state. The federal share would be directed to the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
~Allow no more than 2,000 acres to be disturbed "by production and support facilities, including airstrips and any areas covered by gravel berms or piers for support of pipelines." Work would be allowed only in winter. Also, the Secretary of the Interior would be authorized to withhold up to 45,000 acres from leasing to protect special areas.
~Declare that a 1987 environmental impact statement on oil leasing's potential effects is adequate to meet the law. An environmental impact statement on actions not covered by the 1987 review would have to be finished within 18 months.
~Order future leaseholders to negotiate a labor agreement with unions for construction, maintenance and production in the oil fields. Nothing in the proposal would require that such an agreement be signed.
~Limit court challenges of the legislation to whether the Interior Department complied with its terms. The department's actions would be presumed correct unless countered with "clear and convincing evidence to the contrary."
~Require lawsuits to be filed within 90 days of an action taken under the law or within 90 days "after the complainant knew or reasonably should have known of the grounds for the complaint."
~Order the Interior Department to solve land title uncertainties on the coastal plain by conveying land claimed by the Kaktovik Inupiat Corp. and the Arctic Slope Regional Corp.

THE 2,000 ACRE SCAM - "The proponents of drilling add insult to injury with their spurious arguments in favor of drilling. It is only a few thousand acres, they say. That is like saying, do not worry, the tumor is only in your lungs. The drilling will have impacts that will affect wildlife throughout the area."
--Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-NY) April 10, 200, CR H3251

The Energy bill that narrowly passed the House of Representatives in April 2003 (H.R. 6) contains an amendment designed to make oil development in our nation's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge sound more palatable. One of these scams was an amendment by Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) claiming that development would be confined to 2,000 acres.

The entire 1.5 million-acre coastal plain would still be opened to leasing and exploration. Drilling proponents claim the House energy bill would open only 2,000 acres to the oil corporations, but in fact the entire 1.5 million acre "1002 area" would be opened to leasing and exploration. There is no requirement that the 2,000 acres be contiguous.

Oil corporations want you to think it's one compact area. But, as with the North Slope oil fields west of the Arctic Refuge, development would sprawl over a very large area. Supporting infrastructure would have to stretch across the coastal plain.

The U.S. Geological Survey found that whatever oil and gas is under the Coastal Plain is in small deposits spread throughout the plain. This is why the bill includes the entire Coastal Plain and not a smaller portion of it. To produce oil from this vast area, networks of pipelines and roads would be built, fragmenting wildlife habitat. Even if the 2,000 acres were contiguous, it would have a huge impact on the wilderness.
a.. The 12-lane wide New Jersey turnpike, which stretches more than 100 miles across the state, covers only 1,773 acres.
b.. Twenty oil fields the size of the Alpine oil field could be scatted across the Coastal Plain.

The 2,000 acres does not include all oil industry infrastructure or facilities. The bill's 2,000 acres only included the area where oil facilities actually touched the ground, and excluded gravel mines, roads and pipelines (except their posts). It did not cover seismic or other exploration activities that would be done across the 1.5 million acre area. Air and noise pollution are carried far from developments.

The National Academy of Sciences found that impacts extend well beyond the immediate "footprint."

The negative effects of oil development on animals, vegetation, and human culture extend well beyond the immediate "footprint" of development, according to the Academy. It said, "the common practice of describing the effects of particular projects in terms of the area directly disturbed by roads, pads, pipeline, and other facilities ignores the spreading character of oil development on the North Slope and the consequences of this to. Wildland values over an area far exceeding the area directly affected." The oil field industrial sprawl on the North Slope, including drill sites, airports, roads, and gravel mines has a direct "footprint" of 15,000 acres, but it actually spreads across an area of more than 640,000 acres, or 1,000 square miles, according to the National Academy of Sciences 2003 study, Cumulative environmental effects of oil and gas activities on Alaska's North Slope ( P. 227).

WHAT YOU CAN DO: Call or Write your Senators and Representatives. Tell all of our relations to also make this call or write this letter today.

MAIN MESSAGE: Ask the Senators on the list to: Reject any direct or indirect language that would open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in the Energy Bill.

CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD TOLL FREE NUMBER: 1-800-839-5276
a.. If you live in the lower-48 states, please write to your Senators and urge them to oppose any Arctic drilling language in the Energy bill,
b.. If you live in Alaska, please contact the Senators listed below Remind them that many Alaskans oppose and are completely unrepresented by our own delegation. (We do not recommend sending emails since many offices disregard them or give them lower value than letters, faxes or phone calls.)

Please Call or Write the following Senators:

Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND)
United States Senate United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510
Ph: (202) 224-2315 PH: 202-224-2043
Fx: (202) 224-6519 Fx: 202-224-7776

Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NB)
United States Senate United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510
Ph: (202) 224-5641 Ph: 202-224-6551
Fx: (202) 224-1152 Fx: 202-228-0012

Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) Sen. Blanche Lincoln ( D-AR)
United States Senate United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20510
Ph: (202) 224-3753 Ph: 202-224-4843
Fx: (202) 228-3997 Fx: 202-228-1371