Shell breaks global warming promise for oil sands projects

Royal Dutch Shell has abandoned its written agreements to significantly
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution at its Jackpine Mine and Muskeg
River Mine Expansion oil sands projects. The commitments, made to the
Oil Sands Environmental Coalition (OSEC), helped inform the decision by
the governments of Alberta and Canada to grant regulatory approval for
the projects in 2004 and 2006, respectively.

“We have a long track record of actively working with oil sands
companies, government and other stakeholders to address the
environmental impacts of oil sands development,” said Marlo Raynolds,
Executive Director of the Pembina Institute. “Shell’s decision to break
these binding agreements calls into question its claims of
environmental leadership. Shell seems to believe it can break promises
to Canadians with impunity.”

Breaking its negotiated agreement to reduce GHG emissions from these
projects is a significant step backwards for Shell, a company that has
sought recognition as a leader in the oil sands for its approach to
climate change.

Prior to the approval of both projects, Shell had committed to
setting GHG pollution reduction targets in 2007 “to reduce emissions to
better than the most likely commercial alternative on a full-cycle
basis.” Without these commitments, Shell’s GHG pollution from these
projects will increase by an estimated 900,000 tonnes, which is
equivalent to adding 200,000 cars to the road in Canada.

“Shell has built its reputation in Canada by promising to address
the environmental and social concerns of stakeholders and communities.
Dropping its commitment raises the question of whether these types of
promises are driven by ethics or tactics,” said Simon Dyer, Oil Sands
Program Director at the Pembina Institute. “Shell’s betrayal of both
stakeholders and the governments that approved these projects will
undoubtedly reinforce the growing mistrust that Canadians have of the
oil sands industry, especially on environmental matters.”

In approving Shell’s projects, the Joint Review Panel struck by the
Alberta Energy Resources Conservation Board (ERCB) and the Government
of Canada explicitly noted that they would review Shell’s approval in
the event that the company failed to fulfill commitments that had been
presented as evidence. On behalf of OSEC, today the Pembina Institute
and Ecojustice filed an affidavit with the ERCB and the Government of
Canada requesting that the approval of these projects be re-considered
through a new public hearing.

“The Joint Review Panels were presented with these commitments as
evidence, and it informed their decision. That evidence no longer
reflects reality,” said Barry Robinson, a staff lawyer with Ecojustice
who will represent OSEC. “We are confident that the ERCB and the
Government of Canada will stand by their word and re-evaluate these
projects in light of this new evidence by promptly convening public
hearings.”