Shell to Sea

[small white mayoman]

Had Shell been cute about it and rehoused people nearby they probably could have saved themselves a lot of bother.

or they could have built an offshore refinery

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

yeah the gas would have to come onshore somewhere but it would cost a damn lot more to build a refinery offshore rather than onshore

So ?

Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

i'd didn't say it wasn't as i'm no expert in such matters however the reason i said that they could build and offshore refinery and saved themselves a lot of trouble was in reply to Indiana's comment wherby he stated that if shell were cute about it they could have rehoused people near by . I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of either side however if the govenment did not give shell a site to build an onshore refinery then shell would have had no choice to build the refinery at sea and perhaps saved themselves a lot of hassle

[Gnevin]

Had Shell been cute about it and rehoused people nearby they probably could have saved themselves a lot of bother.

or they could have built an offshore refinery

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

yeah the gas would have to come onshore somewhere but it would cost a damn lot more to build a refinery offshore rather than onshore

So ?

Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

i'd didn't say it wasn't as i'm no expert in such matters however the reason i said that they could build and offshore refinery and saved themselves a lot of trouble was in reply to Indiana's comment wherby he stated that if shell were cute about it they could have rehoused people near by . I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of either side however if the govenment did not give shell a site to build an onshore refinery then shell would have had no choice to build the refinery at sea and perhaps saved themselves a lot of hassle

Perhaps shell never though that a bunch of NIMBYs like these would be given such national attention and would of been so stubborn.

[ludermor]

i'd didn't say it wasn't as i'm no expert in such matters however the reason i said that they could build and offshore refinery and saved themselves a lot of trouble was in reply to Indiana's comment wherby he stated that if shell were cute about it they could have rehoused people near by . I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of either side however if the govenment did not give shell a site to build an onshore refinery then shell would have had no choice to build the refinery at sea and perhaps saved themselves a lot of hassle

That is a crucial issue, the Gov gave Shell CPO rights to the land, the first and only time it has been granted to a private company and is one of the biggest scandals of the development after the shite deal that was done in the first place

[Gnevin]

i'd didn't say it wasn't as i'm no expert in such matters however the reason i said that they could build and offshore refinery and saved themselves a lot of trouble was in reply to Indiana's comment wherby he stated that if shell were cute about it they could have rehoused people near by . I don't want to get into the rights or wrongs of either side however if the govenment did not give shell a site to build an onshore refinery then shell would have had no choice to build the refinery at sea and perhaps saved themselves a lot of hassle

That is a crucial issue, the Gov gave Shell CPO rights to the land, the first and only time it has been granted to a private company and is one of the biggest scandals of the development after the shite deal that was done in the first place

So this is about money ? What happened to the safety concerns ?

[turk]

Are any of the Shell to Sea protestors running in the local elections for the area this week?

[muppet]

GNevin

Who cares . I though this was about the line being unsafe not the ownership on gas and the profits.

The issue was the pumping of unrefined gas through the world's highest pressure pipeline past houses. That has evolved somewhat over the years but the counter argument, as seen on this thread, is all the employment Shell will create and how we will have our own gas supply. That is why it was worth pointing out there will be 50 permanent jobs and that the gas is not ours, Shell will sell it to the market at market rates.

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

Not quite the point. Onshore refined gas in a pipe is a lot safer than onshore unrefined gas. That was the whole point at the start. Onshore refining was a cost issue for Shell and the Government decided Shell's costs were more important than a couple of small villages in Mayo.


Ludermor

The propaganda goes both ways Muppet.
Shell never jailed anyone, the courts done that, the law of the land.

Shell took them to court for blocking Shell access to the locals own land. No Shell, no jail. Turns out Shell were the ones acting illegally but needless to say they have received no sanction.

you meant the enviromental/ecological damage?

I was talking about the social damage.

Indiana

The problem with this issue is that the locals have allowed a bunch of dole queue lifers, tree huggers and semi republicans latch onto the issue and use it for their own purposes. As a result people now probably have entirely the wrong impression of the locals, who are quite different from the layabouts.
I like the idea of foreign companies investing here, but I can see the health concerns of the locals. Had Shell been cute about it and rehoused people nearby -probably could have saved themselves a lot of bother

You have hit the nail on the head, twice. Protest like Glen of the Downs and the second Manchester runway attract undesirables and that can distract from the real issues. Particularly for tabloid hacks like Williams. Also you are spot on about Shell. Supt. McNamara (?) stated that he had to move protesters on because they were blocking roads for ambulances and fire services.

Ask the locals about blocked roads and how when they called the cops to move Shell 4x4s which were blocking roads the Gardai never came. This was right at the very start and got Shell off to a very bad start with some of the locals. That was before they closed roads themselves when they were moving peat. Families had to phone Shell when they were going to school, shops etc just to be allowed out of their houses. Supt McNamara never mentioned that.  

[Gnevin]

GNevin

Who cares . I though this was about the line being unsafe not the ownership on gas and the profits.

The issue was the pumping of unrefined gas through the world's highest pressure pipeline past houses. That has evolved somewhat over the years but the counter argument, as seen on this thread, is all the employment Shell will create and how we will have our own gas supply. That is why it was worth pointing out there will be 50 permanent jobs and that the gas is not ours, Shell will sell it to the market at market rates.

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

Not quite the point. Onshore refined gas in a pipe is a lot safer than onshore unrefined gas. That was the whole point at the start. Onshore refining was a cost issue for Shell and the Government decided Shell's costs were more important than a couple of small villages in Mayo.

Says who ?  Not Shell, the government or independent experts . So says who? STS?

[muppet]

GNevin

Who cares . I though this was about the line being unsafe not the ownership on gas and the profits.

The issue was the pumping of unrefined gas through the world's highest pressure pipeline past houses. That has evolved somewhat over the years but the counter argument, as seen on this thread, is all the employment Shell will create and how we will have our own gas supply. That is why it was worth pointing out there will be 50 permanent jobs and that the gas is not ours, Shell will sell it to the market at market rates.

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

Not quite the point. Onshore refined gas in a pipe is a lot safer than onshore unrefined gas. That was the whole point at the start. Onshore refining was a cost issue for Shell and the Government decided Shell's costs were more important than a couple of small villages in Mayo.

Says who ?  Not Shell, the government or independent experts . So says who? STS?

Let me get this right, you think unrefined gas in a pipe is not less safe than refined gas?

[Gnevin]

GNevin

Who cares . I though this was about the line being unsafe not the ownership on gas and the profits.

The issue was the pumping of unrefined gas through the world's highest pressure pipeline past houses. That has evolved somewhat over the years but the counter argument, as seen on this thread, is all the employment Shell will create and how we will have our own gas supply. That is why it was worth pointing out there will be 50 permanent jobs and that the gas is not ours, Shell will sell it to the market at market rates.

The gas would have to come on shore some where . Offshore refining is as safe as onshore refinery according to independent sources

Not quite the point. Onshore refined gas in a pipe is a lot safer than onshore unrefined gas. That was the whole point at the start. Onshore refining was a cost issue for Shell and the Government decided Shell's costs were more important than a couple of small villages in Mayo.

Says who ?  Not Shell, the government or independent experts . So says who? STS?

Let me get this right, you think unrefined gas in a pipe is not less safe than refined gas?

It's not about what you or me think. It's what the experts think .  I'm not sure if they compared the relative safety of on shore and off shore refining all I know is they said it was safe. 

[muppet]

http://www.naturalgas.org/naturalgas/processing_ng.asp

The above site is a US educational site on Natural Gas.

As a vested interest it will downplay any risks associated with the prodcut but it clearly states that US regulations will only allow 'purified' gas through pipelines.

Natural gas processing consists of separating all of the various hydrocarbons and fluids from the pure natural gas, to produce what is known as 'pipeline quality' dry natural gas. Major transportation pipelines usually impose restrictions on the make-up of the natural gas that is allowed into the pipeline. That means that before the natural gas can be transported it must be purified.

[Gnevin]

http://www.naturalgas.org/naturalgas/processing_ng.asp

The above site is a US educational site on Natural Gas.

As a vested interest it will downplay any risks associated with the prodcut but it clearly states that US regulations will only allow 'purified' gas through pipelines.

Natural gas processing consists of separating all of the various hydrocarbons and fluids from the pure natural gas, to produce what is known as 'pipeline quality' dry natural gas. Major transportation pipelines usually impose restrictions on the make-up of the natural gas that is allowed into the pipeline. That means that before the natural gas can be transported it must be purified.

Are you suddenly an expert on Natural Gas ?

[muppet]

http://www.naturalgas.org/naturalgas/processing_ng.asp

The above site is a US educational site on Natural Gas.

As a vested interest it will downplay any risks associated with the prodcut but it clearly states that US regulations will only allow 'purified' gas through pipelines.

Natural gas processing consists of separating all of the various hydrocarbons and fluids from the pure natural gas, to produce what is known as 'pipeline quality' dry natural gas. Major transportation pipelines usually impose restrictions on the make-up of the natural gas that is allowed into the pipeline. That means that before the natural gas can be transported it must be purified.

Are you suddenly an expert on Natural Gas ?

[ludermor]

Shell took them to court for blocking Shell access to the locals own land. No Shell, no jail. Turns out Shell were the ones acting illegally but needless to say they have received no sanction.

you meant the environmental/ecological damage?

I was talking about the social damage.

Can you give me links to that? I honestly didn't think that was the case

[Gnevin]

http://www.naturalgas.org/naturalgas/processing_ng.asp

The above site is a US educational site on Natural Gas.

As a vested interest it will downplay any risks associated with the prodcut but it clearly states that US regulations will only allow 'purified' gas through pipelines.

Natural gas processing consists of separating all of the various hydrocarbons and fluids from the pure natural gas, to produce what is known as 'pipeline quality' dry natural gas. Major transportation pipelines usually impose restrictions on the make-up of the natural gas that is allowed into the pipeline. That means that before the natural gas can be transported it must be purified.

Are you suddenly an expert on Natural Gas ?

Let me put it a different way . I would rate the opinion of independents experts over  the opinion of a well meaning discussion board user with no background in Natural Gas.

[muppet]

Shell took them to court for blocking Shell access to the locals own land. No Shell, no jail. Turns out Shell were the ones acting illegally but needless to say they have received no sanction.

you meant the environmental/ecological damage?

I was talking about the social damage.

Can you give me links to that? I honestly didn't think that was the case

The problem with this is that the (normally) credible media report only the official side of the story while to other side tends to be only reported on sites such as Indymedia and Blogs. I won't post links to them as even I accept they are not credible.

My understanding was that Shell acquired land under a CPO. The men prevented work being done on that land and Shell got a court order against the men. When they broke the order they were sent to jail for contempt of court. Then it subsequently emerged that the CPO was illegal.