Sorry for my recent extended absence, my family caught a nasty, week-long bug that everyone had the pleasure of catching causing me to not have the ample time to tend to this blog. My apologies to my loyal readers for not posting for awhile. We’re getting back to business this week.
Shell Oil has been under attack again, the company really cannot catch a break. The focus is on wreaking havoc on the environment, and the livelihood and human rights issues in Niger delta. For those of you who followed some of my previous posts on Shell, they were accused of allegedly being somehow involved in discussions with the Nigerian government around the time of human rights activitist’s, Ken Saro-Wiwa, execution. Shell, settled this suit in June for $15.5 million as a “humanitarian gesture,” versus accepting responsibility for his death, something the company did not believe they caused or with which they were involved. Ken Saro-Wiwa was executed by the Nigerian government for his work on behalf of the people the of Niger delta.
Regardless of the situation, it doesn’t look good for Shell. To make matters
worse, Amnesty International released a report on June 30the alleging how
decades of environmental damage by Shell and other oil companies in the Niger
Delta has caused serious violations of local people's human rights - leaving
them to drink polluted water, eat contaminated fish, farm on spoiled land, and
breathing in air that stinks of oil and gas. Because Shell was included in this
report, it only continues to damage their image, especially as it relates to the
environment and human rights.
Shell did come to its own defense as it should, acknowledging the people of
Niger Delta have not benefited as they should, yet blaming violence by
militants and official corruption. Being on the defense, unfortunately, does not
make any company or corporation look good, especially after just being on trial
for other environmental and human rights violations in the same area.
Yet another report from Friends of Earth-Europe focused on Shell’s continued investment in fossil fuels as well as their practice of gas flaring in the Niger delta, stating the company was aware of its practices releasing significant carbon emissions.
So what do you think, should Shell really be in the hot seat? Are they as harmful to the environment as they are being accused? We’ll examine this further in my next post and talk about what to do if a company or corporation is in this situation.
Helping You Understand and Profit from Consumer Health and Green Trends
Colette Chandler
