Paul Horsman heads the oil campaign at environmental pressure group Greenpeace International.
He reckons Shell U.K. Exploration & Production and Greenpeace have learned lessons from the Brent spar dumping battle, but the rest of the oil industry has not.
Since public and European government pressure forced Shell to abort its plan to dump the unused loading buoy in deep water off the U.K., Horsman reckons the attitude of Shell has changed markedly (OGJ, June 26, p. 21).
"We would have liked to have met with Shell before our campaign," said Horsman, " but we have since had several meetings. We think Shell has learned a lesson about openness."
Horsman said that while Greenpeace had been mistaken in its estimate of how much hazardous waste remains on the spar, "It was an honest mistake, but at least we say when we have made a mistake" (OGJ, Sept. 11, p. 22).
Snowball
The Brent spar PR campaign was no different from any other Greenpeace has mounted, said Horsman. Journalists and film crews were invited to join Greenpeace on Brent spar, but at first they refused.
So Greenpeace did what it normally does: shot its own film footage and released this to TV news editors. This resulted in later claims, disputed by Horsman, that Greenpeace had manipulated TV coverage.
"The Brent spar story snowballed and developed a life and momentum of its own," Horsman said. "Later on, if journalists couldn't interview Greenpeace, they interviewed each other. We had no control. It was a monster that just rolled on.
"It is not on our agenda to manipulate media. We shoot footage and let editors make their own decisions. Nobody in Greenpeace predicted it would become such a major news story. We should have been better prepared."
To Greenpeace, the general oil industry response to Brent spar is shown by the appointment by U.K. Offshore Operators Association of a PR company to advise it on promoting decommissioning (OGJ, Sept. 18, Newsletter).
"The oil industry is not seeing that dumping is wrong," Horsman said. "It sees only that it didn't get its message across."
Questions
Horsman said Amoco (U.K.) Ltd. recently decided on toppling and in situ dumping of a platform jacket in the North Sea's Northwest Hutton field, while Unocal U.K. Ltd. expressed a similar preference for Heather field.
Greenpeace has been in touch with both companies in an attempt to persuade them that in situ dumping is unsatisfactory, and only onshore dismantling will do.
Horsman said that among the questions Amoco and Unocal and all other oil companies should be considering is: Who is going to be liable for monitoring and maintaining the dumped structure for as long as 100 years?
"They should start thinking about environmental issues in the same way as they think of their long term investment policies," Horsman said. "They should be considering what pressures will be forthcoming from the public in 15 years time if current trends continue."
