 tower, overreaching and the end of a huge empire.
Posting on Shell Blog on 22 Feb 2014 by Hans Bouman. Some 32 years in Shell E&P; last two jobs were Head of Production Technology Shell International EP and Manager Asset Groningen, the most valuable asset in Shell and ExxonMobil.
Excellent article which very clearly puts the finger on the sore spot! As a seasoned and most senior HSE auditor you are in the best position to reflect on these points. If I still would be working I would make your article compulsory reading for any HSE or Audit course. Budding HSE and audit professionals can learn from you.
After all my years in Shell, I know of no projects in our business that have not suffered from pinhole leaks, corrosion, faulty software, poor or wrongly executed design and maintenance, etc etc. Any of these occurrences should be de-escalated quickly if the proper systems and processes are in place. Yet, things do go wrong and on a vessel like the Prelude, the potential for rapid escalation of the problem is real.
The PLL appears to have been massaged low enough on paper and so the decision makers can wash their hands in innocence if something goes wrong. With a project of this magnitude and complexity (a Moonshot or an Elephant in Shell speak?), there is only one spot where the ultimate decision to proceed is taken and that is right at the very top.
Shell used to take pride in the fact that if a project did not pass the business principles, it just would not get done. The Prelude project does not involve corrupt governments or pressure from the USA to not get involved. So the top of Shell can relax, nothing stands in the way of their business principles anymore, only some mere technical challenges. However, the business principles cover more than corruption and environmental issues. Health and Safety are also very important matters in these principles.
Perhaps it should have been decided to call this a stranded asset and not book the reserves. But we all know how important booking of reserves is!
The top of Shell consists of very smart people so they must have considered this. And then to trust the advice of the technical side after all the problems over the past 10-15 years with major projects, as frequently reported on this site of Donovan, is – to put it mildly – quite courageous. Maybe they felt like Kennedy: ‘We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, ’. But Kennedy was a politician with different goals. Politicians do not drill wells and develop oilfield projects!
Or Shell should have come clean and admit that this is a trial and first of a series where we will learn from mistakes in order to develop otherwise stranded assets. Now that would be real courageous!