International Herald Tribune: Shell 
Concealed Extent of Its Problems to Protect Nigeria Partnership.
Friday, March 19, 2004 
Posted 10 May 04 (an important article that we missed)
The Royal Dutch/Shell Group has kept secret key 
details of its sharp reduction of oil and gas reserves for fear of damaging its 
close ties to Nigeria, whose oil production quota set by OPEC might be 
jeopardized if the facts were disclosed, internal company documents show. 
Nigeria is seeking a significant increase in its quota with the Organization of 
the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which sets production levels for its members 
in an effort to control prices. A lower quota would mean less income for Shell 
and Nigeria and less Nigerian oil for the United States, the largest customer 
for its exports.
Since Shell disclosed two months ago that it had overstated its oil and gas 
reserves by 20 percent, or 3.9 billion barrels, the company's senior executives 
have pledged greater openness to investors, who were stunned by the revelations.
The company announced Thursday that it was again cutting its estimates of its 
reserves by the equivalent of 250 million barrels, mostly involving a natural 
gas field near Norway. Shell also postponed the publication of its 2003 annual 
report for two months to complete a review of its oil and gas assets.
But the company continues to conceal the extent of its problems in Nigeria, the 
country with the largest reserve restatement, to avoid endangering its 
partnership. Shell operates the largest joint venture with the Nigerian 
government. Confidential company documents late last year show that more than 
1.5 billion barrels, or 60 percent of Shell's earlier estimate of proven 
Nigerian reserves, were not fully compliant with accounting rules and company 
guidelines.
A report on Dec. 8, 2003, prepared for senior executives by Walter van de 
Vijver, then the top official for exploration and production, recommended that 
the revised Nigerian reserves stay confidential in view of host country 
sensitivities. Identifying the extent of Shell's lowered reserves in Nigeria, 
the report warned, could affect that country's quota discussions with OPEC. 
Nigeria has been seeking a large increase in its quota, currently at about two 
million barrels a day, as part of a plan to double its daily production over the 
next several years.
Reserves are a key input in quota discussions, the report says, and since 
Shell's portion of Nigeria's reserves constitutes about 50 percent of total 
country reserves, an external disclosure indicating that estimates have been 
overstated could negatively impact the government's position. An OPEC spokesman 
said Thursday that a team from OPEC's secretariat visited Nigeria last month and 
that the organization would discuss a new formula for determining quotas this 
year. Proven reserves, the spokesman said, were part of the quota calculation. 
Oil yields 90 percent of Nigeria's export revenue, and a doubling of its 
production could mean tens of billion dollars in extra annual income.
Andy Corrigan, a spokesman for Shell, the world's third-largest publicly traded 
oil company, declined Thursday to provide details about restated reserves in 
Nigeria, saying only that they constitute a significant proportion of the 
overall restatement. 
E.E. Imohe, the economics minister at the Nigerian Embassy in Washington, said 
he had passed on questions from a reporter to his government this week about 
Shell but had not yet received a reply.
Behind Shell's confidential stance are the company's own financial motivations, 
too. The report said negotiations with Nigeria over $385 million in bonus 
payments could be jeopardized by publication of too much information.
While reserves are a key indicator by which outsiders assess an oil company's 
future prospects, Shell's dealings with Nigeria resonate beyond the stock 
market.
Nigeria is the world's seventh biggest oil exporter. Shell's documents about 
Nigeria portray a sometimes fragile marriage of the two sides and offer a window 
into the kind of relationship that is vital to global energy security. Most of 
the world's oil resides in less-developed countries like Nigeria, yet much of 
the financial and technological resources needed to develop that oil belongs to 
Western oil companies. 
The documents give a far bleaker assessment of Nigerian operations than the 
company's public disclosures. 
For example, Nigeria has called for an end to the daily practice of releasing 
billions of cubic feet of natural gas into the atmosphere by 2008. The flared 
gas, a byproduct of oil production, has become an environmental and political 
issue. Shell's Web site says this opportunity to gather gas is going well. 
Corrigan said the company is committed to meeting the target. 
But a high-level company review last December found that many oil field projects 
were now seen as immature because of the lack of gas- gathering plans, many of 
which were still a long way from a possible request for funds. This, in turn, 
prompted concerns that oil production would have to be shut in without a way to 
utilize the gas. Natural gas is more expensive to transport than oil, so flaring 
the gas has been the most economical approach.
So far Shell has not released a country breakdown of its reserve restatements, 
but it told oil industry analysts last month that Nigeria and Australia were the 
two largest. Company documents show that Shell's senior managers were told in 
December that 720 million barrels in Nigeria were non-compliant with SEC 
guidelines and an additional 814 million barrels were potentially noncompliant. 
At the end of 2002 Shell booked 2.524 billion barrels of proven reserves for 
Nigeria, but after internal reviews and a tightening of company guidelines, the 
December report said only 990 million barrels fully complies with current Shell 
guidelines.
The document recommended that any debooking of proved reserves for Shell's 
venture in Nigeria not be identified publicly with Nigeria but classified under 
a wider geographic area. Last month, when Shell reported more details about the 
reserve downgrading, it said African operations accounted for 1.5 billion 
barrels of the revision. Shell has other operations in Africa, including Libya 
and Egypt, but Nigeria is the only African country listed in a potential 
reserves exposure catalogue distributed to senior executives late last year.
The Shell documents make clear that geology is just one part of determining 
whether oil or gas is a proved reserve. A company must also have firm plans to 
extract the resource and the investments to implement those plans. The absence 
of such commitments, the documents show, is why the Nigerian reserves were seen 
as noncompliant. 
From 1991 to 1999, Nigeria offered Shell and other oil companies an incentive to 
increase reserves, the Reserves Addition Bonus. Shell contended that it was owed 
$385 million under the bonus program, but it only sought 30 percent to 50 
percent of the claim, according to Shell's December report. The bonus program 
applied to a different, less-probable category of reserves than the publicly 
reported proved reserves, which have been downgraded.
In principle, the December document said, Shell's bonus claim should therefore 
not be impacted by reduction in Shell's proved reserves in Nigeria, but 
disclosing their exact amount is likely to undermine the current resolution 
process and put $115 million to $170 million at risk. There are more than 
financial issues behind the decline in reserves.
Community disturbances and political instability were also to blame, according 
to the Shell report late last year. Most of Nigeria's oil reserves are in the 
Delta region, where unrest caused a reduction in production last year. The Royal 
Dutch/Shell Group has kept secret key details of its sharp reduction of oil and 
gas reserves for fear of damaging its close ties to Nigeria, whose oil 
production quota set by OPEC might be jeopardized if the facts were disclosed, 
internal company documents show.
Nigeria is seeking a significant increase in its quota with the Organization of 
the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which sets production levels for its members 
in an effort to control prices. A lower quota would mean less income for Shell 
and Nigeria and less Nigerian oil for the United States, the largest customer 
for its exports.
Since Shell disclosed two months ago that it had overstated its oil and gas 
reserves by 20 percent, or 3.9 billion barrels, the company's senior executives 
have pledged greater openness to investors, who were stunned by the revelations.
The company announced Thursday that it was again cutting its estimates of its 
reserves by the equivalent of 250 million barrels, mostly involving a natural 
gas field near Norway. Shell also postponed the publication of its 2003 annual 
report for two months to complete a review of its oil and gas assets.
But the company continues to conceal the extent of its problems in Nigeria, the 
country with the largest reserve restatement, to avoid endangering its 
partnership. Shell operates the largest joint venture with the Nigerian 
government. Confidential company documents late last year show that more than 
1.5 billion barrels, or 60 percent of Shell's earlier estimate of proven 
Nigerian reserves, were not fully compliant with accounting rules and company 
guidelines.
A report on Dec. 8, 2003, prepared for senior executives by Walter van de 
Vijver, then the top official for exploration and production, recommended that 
the revised Nigerian reserves stay confidential in view of host country 
sensitivities. Identifying the extent of Shell's lowered reserves in Nigeria, 
the report warned, could affect that country's quota discussions with OPEC.
Nigeria has been seeking a large increase in its quota, currently at about two 
million barrels a day, as part of a plan to double its daily production over the 
next several years. Reserves are a key input in quota discussions, the report 
says, and since Shell's portion of Nigeria's reserves constitutes about 50 
percent of total country reserves, an external disclosure indicating that 
estimates have been overstated could negatively impact the government's 
position. An OPEC spokesman said Thursday that a team from OPEC's secretariat 
visited Nigeria last month and that the organization would discuss a new formula 
for determining quotas this year. Proven reserves, the spokesman said, were part 
of the quota calculation. Oil yields 90 percent of Nigeria's export revenue, and 
a doubling of its production could mean tens of billion dollars in extra annual 
income.
Andy Corrigan, a spokesman for Shell, the world's third-largest publicly traded 
oil company, declined Thursday to provide details about restated reserves in 
Nigeria, saying only that they constitute a significant proportion of the 
overall restatement.
E.E. Imohe, the economics minister at the Nigerian Embassy in Washington, said 
he had passed on questions from a reporter to his government this week about 
Shell but had not yet received a reply.
Behind Shell's confidential stance are the company's own financial motivations, 
too. The report said negotiations with Nigeria over $385 million in bonus 
payments could be jeopardized by publication of too much information.
While reserves are a key indicator by which outsiders assess an oil company's 
future prospects, Shell's dealings with Nigeria resonate beyond the stock 
market.
Nigeria is the world's seventh biggest oil exporter. Shell's documents about 
Nigeria portray a sometimes fragile marriage of the two sides and offer a window 
into the kind of relationship that is vital to global energy security. Most of 
the world's oil resides in less-developed countries like Nigeria, yet much of 
the financial and technological resources needed to develop that oil belongs to 
Western oil companies.
The documents give a far bleaker assessment of Nigerian operations than the 
company's public disclosures.
For example, Nigeria has called for an end to the daily practice of releasing 
billions of cubic feet of natural gas into the atmosphere by 2008. The flared 
gas, a byproduct of oil production, has become an environmental and political 
issue. Shell's Web site says this opportunity to gather gas is going well. 
Corrigan said the company is committed to meeting the target.
But a high-level company review last December found that many oil field projects 
were now seen as immature because of the lack of gas- gathering plans, many of 
which were still a long way from a possible request for funds. This, in turn, 
prompted concerns that oil production would have to be shut in without a way to 
utilize the gas. Natural gas is more expensive to transport than oil, so flaring 
the gas has been the most economical approach.
So far Shell has not released a country breakdown of its reserve restatements, 
but it told oil industry analysts last month that Nigeria and Australia were the 
two largest. Company documents show that Shell's senior managers were told in 
December that 720 million barrels in Nigeria were non-compliant with SEC 
guidelines and an additional 814 million barrels were potentially noncompliant. 
At the end of 2002 Shell booked 2.524 billion barrels of proven reserves for 
Nigeria, but after internal reviews and a tightening of company guidelines, the 
December report said only 990 million barrels fully complies with current Shell 
guidelines.
The document recommended that any debooking of proved reserves for Shell's 
venture in Nigeria not be identified publicly with Nigeria but classified under 
a wider geographic area. 
Last month, when Shell reported more details about the reserve downgrading, it 
said African operations accounted for 1.5 billion barrels of the revision. Shell 
has other operations in Africa, including Libya and Egypt, but Nigeria is the 
only African country listed in a potential reserves exposure catalogue 
distributed to senior executives late last year.
The Shell documents make clear that geology is just one part of determining 
whether oil or gas is a proved reserve. A company must also have firm plans to 
extract the resource and the investments to implement those plans. The absence 
of such commitments, the documents show, is why the Nigerian reserves were seen 
as noncompliant. 
From 1991 to 1999, Nigeria offered Shell and other oil companies an incentive to 
increase reserves, the Reserves Addition Bonus. Shell contended that it was owed 
$385 million under the bonus program, but it only sought 30 percent to 50 
percent of the claim, according to Shell's December report. The bonus program 
applied to a different, less-probable category of reserves than the publicly 
reported proved reserves, which have been downgraded.
In principle, the December document said, Shell's bonus claim should therefore 
not be impacted by reduction in Shell's proved reserves in Nigeria, but 
disclosing their exact amount is likely to undermine the current resolution 
process and put $115 million to $170 million at risk. There are more than 
financial issues behind the decline in reserves.
Community disturbances and political instability were also to blame, according 
to the Shell report late last year. Most of Nigeria's oil reserves are in the 
Delta region, where unrest caused a reduction in production last year. The Royal 
Dutch/Shell Group has kept secret key details of its sharp reduction of oil and 
gas reserves for fear of damaging its close ties to Nigeria, whose oil 
production quota set by OPEC might be jeopardized if the facts were disclosed, 
internal company documents show. 
Nigeria is seeking a significant increase in its quota with the Organization of 
the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which sets production levels for its members 
in an effort to control prices. A lower quota would mean less income for Shell.