Benefit CD for Shell To Sea Campaign

by Biker Mon May 12, 2008 14:00

I see in today's Irish Times (12/05/08) that the Irish taxpayers have forked out €8.9 for garda security and overtime at Bellinaboy. And this government is closing hospital wards because its short of money! What a disgrace.

by billy idle Sat May 10, 2008 23:53

The pipe carrying the processed gas from the refinery will be a standard bord gais interconnector pipe which are usually laid along main roads and are then landscaped causing little or no environmental impact if done competently. Indeed they could probably be run along side existing service pipes carrying water, waste etc. which is standard method elsewhere. There is no camparison between this and the crazy route Shell are taking with their unprecidented high pressure raw gas pipe. The bord gais processed gas interconnector for the Corrib field already passes through some SAC land on its way from Galway

Secondly at the EPA oral hearing Shells proposed liquid waste outlet into Broadhaven bay turned out to be in the worst possible area since as pointed out by Erris Inshore Fishermans Assocciation prevailing tides would move most of it back in to the Bay. Not to mention the risk of accidents(highly likely given this crowds record) causing spillages of toxic substances at the Bellanably site which would then easily find there way through the prevailing watershed directly into the inner Broadhaven

Date from Belmullet Met station shows that the prevaling wind in Erris to be predominatly from the SW.

PS - Sad to see Shell trolls like this individual now reduced to saying black is white in a desperate attempt to excuse the seriously disfunctional nature of this project

by me again Sat May 10, 2008 23:19

Billy here is a few easily provable examples of why it is garbage you posted.
"(5) The liquid waste from the refinery will be discharged to the open Atlantic, not the relativly enclosed Broadhaven bay which is also an SAC and important fishery"
Every fisherman on the coast knows that once you go east of the Stag rocks the tidal currents are only a fraction of what they are off Erris head, look up any admiralty chart, or ask the chief.
So please don't insult our intelligence by trying to bluff.
Also "(3) It will not impact on any SAC's, NHA's or any other environmentally sensitive sites" well explain how you will connect to the board Gáis pipeline which is at bellanaboy, with miles of SAC between there and Glinsk?
And finally "(6) Because it is situated right on the North coast the prevailing wind(from the SW) will ensure that a large majority of the airborne emissions will be blown out to sea."
The north coast of where? tell the people of Belderrig/Ballina/Sligo, if the emissions were poison at bellanaboy, then surely they are poison if moved a few miles to Glinsk!
The prevailing winds are westerly's, Not SW.
Not that it will make a difference, there isn't a hope in hell that Shell would risk abandoning bellanaboy, and seek planning permission on a new site.
The people who proposed this "compromise" were naive in the extreme!

by billy idle Sat May 10, 2008 18:58

Assuming you even know what your talking about!!

by me Sat May 10, 2008 18:43

All I would say to billy idle is, have a look at a map, then please stop talking nonsense.

by billy idle Sat May 10, 2008 17:53

The site at glinsk would take care of 90% of the issues that arise at Bellanaboy.

1) Because its right on the coast there will be no need for a dangerous high pressure raw gas pipe running through peoples land near homesteds etc.

2) The area surrounding it is uninhabitated

3) It will not impact on any SAC's, NHA's or any other environmentally sensitive sites

4) It will not be in the watershed of Lough Carrowmore, Erris's main drinking water supply

5) The liquid waste from the refinery will be discharged to the open Atlantic, not the relativly enclosed Broadhaven bay which is also an SAC and important fishery

6) Because it is situated right on the North coast the prevailing wind(from the SW) will ensure that a large majority of the airborne emmissions will be blown out to sea.

All in all an eminantly sensible compromise and it is to the credit of people like JM, Rossport 5 and the majority of S2S,local people etc. who have shown just how reasonable and flexible they are by putting this forward, despite the hell they've been put through by Shell and the estaiblishment.

by jh Sat May 10, 2008 13:13

why would anybody agree to an onshore refinery, if the emmisions from that refinery are going to cause cancers and other illnesses.
that is what S2S told us will happen if the refinery is not offshore, so why now is it ok to have it onland, I think we should be told.

by JM Sat May 10, 2008 00:51 Rossport

The Irish Times - Thursday, May 1, 2008

Corrib gas compromise proposal is 'feasible'
LORNA SIGGINS, Marine Correspondent

A FORMER Bord Gáis Éireann engineering manager has said that a compromise Corrib gas refinery location proposed by north Mayo residents is “technically feasible”.

The coastal location for the gas refinery or terminal at Glinsk, proposed by a group of Kilcommon parish community leaders last weekend, has a “number of advantages”, according to Leo Corcoran, former Bord Gáis engineering manager and consultant to An Taisce.

These advantages included distance from a drinking water catchment and the fact that it would not require an onshore production pipeline, Mr Corcoran said.

“Most engineers will agree that 50m cliffs, such as those at Glinsk, don’t pose a technical problem, and refineries have been built in such locations before. The only problem for Shell is the money it has already poured into an unsuitable location at Bellanaboy,” Mr Corcoran said yesterday .

Shell consultants RPS, who had identified the location in an initial list of possible alternative routes for the onshore pipeline, moved to distance themselves from the debate over the compromise yesterday. Shell EP Ireland has already rejected the compromise, while Bishop of Killala Dr John Fleming, Mayo Fine Gael TD Michael Ring and Labour Party president Michael D Higgins have urged Minister for Energy Eamon Ryan and Shell to respond positively...

by safer homes Thu May 08, 2008 19:40

Has Shell shown a breath of interest in Glinsk? The safest place for refining has to be, offshore.

by S2Ser Thu May 08, 2008 19:07

JM, the proposal made in the statement of the 7 supporters of refining at Glinsk does not square with a campaign which seeks to 'protect health, safety, the environment and resources.

The proposal makes no reference to the robbery of our natural resources, and would not seriously remedy the environmental impact of the refinery on the surrounding area.

How do supporters of the proposal square it with the campaign's objectives?

by JM Thu May 08, 2008 18:39 Rossport

Shell To Sea has been, and continues to be, a campaign for Health, Safety, Environment and Resources.

An offshore production platform for Corrib would always be the safest option for the citizens of Ireland, and would have the least impact on sensitive environments. The only thing safer would be no refinery at all.

There are numerous alternatives to the in-land Bellanaboy refinery as currently planned, none of which have been given the slightest consideration by the oil industry. A shallow water platform would be better, as would a remote coastal location or an un-inhabited island. Everyone except Shell agrees, including Statoil, that Bellanboy was the wrong choice, and it remains so to this day.

Ireland's natural resources, including oil and gas, are being given away to multinational corporations with no return for the State, yet we are expected to bear the social and environmental costs without question.

If these are issues that give you cause for concern, you are free to get involved in any way you feel would be appropriate. You can find out more at the following:

royaldutchshellplc.com
Global news stories on Shell activities

www.artnotoil.org.uk
Creativity against oil exploitation

www.indymedia.ie/mayo
Open forum news and analysis

www.shelltosea.com
Campaign website

www.groundwork.org.za
Environmental justice in southern Africa

www.refineryreform.org
Cleaning up refineries in the US

www.dcmnr.gov.ie/Natural
Department of Natural Resources website

www.mayococo.ie/en/News/GasTerminal/
Mayo County Council Corrib info

www.corribgas.com/
Shell's pro-Corrib website

www.mayogasinfo.com
Researched facts and figures on Corrib

www.nigerdeltaawareness.com
Oil and gas impact in the Niger Delta

www.h-net.org/~esati/sdcea
South Durban Community Environmental Alliance

www.gcmonitor.org
Communities monitoring industrial neighbours

www.londonrisingtide.org.uk
Battling climate change and fossil fuels

www.struggle.ws/rsc/
Rossport Solidarity Camp Website

www.publicinquiry.ie/reports.php#ld196
"The Great Corrib Gas Controversy" publication

anghaeltacht.net/rosdumhach
Rossport story in Irish / Sceal Ros Dumhach as Gaeilge

www.remembersarowiwa.com/
Arts and human rights coalition in UK

www.kensarowiwa.com/
rights and environment campaign in Nigeria

by Pat Thu May 08, 2008 12:38

What exactly is the Shell to Sea campaign now?
The main players say they now want to put place a refinery on land near the coast and say they want the gas to come ashore..
..but this seems to be an anti capitalism/anti project promotion..
If I purchase a CD and donate what am I funding? anti project or Shell to Coast?
Can someone please explain what is going on... i dont understand.