Post on 18-Oct-2015
description
5/28/2018 Case Study
1/8
CASE STUDYSUNK COSTS : The
Plan to Dump the Brent Spar
5/28/2018 Case Study
2/8
CASE STUDY
Faced with the need to dispose of an offshore oil storageinstallation, the Royal Dutch Shell Corporation developswhat it believes is a straightforward and sensible plan: todump the oil platform deep in the ocean, 150 miles offthe northwest coast of Scotland. Doing so avoids a
number of problems, including potential environmentalthreats involved with transporting it and otherwisedisposing of it. The British government agrees but theunprecedented plan sparks outrage among environmentalgroups. The case describes the successful advocacy
campaign waged by the international environmentalgroup Greenpeace, which turned the Brent Spar plan intoa cause celebre, and the efforts of Shell to counter itscritics.
5/28/2018 Case Study
3/8
BRENT SPAR
Brent Spar was a North Sea oil storageand tanker loading buoy in the Brent oilfield, operated
by Shell UK.
Brent Spar became an issue of public concern in 1995,
when the British government announced its support
for Shell's application for disposal in
deep Atlantic waters at North Feni
Ridge (approximately 250 km from the west coast of
Scotland, at a depth of around 2.5 km).
5/28/2018 Case Study
4/8
GREENPEACE
Greenpeace became aware of the plan to sink the
Brent Spar at sea.
campaigning against ocean dumping in the North Sea
since the early 1980s, using high-seas tactics tophysically hinder the dumping of radioactive waste
and waste from titanium dioxide production, and
lobbying for a comprehensive ban on ocean
dumping.
5/28/2018 Case Study
5/8
Greenpeace objected to the plan to dispose of the
Brent Spar at sea on a number of issues:
lack of understanding of the deep sea environment.
dumping the Brent Spar at sea would create
a precedent for dumping other contaminated
structures in the sea and would undermine currentinternational agreements. The environmental effects
of further dumping would be cumulative.
Dismantling of the Brent Spar was technically feasible
minimizing the generation of wastes should be
upheld and harmful materials always recycled,
treated or contained.
5/28/2018 Case Study
6/8
Reactions in Europe
Germany- publicity over shells plans drew animmediate public reaction.
Organized a grassroots protest movements
including churches, politicians and localpoliticians to boycott Shells gasoline stations.
UK- took out ads in the national newspaper
demanding shell to accept its corporateresponsibility to public.
5/28/2018 Case Study
7/8
MISTAKES
Greenpeace overstated its case with incorrect
data calculated from measurements taken from
the storage tanks.
Greenpeace scientists were given the wrong
information regarding the depths that the
samples were taken.
Instead of the depths being measured at the topof the storage tanks, they were taken from the
top of vent pipes that gave access to tanks.
5/28/2018 Case Study
8/8
CONCLUSION
Greenpeace had grossly overestimated the
amount of oil left on board.
Shells assessment of the quantities of oil,
radioactivity, and toxic metals in the Spar were
broadly correct.