London --5 September 1995--Throughout the Brent Spar campaign Greenpeace based its case upon figures supplied by Shell. These indicated that the Brent Spar contained approximately 100 tonnes of toxic sludge and 30 tonnes of low level radioactive waste.
However, during its campaign against the dumping of the Brent Spar installation, Greenpeace took samples from three of the six storage tanks because of Shell's failure to provide an inventory of the contents of the installation. The results were published only five days before Shell reversed its decision to dump the Brent Spar.
Greenpeace scientists who analysed the samples were given the wrong information regarding the depths that the samples were taken. Instead of the depths being measured at the top of the storage tanks they were taken from top of vent pipes that gave access to the tanks. As a result of this, the estimate for the amount of oil remaining in the Brent Spar is likely to be in error.
However, the true inventory of the Brent Spar is still unclear.
"Although regrettable, Greenpeace does not consider the misunderstandings in our calculations to be of primary importance. It does not deflect from the strength of our case against sea dumping," said Sue Mayer, Greenpeace UK Science Director.
"Our opposition to the plans for deep sea disposal, and our public and political work were based on the information provided by Shell. The reports on which they based their initial decision have been criticised by independent scientists." For these documents Click here.
At the moment Det Norske Veritas (DNV) is conducting a complete inventory of the Spar. Greenpeace has constantly expressed support for the DNV inventory and hopes that it will provide essential information on which to base the precise programme for dismantling of the spar on land. DNV will present its findings on 18 October.
"The Greenpeace position on the Spar has never been based on kilos or tons, but on the principles of dumping. This has also been the debate in the wider political community. Clearly the way forward is to initiate as constructive a debate as quickly as possible on the decommissioning and disposal of oil installations in general, and how best to address the on-shore disposal of the Spar itself." said Mayer.
"Greenpeace relies on the trust of the public. Because of this we were happy to make it known that we had made a minor mistake. Greenpeace only wishes that Shell and the UK Government would be as honest and publicly admit their mistakes." said Mayer.
For more information: Greenpeace Communications +44-171-833 0600
LETTER TO SHELL UK
Dr Christopher Fay
Chairman and Chief Executive
Shell UK Ltd
Shell Mex House
Strand
London WC2R 0DX
4 September 1995
PM/TD
I'm looking forward to our meeting this Wednesday. In advance of seeing you, I am writing to you about the results of our sampling on the Brent Spar.
As you know, we were concerned that no full analysis had been done of the contents of the Brent Spar prior to your decision to dump it. Greenpeace therefore took some samples from a storage tank on the Brent Spar during our occupation. We were not able to sample tanks 2 and 4 as the vent pipes were blocked with oily sludge. We thought samples had been successfully taken from storage tank 1, but we have realised in the last few days that when the samples were taken the sampling device was still in the pipe leading into the storage tanks, rather than in the tank itself.
In many references to our sampling, we stressed that the results were not definitive, but I'm afraid that in writing to you and your colleagues on the Shell UK Board on 19 June, I said that our sampling showed a particular quantity of oil on the Brent Spar. That was wrong, and I apologise to you and your colleagues for this.
As I've said, our main concern was that there should be a full and independent inventory of the contents of the Brent Spar, and Greenpeace is delighted that, following your decision not to dump the Brent Spar at sea, such an inventory is being compiled by the independent analysts DNV.
As you also know from my letter to you of 16 August, since your decision not to dump the Brent Spar, scientists have now made it clear that there were fundamental flaws in the scientific arguments that Shell UK put forward to the public and to UK Government Ministers, justifying your decision to dump, in particular, concerning the ecology of the area where you proposed to dump the Brent Spar. I hope that is something, now you have the evidence for this, that Shell UK will be prepared to admit publicly.
In any event, as you know, the basic argument between Greenpeace and the European governments that supported our position on the one hand, and Shell UK and the UK Government on the other, was not about the contents of the Brent Spar, nor the physical characteristics of the proposed dump site. The argument was about whether it was right to dump industrial waste of any sort in the deep oceans, whether dumping the Brent Spar would be a precedent for dumping other oil installations, and indeed other waste in the oceans, and, fundamentally, over whether we should dump wastes into any part of the environment, as opposed to reducing waste, and recycling, treating or containing harmful materials. Our view remains that the division between us on the Brent Spar depends on how deeply we value our environment, and what damage and precedents we find unacceptable. As information about our sampling on the Brent Spar was made available to the press, I am making this letter similarly available, and I would be grateful if you could convey my apologies to your colleagues on the Board of Shell UK.
I look forward to seeing you on Wednesday.
Peter Melchett Executive Director GREENPEACE UK