Internal Shell documents disclosed in a UK court case have exposed evidence of ageing pipelines, missing oil wells and an estimated $10.9 billion decommissioning liability, raising fresh questions over decades of pollution in Nigeria’s Niger Delta.
Internal Shell documents disclosed in a United Kingdom court case have exposed what rights groups describe as years of neglected infrastructure, weak environmental oversight and attempts to minimise the cost of pollution in Nigeria’s oil-producing Niger Delta, raising fresh questions over the company’s environmental record before its exit from the country’s onshore oil business.
The report analyses confidential Shell emails, technical audits, presentations and internal reviews disclosed during ongoing legal proceedings in the UK.
It alleges that Shell knew of serious integrity failures in its pipelines and oil wells, exempted its Nigerian subsidiary from some internal safety standards, and delayed decommissioning ageing facilities despite acknowledging the environmental risks.
The revelations come barely a year after Shell completed the sale of its former onshore subsidiary, Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC), to Renaissance Africa Energy, a transaction that drew widespread concerns from environmental campaigners over responsibility for decades of oil pollution across the Niger Delta.
The report also follows years of litigation brought by affected Nigerian communities against Shell in European courts over pollution connected to its operations.
Among the most striking disclosures is an internal email describing the old Nembe Creek Trunk Line as “a basket” because of its deteriorating condition.
PREMIUM Times had reported that the 96.5-kilometre Nembe Creek Trunk Line runs near the riverine Bille community—a cluster of 45 islands—connecting inland oilfields to export terminals.
This newspaper reported that the pipeline was among the company’s largest oil transport infrastructure assets in Nigeria, with the capacity to transport about 150,000 barrels of crude daily. However, it repeatedly suffered leaks, vandalism and crude oil theft.
A recent visit by PREMIUM TIMES to the Bille community showed residents grappling with new environmental concerns, including reports of subterranean emissions of toxic gases within residential areas and surrounding waterways.
According to the report, although Shell replaced the pipeline in 2010, about 80 kilometres of the old line remained filled with stagnant crude oil years later because the company allegedly lacked funds to decommission it properly.
The documents indicate that the abandoned pipeline recorded at least six operational spills after its replacement, while Shell staff warned internally that additional spills were inevitable unless urgent action was taken.
The report alleges that the company continued oil production despite recognising the environmental dangers posed by the deteriorating infrastructure.
It also cites internal discussions showing Shell managers questioned whether the company should continue producing while “knowing that further environmental damage will occur”.
The report further alleges that Shell could not account for hundreds of oil wells within its Nigerian operations.
According to the report, an internal report submitted to the company’s then Chief Executive Officer in 2014 showed that hundreds of onshore wells were either missing from Shell’s electronic tracking system or their condition could not be verified.
PREMIUM TIMES recently reported calls from Niger Delta groups demanding an audit of abandoned oil wells in the Niger Delta describing them as a time bomb that poses threats to lives, ecosystem and public health.
The report says Shell subsequently launched what it called a “well hunt campaign,” which uncovered about 750 overdue maintenance tasks that contributed to an unsatisfactory audit assessment.
The documents also indicate that Shell lacked real-time pipeline monitoring systems capable of detecting smaller leaks before they caused extensive environmental damage.
The report stated that internal technical reviews further found that pipelines intended for replacement every 15 years remained in service far beyond their design life, with maintenance largely relying on responding to failures after they occurred rather than on preventive replacement.
The report also alleges that more than 1,600 pipeline clamps had been installed across Shell’s network, including numerous older clamps whose precise locations could no longer be identified.
For years, Shell has maintained that the overwhelming majority of oil spills in the Niger Delta resulted from sabotage, crude oil theft and illegal refining.
However, Amnesty International argues that the newly disclosed documents complicate that narrative.
According to the report, senior Shell officials acknowledged that illegal tapping points on pipelines were sometimes left in place because removing them would require shutting down oil production.
One internal communication cited in the report said the Nigerian security agency responsible for pipeline protection accused Shell of being “complicit” in oil theft because illegal connections were not promptly removed.
The report also alleges that Shell executives suspected some company staff and contractors could have been involved in organised oil theft.
Rights groups further argue that Shell’s own documents raise questions about the reliability of oil spill investigations, alleging that company personnel often lacked adequate equipment to distinguish between operational failures and third-party interference.
That distinction carries major legal consequences because the Nigerian National Oil Spills Detection and Response Agency Act (2006) generally provides compensation to affected communities only where spills are classified as operational failures rather than sabotage.
One of the most financially significant disclosures is an internal estimate placing the cost of decommissioning Shell’s onshore assets at $10.9 billion, excluding environmental remediation.
The report says another internal presentation identified approximately 375 square kilometres of mangrove forest affected by pollution and questioned whether the company had the “appetite” to deal with the open-ended environmental liability.
