British multinational Shell continued operating a major oil pipeline in Nigeria for years despite internal warnings that it was causing widespread environmental damage, according to internal documents.
The files, which include emails, presentations and technical assessments disclosed during ongoing UK legal proceedings, suggest senior executives were alerted as early as 2008 to the risks of continuing operations on the Nembe Creek Trunk Line — one of Shell’s key pipelines in Africa’s largest oil producer — amid escalating oil theft, sabotage and infrastructure failures.
Across the Niger Delta, decades of oil spills have left wetlands heavily polluted, with communities reporting devastated fisheries, contaminated waterways and worsening livelihoods.
Shell has previously acknowledged the documents but argues they lack context, insisting the situation was shaped by widespread criminal activity, including illegal refining and pipeline sabotage.
Internal correspondence from October 2008 shows a senior Shell executive, Markus Droll, then technical vice-president, warning colleagues about the risks of continuing operations under deteriorating conditions.
“If there is another massive explosive attack tomorrow… then we could well find ourselves in the situation of simply having to close the production down,” Droll wrote.
He also questioned whether the pipeline was being maintained to appropriate standards, adding:
“I don’t agree that funding can be an issue.”
“Sorry if I sound like a broken record on this – but the approach makes me – as your Technical VP – pretty uncomfortable.”
In response, Ann Pickard, then Shell’s regional executive vice-president, criticised the failure to mark the exchange as legally privileged.
“You have just exposed us significantly in your official disagreement as technical manager without legal privilege,” she wrote.
She acknowledged the decision was difficult but defended continued operations, stating:
“It was not an easy decision… but it represented the lower risk to both people and environment.”
“You are right, we may have to deal with it in the future.”
The Nembe Creek Trunk Line — a 60-mile (96.5km) pipeline capable of transporting up to 150,000 barrels of oil per day — ran through riverine communities including Bille, a cluster of 45 islands in the Niger Delta.
Shell sold the pipeline last year. However, it remains central to a UK lawsuit brought by local communities who allege environmental destruction caused by more than 100 oil leaks between 2011 and 2013.
The claimants are seeking $1bn (£742m), including $250m in compensation and $750m for environmental remediation.
According to UN figures cited in the case, at least 13 million barrels of oil have been spilled in Nigeria since 1958 across more than 7,000 incidents.
Residents of Bille say the spills have destroyed livelihoods that once depended on fishing and mangrove harvesting.
“Before 2011, here was a beautiful area. People play here and go into the river,” said 64-year-old fisherman Balafama Augustus Bruce.
He said that fish stocks had collapsed:
“We used to fish around here. But because of the damage [the spills] have caused, nobody is fishing here again.”
“Because of that I’ve become poor. I eat from hand to mouth.”
Another resident, Taminoibitein Philip, said pollution had become permanent:
“When you go to the bush, you won’t see periwinkle [any more],” she said.
“And the odour [is] killing us… some places – crude [oil], some place – gas.”
“We don’t benefit. We are suffering.”
A 2012 internal Shell document shows sections of the pipeline were classified as “red” due to illegal oil theft connections — a status that, under company guidelines, required immediate shutdown or urgent corrective action.
However, executives warned that shutting the pipeline could trigger further illegal tapping elsewhere.
Instead, the document shows approval was given for continued operation despite the risk classification.
Emails from 2013 reveal internal debate over auditing Shell’s handling of oil theft and pipeline integrity.
Vincent Holtam, then general manager for onshore assets in Nigeria, warned against the proposal, writing:
“I have no doubt that this [audit] will come out as UNACCEPTABLE, in which case we may be very exposed in disputing any oil loss claims from the Government or compensation claims from the community.”
The documents also reference a confidential internal review, codenamed “Project Madrid”, which assessed extensive environmental damage and estimated around 100 illegal refineries operating near the pipeline, affecting thousands of hectares of land and waterways.
Executives were presented with options ranging from temporary shutdowns to long-term operational suspension, though the final decision taken by leadership is not disclosed in the documents.
Shell said that decisions reflected “complex factors” including militancy, sabotage and organised criminal activity, and said it worked with Nigerian authorities and communities to respond to spills.
A spokesperson said:
“The documents selected are presented without the critical context of the operating environment in the Niger Delta at the time.”
“In isolation, they do not reflect the challenges of working against the backdrop of widespread organised criminality.”
Shell added that it has engaged with authorities and undertaken clean-up efforts “regardless of cause”.
Lawyers representing the Niger Delta communities argue that decision-making responsibility rested with Shell’s London headquarters.
Leigh Day said claimants “have always argued that Shell plc in London was ultimately making the key decisions in relation to its Nigerian subsidiary”.
Shell says it has spoken to former executives named in the documents, none of whom wished to comment.
The company also maintains that members of affected communities were themselves involved in oil theft.
Local leaders in Bille reject Shell’s position, blaming corporate negligence for the environmental damage.
“They are not concerned about what happens to you. Their concern is [to] continue to make profit,” said Chief Boma Renner Dappa.
“All that has happened in this environment is as a result of negligence,” he added.
He said pollution had destroyed livelihoods and left residents facing unknown long-term health risks.
Despite Shell selling the pipeline, residents insist the company remains responsible for decades of damage.
Philip said the community’s hope now rests with the courts:
“Let them come and flush the river for us.”
Shell says it will “vigorously defend” the claims when the case proceeds to trial next year.
Boluwatife Enome
Follow us on:
