Thursday, May 28th 2009
“Big Oil Bites Back”
Investors.com, May 28, 2009
“Chevron hasn’t operated in Ecuador since 1992 and got a clean bill of health from Ecuador in 1998. Any pollution now is a product of Ecuador’s mismanaged state oil company.”
Read more »
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
“Justice or Extortion of Chevron by Amazon Activists? The Economist Asks: Is the Rule of Law the Servant of Politics in Ecuador?”
San Francisco Sentinel, May 27, 2009
“President Correa, as The Economist points out, has aligned himself with the American trial attorneys and protesters and publicly stated his support for them. His struggling authoritarian government is nearly bankrupt and any money he can get in a lawsuit against Chevron will help his strongman government continue to survive.”
Read more »
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
“Did Amazon Defense Coalition Violate Terms of Logan Act While Waging Chevron Lawsuit?”
Bob McCarty Writes, May 27, 2009
“American trial lawyers “cozied up to leaders of the Ecuadoran government in zealous pursuit of a $27 billion judgment against Chevron Corporation.”
Read more »
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
Steven Donziger, the lead trial lawyer for the plaintiffs’ case, testified in front of a Congressional committee on April 28, 2009.
Throughout the hearing, he charged Chevron with a long list of highly inaccurate claims. This document responds to those charges and sets the record straight.
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
The Amazon Defense Coalition, the financial beneficiary of the lawsuit in Ecuador, issued a press release on 5/8/09 regarding a waste pit at Shushufindi-38 near Manuel Salinas’ home. The release alleges that Mr. Salinas’ water well is contaminated, and Texaco Petroleum was to blame.
In fact, Texaco Petroleum remediated all of the pits it was responsible for. Petroecuador is responsible for remediating the Shushufindi-38 site, and began that remediation in 2007. In addition, Petroecuador can be seen here performing a work-over (work-overs are major repairs or modifications to a well) on the site as recently as November 17, 2005 (others occurred in 1991, 1993, 1994 and two in 2002, all after Petroecuador assumed responsibility for Sushufindi-38.) In 2005, both parties sampled Mr. Salinas’ well and found that the water met USEPA drinking water standards for hydrocarbons and metals.
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
FICTION:
“…[N]ew proof has emerged that the oil giant never touched the majority of toxic waste pits that it certified as clean to Ecuador’s government in exchange for a legal release,” said a lawyer for the Amazon Defense Coalition. …”The release….does provide evidence of an underlying fraud that proves the remediation never really occurred, despite Chevron’s claims…” - Amazon Defense Coalition Press Release: 3/24/09
FACT:
Texaco Petroleum’s remediation program is a well-documented matter of public record, and this “evidence” of an alleged fraud is a knowing and deliberate fabrication by the plaintiffs. The Government of Ecuador and Petroecuador certified – and investigations by the Controller General’s office in Ecuador have confirmed – that Texaco Petroleum completed remediation in every one of the pits for which it was responsible, in accordance with all local and international regulations, accepted operating practices and contractual obligations.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys and the activists know – and are conveniently ignoring – that Petroecuador did not cooperate in the remediation program at the time when Texaco Petroleum carried out its commitments, and that Petroecuador did not begin a remediation program until 2005, promising to remediate all the remaining pits by 2010.
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
FICTION:
“During that period Texaco dumped 18.5 billion gallons of formation waters, a toxic byproduct of the drilling process, directly into a vast uninhabited area of the northern Ecuadorian Amazon in contravention of industry standards of the time.” - Amazon Watch Press Release: 6/4/07
FACT:
Texaco Petroleum always properly treated this naturally occurring “produced water” that comes to the surface during oil production before discharging it.
Moreover, Texaco Petroleum’s practice of releasing treated produced water into the environment was legal in Ecuador and in other countries like Venezuela and Colombia. Stream and river samples collected during the Judicial Inspections show that all of the water meets USEPA drinking water standards for hydrocarbons or metals except for those locations where Petroecuador had recently had a major spill. Notably, Mr. Cabrera did not take a single sample of water from a river, creek or stream. In 1998 the World Bank called the treatment and discharge of produced water an acceptable practice, and as recently as 2003, 800 million barrels of produced water were discharged worldwide (OGP, 2004) – 100 million in South America alone. Much of the 30 million barrels of produced water discharged in the Western U.S. was actually used in agricultural irrigation and wildlife watering holes.
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
FICTION:
“The existence of an environmental damage and the presence of toxic elements such as chromium, benzene, benzopyrene, and innumerous health threatening elements have been systematically proven.” - Pablo Fajardo, Radio Tropicana: 1/31/08
FACT:
While plaintiffs’ attorneys continually claim that carcinogens are present, the facts are very different. Mr. Cabrera didn’t analyze a single soil sample for benzene and he did not analyze any soil sample for any potentially carcinogenic heavy metals, including hexavalent chromium. He did analyze 178 soil samples for polyaromatic hydrocarbons including benzo[a]pyrene. No benzo[a]pyrene was detected in 171 of those samples (96%), and the 7 samples where it was found were from Petroecuador sites, not pits remediated by Texaco Petroleum. Mr. Cabrera collected a total of nine water samples either directly from water in open pits or from boreholes within pits and no benzo[a]pyrene was detected in any of these samples.
The actions of the plaintiffs speak louder than words. While continuing to lie about finding benzene in media statements, the reality is that the plaintiffs stopped testing for this compound in 2005 after test results continually returned zero traces of benzene.
Wednesday, May 27th 2009
FICTION:
“The evidence clearly documents how Chevron created a cancer pit in the Amazon to save money in its production costs.” - Pablo Fajardo, Amazon Defense Front Press Release: 2/28/08
FACT:
In 15 years of litigation the Amazon Defense Coalition has yet to submit a single piece of medical evidence to substantiate cancer claims.
Medical and scientific experts have reviewed the studies used by the plaintiffs to support their claims and each expert independently concluded that they are flawed, biased and inconclusive.
Arana and Arellano’s published letter in Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 2007 shows that there is not an increased risk of cancer in the village of San Carlos.
Kelsh, et al, concluded in their 2008 peer reviewed paper published in International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, “The national mortality data collected and summarized by INEC does not currently support a relationship of oil extraction activities and adverse health outcomes in potentially exposed communities.”
Neither the plaintiffs’ attorneys nor Mr. Cabrera have submitted any valid evidence to the court to support that there are increased health or cancer risks in the area. Mr. Cabrera submitted only a summary of an opinion survey from which he extrapolated approximately $9.2B for individual cancer deaths. Not only is his reported cancer death rate more than 250 times higher than that reported by the Ecuadorian government for this region of the Amazon, he fails to name a single beneficiary to collect the dollar damages. Instead plaintiffs have announced that all damage awards will go the Amazon Defense Front.
Tuesday, May 26th 2009
“Chevron, Ecuador and the Organized Shake-Down, Part I”
Shopfloor, May 26, 2009
“an attack on Chevron’s reputation, part of a coordinated campaign meant to bully the company into settling a multibillion dollar lawsuit brought by U.S. trial lawyers” … “Chevron has facts on its side.”
Read more »
Tuesday, May 26th 2009
“Trashing Chevron in Amazon Court”
By Judy Lloyd – Fox and Hounds Daily, May 26, 2009
“Not surprisingly, because they are a successful company, they are also a target for trial lawyers seeking to line their pockets through endless litigation.”
Read more »
Tuesday, May 26th 2009
“Following The Money Difficult in Ecuador Lawsuit”
Bob McCarty Writes, May 26, 2009
“Americans deserve to know more about the people behind the lawsuit, how they’ve raised money (if any) and how they’ve spent money to advance the lawsuit.”
Read more »
Thursday, May 21st 2009
“Justice or extortion? The hounding of an American oil company”
The Economist, May 21, 2009
“The judge in Lago Agrio, Juan Nunez, is expected to rule on the case later this year. He has made no secret of his sympathy for the plaintiffs. The lawsuit appears to have the backing of Mr. Correa’s government.”
Read more »
Friday, May 8th 2009
“The Combine: Activists, Lawyers and Ecuador Attacking Chevron”
Shopfloor, May 8, 2009
“President Correa agitates against American oppressors just as Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and Evo Morales in Bolivia do, and Chevron is a handy, wealthy target.”
Read more »
Thursday, May 7th 2009
“Ecuador grabs for Chevron’s wallet”
The Washington Times, May 7, 2009
“This looks like an Ecuadorian shakedown of millions of American small investors who have a stake in Chevron. Now that is a story worth investigating.”
Read more »
Wednesday, May 6th 2009
“Ecuador tries crude form of justice to steal $27 billion from Chevron”
By Dan Gainor – Business & Media Institute, May 6, 2009
“It’s the classic green battle- not green for Mother Earth, green for the cold, hard cash Ecuador is trying to steal. Chevron calls this case a ‘fraud’ and they are being kind.”
Read more »
Monday, May 4th 2009
“‘60 Minutes’ Promotes $27-Billion Leftist Fraud Efforts Against Chevron”
By Jeff Poor – Business & Media Institute, May 4, 2009
“PetroEcuador has a horrendous environmental record with more than 1,000 oil spills since 2000. In 2006, BusinessWeek said the company had “suffered an oil spill every two days this year.”
Read more »
Friday, May 1st 2009
“More Banana Justice”
Investors.com, May 1, 2009
“The case has zero merit, not only because Chevron’s Texaco acquisition hasn’t operated there in decades, but because it exited on best of terms. Chevron left Ecuador with no past or future liability in 1992, something the Ecuador government itself certified in 1998.”
Read more »
Tuesday, August 24th 2010
Reuters profiles the Chevron Ecuador case: A run-down court building that also houses the local casino in this Amazon jungle town is the unlikely venue for the largest environmental damages lawsuit ever tried. Read More »Tuesday, August 24th 2010
Reuters also features additional details of the Chevron Ecuador lawsuit: U.S.-based Chevron Corp (CVX.N) faces a $27 billion environmental damages lawsuit in Ecuador, a case that has already dragged on for years and could last many more if it gets bogged down in appeals. Read More »Friday, August 13th 2010
A new article on the Chevron Ecuador lawsuit: The story of Chevron in Ecuador already bears a remarkable resemblance to that of Dole in Nicaragua. A U.S. company persuades a U.S. judge to toss out an alien tort claim on forum non conveniens grounds. U.S. plaintiffs lawyers then seek jackpot damages in a Latin American court (while being lionized in a controversial documentary). The corporation discredits the Latin American court by returning to the U.S. courts and alleging fraud. In Dole's case, a judge in California state court found that some of the plaintiffs lawyers had misled the court. In the Chevron case, it appeared that the actor most clearly discredited was the Ecuadorian judge caught on film discussing damages with an outside party. But last week, as the Litigation Daily previously reported, Chevron's lawyers at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher filed a brief asserting that outtakes from the documentary Crude, turned over by the filmmaker in response to a Second Circuit discovery ruling, suggest that the plaintiffs lawyers themselves choreographed an "independent" expert's report recommending up to $27 billion in damages. Last year plaintiffs countered coverage of the judicial bias videotapes by attacking the motives and background of the American who secretly filmed the judge. Explaining the newly released footage will be more difficult. Based on what is known so far about the Crude outtakes, outrage seems appropriate. While the footage raises interesting questions of filmmaking ethics, what matters for the litigation is the apparent evidence of collusion between plaintiffs and court-appointed expert Richard Cabrera. Read More »
Wednesday, September 1st 2010
Discussion of the restrictions that Ecuador President Rafael Correa is placing on the media: Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Nicaragua have passed new media laws—all of them aimed at clipping the wings of privately owned news sources—and the call for “social control of media” is viral among lefty groups. (It was unanimously endorsed, for instance, by participants at an August confab in Argentina of regional leftist parties—which now govern 11 Latin American countries—called the São Paulo Forum.) “The threat to freedom is all around,” says Amaury de Souza, a Brazilian political scientist. “And it’s growing.” Read More »Wednesday, September 1st 2010
This article discusses Ecuador's oil exports and imports of refined crude: Ecuador is one of Latin America’s largest oil exporters, with net oil exports estimated at 305,000 barrels per day (bbl/d) in 2009. Read More »Wednesday, September 1st 2010
Ecuador signs second loan in two months with China: Ecuador and China signed on Tuesday a $1 billion loan deal as the Asian giant is pushing ahead with the policy of securing energy resources in Latin America and Africa. The fresh loan deal, which Ecuador's government signed in Beijing with the China Development Bank, comes just two months after Ecuador and the Export-Import Bank of China signed a $1.7 billion deal for financing a huge hydroelectric project in Ecuador. Read More »