Team Ineos introduced before the start of the Tour de Yorkshire in Doncaster, 2 May 2019. Photo: DrillOrDrop
More than 100 campaign groups have urged the UK and Scottish governments not to bail out part of the Ineos group because of losses during the coronavirus outbreak.
Reports earlier this month (The Times, Sky News) suggested that Petroineos, part-owned by Jim Ratcliffe’s Ineos Group, was seeking an emergency government loan that could be as much as £500m.
But an open letter today signed by groups including Talk Fracking, Greenpeace UK, Frack Free United, Food and Water Action Europe and the fashion designer, Dame Vivienne Westwood, asked ministers not to grant any loans to the company.
Petroineos, a joint venture with the Chinese state oil firm, PetroChina, runs refineries at Grangemouth in Falkirk and Lavera, near Marseille in France.
Ineos Upstream, another part of the Ineos group, holds exploration licences across northern England. It has planning permission to drill and test for shale gas at sites in Derbyshire and south Yorkshire.
Dame Vivienne and her son, Joe Corre, said:
“The Prime Minister of the UK and the First Minister of Scotland must prove true climate leadership by not granting any government support to Jim Ratcliffe and Ineos.”
The letter said bail outs or government loans to companies like Petroineos could “not be tolerated” because they contributed “systematically” to climate change and increased plastic pollution:
“Every investment in or support for Ineos would directly fuel the climate and plastics crisis, locking in future instability at a time when investment should be prioritised towards creating secure and sustainable industry.”
The letter described Ineos as the “main driving force” behind the supply chain of fracked gas from the US used by Ineos to produce plastics in Europe.
“The Ineos Dragon Ships crossing the Atlantic emblazoned with the slogan ‘Shale Gas for Europe’ are leaving more than a toxic legacy in Europe — they are fuelling the proliferation of fracking in Pennsylvania, a state that was already struggling with the impacts of oil and gas industry pollution.”
Louise Edge, head of Greenpeace UK’s oceans plastic campaign, said:
“Any support packages for companies must set conditions to protect workers’ rights and high environmental standards, prevent public money from being diverted into the pockets of shareholders, and re-orientate the industry towards meeting the Paris climate agreement.”
- DrillOrDrop invited Ineos to respond to the letter. This article will be updated with any response.
Categories: Opposition, slider
DRILL OR DROP? 
If any of these groups had done anything like the efforts of INEOS across Europe to prevent deaths from Covid-19 they may have a bit more credibility!
And since when has the oil refinery at Grangemouth had ANYTHING to do with fracking?
And no refinery at Grangemouth? Pretty clever idea. Would put a stop to independence. LOL.
Martin
Fending off the 5g pyromaniacs and London Real Conspiracy guff passes the time during lockdown.
Now pagans and druids are signing up to prevent Petroineos getting a UK gov hand out. ( looking through the list of those against it). I looked for Trumps signature, as closing down Scottish insustry would no doubt help in the forthcoming UK / USA trade deal negotiations ( no need for frack gas Nicola….just buy our plastic instead ).
There were some Americans signing the letter, i guess they are in the pay of Trump / Bill Gates? ( and those from ROW were probably a bit hazy about who was asking and what for).
But back in the real world, the company should not get a loan if it does not need or deserve it, but i would say they get something as they link it to the refinery, not the plastics division. The SNP could topslice whatever the UK stumps up, to look willing i guess.
However, i am sure that
Ineos, the company that thought it would be acceptable to impose relentless continual drilling and fracking on local communities.
https://frack-off.org.uk/social-media-post/ineos-fracking-plans-revealed-396-wells-per-licence-block/
I doubt they will receive much sympathy from the tax payers.
An Empire of Trash
https://www.feasta.org/2016/06/11/jim-ratcliffe-ineos-and-the-empire-of-trash/
Well, jP, not wanting to burst your bubble, but it will not be the tax payers who make the decision, so their sympathies may count for very little!
I am a tax payer, who used to visit Grangemouth frequently, and my sympathy is with the good folk around that area (many now high tax payers) that have had a long period of uncertainty regarding the future of the refinery and the chemicals plant. I have had a clear explanation of what closure would mean to those good folk-not that such would be of any interest if it spoils your messaging. Not a very caring lot, are you, even though you try and present that you are.
This disgusting polluter who is not allowed by law to carry out fracking has got the nerve to apply for British taxpayer to bail them out. They’ve got to be joking! No way.
David Hudson
Wrong-again-David!
Sir Jim has just decided to frack elsewhere and will pay the appropriate taxes to the USA. Maybe, one day he will do the same and pay more taxes in UK. But probably not for some time-not least because his investment of £2.5 billion to keep open four chemical facilities in the UK, including Grangemouth Refinery have yet to show a significant profit!
Not to worry. His profitable businesses elsewhere will continue to fund his non profitable ones in UK??? LOL. Not the way international businesses function, David. If they operate profitably elsewhere it usually means because they receive better support elsewhere and that is where they will gravitate to over time, unless that same support is provided.
But, why not get excited about him being a tax exile? (Which he is NOT.) Can’t see the excitement about that. If his UK business is not that profitable, not much tax to exile is there!? Besides, the antis are continuously trying to delay his exploration in UK and add cost-which reduces his tax requirement even further!
Isnt he another tax exile domiciled in Monaco?
Yes UK’s richest non resident not long ago , perhaps he should pull his money out of his greenwashing campaigns and sell a few yachts to tide him over. Bless him , it must be tough .
Yes, hewes62, any company loan would need to be based upon the ability to repay ie. a sound business after Covid-19, and the consequences to the broader economy if the business just shut up shop.
As long as the first is met, a LOAN (not a GIFT) at current negative borrowing rates could be a nice little earner for the Government-and the tax payer.
Oil back to around $35/barrel, probably on the way to $55/barrel next year. Not sure about the down stream products made around this refinery, but this oil would be no different to the oil used to manufacture artificial rubber utilised widely in medical devices.
Collateral damage for these antis still being something to be ignored. They are very pleased to try and find collateral damage around those they dislike but totally ignore the collateral damage of their alternatives. Don’t think those employees earning very good money at the refinery, and all the support businesses, would be too pleased to be seen as candidates to be thrown under the electric bus.
Indeed Martin, they seem a confused and contradictory bunch. Petroineos is the joint venture between PetroChina and Ineos that own and operate the Grangemouth oil refinery, not the adjacent Ineos Grangemouth petrochemical site.
Even if it was the Ineos Grangemouth petrochemical site that were seeking a loan. I don’t see the logic in wanting to damage the main European producer of raw materials needed for hospital grade sanitisers and the plastics required for single use medical equipment and PPE during a global pandemic.
Ratcliffe, One of hte world’s richest men – you have got to feel sorry for him and Richard Branson. They have followed the fairy tale of making more and more money, but come the pandemic they went to the cupboard to find there was no jam left to go on their daily crust.
Hand sanitiser is made from 60% alohol and aloe vera. You can argue about how important plastics are to mankind. They are not good for hte planet and its ocieans. Certainly packaging is an area wehre plastic can and should be replaced with greener alternatives.
CJR, there are two approved formulations for the manufacturing of biocidal sanitiser products to meet both EU regulation requirements and World Health Organisation (WHO) standards.
Formulation 1:- Ethanol, Hydrogen peroxide, Glycerol, Sterile distilled or boiled cold water.
Formulation 2:- Isopropyl alcohol, Hydrogen peroxide, Glycerol, Sterile distilled or boiled cold water.
Ineos are the main European producer of both Ethanol and Isopropyl alcohol.
I will leave you to argue the point on how important to mankind the single use plastic gloves, aprons, saline drips, syringes, medical tubing, sterile laboratory equipment etc. are with NHS staff and patients.
Or, one could argue that your use of a plastic keyboard is not good for the planet or its oceans, CJR. However, of course, your use is okay and for others it is not!
Oh, talking about oceans, now ocean mining starting with all the damage to the environment that might cause-for what? Yes-to provide enough rare raw materials for alternative energy to function. And I agree with you about plastic packaging, having arthritis in some fingers, but why is a lot used? Because some twerps decided they could contaminate products that were not securely packaged and then blackmail retailers to pay them money to stop doing it! Even with Pick & Mix sweets! Plastic packaging is NOT the problem, incorrect disposal of it is. Just like sewage. The Victorians made good strides there, so plastic waste disposal should be easy in this day and age. There are more enlightened places in the world who are now digging up their plastic landfill as they have found it can be recycled in a much more environmentally friendly way AND a way that gives a profit!
PS. And you need to study how Sir Jim’s wealth was calculated, CJR. Very much an assessment of the value of the assets of his businesses, if they were sold. That was when they had a high value before Covid-19. It does not mean he has cash sloshing around in a bank to inject into a business. And it does not mean there would be loads queuing up with the money to pay him for those assets-including his own yachts, or houses at this point in time.
Suffering from cancer On chemo therapy and therefore shielding Yes very grateful for medical plastics but also mindful that the virus could be lurking on plastic surfaces. Quarantine all plastic packaging food etc coming into my house routinely. Difficult to manage.
From MedMD coronovirus viable on plastic packaging for
2 to 3 days