ExxonMobil makes no financial commitment to deal with responsibilities of possible oil spill

Aug 06, 2017 News

---

…yet granted Environmental Permit

 

There is a possibility that neighbouring countries, when environmental damage occurs, can move against Guyana. If the burden is left to bear by Guyana, the country may have to pay damages equivalent to years of oil revenues. ExxonMobil’s EIA also offers no compensation to fishermen and other Guyanese who are most likely to be affected
in the case of an oil spill.

 

ExxonMobil is known to be associated with some of the world’s most horrific oil spills. One good example is what happened in Alaska, United States.
In 1989, the oil tanker Exxon Valdez slammed into a reef and spilled more than 11 million gallons of crude oil into the cold, clear waters of Alaska. Those waters, referred to as ‘Prince William Sound’ were deemed one of the “last best places” on Earth. The oil charged through Prince William Sound and out into the Gulf of Alaska. The damage spread more than 1,300 miles of some of the most remote, wild shorelines in America.
The amount of oil spilled can fill 125 Olympic size swimming pools. Four deaths were directly associated with clean up efforts.
Although this happened 28 years ago, The Valdez area in Alaska has not recovered to date.
The coastal ecosystem is said to be permanently damaged. There are still pools of oil sitting in some parts of the beaches. This oil is still toxic and still hurting the ecosystem near the shore.
With ExxonMobil’s operations heading into full swing, Guyana is now at risk of having to face the consequences of an oil spill.
It was earlier reported that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accepted an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) from the oil giant. An EIA evaluates the likely environmental impacts of a proposed project or development, taking into account inter-related socio-economic, cultural and human-health impacts, both beneficial and adverse.
But ExxonMobil’s EIA leaves much to be desired.
According to the source document, ExxonMobil has little or no plans in place to deal with any financial eventuality of an oil spill.
Exxon claims that the possibility of an oil spill is not very high. However, it said that there is a 10 percent chance that in the event of a spill, oil will reach the coast of Guyana where 90 percent of its population sits.
ExxonMobil inferred that because of the purported ‘slim’ chance of an oil spill, detailed response measures are not needed. However, with a two percent possibility of occurring, the practice around the world is that oil companies are made to cater in detail for disasters. And indeed, the impact of an oil spill will be major for Guyana and its neighbours.
There is also nothing in the EIA that speaks to how Guyana’s neighbours will be compensated. What was clear is that ExxonMobil did not commit to bearing the legal or financial responsibility in the event of a disaster.
There is a possibility that neighbouring countries, when environmental damage occurs, can move against Guyana. If the burden is left to bear by Guyana, the country may have to pay damages equivalent to years of oil revenues.
ExxonMobil’s EIA also offers no compensation to fishermen and other Guyanese who are most likely to be affected in the case of an oil spill.
The EIA has little or no information on the role to be played by relevant stakeholders as it pertains to consultations, training and quick response measures. In short, the oil giant did not commit to anything.
In the event of an oil spill, there is no oversight mechanism in place to oversee the remedial action taken by the company.

Further, the entity said little on how it will maintain and monitor its own equipment to help prevent a spill. It did not commit to regularly checking for leaks in pipelines etc.
In other parts of the world, there are strict restrictions on drilling operations during the nesting and breeding season of marine mammals. But, in Guyana, Exxon is given a free rein; the EIA does not speak to this issue.
ExxonMobil’s EIA said that unplanned events, such as a “large oil spill,” are considered unlikely to occur because of the extensive preventative measures employed.
The EIA noted that the light nature of the Liza field crude oil, and the region’s warm waters would help minimize the severity of a spill. “Accounting for these factors, the modeling indicates only a five to 10 percent probability of any oil reaching the Guyana coast.”
However, Exxon admitted that a spill at a Liza well would likely impact marine resources found near the well.
The EIA also noted that air quality, water quality, seabirds, and fish could also be impacted.
The EIA noted, “…given the sensitivity of many of the resources that could be potentially impacted by a spill (e.g., Shell Beach Protected Area, marine mammals, critically endangered and endangered sea turtles, coastal Guyanese and Amerindian communities reliant on ecosystem services for sustenance and their livelihood), preparation for spill response is warranted. Therefore, we believe it is critical that EEPGL (Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited, Exxon’s partner) commit to regular oil spill response training exercises, document the availability of appropriate response equipment on board the FPSO (Floating Production Floating and Offloading unit) , and demonstrate that offsite equipment could be mobilized for a timely response.”
That is the extent to which the details of the handling of an oil spill were listed. The spill response procedure was not noted.
In early June, the EPA granted ExxonMobil its Environmental Permit. Without the environmental permit, a production license cannot be granted.

---

---