ExxonMobil wants to keep loopholes in Liza 1&2 permits that allowed flaring

Aug 21, 2020 News

---

By Kiana Wilburg

Before the Government grants its approval for the Field Development Plan (FDP) for ExxonMobil’s third project in the Stabroek Block, called Payara, there are two major environmental issues which have to be addressed.
One that is of grave concern is the fact that ExxonMobil is opposed to being bound by provisions that would prevent it from flaring once Payara gets up and running.
In fact, the American multi-national wants to preserve the same ambiguous language of its first permit for the Liza Phase One Project which allowed it to flare over 10 billion cubic feet of gas on the Liza Destiny vessel. The company had blamed the need to flare on the mechanical issues experienced with the vessel’s gas compressor system. That equipment is currently being fixed in Germany.
During an exclusive interview with Kaieteur News yesterday, Head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Dr. Vincent Adams confirmed that indeed, one of the issues of concern relate to flaring.
When questioned about why the company would want to preserve the loose terms despite concerns raised about the dangers of flaring, Dr. Adams said: “Well it tells you all you need to know about the mindset and safety culture of the company we are dealing with.”
The EPA Head said he has a duty to protect the nation and ensure that the same blunder with the first permit is not made again. “After all, the granting of approvals requires that we learn from the mistakes made in the award of previous permits and incorporate those learnings into whatever we are doing going forward…I am not here to make a career, I am here to protect Guyana.”
As it relates to ExxonMobil’s opposition, Dr. Adams sought to remind that he is entrusted with the power to withdraw or change unilaterally, any permit that is granted.
The EPA Head said: “I am already rewriting the permits for Liza One and Liza Two…”
FAILURE TO PAY
Dr. Adams was also keen to note that the EPA is in the process of taking ExxonMobil before the courts for its failure to pay the authority a fine that totals less than US$2,500 for the spilling of hydraulic fluid in six instances in the Stabroek Block. The EPA Head said that ExxonMobil is insisting that that the spills are not major and did not result in any environmental harm, as such; it does not believe it should be made to pay the fine.
But Dr. Adams said he disagrees with this as the permit granted to the oil giant, clearly states that it has to follow the manufacturer’s guide on the use of materials and equipment.
Due to its failure to follow such a simple instruction, Dr. Adams notes that there were six spills.
“And now, they want to direct the EPA and tell the EPA what is in its laws and what those laws actually mean. It is ridiculous that they are pushing back on this…,” the EPA Head said.
He added, “… When you consider this issue with flaring and then this refusal to pay this fine, it is clear to me that the culture of this company is production above safety. They are all about cutting corners for their bottom-line. We cannot continue like this…We have to take a firm position against ExxonMobil.”
BROKE ITS LAWS
Upon noting the comments of Dr. Adams to the effect that he had granted a permit with loopholes that allowed ExxonMobil to flare until it fixes the Liza Destiny’s gas compressor system, many international lawyers and environmentalists have since noted that the EPA had no right to grant such a permit in the first place.
International lawyer, Melinda Janki, was keen to note during an interview on Kaieteur Radio’s programme, Guyana’s Oil and You, that neither Dr. Adams nor the EPA has any legal standing to allow ExxonMobil to pollute the atmosphere.
The lawyer pointed out that the EPA in allowing this to occur, is flouting the nation’s laws which require that the agency control or prevent pollution.
Janki had said: “It is important to note that the permit that was issued to ExxonMobil’s subsidiary, Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL) was issued before he (Dr. Adams) arrived on the scene. So he inherited a situation that is most unsatisfactory…and I agree that the permit’s language is badly written…”
That said, Janki said it is prudent for the EPA to remember that its function by law is to protect the environment. “…It is bound by the Constitution which guarantees the right to a healthy environment, to prevent pollution,” the lawyer added. With this in mind, she insists that the EPA should shut down ExxonMobil’s operations until it can produce oil in a safe and environmentally friendly manner.
250 TOXINS
Extensive research conducted by Kaieteur News shows that gas flaring contributes to climate change, which has serious implications for the world.
The Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, was keen to note in one of its studies that gas flaring is actually a major source of greenhouse gases (GHG) contributing to global warming which could accelerate the problem of climatic change and harsh living conditions on earth, if not checked.
The Department also notes that there are over 250 toxins released from flaring including carcinogens such as benzopyrene, benzene, carbon disulphide (CS2), carbonyl sulphide (COS) and toluene; metals such as mercury, arsenic and chromium; sour gas with Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2); Nitrogen oxides (NOx); Carbon dioxide (CO2); and methane (CH4) which contributes to the greenhouse gases.

---

---