Guyanese environmentalist asks Exxon official to justify need for local gas-to-shore project, but gets no response

Jul 11, 2021 News

Consultations for proposed gas project….

Kaieteur News – A Guyanese environmentalist participating in the ongoing virtual consultation led by Exxon Mobil subsidiary, Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEGPL), on the proposed onshore gas-to-energy project, has asked the oil operators to justify a need for the gas project locally but got no response.
Environmental professional, Simone Mangal, is among those who questioned the feasibility of the project in the face of efforts from the Government of Guyana to invest in a pipeline, which will bring gas-to-shore for local and commercial use.

Guyanese environmentalist, Simone Mangal

The concerns are being raised even as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has ordered consultations for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) into the proposed onshore gas project, which has faced heavy criticisms over how the project will be of use to the people of Guyana.
The concerns also follow a report on a similar project in Ghana’s energy sector, which left the African country struggling to be financially sustainable, mainly due to a gas project which was meant to lower the cost electricity and off more reliable sources of energy, but left the country trapped in a deal which requires it to pay for a lot of gas that it has no use for.
During the virtual discussion on Thursday, Mangal expressed concerns about the local demand for such a project and the effects it will have on Guyana’s future generations.
She pointed to a need for clarity on the specifics on how the project will benefit and impact the citizenry. The environmentalist noted that the ambiguity, which surrounds the project, makes it difficult for her to adequately understand the real aims and objectives of the exercise.
“I am struggling to meet the objectives of this consultation exercise because the scope of this project is not clear. You would appreciate as a professional, that unless the scope is clear then you cannot begin to imagine what areas of impact has to be examined. I must be able to constructively contribute to the terms of reference process that you have outlined….,” she said stressing on need for clarity on whether there is demand for the gas locally.
“What is the purpose of transporting the gas to the shores of Guyana through a pipeline? Is it to monetise the gas? Is it because Guyana requires an energy demand that is going to be met by this gas?” queried Mangal.

An example of gas-to-shore pipeline that is proposed. (picoilnowguyana)

“I would like to understand who owns the gas. Who is selling the propane, methane and pentane? Is it a joint venture? And the second thing is, what is the demand that the Government of Guyana or the people of Guyana has to justify a pipeline coming to shore, because if we have an X amount of demand based on business usual but we have excess amount coming its effectively [an issue] which means if we are not using it all up or we are intending to put in an industrial footprint to use it up. We need to know where the gas is going in order to fully understand what the commutative or real impact… according to the parameters that you have outlined, which are environmental as well as socio-economic,” outlined the environmentalist.
She submitted that the matters needed to be clarified sooner than later so that consultative process gives the realistic and adequate feedback for the project to move forward.
However, EEGPL’s representative on the panel, Erik DeMicco, provided no response to the concerns raised. Instead, he suggested that the questions are best suited for another forum that it was outside of the ambit of the project’s scope.
He noted that: “As part of the process of the EIA it’s very clear that we need to stay within the constraints of what the project specifically ties to, which is the initiating location of pipeline, at the FPSOs to the natural gas.”
“That goes into some of the commercial aspect of the project,” added DeMicco.
“And we are really looking at the environmental, biological, physical receptors and socio-economic,” he continued, adding, “I am sure you will then say how can we look at the socio-economic, if we are not sure of how the other aspects tie in to this project. We may need to follow-up with that… but I think that’s where the notes will be taken for the comments and concerns to ensure that the EIA captures all the information as it goes through the process.”
He suggested further, that there will be other opportunities where such concerns will be addressed.
“And this, this is the first opportunity to hear more about the project, it’s very early in the stages, we will have stakeholder engagements later in the cycle to capture more information on the operations, and hopefully provide you with some more of those details that you are requesting. Your comments have been captured and the information will be provided at a later time, but as it relates to the commercial aspects, I don’t have that within my information at this time,” he said.