EPA decision on ‘low impacts to fisheries sector’ technically unsound- environmentalist

Jul 25, 2022 News

---

ExxonMobil 35- well exploration campaign…

Kaieteur News – Although May of this year commemorated seven years since United States oil major, ExxonMobil discovered significant hydrocarbons off the country’s coasts, Guyana is yet to conduct a comprehensive study of the critical environmental receptors that could be impacted by the company’s operations. Yet, the regulatory body that approves Exxon oil development and exploration projects, has determined in its most recent Screening Decision, for a new 35-well exploration campaign in the rich Stabroek Block, that impacts from the project to the fisheries sector would be low, given the distance of the project site to the coastline and fishing grounds.

This point was raised by Environmentalist, Simone Mangal-Joly during a recent interview with this newspaper. Mangal-Joly who is also a Geologist noted that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) reasoning is “very narrow”.

“The likelihood of impacts to coastal demographics and fisheries are low given the distance of the project site to the coastline and fishing grounds,” the EPA stated in its Screening Report for the project, adding in a Public Notice that “the impacts from the proposed project/activity will be temporary; and the impacts from the proposed project/activity will be localised.”

However, Mangal-Joly explained that in the absence of critical offshore data, the EPA’s decision is “technically unsound”.

According to her, “The question that we must ask here is whether Guyana has valuable offshore reefs, nurseries, and fish and mammal populations that may not be used by people but are valuable. These form part of an increasingly endangered marine biodiversity and food chain.”

She noted that the Environmental Protection Act requires the identification of sensitive environmental receptors and analysis of potential impacts on such receptors.

However, seven years after oil was found and after four Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) have been approved for ExxonMobil to produce oil and gas, in addition to the numerous waivers of EIAs for exploratory drilling and use of seismic guns for Exxon and other oil companies, “no one can tell you where the sensitive environmental receptors are located relative to the various production areas and exploratory drilling activities.”

Mangal-Joly argued that distance alone does not show the full picture of the likely dangers encompassed in a project. “What matters is the location of activities relative to sensitive receptors, nurseries, migratory routes for fish and mammals, different seasons of year when mammals and fish might be more vulnerable mating, spawning, respectively etcetera, direction of currents and the ocean topography, the movement of the many vessels servicing offshore activities etcetera,” she argued.

The environmentalist contended that these basic scientific facts have been missing throughout the permitting process. In fact, she said that nowhere in any EIA or EPA Screening Report for waived EIAs is there any acknowledgement or assessment of the cumulative effect of the exclusion of fishermen over time and space from fishing grounds to accommodate offshore oil and gas service vessels. This includes the many vessels bringing waste to shore, Mangal-Joly noted, explaining that “those exclusions do very much affect offshore as well as near shore fishers.”

She told this newspaper, “The truth is that all the conclusions made in the EIAs and by the EPA that impacts would be low have never been scientifically supported. Everything is just being assumed to have a low impact.”

Moreover, the environmentalist argued that oil companies such as ExxonMobil and Hess would not dare submit an EIA in their home countries without basic scientific information inclusive of a geospatial map, showing the location of their activities relative to sensitive environmental receptors and current directions.

To this end, Mangal-Joly said, “They are running a multi-billion-dollar profit outfit offshore Guyana and have millions to give to hospitals and things that gets their logos plastered everywhere and ingratiates themselves into our society, so why can’t they pay a relative pittance for appropriate studies to meet rock bottom standards when it comes to the EIAs that are getting them their permits?”

35- well Stabroek Block drilling campaign

Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL) commonly referred to as ExxonMobil Guyana, intends to commence the 35 well campaign in the third quarter of 2023, signaling that if discoveries are made, well tests may be performed. Conclusion of the proposed drilling campaign is expected by the fourth quarter of 2028.

The Project Summary explains, “The exact locations of the 35 exploration/appraisal wells comprising the Project have not yet been finalised. While some of the 35 wells will be drilled for exploration purposes, it is also possible that some of the wells may be drilled as appraisal wells within the proximity of previously drilled exploration areas. Therefore, four areas of interest have been identified within the Stabroek Block as the possible locations for the proposed 35 exploration/appraisal wells to occur.”

The document notes that EEPGL- the Stabroek Block operator- is acting on behalf of itself and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) Petroleum Guyana Limited, and Hess Guyana Exploration Limited in seeking an Environmental Authorization to carry out the activities.

The Stabroek Block is located approximately 200 kilometers offshore in Guyana waters, where EEPGL has conducted substantial exploration and development activities to date.

EEPGL currently has six drill ships operating offshore Guyana: the Stena Carron, the Stena DrillMAX, the Noble Bob Douglas, the Noble Tom Madden, the Noble Don Taylor, and the Noble Sam Croft. The wells could be drilled by any one of these six drill ships.

The drilling of the exploration/appraisal well(s) in the Stabroek Block is expected to potentially occur simultaneously with other drilling activities, including: The Liza Phase 1 Project well drilling and production operations; The Liza Phase 2 Development Project well drilling programme and production operations; The Payara Development Project well drilling programme, installation, and start of production; Ongoing exploration/appraisal well drilling operations in the Stabroek Block covered under a 25-well campaign approved on 1 October 2019; The Yellowtail Development Project well drilling programme and installation operations; and two 12 well campaigns in the Kaieteur and Canje oil blocks for which environmental authorization is currently being sought.
As such, the EPA has ordered that a Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) be conducted.

In the regulator’s screening report, it was explained “It can be concluded based on the existing data, technical review and exercise of discretion that the environmental and human impacts from the proposed 35 multi-well exploratory and appraisal drilling are known.” EPA said that while the likelihood of some of the impacts from the project were noted to be high, the severity of these impacts’ ranges from low to medium, once mitigation measures outlined, are implemented.

 

 

---

---