On the heels of a key decision on approvals for ExxonMobil’s Payara well for which the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had outlined a number of critical concerns, the agency’s Director Dr Vincent Adams was yesterday sent on immediate leave by the PPP/C administration.
“I received a letter to proceed on vacation since I had 126 days outstanding. The records in Human Resource states I am entitled to 77 days,” he confirmed with this newspaper when contacted.
Questioned on whether he had outstanding work, he said that he did and would ensure he brings government up to date on where he is before proceeding on leave. He said that his letter stipulated that he hands over to Sharifa Razack. She is currently the Permit Review and Authorisation Manager and reports to the Director of Corporate Services.
Adams’ abrupt exit from a process that he was actively a part of, as well as being this country’s lead technical person, is likely to draw public consternation and questions on the rationale of the move.
The decision also came one day after ExxonMobil defended its plans to release thousands of gallons of reservoir water into the ocean instead of re-injecting it into wells, claiming that it could drive costs up and this country would need to determine the balance it takes.
“The water that we produce is treated on the vessel and what is discharged causes no damage to the environment. It is treated to international standards and there is no harm at all. There is a discussion that is ongoing for Payara on whether or not we go to a different standard, which is you say would be to inject that water. There are some potential risks to doing that, some chemistry issues between the produced water and the reservoir fluids which could cause potential problems creating fractures in the reservoir,” ExxonMobil Country President Alistair Routledge on Wednesday told a virtual press conference.
“There are also potentially environmental aspects of treating and injecting that water in addition to sea water, in the sense that you can have more air emissions because of the potential energy that is needed for the treating of that water. As always with environmental issues these are quite complex balancing acts as to how we manage to get the minimal impact, to protect the environment and to maximize the return to the state from it,” he explained.
Minster of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat had told this newspaper that concerns raised by Guyana’s oversight agencies were among reasons for an expanded examination of plans for ExxonMobil’s proposed third oil well, Payara, which the former premier of Alberta, Canada, Alison Redford, has been tapped to lead.
The Minister had said that it was concerns raised by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the Department of Energy, such as the impact of reservoir water dumping into the ocean and flaring volumes that are among the issued to be addressed.
And according to one source, “As I understand, there are issues about Exxon’s dumping of over 250,000 tonnes of reservoir water into the ocean and then using clean ocean water for reinjection. That does not make sense because the well water is to be used for reinjection. There is no study on the impact and toxicity of this on the ocean and we cannot just go with commitments. We need to see the studies of the effects because this is a different project. The density and technical information and management of the reservoir has to meet international and environmental standards or we will just be left to spend whatever money we got on clean up.”
“There are also issues about flaring [of gas] because you know the situation we are in. We have said that we do not want flaring. And …there has to be legal binding language and clauses that guarantee and clarify what is expected, because the feedback thus far is not good. I also understand that an issue about ocean vibrations and tremors was raised…so there a number of issues,” the source added.
With over 10.2 billion cubic feet of gas flared to date, ExxonMobil’s Presi-dent would not commit to a deadline. The company had said by August 10th of this year but then said that COVID-19 restrictions has seen that process extended. Nonetheless, Routledge said “Our aim is always to minimize it. It is a safety requirement to have no flare…and we hope very soon to be on pilot.”
It was Adams, who has decades of experience in the public and private sectors in environmental management, groundwater, and petroleum production fields, and worked on US$ billion dollar-projects at the United States Department of Energy, where he had served for some 30 years, who was playing a “lead role” for government’s side on discussions on Payara.
‘Simplify’
The one-time professor’s contract was signed in October of 2018 for a five-year period and he had emphasised that he wanted to boost oversight capacity, especially in the oil and gas sector before leaving, as he did not intend to restart a career here.
Since then, he has been credited in getting oil giant ExxonMobil to commit to unlimited insurance liability in the event of a spill here.
Adams holds a PhD in Environmental Engineering, MSc Degrees in Groundwater Hydrology and Geological Engineering/Petroleum Engineering, and a BSc in Civil Engineering and was once employed with global oil major British Petroleum . “We have Dr. Adams there and he knows what this is about and what is needed to be done in the best interest of this country and are confident he will assist,” one source said.
When this newspaper had questioned why Adams was not then appointed the lead reviewer, the source said that it was a Canadian grant and Redford was identified by the Canadian government and this government has confidence that she and Adams and the entire team, “will advise the government on the people’s best interest, this country’s best interest and the environment’s sustainability.”
Adams was asked how he felt about being sent on leave at this critical time when he is not there to defend the points he had raised about the Payara project. He responded that while he does need his vacation time, he wanted to see the process to the end, knowing how critical the concerns were to the long-term environmental sustainability of this country.
“I would have liked to assist the team to bringing the review to completion. Some of the issues are technical and complex and someone without understanding the scientific and technical points would not be able to aptly brief both the policy makers and the review team on them. I felt that I could simplify it so that we are not confused with too much technical terms,” he said.
It is the very technical matters that ExxonMobil’s Country Head says are to be dealt with, but opined that when it comes down to it, it would be a question of deciding between monies earned from the project or the safety of the environment.
“For now they are technical matters being worked between our technical team and the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy. There may be one or two issues where they no longer become technical; they truly become, if you like, a balance between what it is the government want between economic return to the state versus the protection to the environment,” he said.
