Three more civil society activists have objected to the EPA’s decision not to require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for ExxonMobil’s offshore Kaieteur Block drilling programme and they also lambasted the government agency’s waiving of EIAs “for all manner of projects at an unprecedented level”.
In an October 23rd letter to Omkar Lochan, Chairman of the Environ-mental Assessment Board (EAB) which adjudicates appeals of decisions made by the EPA, Vanda Radzik, Janette Bulkan and Alfred Bhulai said “This is a dangerous trend and contradicts the EPA’s own proclaimed slogan: “The Environment is Every-body’s Business” and its mandate: “To promote, facilitate and coordinate effective environmental management and protection; and the sustainable use of Guyana natural resources.”
In their letter to Lochan, the trio noted that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in its public notice of September 24, 2021 had said that it had screened the project and assessed the potential environmental impacts and that it had determined that the project will not significantly affect the environment or human health and was therefore exempted from the requirement of an EIA.
The civil society activists said that the EPA has not provided any scientific or social impact evidence or any other rational grounds as to why an EIA/ Environmental and Social Impact Assessment is not warranted.
They said that they disagree with the two “flimsy” reasons provided by the EPA for its determination: 1. Review of existing environmental baseline information of the Kaieteur Block has been collected via two separate assessments in 2019 and 2020, respectively.
2. Conduct of similar campaigns in the Stabroek, Canje, and Kaieteur Blocks.
“We object to the lack of systematic disclosure of information about this project that by law should be in the public purview. The best approach to safeguarding our environment and our human health and well-being is to prevent harm, and apply the Pre-cautionary and the Avoidance Principles enshrined in Section 2 of the Environmental Protection Act.
Guyana’s EP Act requires every EIA to identify, describe and evaluate the direct and indirect effects of a proposed project on climatic factors and, most importantly, on the climate and atmosphere. This includes the impact of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel production. The EPA has to apply and enforce this Act and its protections against the deep water petroleum operations that threaten air, water, land and people’s health and well-being. Oil companies have to obey Guyana’s laws as do the Government, the EPA and the Private Sector”, the trio said.
The activists adverted the attention of the EAB to the very high risks to human and non-human lives and to the entire ecosystem of any well blowout. They cited the destruction of the Deep-water Horizon rig which was over the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010. “Macondo was 18,300’ deep under 5000’ feet of water, similar to Liza-1 in the Stabroek tract (17,825’ under 5719’ of water). Macondo blew out on 20 April 2010 and was sealed on 15 July 2010, 86 days later, with a spill rate of about 50,000 barrels per day under a wellhead pressure of >6000 psi.
“For comparison a car tyre has a pressure of 32 psi. We further remind the EAB that while the Macondo well is very similar in depth of water, it is only half the depth of underlying rock as Liza-1, Payara, and Yellowtail in Guyana’s EEZ and that the Kaieteur Block is in deeper water still”.
The activists argued that the fact that nothing has gone wrong with the wells drilled to date is no justification for ExxonMobil and its subsidiary EEPGL to not provide specific information on the precautions they are taking.
Arguing that the oil and gas industry is one of the most polluting in the world, the activists said this particular project entails the drilling of 12 wells and therefore triggers the need for an EIA when account is taken of the cumulative effects.
They further decried secret internal assessments by the EPA in relation to EIAs. They noted that the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation and Justice in
Environmental matters in Latin America and the Caribbean, also known as the “Escazú Agreement” came into full effect in April, 2021 and that President Irfaan Ali affirmed Guyana’s commitment to it in his speech on Earth Day, April 22.
They pointed out that Escazú guarantees “full and effective implementation of the rights of access to environmental information, public participation and justice” and protects the rights of citizens to live in a healthy environment. It also guarantees access to environmental information, consultation in environmental decision making processes.
In a letter to Lochan of October 22, environmentalist Simone Mangal-Joly has also objected to the EPA decision not to have an EIA for the 12-well programme in the Kaieteur Block.
In recent months there has been an upsurge in pressure on the EPA and the EAB over decisions made in terms of EIAs for major projects and the siting of others.
