Dear Editor,
On January 24, 2023, a Reuters Exclusive article stated that, “Exxon Mobil Corp (XOM.N) said it has
stopped routine flaring of natural gas from production in the top U.S. shale basin and will press for
stronger regulations for rivals to do the same, company officials said in an interview”.
(https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/exxon-halts-routine-gas-flaring-permian-wants-others-follow-2023-01-24/) While in Guyana, Exxon continues to flair gas despite its stated claims on its website about “Environmental efforts in Guyana” ,
(https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/locations/guyana/environmental-efforts-in-guyana) “ExxonMobil’s fundamental goal everywhere we operate, including Guyana, is to reduce environmental incidents to zero through a process of continuous improvement and the delivery of superior environmental performance. Not only do we comply with all applicable environmental laws and regulations and seek to go beyond these where practical, we apply international standards where laws and regulations do not exist.”
Since Guyana has no Environmental Laws to restrict flaring, one would have expected that ExxonMobil would have implemented international standards such as 30 CFR § 250.1160.
(https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/30/250.1160). Instead, Exxon-Mobil continues to flare gas without restriction and have convinced the Guyana EPA to accept a paltry fee for flaring excess gas (above the ten (10) percent which I understand is included in their contract) while contaminating our environment and breaching international standards. I wondered why ExxonMobil had to flare ten (10) percent of the gas when they claimed that it is better to inject all the natural gas back into the wells.
Two paragraphs in a recent article on January 22,2023 in Inews Guyana may shed some light on why ExxonMobil is flaring ten (10) percent of the gas, (https://www.inewsguyana.com/gas-to-energy-project-can-pay-for-itself-vp-jagdeo-on-loan- repayment/ ). “The pipeline aspect is through the sale of the liquids. So, when we sell the liquids at the current price it is, we’ll probably get upwards of $100 million from the sale of the cooking gas and other liquids. That could repay the loan to EXIM bank and our share of the cost of oil,” Jagdeo further explained. “When the project is completed, the Government will make an annual payment to EEPGL coventurers over a 20-year period to recover the cost of their investment in the pipeline used to deliver a minimum of 50 million cubic feet of gas per day to Wales.”
Editor, I have written before that 50 MMscfd does not have enough LPG to satisfy the local market and questioned where the additional LPG was coming from. This latest Inews Guyana article has prompted me do some additional research and I have suddenly realized that the ten (10) percent gas that ExxonMobil is flaring is LPG. We are aware that ExxonMobil is reinjecting the gas at high pressure because of the number of times the high pressure compressor failed. ExxonMobil has to be injecting the gas at pressures exceeding one thousand (1,000 PSI) pounds per square inch. Since LPG becomes a liquid under a modest pressure of one hundred and seventy-seven (177 PSI) pounds per square inch, and since a liquid is incompressible, then ExxonMobil must remove the LPG before they can increase the pressure to over 1,000 PSI.
Also, based on the composition of the gas from Liza operation, we know that the LPG is 10.5 percent (Propane 6.7% and Butane 3.8%) of the total associated gas. Since there are no facilities to process the LPG on the ship (FPSO) then ExxonMobil has resorted to flaring the LPG and have not released this information to the Guyanese public. Imagine them trying to explain that they are currently flaring twice as much LPG than the local consumption and the Guyanese public is currently paying G$4,500 per 20lbs cylinder. This would also explain where ExxonMobil would be getting the LPG that they proposed to sell to third parties.
Reference Stabroek News article July 2021 by Laurel Sutherland, “Serious questions raised on gas to shore project at scoping meeting – sales to be made to third parties. It is amazing that the Guyana Government is building a pipeline for 1.3 billion US dollars to bring 50 MMscfd of gas to shore and ExxonMobil will be using the same pipeline free of charge to bring the 10% gas (LPG) they are currently flaring to shore. In addition, Guyana is also building the gas processing plant to process the LPG which ExxonMobil has plans to sell to third parties. The above analysis clearly shows that it is ExxonMobil and their partners (and not the Government of Guyana) who should be the ones to finance the gas to shore pipeline and the gas processing plant.
Sincerely,
Tara Singh
