Exxon to train protected species observers to cushion operation impact on marine life
ExxonMobil will be training protected species observers as part of its plans to mitigate the environmental impact on marine life of its operations offshore and it is encouraging organisations to apply although it has already received about 100 applications for training.
“It is a process. Make sure you apply so everyone has the same opportunity,” ExxonMobil’s Senior Director of Public and Government Affairs Deedra Moe said last Thursday evening in response to concerns raised by head of the Guyana Marine Conservation Society Annette ArjoonMartins at a stakeholders’ forum for the company’s Payara project’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
On October 22nd, through project management firm RPS Group, ExxonMobil announced that it was looking for “local, motivated qualified candidates to become certified Protected Species Observers” in order to train them for the post, free of cost.
The posting stated that candidates would gain professional certification, which is accepted by regulatory agencies, as they join other passionate and hardworking groups of environmentalists.
While it did not state in which area candidates should be qualified, it said that they should have at least a Bachelor’s Degree and excellent written and verbal skills.
Arjoon-Martins said she did not believe that enough was being done to protect marine species, as she questioned the data presented on the marine life, while charging that it represented mere observations over a period and not proper research.
“There are no protected species observers in Guyana. So I had reasoned that had you started your capacity building by attaching Guyanese to your foreign observers, give them the formal training but, more importantly, put them as local counterparts to go and get working knowledge and continue that process…—I had made this recommendation since Liza 1 and am making it again—if we had done so, we would have gotten at least two dozen certified species observers by now … if they were serious about local capacity building, we would have been a bit ready and now all those vessels are out there doing work,” she said.
“All the information we are getting from the foreigners. They are using the information from their Protected Species Observer as baseline and we want research. Observation is not research. Research is an investigative study—say you go out at different points, different seasons… and you have accurate information. It is then you can say which whales will be passing through and when and what else and whatever,” she added.
She pointed out that in the event of making a case that offshore oil and gas operations were affecting marine life, there was no scientific data to refer to.
“There are just reports on observation data… you can only hold them accountable if you have scientific data… Have they established and compared their baseline from say Liza-1 and Liza-2? Can you say how it has impacted since then and what else ever? My friend in Suriname went out on Tullow’s vessel and did all her surveys on the whales. We know the sperm whales pass through our migratory waters in Suriname with calves in April. If a calf is going through and can’t swim away… More so they are ramping up their vessels then, are we to believe that the vessels will slow down for a whale or turtle? What about from the Georgetown harbour to the vessel, because there is increased activity there, who will stop for a whale or a turtle? They have to make sure they put watchdog people like us there but they don’t want us on board,” she said.
For its part, ExxonMobil believes that impact on marine life would be only negligible but has listed a number of plans to preserve marine life around its Stabroek Block operations.
The company said that it understands that there could be some impact, including potential health impacts on marine fauna. As a result, it assured that it plans to follow international standards for treatment of discharges to water.
Another possible impact could be changes in distribution of fish due to altered water quality. Further, while it said that injury of fish from sound exposure of the operations was also “negligible,” it pointed out that there could be some disturbance from “non-impulsive” sound during the functioning of the floating production, storage and offloading platform and other marine vessel operations, such as drilling. For this reason, the company says that it will follow international guidelines and employ trained marine mammal observers (MMOs) during impulsive noise activities. The company said that it will also avoid seismic operations if marine mammals are sighted within the mitigation zone during specified pre-startup periods and use soft-start procedures.
Additionally, it said it will regularly maintain marine vessels and operate them in accordance with manufacturers’ specifications and at their optimal levels to minimise sound levels to the extent reasonably practicable.
At the forum biologist Joe Ryan pleaded with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to have the company use alternative dispersants for oil waste disposal as he said that the current Corexit was itself toxic. The company said that it will do everything possible to protect the waters and meet global regulatory compliance. “In the unlikely event of a spill, which I agree is very small, what they will do is they will put a chemical dispersant