Vironmental permits showcase marked improvements

to these Permits and if an approval is given, the EPA may include such terms and conditions as may be appropriate, including reduced timelines for any proposed flaring events.

“Pursuant to Condition 3.17 of the Payara Environmental Permit, the EPA has established a payment for CO2 equivalent emissions as a result of flaring at the rate of USD$30 per tonne of CO2e, consistent with similar mechanisms included in the modified Liza-1 Permit. The institution and applicability of this payment is determinable by the EPA, in consideration of the Polluter Pays Principle. The EPA also reserves the right to increase this rate where any instance of flaring exceeds sixty (60) days”, the statement said.

The EPA noted that the Stabroek News article reported that the thirty-six-day period approved for flaring under the Liza 1 Modified Environmental Permit had expired. However, the EPA said that at the date of the article’s publication, the approval issued to the company was still in effect. The environmental body further said that the Modified Permit requires that the payments be made to the EPA within twenty-eight days of the expiration of the approval in order to ensure it is calculated based on the actual volumes as well as sound internationally-recognised methodologies.

“To this end, the EPA refutes any allegations that it lacks the requisite capacity and capabilities to perform the necessary calculations. The EPA boasts a wide variety of professionals qualified in environmental management, chemistry, engineering and other pertinent fields, and recruits additional expertise, local and international as necessary.

“The EPA views the Payara Environmental Permit and the Modified Liza 1 Environmental Permit as marked improvements, particularly in consideration of the more specific flare management conditions that are consistent with industry practice in order to regulate and/or deter periods of flaring. Specifically, the Payara Permit was a major improvement in that it also included provisions for produced water management, cradle to grave waste management, insurance requirements and reporting mechanisms; which were notably absent from the Liza permits”, the environmental body said.

The EPA said it wishes to assure the public that it has pursued, and continues to pursue environmental safeguards and deterrent mechanisms to address any prolonged periods of flaring which may pose risks to the environment, “consistent with best-practice and international standards”.

The EPA and the government have come in for strong criticism for the manner in which environmental matters such as flaring have been handled. Searing criticism has come in particular from its former Director Dr Vincent Adams.

The EPA has also been pilloried for not being accessible to the media on environmental matters.