From an oily contract to an unregulated gaseous pipeline: Guyanese must say no to ExxonMobil’s eyepass

(This is one of a series of weekly columns from Guyanese in the diaspora and others with an interest in issues related to Guyana and the Caribbean)

Elizabeth Deane-Hughes has been a non-practicing Attorney since the late 1990s. She is very passionate about ensuring that the nascent gas sector starts up with proper regulations and legal instruments in place. She dreams of going back to her farm and creativity when these faulty GTE pipeline EIA/EIS are withdrawn or repudiated. Hopefully very soon!

We were unprepared and undereducated for the Oil Industry in 2006. Fast forward to 2022 and the Gas aspect of the Oil & Gas industry is about to start up on very faulty grounds and yet still we are unprepared and undereducated. The oil and the gas sectors of the one industry commonly called O & G entertain entirely different risks. Everybody knows oil is not gas and gas doesn’t turn into oil, even if gas may be in the mix of oil coming up from the wells deep at the bottom of the sea.

On 20 April 2022 the developer ExxonMobil Guyana submitted their Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and their Environmental Impact Strategy (EIS) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval to move into the permission stage. Generally, after permission is granted the construction phase begins. This submission of the documents triggers a 60-day period, ending 18 June 2022, for the citizenry to peruse and submit any comments and/or concerns about what is contained in the very voluminous documents, which some say runs to as much as 5000+ pages.

I started to read the documents but in the week ending 7th May 2022, advertisements for public consultations about the submitted EIS/EIA were in the press. ExxonMobil Guyana was politely and respectfully asked to postpone this road show until after the closing date of June 18, 2022. On Sunday 8th May 2022, their press department issued a statement which said that “the public consultations were complimentary to the process”. I decided to attend these “complimentary to the process” sessions. At the first public consultation session held in Region 4 at the Umana Yana, 11 May 2022, I took the opportunity to state the following which is part of a printed document I had prepared as a statement and submitted.

“I take this opportunity to make it pellucidly clear that I have no objections to pipelines nor this one per se. My concerns are with the lack of due process and following procedure. There are fundamental breaches in adherence to the instruments that govern our country and also that of the Gunning principles.

This can however be fixed, simply by recalling the submitted EIS/EIA documents, and resubmitting after correcting the errors which include but are not limited to:

● Engaging the primary stakeholders who are in the area of influence (AOI) as defined in the environmental impact plan in the EIA/EIS – it’s interesting that the document has photographs of houses in Crane, Canals Number 1&2 but yet still the people living next to the proposed pipeline were not engaged. It is asserted that extensive stakeholder consultations were held throughout regions 1-6, but this group was overlooked

● Attaching the required signatures and addresses, showing ownership of the land where the pipeline is going and all the other requirements as stated in the Environmental Protection Act and its Regulations

● Crafting a gas pipeline management plan – this is done internationally including the USA, Australia and Mexico just to name a few – that includes modelling for gas spills not just oil spills

● Undertaking an environmental study of marine life – after all we have turtles that nest on our shores – that includes assessing the impacts of seismic activity

● Taking out the draft document/documents. (There is a draft technical report in Volume 2 of the submitted EIS/EIA which has very prohibitive limiting clauses. There are 3 volumes that make up the submitted EIA/EIS)

This would create a win/win for both EEPGL/ExxonMobil & the people of Guyana.

All of us here are leaving the shores of this life empty handed; the least we can do is create a platform of adherence to our current written instruments for generations to come. “

The submitted EIA/EIS are replete with errors starting off with the lack of a feasibility study. Without the feasibility study there is no basis on which the gas-toenergy (GTE) pipeline project may proceed or exist. Even the Petroleum Agreement 2016, when all of these woes began, says so. The Attorney General was asked if Guyana varied that term in the governing contract and so far, all we get is absolutely dead silence; not even an acknowledgement.

So, it became clear from attending those four sessions that there is a general under-education about the whole O& G sector and that they are two separate assets that may complement each other but have very different characteristics and risk factors. The developer and their hired assistants kept using words and concepts quite glibly; as though oil and gas are synonymous and as if the compulsory land acquisition and the EIA consultancy requirements are the same.

Another version of the same behaviour pattern is evident in the submitted documents where an oil spill plan is used in a gas pipeline project’s EIA/EIS. In fact, there is no Gas Leak Management plan in the gas pipeline’s EIA/EIS. Moreover, in the documents a gas spill model in the Demerara River is used for a gas pipeline about a good 5 miles away – one is not sure what equation connects these two things but in their world it does. On top of all this, a draft technical document is included which contains some prohibitive exclusion clauses. Imagine

what kind of exclusion clauses they have in the oily permits!

The developer didn’t attach their name, names of the Board of Directors, signatures, etc. according to the Environmental Protection Act and its regulations. This is despite saying, in correspondence to me dated May 17, 2022, that “ExxonMobil Guyana’s policy is to comply with all applicable laws and regulations.” To be honest if I were the developer, I too would not have attached my signature to such a badly prepared document; not in accordance with the written instruments of our country.

I write! I write! I write! Then I realize this is a people of Guyana issue and those most likely to suffer are the grass roots who have not much concept of either side of the industry and are too busy just trying to stay alive. I may be able to leave but as Buju Banton’s song says, “what about those who can’t?” However, I do not want to leave - thank you very much

ExxonMobil Guyana. I want adherence to our laws and respect for our environmental requirements.

Last week, the grassroots women of Red Thread and I sat together to bring this message so that you know what is really going on and so that we can start standing up for all our rights - Get up! Stand up! Brother Bob Marley did say. Let our voices be heard.

Write, write, write, call, call, call - the developers and EPA invite us to submit let’s do just what they invite us to do a@epaguyana.org, guyanacommunity@e xxonmobil.com, guyanastaff@exxonmobil.com 592-623-1176

Here are some things to consider, including some basic questions that have not been answered about the Gas-toEnergy (GTE) Pipeline Project:

● Where is the Gas Management Pipeline Plan or Gas Management Pipeline System Guyana?

● If there is a gas leak accident, we

Guyanese have to pay for any damage to ourselves and our environment and we still have to pay for the pipeline construction as a recoverable expense.

● ExxonMobil Guyana and ExxonMobil have said that they obey the laws of Guyana, so where is the feasibility study for this GTE project?

● If ExxonMobil Guyana and ExxonMobil obey the laws of Guyana, why did they not put their name and the names of the Board of Directors on the submitted Environmental Impact Assessment and Environmental Impact Strategy that they submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency?

● Why is ExxonMobil not following their own plan and consulting the people they describe as “primary stakeholders” living along the pipeline route?

● Oil & Gas are not the same thing. There are different risks for each. We want protection against any and all gas leakages.

● We are really leaving our children without any protection, regulations and governance in this gas sector.

● We already have many problems in the oil sector with no good regulation and governance.

● Enough is Enough. We want protection and good governing laws for this gas sector in the Oil & Gas Industry

● Let our voices be heard!!!

THE TIME FOR EXPLOITATION IS UP!!!