Exxon avoids a question on oil disaster insurance
An Exxon Valdez oil tanker sped March 24, 1989, hundreds of miles of coastline at Alaska’s Prince William St., destroying wildlife and changing lives in fishing communities for generations. (John Gaps III / Associated Press)
Kaieteur News – If an oil spill are to happen right now on the shores of Guyana, our country would sink into debt because of our inability to obtain written evidence that the operators were in the Stabroek Block; ExxonMobil, Hess and CNOOC / NEXEN will accept full liability for any resulting costs.
What Guyana currently has is “assurance” from the local subsidiary ExxonMobil Guyana that the parent companies will do so. But this is not sufficient – it has been over a year since the company made that commitment to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Kaieteur News had reported extensively on this exact issue, raising the concern that Guyana would remain unprotected in the event of an oil disaster strikes. The paper later reached out to Janelle Persaud, Exxon’s Government and Public Affairs Adviser by email on February 18, 2020 to find out if the company has kept its commitment and provided the Government with evidence that Guyana has disaster coverage comprehensive oil from the parent companies.
Persaud gave an answer on March 1, 2020, but the oil giant’s spokesman avoided the question with the response giving no such indication.
Exxon Government and Public Affairs Adviser, Janelle Persaud
“Stabroek Block colleagues have secured comprehensive insurance for our petroleum activities. Under the current legal framework and agreements with government, our commitments, including environmental protection measures to respond to operational incidents, are widely assured, ”the reply stated.
“Beyond this,” he said, Exxon is “committed to environmental performance excellence. We aim to prevent incidents that would have a negative impact on the environment. Preventing environmental issues is our top priority. However, we also prepare and practice an emergency response in case of unlikely events such as an oil spill. ”
The oil giant further noted that “We use robust preventative and mitigation mechanisms including advanced technology; vigilance maintenance; robust health and safety measures; ongoing risk management and effective emergency preparedness. ”
The reader should note that nowhere in the company home does he state that he will provide “security” in writing to ensure that Guyana does not bear the costs in the event of any disaster.
And while the company prides itself on being “committed environmental performance excellence”, it is no stranger to oil spills.
There was the 1989 Exxon Valdez Oil spill, which is said to be one of the most devastating man-made disasters in the world. An Exxon-Valdez oil tanker ran into a reef in Alaska causing more than 10 million gallons of oil to cover Alaska’s cloak. The flood killed thousands of whales, seabirds and other marine life. The tourism and fishing industries were ruined for years.
The then Director of the EPA, Dr. Vincent Adams, who included in the Environmental Permits for Liza Dau and Payara Exxon projects, a provision that protects Guyana from accepting liability from any disasters.
That provision would also be included in all other licenses not only for Exxon, but other oil companies.
However, it was not included in the license for Liza One. And while the EPA now under the control of Sharifa Razack has the authority to change the license, it has not moved to do so, leaving Guyana at greater risk.