Exxon would dump up to 29,000 barrels of oil into the ocean each year with 10 FPSO – Kaieteur News

Exxon would dump up to 29,000 barrels of oil into the ocean each year with 10 FPSO

By Mikaila Prince

An employee stands on an Alaska beach blackened by oil spilled from Exxon Valdez Oil Dancer in March, 1989. This is the fate of thousands of miles of coastline at Prince William of Alaska Alaska (Credit: John Gaps III / Associated Press)

Kaieteur News had recently reported that with 10 Floating Production Storage and Unloading (FPSO) vessels, ExxonMobil would dump two million barrels of toxicly produced water daily in Guyana waters.
Recent calculations now show that not only would Exxon – which flaunts itself as an effective controller of its waste – dump those millions of barrels of water produced, but up to 29,000 barrels of oil that would be contained in that toxic water.
Kaieteur News reached this figure based on initial projections by former Director of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Dr. Vincent Adams.
Dr. Adams, during a Moray House Trust virtual discussion titled, Guyana’s Oil: Priorities for 2021, has stated that Exxon is expected to dump 200,000 barrels of water produced daily on the basis of its Payara Environmental Permit audit. Multiply that by 10, Dr. Adams has indicated, that it would amount to two million barrels of toxic water being dumped into the Guyana ocean, which can leave significant environmental damage, putting marine life and ecosystems at risk.
It should also be noted that Dr. Million’s two-barrel projection appears to be Adams based on an assumption that all FPSOs going forward will have specifications similar to Liza Dau and Payara.
Notwithstanding this, what the former EPA Director had also made it relevant to weigh, is that the water produced can contain “.42 milliliters per liter of oil,” and with a dump of about two million barrels per day, about 80 barrels Oil produced by the projected 10 FPSOs would also be unloaded into the ocean.
Multiply those 80 barrels of oil by 365, which would indicate the days of the year, and this would equate to 29,200 barrels. The effects of this dumping could be catastrophic, as it could kill plants and animals, disturb salinity / pH levels, air / water pollution and more.
“On top of that,” added Dr. Adams, “the temperature of the dumped water is 55 degrees centigrade. Ocean temperatures are around 20-23 degrees centigrade. Now that’s about two and a half times, so you can’t tell me that and make public statements that, to the best of my knowledge, are irresponsible to say, ”as he referred to allegations from ExxonMobil Guyana President Alistair Routledge, who had said the water has no effect on the environment.
Despite Routledge’s allegation, the company has never stated that it has done a study.
Redirecting that water must be the only option
With the aim of protecting Guyana’s marine life and environment, Dr. Adams is adamant that Exxon must inject the extracted toxic water, while criticizing the US oil giant for misleading the public after it said the World Bank had recommended that it dump dumped water produced into the ocean .
“That’s a lie,” he had insisted. “The World Bank never recommended dropping water offshore. The World Bank said, however, that it must be the last resort if it is not technically or financially feasible. Well, we know it’s technically feasible and you can’t tell me it’s not financially viable. “
It would cost Exxon $ 300M to re-spray the water produced at Payara’s well, Dr. Adams reminded, noting, “You tell me that when you make tens of billions, or even hundreds of billions of dollars, the lives and health and safety of the Guyanese people’s environment are not worth $ 300M? ”
It was against this background that Dr. Adams, “Refusing that water must be the only option.”
Notably, Dr. Adams has been leading the charge for ExxonMobil to have the relevant technology in place to re-inject any and all toxic water extracted during the oil production process. However, he was fired by the Irfaan Ali administration before he could see this and other environmental issues related to the Payara project.