While no definitive timeline has been provided by ExxonMobil as to when the defective seal on the gas compressor on the Liza Destiny Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel will be fixed, Minister of Natural Resources Vickram Bharrat yesterday said they have asked the oil company to source a replacement seal as soon as possible.
He said ExxonMobil has informed him that the issue should be resolved in a few days.
After announcing only last month that it had rectified problems on the Liza Destiny FPSO vessel which saw the company flaring over two billion cubic feet of associated gas in 2020, ExxonMobil on Friday said that it has begun flaring again after experiencing another issue with its compressor seal.
“There was a technical issue regarding a seal on the gas compressor on Liza Destiny. This unfortunate incident resulted in us having to temporarily increase our flare above pilot levels in order to maintain safe operations,” Exxon said in a statement.
When contacted yesterday Bharrat said that Exxon has expressed its disappointment that the seal on the gas compressor “tripped” again. He disclosed that the gas compressor in question would be the one that was sent to Germany to be fixed.
He said that upon its return it was installed and ExxonMobil conducted tests which gave them confidence that it was okay because production peaked. When told of the issue, Bharrat said that Exxon has been asked to work on the issue immediately and to get a replacement seal as soon as possible.
The minister said that they were assured that SBM offshore and another company that have the capabilities to fix the seal have already been contacted.
“We are hoping that it is just seal and there is no further damage which may result in the compressor having to go back to Germany… we are hoping that in the coming week it can be resolved and it is not anything worse than we mentioned,” he said, adding that when he gets more information he will issue a statement.
Meanwhile, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) yesterday issued a statement on the restart of flaring of gas on Liza Destiny.
Growing concern
“WWF notes with deep and growing concern that Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Ltd (EEPGL) has started flaring of gas on its first Oil and Gas Platform in the Stabroek Block off the coast of Guyana,” the statement read.
It added that the company did not inform the Government of Guyana prior to this development and that recommencement of flaring defies ExxonMobil’s global commitment to reduce flaring from 2016 levels by 20 per cent in 2020, adding that such activities do not support the company’s global statement about reducing its greenhouse gas footprint.
“The burden of responsibility falls squarely on ExxonMobil. We look forward to the Company being held accountable for this development,” David Singh, Director of WWF-Guianas was quoted as saying.
Additionally, WWF said that EEPGL is undercutting Guyana’s green image making it more difficult for the country to promote and build a sustainable, low-carbon economy, adding that the lack of, and limited disclosure of information gives no confidence that the company will take its corporate citizen responsibility seriously in Guyana which is known for its climate mitigation efforts.
“Future development of its oil expansion program must be reviewed against this recent development and the way it was disclosed,” WWF added.
No response was received from Exxon when the Sunday Stabroek contacted the company yesterday for an update.
Beset
From the beginning of production in December of 2019, ExxonMobil had been beset by technical problems in meeting its target of 120,000 barrels of oil per day (bpd) which saw large volumes of gas being flared.
The large amounts flared from its offshore operations prompted the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under its former Director Vincent Adams to put the company under close scrutiny and had production rates reduced to, at one time, 30,000 bpd and flaring between 15 million cubic feet per day.
Friday’s incident saw the company being flayed by Adams for continuing its maximum production. Adams, who was sacked by the PPP/C government last year, said that he had cautioned against allowing the maximum production rate and advised that a plan be devised to “keep stability in the reservoir.” Adams said that the company should be asked to address the problems with alacrity.
“Operating full blast is not emergency. You cannot tell me that you are producing at full capacity and call that an emergency situation. The Permit specifically prohibits flaring under normal operations. So what then is happening here? Something is wrong with that whole picture,” he contended.
“They should not continue producing at maximum and production should have gone to minimum to keep stability in the reservoir. If they are flaring with those production rates, that is a whole lot of flaring,” he added.
Exxon also appeared to have been producing above the 120,000 bpd mark. Its partner in the Stabroek Block, Hess, last week boasted at an earnings call that the solved compressor problems saw production at 120,000 barrels per day and sometimes over.
Adams who is credited with strong oversight changes to the environmental and production permits, explained that it is reasonable to expect unplanned disruptions in operations. However, he was quick to point out that what must be unacceptable are the same disruptions caused by the same type of equipment failure, which the Government was overly accommodating in accepting for over one year.
Pointing to Exxon’s own promised environmental commitments, Adams said, “Not to mention that Exxon is on record since inception in 2016, committing to having zero flaring from ‘day one’ after start of operations. The fact is that ‘day one’ turned into day 300 and more.”
And even more egregious and uncaring for the health, environment, and wellbeing of the people of Guyana, according to Adams, “was (Exxon subsidiary) EEPGL’s revelation during the Payara review that it’s okay to discharge air pollutants through flaring because Guyana is a carbon sink and therefore has the capacity to absorb more pollutants – a proposal that brought instant rejection by the EPA with the demand that they comply with the same standards they have to abide with in the United States which allows flaring for a maximum of 48 hours after startup.”
He said that since he left the EPA, the position of 48 hours was withdrawn and changed to 60 days instead.
