The Guyana Shore Base Inc (GYSBI) is seeking Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) financing to expand its Houston facility to potentially provide support for up to five floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) units, among other upgrades.
ExxonMobil has said that its planned scale of operations is too large for GYSBI to solely meet its needs and in March of this year advertised for firms to show their onshore support services capabilities.
While it is unclear if the company has secured any commitments from ExxonMobil on providing additional supports services, the IDB project summary for GYSBI’s proposal states that the financing would help it to build additional berths at its Houston Port to accommodate the increased number of ships to be associated with future oil and gas operations.
The proposal for the expansion has been made even as across the Demerara River, work is forging ahead on TriStar Inc’s six- berth facility and down north of the river, a consortium of local businessmen is planning to build another mega- shore base. At Parika, Stanley Ming is also developing a US$200 million shore base with a United Kingdom partner.
The summary of the proposal, submitted in April of this year, states that the company is seeking the support of IDB to refinance certain existing bridge loans, expand GYSBI’s port and shore base facilities through the construction of four additional berths, increase the size of the Shore Base logistics support area, develop and construct an infill project that will allow offloading of heavier cargo, purchase and construct a waste management facility, install rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity to meet GYSBI’s energy needs, and construct additional warehouse capacity.
It added that the company is seeking total debt financing of approximately US$130 million, and that IDB Invest as a lender provide approximately US$70 million.
In April, the company had facilitated a press tour of a US$16 million project expansion it was working on, to add two specialty berthing facilities. This, it said, was after a two-and-a-half-year construction hold-up of the project by the then APNU+AFC government. It added that it was continuing “full throttle” with plans from 2019. The GYSBI and government had said that the project was being executed to further boost local content as all heavy-lifting and storage works will be transferred to Guyana from the current location in Trinidad and Tobago.
In a 2019 interview with Stabroek News, GYSBI Partner, Robin Muneshwer, had pointed to an increase from a two to four-berth facility that would operate on a 24-hour basis at the Houston waterfront property, and that it formed part of a US$100 million planned second phase of expansion.
When the company had announced the US$100 million expansion of its operations here, General Manager Mark Edwards had informed also that plans were in place to invest a further US$50 million ($10.4 billion) in the next 12 months.
It is unclear if since then the company had plans to access the over US$100 million loan.
With 350 employees, of which it boasts a 95% local workforce, GYSBI currently provides support for oil and gas operator companies in Guyana. It also offers services such as waste management, chemical storage, warehousing, construction, berthing of supply vessels, cargo marshalling area, loading and offloading, supply chain management, expatriate management, and customs services, having expanded beyond the traditional pipe yards found in Guyana.
Environmental Impact
The company has submitted to the IDB not only its expansion proposals but an Environmental Assessment and Environment Management Plan, having already gotten approval from the Environmental Protection Agency and said that it also plans to build an Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF).
This Environmental Assessment (EA) addresses the proposed improvements to the Port’s transport and logistics improvements and acknowledges that the Project could also potentially lead to “negative environmental and social impacts during its construction and operation.”
The ES states that potential environmental and social impacts resulting from project-related activities include emissions and noise from construction and operations vehicles, vessels, fuel storage, and equipment, noise generated by construction equipment and activities, dredging activities for berths’ construction and maintenance dredging, flood risk, waste generated by construction and operations activities, decreased pedestrian and traffic safety and increased traffic congestion and disruption.
In addition to increased traffic congestion, it said that there would also be increased river traffic, decreased access to critical facilities, shopping and bus stops.
Possible, too, with the expansion is the loss or disturbance of vegetation, wildlife injury or mortality, underwater noise, degradation of aquatic habitats and increased surface water runoff from vegetation clearing.
From its assessment, GYSBI said that none of the mentioned impacts were determined “to be major and would all be reduced to minor or negligible with the implementation of appropriate management measures.”
An Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) was also developed outlining the measures and actions necessary to further minimise impacts to acceptable levels. The company said that implementation of the project would result in positive environmental and social impacts, as the project components would address the port’s operational inefficiencies and its adjacent infrastructure.
“This EA considers both the construction and operations phase of the Project, and focuses mainly on the relevant existing physical, biological, and socioeconomic environments within the direct footprint of the Project, namely the new berths 3 and 4, the GYSBI Port area and the Annex,” the project summary states.
However, the company noted that it is understood that in the case of some impacts, such as air quality, noise and traffic, impacts may extend beyond the immediate Project footprint. As such, both a Direct Area influence (DAI) and an Indirect Area of Influence (IAI) were defined for the Project.
The DAI for the Project was defined as “the footprint of the Project, where the majority of the impacts from the Project are expected to occur and/or be experienced most acutely, namely: new berths 3 and 4, GYSBI Port and the GYSBI Industrial Estate or its “Annex”.
The IAI of the Project is defined as the area within a 500-metre radius of the project footprint where some impacts such as traffic, dust and noise disturbance could occur, but generally with a lower level of intensity than in the DAI.
‘Integrated waste management facility’
And with plans to have a facility to treat both hazardous and non-hazardous waste here, GYSBI’s expansion plans has inclusion for an Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF), to be executed and managed by its partner, Sustainable Environment Solutions.
The company prepared a separate Environment Management Plan for that aspect of the project. The 233-page plan says that with limited alternatives for waste management solutions for the emerging oil and gas sector, the idea for the facility was birthed. “The commencement of production offshore has resulted in a greater need to develop facilities to safely receive, treat and dispose of waste generated by the sector. Sustainable Environmental Solutions (Guyana) Inc (SES) has responded to this need by pursuing the establishment of an Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF).
This initiative, according to the company, is based on a request from Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL) for a facility to receive, treat and dispose of waste generated by its offshore operations.
“SES intends to design, build and operate an IWMF for EEPGL’s generated hazardous and non-hazardous waste and which will have the ability to safely manage all waste generated offshore and onshore. The facility will be built and operated in accordance with EEPGL’s corporate, social and environmental responsibilities and conform to local, national and international standard,” it said.
The principle of the operation points out that wastes generated on the offshore installations will be shipped to Georgetown and received at the GYSBI berths. GYSBI will off-load the wastes from the Production Support Vessels and transport it to the IWMF reception gate. From that point onwards, SES becomes responsible for the waste on-site and the operational provisions of this EMP become effective.
Additionally, waste treated and neutralised by the IWMF that is identified for disposal at the Haags Bosch landfill will be collected from the IWMF by Purans Brothers Inc.
The company will no longer take responsibility from the point of departure and it will be Purans Brothers Inc that bears all such responsibilities for waste management and disposal.
On its roles and responsibilities in the waste management process, the company said that already, the inter-relationship between the partners and third-party contractors in this project determines their respective responsibilities for waste management.
It explained, “The IWMF will treat wastes generated by EEPGL and its various subcontractors associated with the offshore oil exploration and production activities. The SES operated IWMF will not initially be accepting wastes from other businesses and activities in Guyana and is primarily intended as a dedicated facility to Guyana’s offshore hydrocarbon exploration and production industry. Once fully operational, however, SES may also offer its advanced waste treatment facilities to other third parties in Guyana. SES will provide the EPA with a declaration of those other waste types, their provenance, quantity and treatment prior to accepting such wastes.”
“GYSBI owns and operates the shore base facility and is responsible for receiving the wastes at its Production Support Vessel (PSV) berths, off-loading, and bringing the wastes to the reception area of the IWMF. The management of wastes on the offshore production facilities and at the GYSBI off-loading operations is not covered in this EMP as SES has no control over these off-site activities. The governance of the wastes outside the IWMF is set out in the respective Environmental Permits of EEPGL and GYSBI.”
