Saying there has been a lack of research and consultation, the main opposition APNU+AFC is moving to halt the government’s estimated US$900 million Wales Gas-to-Shore Project (GSP) project in order for there to be comprehensive studies by independent consultants and a parliamentary review.
“Be it further resolved that the Gas-to-Shore Project’s final decision be put on hold until the National Resources Committee presents it report to Parliament for debate and approval,” a motion, in the names of Alliance for Change (AFC) members David Patterson and Khemraj Ramjattan, states.
The motion, which has been submitted to the National Assembly, notes that the current PPP/C administration made a decision to select Wales for the location of the project “championing it as a “no brainer” selection, despite the fact that no data nor study publicly exists to support such a decision.”
In the introductory clause, the motion further says that the Wales location will require a 110km long pipeline to be laid along the seabed as well as 27km on land, which will pass through residential, commercial and agricultural zones. It further point outs that no investigation nor study has been conducted to understand the environmental and safety risks from pipeline leaks and ruptures that may be caused by defective construction, aging, corrosion, sea bed land forms, mudslides, hurricanes, faults, fractures, and seismic activities such as earthquakes and volcanoes.
In addition, the motion also notes that gas leakages and exposures in the marine environment have shown to be highly toxic to fish, and living organisms and the ecology, which could devastate the fishing industry.
Further, it cites a March 2021 United States Bureau of Environmental Enforcement (US Offshore oil & gas regulator) report that stated that the technology is not matured and reliable enough to ensure the integrity of deep-water pipelines and detection of subsurface leaks.
Apart from that, the motion states that no new study has been conducted to investigate the economic, social and environmental renewable alternatives, such as solar, hydropower, and wind, including an energy mix with phasing, thereof.
The gas-to-energy project entails the construction and operation of a 12-inch pipeline, approximately 220 kilometres long, from the Liza Phase 1 and Liza Phase 2 Floating, Production, Storage, and Offloading (FPSO) vessels in the offshore Stabroek Block, to an onshore natural gas liquids (NGL) and natural gas processing plant (NGL Plant) located at Wales. Government also has plans for a development zone in the area, which once accommodated a thriving sugar plantation and factory.
According to the schedule, the pipeline will commence at Nouvelle Flanders with a corridor of approximately 30 meters in width. It will continue in a southerly direction to the side dam between Vreed-en-Hoop and Nouvelle Flanders and will pass through L’Union, Rotterdam, Mary and Harlem, Wallers Delight, Ruimzigt, Klein Pouderoyen, Malgre Tout, Versailles, Lust en Rust, Java, Canal Number One, L’Orataire, Bordeaux, Resource and Alliance, and Canal Number Two.
The 30-metre corridor passes through state lands and strips of land within the areas mentioned.
Government has said that areas where the pipeline will run will not be are not residential area pathways. And in areas where the project would infringe on the lands of private citizens, government can acquire those lands for the project.
Patterson’s motion contends that marine traffic will be affected because the Wales location is “at the mouth of the Demerara River, which has a very shallow draft and where 90% of the commercial marine traffic operates”.
“…such a location would exacerbate the safety and environmental risks effected by the worsening marine traffic congestion,” the motion states.
But the path of the pipelines, according to the proposal submitted to the Environmental Protection agency, does not come into Wales via the Demerara River.
ExxonMobil’s local affiliate, Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL), which submitted an application to the Environmental Protection Agency for environmental authorisation for the project, has also said that the onshore route of the 27 kilometers-long, 12 inch-diameter underground natural gas pipeline was selected by the government.
The EPA has invited public submissions on the scope of the study for the project, which is intended to begin operations in 2024 and there have been meetings on the project, where feedback would help to craft the terms of reference for the EIA.
On the financial side, the opposition’s motion pointed out that the costs for the pipeline will make this the single largest infrastructure project in the country’s history and should be analysed thoroughly to ensure value for money.
Before the project is given the go ahead, it recommends that there be comprehensive studies, conducted by independent internationally-recognized consultants, to inform the decision. It said the scope of works for such studies should include an investigation to understand the geological, environmental, and safety risks with mitigative actions, from pipeline leaks, ruptures, and movements that may be caused by defective construction, aging, corrosion, sea bed landforms, mudslides, hurricanes, tsunami, faults, fractures, and seismic activities, such as earthquakes and volcanoes; analyses of the available technology for real time monitoring of the deepwater pipeline to ensure its integrity and reliable detection of subsurface leaks; and the environmental, safety and health risks with mitigative actions associated with accommodating the gaps in technology; investigation of the health, safety and environmental risks with mitigative actions posed by the shallow draft and worsening marine traffic congestion at the mouth of the Demerara River; and an analysis of the economic, social and environmental renewable alternatives such as solar, hydropower, and wind, including an energy mix with phasing, consistent with our overall effort to achieve a low carbon economy and compliance with the Paris Agreement on climate change; and an economic analysis including the total estimated project cost of the gas-to-shore project alternatives covering energy mix and phasing approaches.
The motion recommends that these studies be submitted to the Natural Resources Committee of the Parliament, which shall, after examination, present a report to this Assembly.
