The lucrative returns that that have been known to accrue to countries whose territorial spaces have yielded huge volumes of crude oil come at considerable risk, not least, the risk of environmental mishaps that can wreak varying degrees of damage, even longer-term devastation. Oil spills have been known to occur on account of both operating accidents and, sometimes, ill-explained natural disasters. Whatever the reason, these can have far-reaching long-term environmental and ecological damage.
Less than a week ago the South American nation of Peru declared a “ninety-day Environmental Emergency” following a January 15 oil spill which reportedly occurred during the unloading of an oil tanker being operated by the Spanish energy and petrochemical company, Repsol. The Tanker, the report said, was being unloaded at the country’s La Pampilla Refinery currently being operated by Repsol.
The government’s declaration of a state of emergency in the coastal area of Lima, the country’s capital, represents a pointed pronouncement on what it has reportedly described as an “ecological disaster” while the authorities are reportedly working through an Environmental Crisis Committee to mitigate the effects of tragedy.
The oil spill is being linked to an underwater volcanic eruption off Tonga in the Pacific on Friday January 14 and subsequent tidal waves which hit the tanker spilling more than 6,000 barrels of oil.
The sector’s experience of oil spills is that it frequently takes considerable time to provide full assessment of the extent of the damage though one of the earliest reported responses of the Peruvian authorities has been to seal off three beaches damaged by the spill and from which scores of dead animals covered in oil have been recovered.
Peru’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been reported as describing the occurrence as “the worst ecological disaster that has occurred around Lima in recent times and has seriously damaged hundreds of fishermen’s families.”
In the immediate aftermath of the spill and the assessment, so far, by the Peruvian authorities of the extent of the damage, sharp exchanges have already erupted between the authorities in Lima and Repsol over the question of compensation. While the Foreign Ministry in Lima has already asserted that Repsol should “immediately compensate for the damage,” the company’s Communications Director has, according to reports, fired back, a company official asserting that “we did not cause this ecological disaster and we cannot say who is responsible.”
Other reports, however, point, seemingly, to an understanding between the Peruvian authorities and Repsol with regard to a cleanup operation. One such report asserts that the company and the Peruvian Ministry of the Environment have reached “a series of agreements” on the cleanup exercise that will include the delivery of a schedule to the government to address issues of “cleaning and decontamination” that will involve the hiring of Peruvian fishermen. Other “environmental commitments” are also, reportedly, included in the understanding reached. Additionally, a Peruvian official is quoted as saying that Repsol has agreed “to take some actions against the economic and social impacts” caused by the oil spill and its consequences.
Insofar as the immediate impact of the occurrence on affected families and persons, including fishermen, is concerned, the understandings reached between Repsol and the Peruvian authorities include the delivery of baskets of food products to families in the areas affected by the oil spill.
The Peruvian authorities, meanwhile, are reporting that an agreement has been reached with the United Nations Office of humanitarian Affairs that will allow the world body to provide advice and help to cope with these environmental disasters.
Peru’s oil spill and its economic and environmental blowback has occurred at a time when South America has become the centre of global industry attention on account of ongoing world class oil finds and oil recovery pursuits, notably those occurring offshore Guyana, which is being spearheaded by the US company ExxonMobil. No stranger to oil spills and their consequences, ExxonMobil is well-remembered on account of the March 1989 oil spill at Prince William Sound, Alaska, when the Exxon Valdez, an oil supertanker owned by Exxon’s Shipping Company, struck the Prince William Sound’s Bligh Reef, spilling an estimated 10.8 million US gallons of its cargo. Regarded as one of the biggest environmental disasters in recent history the Exxon Valdez oil spill and its consequences served to focus increased global attention on the huge risks and dangers that attend the pursuits of the oil recovery industry.
In the particular instance of Guyana’s oil recovery pursuits, pockets of local as well as international concern have been raised over what is felt in some quarters, both locally and internationally, to be the enormous potential risks associated with ExxonMobil’s ongoing offshore oil and gas recovery operations here. Since the commencement of its operations in Guyana the company has been the target of ceaseless local and international lobbying and litigation aimed at stopping its operations here on the grounds of its possible dire environmental consequences.
In a poor country long fed a diet of dreams about Guyana’s ‘old wealth’ and the potential which it holds for socio-economic transformation, the local environmental lobby to set aside the country’s oil-driven prosperity continues to be nowhere near as robust as the dreams of prosperity that preoccupy a country which, for all its touted oil wealth, remains a largely poor population.
