Black gold pours into the Gulf of Suez, Libya struggles to deal with a tanker explosion, and Shell still hasn’t covered the costs of exploration and exploitation in the Niger Delta.
This summer has been a torrid time for anyone working PR for the oil and gas industry. Climate change events have been starkly visible. Like soaring temperatures and drought conditions across much of Europe and swathes of the US followed by wildfires in Turkey, Greece and France, and flash flooding in Texas. Then there’s SkyTruth’s report into the pollution impact of offshore carbon energy infrastructure.
Then you read that Egypt is now working to mitigate the fallout from an oil barge which capsized in the Gulf of Suez. The vessel, belonging to Saudi Arabian drilling firm Ades Holdings, was being towed to a new location amid rocketing fossil fuel activity in the area – with the state-owned General Petroleum Company set to open 41 well drills this year alone in a huge investment push in the opposite direction to concepts like net zero.
It’s still too early to ascertain the impact of this North African incident, but the financials alone are set to be significant. And the fact this occurred just days after an explosion onboard a tanker carrying close to 1million barrels of crude oil off the Libyan coast further emphasises the dangers of offshore accidents. And raises questions about what happens next, and who will be responsible for orchestrating and organising clean ups.
‘Just two weeks ago, we documented an oil spill off the coast of the United Arab Emirates in the Strait of Hormuz,’ says Farah Al Hattab, A Campaigner at Greenpeace MENA, referencing a third maritime disaster involving the fossil fuel industry. ‘These unfortunate events and the resulting spills are stark reminders of the fragility of oil infrastructure and the insufficient emergency preparedness and response, particularly in the face of climate change.’
‘We call on the relevant authorities to immediately conduct a thorough, transparent environmental risk assessment and take urgent measures, including the removal of the sunken drilling structure from the Suez Canal and the monitoring of potential leaks from the exploded ship in Libya,’ Al Hattab continues.
‘Emergency systems and rapid response capabilities must be reinforced, and coordination with local civil society must be prioritized before it’s too late,’ they add. ‘Continued oil dependence in a region that is environmentally critical constitutes an ongoing environmental disaster and a key driver of climate breakdown. We therefore urge governments across the region to make a firm decision to transition toward clean and sustainable energy sources.’
Many people have a right to be concerned, then, not least given historic records of the oil and gas sector not taking responsibility. In May, for example, Nigerian authorities warned Shell it could still be liable for tens of billions in compensation resulting from 70 years of reckless exploration and exploitation in and around the Niger Delta, leading to significant and widespread pollution.
Despite selling off its Nigerian subsidy SPDC to Renaissance Group – a five firm consortium of domestic exploration and production companies and an international energy group – red flags are raised over the new owner’s ability to cover historic debt. If unable to pay, authorities will again come for Shell, once more stalling efforts to claim for environmental damages which have so far taken decades to get nowhere.
According to a comprehensive, four-year study by the Bayelsa State Oil and Environmental Commission, around $12billion is owed to nine Niger Delta states due to this environmental devastation. Beyond this, leaders from the Ogale and Bille communities are also taking legal action against Shell in UK courts over land and water contamination, while members of Nigeria’s Bodo community are pursuing $660million in damages for similar ecological crimes.
‘A just energy transition is critical, and it is about time Shell takes part in it,’ says Ana Xambre Pereira, Advocacy Officer at the Dutch human and environmental rights non-profit, Both ENDS Shell’s current exit is not a responsible divestment nor an energy transition, it’s an offloading of toxic assets and liabilities onto the local communities, while Shell continues its offshore fossil fuel operations and walks away with the profits. A just energy transition means enforcing clear standards for responsible divestment now, before more communities are sacrificed.’
‘When will Shell stop prioritising profit over public health? Our findings from the blood tests of 80 women in Otuabagi, show hydrocarbon levels more than 8000 times above World Health Organization permissible limits,’ adds Dr Dr. Emem Okon, Executive Director of Kebetkache Women Development & Resource Centre in Nigeria. ‘The Bayelsa Oil and Environment Commission tested the blood of 1600 persons, and all had hydrocarbons in their blood too. Women are suffering from respiratory diseases, fertility problems, breast cancer, eyesight impairment, among many others! Shell cannot divest without clean-up and remediation.’
Image: Logan Voss / Unsplash
More Case Studies, Features and Industry Insight:
Water sustainability should be top priority for Net Zero Week
Quick question: why are more offices not using smart ventilation?
Dead seas tell no tales: activists, pirates, economies and ecosystems