…Energy Technologist tells EPA solar should be pursued instead of gas-to-shore project
Kaieteur News – The associated gas from oil production should be reinjected to save Guyana from further damage to the environment. This is the view of Former University of Guyana (UG) Lecturer and past representative of the Transparency Institute Guyana Inc (TIGI), Mr. Alfred Bhulai who has suggested, in a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), that solar power be pursued instead, as this option could be at least five times cheaper than the proposed Gas-to-Energy Project.
Bhulai, who holds a degree in Applied Chemistry (U.G) and Engineering (Technical University of Berlin) sent his submission to the EPA yesterday. Currently, there is a 60-day period where members of the public can share their views and concerns or even questions regarding the project which must be addressed before an approval is granted by the regulator body.
An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Gas-to-Energy project to be constructed at Wales on the West Bank of Demerara was submitted to the EPA, which triggered the comments period. The Gas-to-Energy project is being pursued by Esso Exploration and Production Guyana Limited (EEPGL), on behalf of itself and its coventurers (Hess Guyana Exploration Limited and CNOOC Petroleum Guyana Limited). It proposes to bring the associated natural gas, produced from the Liza field in the Stabroek Block, to shore for use.
The Government of Guyana is pursuing a separate project to construct a power plant that would use a portion of this associated natural gas as a fuel source. Accordingly, EEPGL, at the request of the Government, is proposing the Project to provide fuel for the Power Plant. The project will involve capturing associated gas produced from crude oil production operations on the Liza Phase 1 (Destiny) and Liza Phase 2 (Unity) Floating, Production, Storage, and Offloading (FPSO) vessels, transporting approximately 50 million standard cubic feet per day (MMscfd; 1.4 million standard cubic meters per day [MMsm3/d]) of rich gas via a subsea pipeline and then an onshore pipeline to a NGL processing plant, treating the gas to remove NGLs for sale to third parties, and ultimately delivering dry gas meeting government specifications for use at the Power Plant.
Bhulai, in his submission explained that his comments on the project was prompted by the justification for the venture, as an alternative source of energy, touted by the Project Manager, Friedrich Krispin at a public consultation held at Leonora on May 13, 2022.
He said, “The associated gas from the oil wells is best reinjected and the money earned from Guyana’s oil (can) be used to install the equivalent in solar power as recommended.” The specialist was keen to note that solar power can eliminate completely the environmental impacts and can be implemented gradually, beginning in areas which presently do not have electricity.
“People will be empowered with reliable power and not be subject to large-scale blackouts. It (solar power) is at least five times cheaper than the Gas to Energy scheme, not dependent on unrevealed source gas prices,” Bhulai pointed out.
It must be noted that Guyanese are still clueless about the cost it will be billed by ExxonMobil to transport the gas, via a pipeline from the Liza Phase One and Two fields, in the Stabroek Block. So far, the cost to lay the onshore and offshore pipelines alone is expected to cost around US$1.3 billion. As a consequence, the Specialist went on to urge the EPA to make full use of his suggested alternative, which he believes would lend to the “effective management of the natural environment so as to ensure conservation, protection, and sustainable use of Guyana’s solar and gas resources”.
Floating Liquid Petroleum and Natural Gas Plant
Though he outlined his preference for the reinjection alternative and the use of solar power to provide a stable supply of electricity, the Energy Technologist also suggested that a Floating Liquid Petroleum and Natural Gas Plant be pursued, rather than transport the gas to shore, via a pipeline.
This option, according to Bhulai, “have no significant difference in economics between onshore and floating gas to power plants; are more flexible and longer lasting, by being able to move to many more wells than Liza (and) are more suitable for selling gas on the world market, if the power plant is not realized in time, and after we use what we need; and will eliminate the onshore pipeline environmental impact.”
In his letter to the EPA, the Specialist made reference to Section 4(1) of the Environmental Protection Act, which states that the functions of the EPA are “(a) to take such steps for the effective management of the natural environment so as to ensure conservation, protection, and sustainable use of its natural resources; and (b) to promote the participation of members of the public in the process of integrating environmental concerns in planning for development on a sustainable basis.”
Against this background, he said he expects the EPA to promote participation of the public via non-governmental media in the process of integrating environmental concerns in planning for development of Guyana’s energy on a sustainable basis.
Original posted here: https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2022/05/30/reinject-gas-and-save-guyana/
