If it wins the upcoming elections, the Alliance for Change (AFC) said it will make a series of changes to the oil and gas industry as outlined in its 18-point plan for the sector. Upon inspection of its to-do list, it is clear that much of its plan mirrors initiatives already undertaken by the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP) government.
The AFC proposes, for example, “Cradle to grave management of all waste produced on onshore and offshore oil and gas operations, including waste treatment and disposal facilities.” It should be noted that the government already addressed this matter. In fact, a detailed cradle-to-grave management plan is available for perusal on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) website.
Additionally, the AFC promises improvements in capping stack logistics, location, and deployment time. Notably, Guyana already has a capping stack available in country, with a subscription to another.
The AFC also pledges to provide full liability coverage and/or a Parent Company Guarantee, which Guyana already has in place, amounting to $2 billion. Importantly, Guyana’s recent oil spill legislation requires the polluter to cover all costs associated with any oil spill event.
Moreover, the AFC’s plan includes measures for capacity building and staff retention at oversight bodies, such as the EPA, the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA), and the Civil Defense Commission (CDC). This concern has been previously addressed by the government, which noted that the loss of skilled technical officers is primarily due to these individuals leaving for higher-paying jobs in the oil and gas sector.
Regarding the AFC’s promise to ensure public disclosure of information and contracts, it should be noted that all contracts related to the oil and gas sector, as well as those in the mining industry, have been made public.
The AFC’s plans also include rigorous monitoring of offshore activities, incorporating a mix of real-time and on-board monitoring, as well as contractor reporting, all of which is already being implemented. Guyana already conducts rigorous monitoring of the oil and gas industry, ensuring that officials are present during oil sale transfers while employing remote monitoring. Furthermore, contractor reporting is a requirement embedded in the permits granted to all operators.
The AFC’s plan also references the reinjection and prohibition of dumping produced water into the ocean; however, the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) already outline that any dumping complies with international best practices. Regarding its promise to prohibit gas flaring, Guyana has implemented a system where flaring outside of startup and emergencies incurs a fee of US$50 per ton of carbon equivalent released. There is strict compliance with Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) as monitored by the EPA.
Permits already include severe penalties for non-compliance with the EIAs and other relevant laws, yet this was another promise of the AFC.
The AFC also announced that it would implement decommissioning plans for the oil sector. It is essential to note that Guyana already has comprehensive legislation that outlines clear parameters for decommissioning, including the establishment of a decommissioning fund. While the AFC intends to implement a depletion policy to address resource depletion, it has not specified how this will be achieved.
Additionally, the AFC’s proposal includes renegotiating the fiscal terms of the Stabroek Block contract and applying ring-fencing rules, establishing a national oil company, and restructuring the Guyana Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (GYEITI). While none of these are new issues, they are the only aspects of the AFC’s plans that were not acted upon by the PPP administration.
