Environmental groups have rejected a draft scoping report by TotalEnergies EP SA to perform more exploratory drilling off the West Coast, warning the document seriously underplays the risk of a devastating oil spill and damage to the region’s small-scale fishing culture.
The report, which lays out the details of TotalEnergies SA’s proposed drilling project and its potential impact is an early step in the environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) process.
In line with SA regulations, TotalEnergies SA appointed an independent, UK-based sustainability consultant to compile the report, but activists argue it downplays the heightened risk of an oil spill associated with exploratory drilling at such depths.
At least 711 offshore blowouts or well releases resulting in oil spills have occurred since 1955, and the risk of a catastrophic oil spill is highest at the exploratory drilling phase.
According to the report, TotalEnergies SA plans to drill as many as seven wells in an area spanning nearly 30,000km2 between Saldanha Bay and Kleinzee, at depths of between 500m and 3,900m.
This is deeper than the Deepwater Horizon well, which was responsible for the largest marine oil spill in history in 2010, with the increased pressure on oil and gas pockets raising the associated risks.
The deepest well proposed by the project would be almost eight times more accident-prone than the well responsible for the Deepwater Horizon accident, according to a statement by nonprofit organisations The Green Connection and Natural Justice.
Limited scope
TotalEnergies SA insists it complies with all regulations applicable to its exploration activities and told Business Day it “encourages all stakeholders, including NGOs, media and community members to actively engage in the EISA through the appropriate channels”.
The environmental groups criticised the scoping report’s methodology, which “makes it very clear” the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process will only consider the project’s exploration phase.
“It must also be accepted that exploration has as its goal to lead to exploitation. If it did not, the application for authorisation would not have been made,” the groups said in a statement.
David Mtshali, an attorney and senior programme officer at Natural Justice said TotalEnergies SA conduct a comprehensive assessment that considers the entire life cycle of the proposed project.
“The applicant’s attempt to separate the exploration and production phases to avoid climate scrutiny is legally untenable,” he said in the statement.
The proposed exploration and eventual exploitation will result in “unacceptable significant emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), increasing atmospheric GHG levels and resulting in increased adverse impacts on human health and wellbeing on the environment,” the groups maintain.
Paris Agreement lag
SA is lagging in terms of its commitment to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement, which calls on countries to limit the rise in average global temperatures to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
Climate Action Tracker, an independent scientific project, says global warming would exceed 2°C and even to 3°C if all countries followed SA’s “insufficient” approach to emissions reduction.
TotalEnergies told Business Day it “believes that new oil projects are still needed to meet the demand and keep prices at an acceptable level to create the conditions for a just transition”.
Restrictions on oil and gas exploration are a critical component of limiting the increase in global temperatures, and the global GHG emissions reductions needed to achieve the Paris Agreement’s goals would be impossible if all the world’s proven oil and gas reserves were used.
According to climate activists, the project’s environmental impacts are likely to include increased temperatures, worsening and prolonged droughts, longer and more intense heatwaves, increased extreme weather events, increased ocean acidity, a decline in ecosystems and habitat and increased rates of species extinction.
Small-scale fishing lies at the heart of the West Coast’s cultural identity and coastal communities and offshore drilling threatens the region’s ability to continue its traditional practices.
Cultural impact
However, TotalEnergies SA’s draft scoping report does not assess the impact of seismic blasting and increased pollution risks on marine biodiversity on the West Coast’s cultural heritage.
According to the lobbyists, this is a “direct violation” of SA’s National Environmental Management Act (NEMA).
Masifundise, a lobby group focused on SA’s small-scale fishing communities, highlighted the effect repeat seismic surveys have had in disrupting fish migration patterns in the tuna fishing grounds of Southern Namibia, where catches have severely declined since 2011 and reached non-commercial rates in 2017.
The scoping report cited a lack of available population and distribution information in the proposed drilling area but, instead of taking the precautionary approach set out by NEMA, the report concludes that encounters are likely to be rare, despite the significant uncertainty.
“Our primary responsibility is to explore and operate our fields in accordance with strict requirements concerning safety, emissions reduction and environmental impact,” TotalEnergies SA said.
“In 2024, like in 2023 and 2022, TotalEnergies was the major that invested the most in the energy transition,” it said.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.