KAMPALA/UGANDA: Climate activists have revealed the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) will emit a total of 379m tonnes of climate-heating pollution, more than 25 times the combined annual emissions of Uganda and Tanzania, the host nations.
The new analysis, by the Climate Accountability Institute (CAI), found construction and operation contributed only 1.8% of the full emissions of the project when taking into account overseas transport, refining, and burning of the 848m barrels of oil by end users. It considered the 25-year lifespan of the project and refining in Europe and China. In the years of peak oil flow, the associated emissions would be more than double those of Uganda and Tanzania in 2020.
Quoting an expert report, The Guardian reports that the East African crude oil pipeline which projects to transport oil drilling in a biodiverse national park in Uganda more than 870 miles to a port in Tanzania for export, is monstrous and will waste billions of money and human lives, quoting a report. The main backers of the multibillion-dollar project are the French oil company TotalEnergies and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).
In the report released on Wednesday, October 27, 2022, by the US-based Climate Accountability Institute (CAI) the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) will produce vast amounts of carbon dioxide that will result in 379m tonnes of climate-heating pollution over a period of 25 years, the project’s shelf-life.
The main backers of the multibillion-dollar project which has attracted determined criticism from climate change activists and some members of the EU parliament are the French oil company TotalEnergies and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC).
The report titled: East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline: EACOP lifetime emissions from pipeline construction and operations, and crude oil shipping, refining, and end use, was commissioned by Climate Litigation Accelerator, a global collaborative hub for research, advocacy, and strategic litigation on the climate emergency based at the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice at New York University Law School.
From its website, CAI says it engages in research and education on anthropogenic climate change, dangerous interference with the climate system, and the contribution of fossil fuel producers’ carbon production to atmospheric carbon dioxide content. This encompasses the science of climate change, the civil and human rights associated with a stable climate regime not threatened by climate-destabilizing emissions of greenhouse gases, and the risks, liabilities, and disclosure requirements regarding past and future emissions of greenhouse gases attributable to primary carbon producers.
The study says following its assessment of the claims contained in the TotalEnergies and CNOC’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIAs), it is found that the construction and operation of the pipeline contributed only 1.8% of the full emissions of the project when taking into account overseas transport, refining and burning of the 848m barrels of oil by end users.
“It is best practice to transparently and completely report on a project’s full climate impacts. Total and CNOOC have both ignored the broader climate impacts of this harmful project,” CIA blames the two companies in the report.
CAI estimates its numbers from the far larger supply chain emissions from maritime transport of crude oil to European and Chinese refineries, the emissions from refining the oil into petroleum products, and the emissions from the fuels being used as intended by consumers. It further reveals it has analyzed the emissions from tanker transport from Port Tanga in Tanzania through the Suez Canal to Rotterdam (and return), refining of the waxy crude oil into petroleum products, and end-use consumption of the carbon fuels to arrive at the above conclusion.
“Emissions attributed to the 25-year operation of the pipeline total 379 million tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2). This exceeds France’s national emissions in 2020 (277 MtCO2) and slightly less than Australia’s (392 MtCO2). At peak pipeline crude oil flow, in years three through six, attributed emissions total 34.8 MtCO2/yr,” the report adds.
Mr. Richard Heede who leads CIA’s “Carbon Majors,” a project that quantifies 108 largest oil, gas, coal, and cement producers, says: “It is time for TotalEnergies to abandon the monstrous EACOP that promises to worsen the climate crisis, waste billions of dollars that could be used for good, bring mayhem to human settlements and wildlife along the pipeline’s path.”
As a result, ResearchFinds News has established that CAI has filed an affidavit with the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) in support of an injunction against the construction of the pipeline, as have other East African and international NGOs. Furthermore, within the project’s time horizon, the asset may be stranded as Europe moves away from fossil fuel consumption. This is a substantial risk to financiers, investors, & insurers.
“It is time for TotalEnergies to abandon the monstrous East African Crude Oil Pipeline that promises to deliver oil we don’t need, worsen the climate crisis, waste billions of dollars that could be used for good, bring mayhem to human settlements and wildlife along the pipeline’s path, and undermine the company’s commitment to align its investments with the Paris Climate Agreement,” CAI counsels.
Heede described EACOP as a “mid-sized carbon bomb”.
UNOC, TotalEnergies React:
TotalEnergies said that, as a pipeline project, “EACOP is neither the legal owner of the oil nor is it the ultimate end user.” It said environmental assessments followed national regulations and that an updated analysis, including oil use, had been performed, but did not provide details.
TotalEnergies said that, as a pipeline project, “EACOP is neither the legal owner of the oil nor is it the ultimate end user”. It said environmental assessments followed national regulations and that an updated analysis, including oil use, had been performed, but did not provide details.
But to arrive at the assessment, CAI has reviewed the environmental assessments by the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP), a consortium of the oil companies TotalEnergies (France) and China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) for the purpose of transporting crude oil from their fields at Tilenga and Kingfisher at Lake Albert through the proposed 1,443 km pipeline to the Marine Storage Terminal at Port Tanga, Tanzania.
The Chief Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer at the Uganda National Oil Company, Peter Muliisa, says CAI’s numbers were false and misleading.
He also said contrary to what CAI is claiming, EACOP’s projected emissions are only 13kgs of carbon dioxide per barrel, below the world average of 34kgs.
He adds that Uganda only accounts for Scope 1 and Scope 2 and is not responsible for Scope 3 emissions.
Essentially, Scopes 1 and 2 are those emissions that are owned or controlled by a company, whereas Scopes 3 emissions are a consequence of the activities of the company but occur from sources not owned or controlled by it, according to climatepartner.com.
“Our project is cleaner than most oil projects in the world. Their numbers are misleading and this is double counting. The reason is that we have done things better making EACOP one of the low-emitting projects in the world,” he says.
A Ugandan lawyer and commentator on oil and gas issues, Elison Karuhanga, agreed with Muliisa in a tweet: “If EACOP over 25 years will emit 377.6 Million Metric Tonnes of Carbon, it is from this figure over 25 years that they get 34m MT per year. So let us do the math. 377.6m ÷ 25yrs = 15.104m per year. As you can see it doesn’t add up,” he tweeted.
On the move by CAI to seek redress from the East African Court of Justice, Muliisa scoffed at their lawyers: “They are wasting time. They will definitely lose and they are going to lose.”
TotalEnergies, despite repeated public assurances that the company is decarbonizing its portfolio in alignment with the Paris Agreement, is investing $3.5-$5 billion in a 1,443-km pipeline to bring its Ugandan oil reserves to market in partnership with the China National Offshore Oil Company. The East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) consortium’s Environmental and Social Impacts Assessment (ESIA) reports have each been approved by the Governments of Uganda and Tanzania.
In September, EU lawmakers called for EACOP to be stopped, prompting Uganda’s president, Yoweri Museveni, to respond: “They are insufferable, so shallow, so egocentric, so wrong.”
A number of financial institutions, including previous backers of TotalEnergies, have said they would not finance EACOP. These include 24 banks and 18 insurance companies. But President Museveni has insisted the country would find other funders if anticipated funders pull out.
Additional reporting from: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/27/east-african-crude-oil-pipeline-carbon
See the full report: https://climateaccountability.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CAI-EACOP-Rptlores-Oct22.pdf
