Sea change: Climate activists bearing anti-TotalEneergies placards (above) picket in Cape Town. Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment Minister Barbara Creecy (left) has released her department’s draft offshore oil and gas sector plan. (Brenton Geach/Gallo Images & Islam Safwat/Getty Images)
The mineral resources and energy department has given TotalEnergies the go-ahead to explore for oil and gas off the southwest coast of South Africa.
In its decision, the department granted environmental authorisation for TotalEnergies Exploration & Production South Africa (Teepsa) to drill up to five exploration wells along the coast between Cape Town and Cape Agulhas, in Block 5/6/7.
About 12 500 people have signed an online petition to “stop the drilling of underwater oil wells near Hermanus, an important whale migration area” and civil society organisations are likely to challenge the decision.
The area is 10 000 km2 and is about 60km from the coast at its closest point and 170km at its furthest, in water depths between 700m and 3 200m.
The department said it is satisfied that the project, which Teepsa is undertaking with Shell and Petro SA, will not result in detrimental risks to the environment and the public.
It said all fundamental and proper requirements prescribed in the applicable legislation had been satisfied. The department said the identification and assessment of potential impacts of the activity was adequately undertaken and “the proposed mitigation and management measures are aligned with potential impacts”.
People and affected parties have 20 days, from 20 April, to appeal the decision with the department of forestry, fisheries and the environment.
Stefania Falcon, the coordinator of the Wildlife Animal Protection Forum South Africa, said the environmental authorisation approval illustrated a “flawed” process. “The fact that permission has been granted for exploration in one of the most environmentally pristine areas in the world, despite the overwhelming publicly recorded outcry from organisations, private individuals, resident associations, communities, municipalities, provincial authorities and scientists is extremely concerning.”
Ecojustice group the Green Connection, is likely to appeal the decision. Its strategic lead, Liziwe McDaid, said it is “very disappointed in the department’s decision to increase fossil fuel exploration in the teeth of the climate crisis. Thousands of families depend on the ocean for livelihoods, which could be put at risk. This cannot be in the public interest.”
Michele Pickover, the executive director of the EMS Foundation, said the department’s “so-called environmental consultation process is merely a box-ticking exercise”, which “contemptuously disregards public opinion and ignores extremely thoughtful inputs from civil society”.
She said the mineral resources and energy department should not have been consulting on environmental issues because it has “a harmful extractive agenda at any cost”. Pickover said the organisation is consulting its lawyers, Cullinan and Associates, with regard to an appeal.
On the need and desirability for the project, Teepsa’s final environmental and social impact assessment report, prepared by its environmental assessment practitioner SLR Consulting, said the proposed exploration would generate information about the viability of extracting oil and gas.
Teepsa says the exploration project has no direct influence on greenhouse gas emissions that would arise from the consumption of fossil fuels. It distances itself from these aspects saying they are influenced by South Africa’s energy and climate change related policies, the financial costs of the various energy sources, and consumer choices in this regard.
“The proposed exploration project will potentially lead to South Africa optimising its own indigenous resources to provide its identified oil and gas needs until the 2050 deadline to achieve carbon neutrality, rather than having to mainly import, as at present (a situation which has been exacerbated by the recent closure of several South African refineries).”
Janet Solomon, the co-founder of environmental coalition Oceans Not Oil, said: “The Teepsa authorisation approval rush is part of the ANC government’s creation of the ‘enabling environment’ that feeds their vision to give ‘primary use’ of South African seas — 95% of the 1.5 million square kilometre exclusive economic zone — to multinational oil corporations with high risk profiles.”
She said the minister of environment, forestry and fisheries, Barbara Creecy’s proposed marine offshore oil and gas sector plan, which was recently published for public comment, “now needs mass public engagement, as in it, she [Creecy] undertakes to maximise the recovery of offshore hydrocarbon reserves ‘sustainably for the benefit of ordinary South Africans’.
“Three court cases to date have shown that communities coast wide are emphatically against oil and gas [Operation] Phakisa’s] ocean-grabbing. Government should be listening and learning to avoid further litigation.”
The draft Offshore Oil and Gas Sector Plan released by Creecy’s department describes how South Africa is “endowed with rich geological resources” in the sea, including hydrocarbons such as oil and gas. “These are valuable economic assets for the country. Finding and mapping concentrations of offshore oil and gas resources that would merit commercial production is therefore a key priority for the government.”
It describes how, although oil and gas resources were first discovered in 1969 and production commenced in the 1990s, the oil and gas industry is still in its infancy, and further exploration will be required to unlock the potential of the nation’s petroleum resources.
“Since the oil and gas sector is in an early development phase, major investment in exploration activity is required before the sector’s potential can be realised. This is an area of high risk but with huge economic potential that requires substantial capital investment. Operators range from multinational to smaller locally owned oil and gas companies.”
‘Not as rapid’
The plan notes that there are 20 active exploration and seven production rights over the offshore petroleum blocks. “The advancement of oil and gas exploration in South Africa has not been rapid as envisaged by Operation Phakisa, whereby the Oil and Gas Lab formulated an objective to drill 30 exploration wells in the next 10 years.
“This 30-well aspiration is unlikely to be achieved in the three remaining years of the target set out through Operation Phakisa, with only two exploration wells and one pilot well, having been drilled post 2014 in the South Coast Basin,” according to the plan.
It notes that although most exploration rights are already in their second or third renewal period, most offshore operators are still in the early stages of their exploration efforts. “As such it will take a significant amount of time before these operators are prepared to transition from exploration to production activities in the event of a discovery.”
Securing the future of the upstream oil and gas sector will “confirm its position as a strategic and indispensable” part of South Africa’s Integrated Resource Plan, giving the opportunity to diversify the energy production portfolio, address energy problems and secure low carbon emissions in the future through gas resources.
“It can therefore be said that the sector offers significant potential for contributing to the country’s socio-economic development. The minimisation of the environmental impacts associated with exploration and production activities offshore is a fundamental concern for the government. In order to preserve the environment while efficiently maximising hydrocarbon recovery, exploration and production activities have to be undertaken as per the prescribed regulatory framework,” according to the plan.
But the science is clear that new fossil fuel development, including methane, poses a threat to South Africa’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate goals, said Solomon.
“Ending methane, coal and oil development is key to meeting these goals. Operation Phakisa’s oil and gas stream is not sustainable, is significantly harmful to marine and land biowebs, comes with extreme climate and environmental risks, risks to fisheries and tourism and makes a mockery of the sound environmental management function provided for in section 24 of the Bill of Rights, our commitment to the Paris Accord and Creecy’s departmental mandate.”
TotalEnergies said it welcomes the dialogue and continues to work closely with communities, authorities and all interested stakeholders and ensures adherence to the local regulations and environmental and social performance best practices.
[/membership]