Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Information and Discussions on Mining Issues
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67592
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Lisbeth »

Paradise is closing down: The ghastly spectre of oil drilling and fracking in fragile Okavango Delta

By Andreas Wilson-Spath• 15 December 2020

Image
The Okavango Delta, Botswana. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

For a distance of some 150km, Canadian company ReconAfrica’s oil and gas prospecting concessions border the Kavango River, a crucial source of water in a semi-arid area and the lifeline for one of Africa’s greatest concentrations of wild species in the Okavango Delta into which it discharges.

The fate of one of Africa’s most valuable ecosystems may depend on results from wells being drilled deep into the bedrock beneath the Kalahari of northern Namibia and Botswana in the hunt for a petroleum reservoir.

If the search by Canadian oil and gas company ReconAfrica is successful, the region could be irrevocably transmogrified by networks of access roads, truck traffic and heavy machinery, pipelines, drill rigs and hundreds of oil and gas production wells.

Image
A group of yellow-billed storks and other birds feed on small fishes in the flooded grassland in the Kwedi concession of the Okavango Delta, about 30km north of Mombo, Botswana. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

For ReconAfrica it would mean “the largest oil play of the decade” and immense financial profits. For social and environmental justice activists it spells unmitigated disaster.

The role played by the Namibian government (a 10% shareholder in ReconAfrica’s Namibian exploration concession) is of grave concern. While the petroleum company is vocally proclaiming that they are on the brink of a major discovery, the Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME) is downplaying potential risks and suggesting that the focus is merely on “exploration”.

Does this mixed messaging suggest misinformation on the part of ReconAfrica to lure potential investors? Is the government trying to obfuscate what’s really happening in the region? Is this then a case for the US Securities Exchange Commission to investigate?

ReconAfrica holds exploration licences for an area of more than 25,000km² in north-eastern Namibia and a further 9,900km² across the border in Botswana. Beneath this land lies the Kavango Basin, a geological mega-structure which the company’s experts conservatively estimate to contain 120 billion barrels of oil equivalent.

To put the claimed size of this deposit into context, the largest oil field in history, Saudi Arabia’s Ghawar Field, is believed to have held a total of 88 to 104 billion barrels of oil, while the country estimated to have the biggest proven reserves is Venezuela at about 303 billion barrels.

Image
A group of giraffes in the Kwedi concession of the Okavango Delta. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

In a press release, the MME suggests that the “necessary environmental impact permits” are in place, but opponents question the efficacy and thoroughness of the process and argue that ReconAfrica’s environmental impact assessment (EIA) falls short of legal requirements.

One major concern is that the exploitation of oil or gas deposits may require the use of hydraulic fracking technology, which involves injecting pressurised, water-based, chemical-laced fluid into wells to help release hydrocarbons tightly held in so-called unconventional deposits.

The myriad dangerous effects of fracking, from its need for vast amounts of water to the potential for artificial earthquakes, the contamination of ground and surface water and the poisoning of humans as well as the natural food chain, are well documented.

In its extremely optimistic communications with the media, ReconAfrica implies that fracking may well be on the cards. Daniel Jarvie, a petroleum geochemist on the company’s technical team, states that its licences in Namibia and Botswana “offer large-scale plays that are both conventional and unconventional”. Such unconventional “plays” would require fracking.

In a 2019 presentation to investors, ReconAfrica compares the Kavango basin to the huge Eagle Ford Shale oil and gas field in Texas and refers to plans for “modern frac simulations”. In the case of the Eagle Ford Shale, fracking at thousands of wells has been linked to air pollution and an increase in seismic activity “33 times the background rate”.

Dr Annette Hübschle of the Environmental Futures Project of UCT’s Global Risk Governance Programme warns that “we should be very concerned about the long-term impacts of fracking on livelihoods, health, ecosystems, biodiversity conservation and especially climate change.”

Image
A hamerkop rests on the branch of a tree in the Kwedi concession in the Okavango Delta. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

The MME insists, however, that neither an onshore production licence nor a licence to develop unconventional resources has been applied for or granted. They declare that “no hydraulic fracking activities are planned in Namibia” and that “Recon will not be conducting any fracking activities in the Okavango Delta.”

While the MME seems to imply that what is going on is merely exploration for possible petroleum reserves, ReconAfrica appears ready to move into oil production as soon as possible, noting that once a commercial-scale discovery is declared, their agreement with the Namibian government entitles them “to obtain a 25-year production licence”.

Ultimately, the debate over fracking may be moot as there is little doubt about the overwhelmingly destructive effects of major petroleum production – with or without fracking – in a dry, ecologically-sensitive region.

And that’s without the occurrence of any disasters – an unrealistic expectation from an industry responsible for some of the biggest environmental catastrophes in history, from the Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon to Canada’s tar sands and the devastation of the Niger Delta.

According to Hübschle, “the EIA fails to address the issue of the high volumes of water required for exploration and how the highly toxic and radioactive drill mud will be cleaned and disposed of.”

A threat to people and cultural heritage

Image
A small herd of zebras in the Kwedi concession in the Okavango Delta. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

What is indisputable are the risks to which large, industrialised oil production would expose the region.

For a distance of some 150km, ReconAfrica’s concessions border the Kavango River (often referred to as the Okavango River, and called Rio Cubango in Angola), a crucial source of water in a semi-arid area and the lifeline for one of Africa’s greatest concentrations of wild species in the Okavango Delta into which it discharges.

The region as a whole is home to around 200,000 people. The Okavango Delta, which is downstream from the suspected oil field, provides a livelihood for indigenous populations of at least five ethnic groups who rely on the landscape for water, fishing, hunting, wild plant foods, farming and tourism.

Of particular concern are local San communities whose already threatened lifestyle would be deeply impacted by the arrival of the oil industry. What’s more, the area where petroleum production would occur includes Botswana’s Tsodilo Hills — a Unesco World Heritage Site — which is celebrated as the “Louvre of the Desert” and protects over 4,500 San rock paintings, some of which are 1 200 years old.

Hübschle notes that “very few affected parties were consulted by government and the company. While the company is engaging in a winning hearts and minds campaign, there are many affected people who are deeply concerned about their land rights, ability to farm and derive income from community conservancies.”

A threat to wildlife and ecology

Image
A female leopard rests on a termite hill in the Kwedi concession in the Okavango Delta, (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

A future Kavango Basin oil field not only poses an existential risk to the Okavango Delta, a Unesco World Heritage Site in its own right — Botswana’s most-visited tourist destination and home to a very large and diverse population of animals, including more than 70 species of fish and over 400 species of birds — but it also directly overlaps the world’s largest terrestrial cross-border wildlife sanctuary, the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (Kaza), which straddles the borders of Botswana, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Angola and Zambia.

A source of millions of dollars of income from sustainable ecotourism, the area protects at least four species on the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) list of “critically endangered” animals, including the black rhino and the white-backed vulture, seven “endangered” species, including the grey-crowned crane and the African wild dog, as well as 20 species listed as “vulnerable”, such as the martial eagle and Temminck’s pangolin.

The region is also known for its extensive network of migration routes for the planet’s largest remaining elephant population. Studies have revealed that these animals have huge home ranges of nearly 25,000km² and roam across vast distances between Botswana, Namibia, Angola and Zambia.

The disruption of migration corridors by a massive new oil industry infrastructure would not just endanger the survival of the elephant population but is likely to increase detrimental interactions with local human communities.

“If full-scale drilling goes ahead”, says Hübschle, “the outlook for Kaza would be grim. Tourists won’t come on safari to look at oil rigs.”

From a global perspective, extracting vast amounts of fossil fuels from the region will exacerbate the ongoing human-induced climate crisis which is itself threatening the survival of the Okavango Delta as a result of decreasing annual rainfall in the catchment area.

Image
A hippo bull roars in the Kwedi concession in the Okavango Delta. (Photo: EPA / Gernot Hensel)

In a deeper, geological irony, the rocks suspected of containing the oil and gas reserves of the Kavango Basin were deposited in the Permian Period which came to a cataclysmic end in the most extreme extinction event of the Earth’s history that wiped out 90% to 95% of all marine species and 70% of all land organisms.

Digging up and burning oil from these strata will push us even closer to a new global mass extinction.

In its myopic vision, all ReconAfrica sees in the northern Kalahari is money buried underground.

Image
The Okavango Delta, Botswana. (Photo: EPA-EFE / Gernot Hensel)

At a time when the world’s few remaining wild places need all of the protection we can muster when biodiversity is declining rapidly and when global heating is wrecking the world, it’s the kind of vision that undermines the very foundations of our existence.

If we believe in restorative social and environmental justice, we ought to insist that the international fossil fuel industry funds Namibia and Botswana to keep the oil in the ground, to develop renewable energy systems instead and to safeguard their irreplaceable ecosystems. DM

Andreas Wilson-Späth is a part-time freelance writer and ex-geologist who lives and works in Cape Town.


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Alf
Posts: 11606
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 12:40 pm
Country: south africa
Location: centurion
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Alf »

Even there now 0= 0=


Next trip to the bush??

Let me think......................
User avatar
Peter Betts
Posts: 3084
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:28 am
Country: RSA
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Peter Betts »

There is no hope


User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67592
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Lisbeth »

South Africa swims against the global tide, puts ‘controlled’ fracking back on the agenda

By Tony Carnie• 6 June 2021

The State has opened the hatch to pouring scarce water underground, despite the rest of the world working towards banning fracking, and despite South Africa being one of the driest countries on Earth

Swimming against a global tide to ban fracking outright, the government has published new proposals to safeguard South Africa’s declining water resources through “controlled” fracking – while simultaneously leaving the door wide open for oil and gas corporations to blast vast quantities of water underground to extract fossil fuels.

The new plans by Water Affairs Minister Lindiwe Sisulu propose a 5km buffer zone to separate fracking operations from strategic water resources, wells and dams, along with a ban on certain toxic fracking fluids.

Fracking – or hydraulic fracturing – is a water-intensive technology pioneered in the United States and Canada to get access to declining reserves of fossil fuels by injecting a high-pressure cocktail of water, sand and chemicals deep underground to smash apart underground rock formations, raising major concerns about the pollution of surface and underground water supplies – and increasing the likelihood of earthquakes.

The new water-use measures, published by Sisulu’s department for public comment in a Government Gazette notice on 7 May, have raised fears in farmers, conservationists and other interest groups that this a further signal that the government remains determined to reopen the path for major exploration and drilling by the oil and gas fracking industry.

Following an initial storm of publicity just over a decade ago over plans to frack the water-scarce Karoo, the subject has increasingly faded from the public radar after a legal ruling that temporarily derailed the country’s fracking regulation plans.

Image

Following a legal challenge by the Treasure the Karoo Action Group (TKAG) and the civil rights group AfriForum, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled in 2019 that the minister of mineral resources was not empowered to make regulations to manage the negative environmental impacts of fracking.

Now, coupled with a series of more recent pronouncements by Mineral Resources and Energy Minister Gwede Mantashe and other gas-related developments, the publication of the latest water-use regulations by Sisulu provide further indications that the fracking train is being pushed slowly back on to the rails.

To the astonishment of several interest groups, the public was given just 30 days to comment and respond to regulations that have profound implications for water security in a nation ranked as the 30th driest in the world.

In her budget speech to the National Assembly on 14 May, Environment Minister Barbara Creecy said efforts were under way to secure strategic water sources and wetlands that supply water to 60% of the country’s people, more than 90% of urban dwellers, 67% of national economic activity and 70% of irrigated agriculture.

“We are firmly of the view that, as a water-scarce country, we cannot afford to compromise any of our strategic water sources for short-term gain. In this regard, the department will continue to work with relevant government departments and other sectors responsible for mining, human settlements, agriculture and water affairs to protect strategic water sources from potential undesirable environmental impacts,” Creecy said.

At a national symposium on 19 May, Libby Dreyer, the Development Bank of Southern Africa sustainability head, reiterated these concerns, noting that the country was headed for a 17% water deficit by 2030.

So why, asks AfriForum environmental affairs manager Lambert de Klerk, is the government still pushing to divert critically scarce water resources into fracking?

“It’s very worrying that we hear ministers acknowledging that South Africa is a water-scarce nation, but government as a whole does not appear to be asking questions on why other nations are banning fracking. Something much bigger seems to be going on here,” he suggests.

De Klerk, along with the TKAG head Jonathan Deal, has written to Sisulu’s department demanding that the 30-day comment period be extended to 60 days at the least, to allow for expert interrogation of the proposals by hydrology and geological experts.

“Many of the scientists that we have previously used on these and related issues are tied up in other urgent projects and of course the effects of Covid-19 on their schedules is also complicating the issue.

“At the very minimum, 60 days may be best practice, but as we pointed out, the country is in a State of Disaster and is heading for a third wave of Covid-19 – at least according to our government.”

He says Sisulu’s department needs to re-evaluate the time frame for comments, as well as the mixed messaging from department officials on whether the comment period is one month or two months.

In an email sent to the department on 21 May, Deal said: “I am suggesting that having regard for the State of Disaster, Covid-19 third wave … and in view of the extremely technical nature of these regulations, and finally taking into account the potential consequences to the community of TKAG failing to properly comment on every aspect of the regulations, the department should be aiming at a minimum of a 180-day turnaround on the comment for these regulations.”

AgriSA, the national farming federation, told DM168 that it could not support the government’s onshore shale gas industry plans.

This was because of the uncertainties about the availability of water to conduct fracking as well as uncertainties about the contamination of vital water resources, said AgriSA natural resources head Janse Rabie.

Although the proposed regulations helped to clarify the range of authorisations now required, “there is still no answer as to where the water that is needed to conduct exploration and production will be sourced from”.

“South Africa’s water challenges are all too apparent. We are one of the most water-stressed countries in the world. Our agricultural sector already requires almost 60% of South Africa’s water in order to maintain our country’s current food security. We are of the view that South Africa’s food security (and per implication that of our neighbouring countries and the region) is being put directly at risk by government’s intention to pursue onshore shale gas production.”

Rabie said the seemingly “blind pursuit” of fossil-based energy generation was increasingly running contrary to international trends on sustainable development and climate change adaptation and mitigation.

Elsewhere in the world an increasing number of countries have banned or imposed moratoriums on fracking because of concerns about water use, pollution, the climate crisis and earthquake risks.

In the US state of Oklahoma, government geologists have reported that the seismicity rate is now 600 times higher than the historical background seismicity rate, largely the result of the underground burial of water by the oil and gas industry.

Lynn Buehring wears a breathing mask outside her home in Karnes County, Texas, US. She lives in the middle of three different hydrofracking wells. She is suffering from severe reactions to the chemicals and hydrogen sulfide gas released from the wells.

The Oklahoma Geological Survey historically recorded about one-and-half earthquakes a year exceeding magnitude three. By 2015, the number of similar-sized earthquakes in Oklahoma had increased to about two and a half such events each day.

Government geologists have blamed this on the burial of “produced” water by the oil and gas industry rather than the fracking process itself, noting that water injection places increased pressure on natural geological faults deep within the earth.

A recent study by researchers at Duke University found that from 2011 to 2016 water use per well in the United States had increased up to 770%, whereas flowback and produced water volumes generated within the first year of production increased by up to 550%.

“The steady increase of the water footprint of hydraulic fracturing with time implies that future unconventional oil and gas operations will require larger volumes of water for hydraulic fracturing, which will result in larger produced oil and gas wastewater volumes,” the researchers warned.

Closer to home, local environmental consultant and anti-fracking campaigner Judy Bell said she was astonished that the government department entrusted with protecting water resources could consider sanctioning fracking.

“There is even an initiative that is gaining momentum to get a global ban on fracking. Why does government think we will be able to frack differently and cause no harm to us, our children and their children?” she asked.

The Department of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation has not been able to provide clarity on whether the deadline for public comment will be extended. For now, the department says the deadline is 7 June. DM168

The following countries have banned fracking based on mounting evidence:

Some sources attribute the genesis of fracking to battlefield observations made by Colonel Edward Roberts during the Battle of Fredericksburg in 1862.

During the fighting, Roberts watched the devastating effect that heavy artillery had on narrow, water-filled channels.

Accounts suggest that he later used this knowledge to design and obtain a patent for a civilian-use “exploding torpedo” that could be lowered into an oil well and detonated to shatter the surrounding rock. When water was pumped into the well, oil flows increased – in some cases by as much as 1,200% – and fracking was established as a way to increase a well’s productive potential.

According to the US-based Natural Resources Defense Council, such explosives were replaced with high-pressure blasts of liquids in the late 1940s, and so “hydraulic” fracking became the standard in the US oil and gas industry. Since then, approximately one million wells in the US have been “fracked”.

Yet mounting global evidence about the negative impacts of this procedure on people, the environment and water resources has prompted several countries, provinces or states to ban fracking or impose moratoria. They include:

AUSTRALIA

The province of Victoria amended its constitution last year to prohibit fracking permanently. Premier Daniel Andrews said his Labour government had listened to the voices of farmers and regional communities and had taken a decision to enshrine the ban in the constitution, making it more difficult for future governments to reverse this.

The Tasmanian government imposed a moratorium on fracking until 2020, which was recently renewed until 2025.

EUROPE

France

In 2011, France was the first European country to ban fracking after sustained public pressure. In 2017, President Emmanuel Macron and the French parliament passed a law that also banned exploration and production of all oil and natural gas ventures within mainland France and overseas territories.

The use of fracking for gas extraction is widely opposed in Switzerland. Despite the almost complete lack of concrete projects, certain cantons have already imposed bans.

The Netherlands

The Netherlands imposed a moratorium in 2015, an example followed by Denmark in 2016.

Bulgaria

Following a series of nationwide public protests, the Bulgarian government banned fracking in 2012 and said it would only reconsider the matter if it became clear that it posed no risks to the environment. Many of the protesters held loaves of bread above their heads to symbolise concerns about the country’s food security.

Germany

With some exceptions, most fracking has been banned in Germany since 2016, with the matter due to be reconsidered this year.

Spain

In May 2021, the Spanish Congress approved a new decarbonisation bill that also banned fracking.

Ireland

The Republic of Ireland passed a bill in 2018 to ban all onshore fracking.

United Kingdom

In 2015, the National Assembly of Wales approved a moratorium on fracking, “until it is proven to be safe in both an environmental and public health context”.

Scotland

Scotland banned fracking in 2017 following “one of the most far-reaching investigations into unconventional oil and gas by any government anywhere in the world”.

“Based on the evidence on impacts and the clear lack of social acceptability, I can confirm the Scottish government final policy position is that we do not support the development of unconventional oil and gas – often known as fracking – in Scotland,” said energy minister Paul Wheelhouse.

In 2019, England imposed a fracking moratorium and warned that it would not agree to fracking in the future “until compelling new evidence is provided” that it could ever be safe.

The UK’s only active fracking site at Preston New Road in Lancashire was brought to an immediate halt after fracking triggered multiple earth tremors that breached the government’s earthquake limits.

NORTH AMERICA

United States

The State of Vermont banned fracking in 2012, followed by New York State in 2014, Maryland in 2017 and Oregon in 2019, while Florida has also imposed restrictions.

Earlier this year, the Delaware River Basin Commission declared fracking to be a significant risk to human health and aquatic life and banned such activity around this major provincial river system.

According to the Associated Press, the ban applies to the entire watershed and two counties that form part of the Marcellus Shale. Nearly 13,000 wells have been drilled elsewhere in the vast Marcellus formation, turning Pennsylvania into the second-largest gas-producing state.

“The fracking ban in the Delaware River basin is a momentous victory for public health, the environment, and against climate change,” said Kimberly Ong, an attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council. But Republican state lawmakers in Pennsylvania as well as a landowner group have filed lawsuits challenging the commission’s right to regulate gas development in the watershed.

Canada

The Province of New Brunswick banned all fracking in 2015, and Quebec also has a similar ban for shale gas fracking.

LATIN AMERICA

In 2017, Uruguay banned fracking for at least four years. In Argentina, the province of Entre Ríos prohibited fracking to protect surface and underground waters, including the Guaraní aquifer.

In 2018, Colombia declared a judicial moratorium on fracking and, in 2019, Costa Rica declared a moratorium on fracking and all forms of hydrocarbon extraction.

In Brazil, the State of Paraná and Santa Catarina prohibited fracking in 2019.

In 2019, Mexico suspended a previously granted authorisation to allow fracking in Veracruz and Puebla. DM168


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Richprins
Committee Member
Posts: 76116
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
Location: NELSPRUIT
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Richprins »

We simply do not have the water! @#$

I hope the government has not received bribes again...

Normally the silly 30 day public comment window indicates a decision has already been made.


Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
User avatar
Lisbeth
Site Admin
Posts: 67592
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Lisbeth »

It is not only a question of water :evil:


"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
User avatar
Peter Betts
Posts: 3084
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:28 am
Country: RSA
Contact:

Re: Fracking in Southern Africa - General

Post by Peter Betts »

Wrecking MY Karoo >> they must get lost


Post Reply

Return to “Mining and Other Extraction Issues”