February 24, 2024, 03:11:56 AM

Author Topic: Oil in T&T.  (Read 6235 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline soccerman

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 4655
    • View Profile
Oil in T&T.
« on: January 15, 2014, 10:29:29 PM »
Trinidad Oil Spills Leave State-Owned Energy Company Scrambling To Clean Up
The Huffington Post  |  By Nick Visser

At least 11 oil spills have crippled parts of Trinidad and Tobago, coating miles of beach with crude as the state-owned energy company scrambles to control what's being called one of the country's worst environmental disasters.

Petrotrin, Trinidad's state-owned oil company, first responded to an oil spill near La Brea on Dec. 17, according to a report from the Trinidad Guardian. Over the past month, the company has confirmed at least 11 spills and was slapped with a $3.1 million fine from the country's Environmental Management Authority last week, which the company's president, Khalid Hassanali, called "harsh."

Here's where it gets weird.

The pipeline responsible for the first of the leaks at Petrotrin's Point-a-Pierre facility, which resulted in an initial spill of more than 7,000 barrels, may not have undergone any inspections for the past 17 years, according to a confidential report commissioned by the company and obtained by the Trinidad Guardian. Of the other 10 leaks, Petrotrin has accused saboteurs of causing at least 2 while releasing a series of media releases praising what they describe as "significant progress" during clean-up efforts, saying the beaches would be clean one to two weeks after the spill.

Petrotrin did not return requests for comment in time for publication.

However, local officials have accused the company of trying to downplay the extent and size of the spill, according to the Trinidad Express. Two former energy ministers also came forward earlier this month, saying Petrotrin did know about the state of its aging infrastructure after a government audit was ordered in 2010.

"There was no question of sabotage, it was all a question of bad operations on the part of Petrotrin," MP Paula Gopee-Scoon said. “It was a cover-up from day one.”

Petrotrin has since used the controversial dispersant Corexit 9500 to control the spill, used in record quantities by BP during 2010's Gulf oil spill. Many scientists have said the chemical becomes far more toxic than oil alone when the two are mixed, harming marine life, but Petrotrin's president has defended the use of the dispersant, saying "all the chemicals we are using are approved chemicals and we are using them in the approved manner."

Petrotrin's chairman denied the occurrence of any more spills in the region this week and insisted claims that oil had spread to neighboring Venezuela were false. But government officials have demanded the Minister of Energy commission an independent investigation into the cause of the spill "by people who don’t have anything to protect and no rear end to cover."

Trinidad's energy department approved a new national oil spill contingency plan in January 2013.

Take a look at more photos below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/14/trinidad-oil-spill-petrotrin-energy-company_n_4596696.html?utm_hp_ref=email_share

Offline pecan

  • Steups ...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6855
  • Billy Goats Gruff
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2014, 06:37:10 AM »
Just heard about this from my Mom.

The first was way back on Dec 17th? and the news only now coming out ... at least up here. Was this reported locally?
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Offline Tallman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 25195
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2014, 07:05:12 AM »
Just heard about this from my Mom.

The first was way back on Dec 17th? and the news only now coming out ... at least up here. Was this reported locally?

Yes, this has been covered extensively in the local newspapers from the time it happened.
The Conquering Lion of Judah shall break every chain.

Offline Michael-j

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 958
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #3 on: January 16, 2014, 07:31:09 AM »
Just heard about this from my Mom.

The first was way back on Dec 17th? and the news only now coming out ... at least up here. Was this reported locally?

Yes, this has been covered extensively in the local newspapers from the time it happened.

Yup. And like everything in Trinidad, there's always a political slant to it...

Offline pecan

  • Steups ...
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6855
  • Billy Goats Gruff
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2014, 07:36:10 AM »
I need to read other local news feeds more frequently.
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.

Offline Tiresais

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2817
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2014, 10:50:09 AM »
hah I'm in England and I saw it last month - have the T&T Express app (don't judge me, no one else has an app out)

Offline Brownsugar

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 10179
  • Soca in mih veins, Soca in mih blood!!
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #6 on: January 16, 2014, 05:41:53 PM »
Sunity Maharaj wrote an insightful piece on it, well so I'm told.  I just tried to find it but couldn't.  Not sure if it was in the form of her weekly column or on her facebook page.....
"...If yuh clothes tear up
Or yuh shoes burst off,
You could still jump up when music play.
Old lady, young baby, everybody could dingolay...
Dingolay, ay, ay, ay ay,
Dingolay ay, ay, ay..."

RIP Shadow....The legend will live on in music...

Offline Tallman

  • Administrator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 25195
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #7 on: January 16, 2014, 06:55:41 PM »
Sunity Maharaj wrote an insightful piece on it, well so I'm told.  I just tried to find it but couldn't.  Not sure if it was in the form of her weekly column or on her facebook page.....

Slipping on the oil spill
By Sunity Maharaj (T&T Express)


Dec 28, 2013

It is the measure of our historical alienation that we know next to nothing about the energy industry on which we are almost completely dependent. We live on the fruit end of the business where the only thing of importance is price. Apart from that, we are largely content to live in blissful ignorance and leave the rest to Houston or Melbourne or wherever.

The horrendous oil spill that has been coursing like poison through coastal communities in south Trinidad exemplifies our flat-footedness even at the highest levels.

Notwithstanding the newly updated National Oil Spill Contingency Plan (NOSCP), we have been consistently behind the curve on this one.

The first disaster was Petrotrin’s statement issued on December 19,a full two days after a leak was discovered. In it, Petrotrin assured the public that “it has mobilised all available resources to manage the spill response efforts in an effective and efficient manner and the situation is under control”.

It claimed that it had cleaned up the spill and that an aerial survey conducted on the 18th had found “no sheen or oil along the shoreline spanning Claxton Bay, San Fernando, Mosquito Creek and Otaheite”.

Not mentioned, at least in the media report, was the coastline of La Brea.

The company’s claim that the situation was “under control” was immediately contradicted by La Brea residents who complained about nausea and headaches and led reporters to the accumulation of oil and sludge along the La Brea shoreline from where it was beginning to spread.

While media reports quoted Petrotrin officials as saying they did not know the source of the leak, OE (Offshore Engineer) Digital Edition was reporting that the leak was found on the No 10 Sea Line at the Petrotrin Pointe-a-Pierre Port during fuel oil bunkers loading operations for the barge Marabella.

On December 21, 96 hours after the disaster had struck, Petrotrin’s management called a news conference to present its take on the problem as a mystery, raising the spectre of sabotage.  Up to this point, the oil spill was being handled as a Petrotrin problem without any reference to the National Oil Spill Contingency Plan. It was not until the next day, December 22, that the Minister of Energy triggered the NOSCP in recognition of the fact that T&T was dealing with an oil spill disaster of Tier 3 magnitude.

The big question is: why did it take so long for the ministry to recognise the depth of the problem?

The National Oil Spill Contingency Plan (2013) defines a Tier 3 spill as one “requiring substantial resources and support from regional or international oil spill co-operatives to mitigate effects perceived to be wide-reaching, ie, of national or international significance”.

According to the Plan, operators that are in the business of oil and gas production and shipping of crude oil “shall be required to obtain membership with a suitable Tier 3 oil spill equipment cooperative that can mobilise equipment into the country within at least 24 - 48 hours”. (My emphasis)

In determining the tier of a spill, operators must apply a given mathematical formula. In being categorised at Tier 3, the Petrotrin Oil Spill would have qualified as a Worst Case Discharge as defined under the NOSCP.

It was not until Christmas Day, a full week after the leak was sprung, that the complement of personnel from Florida-based Oil Spill Response Ltd arrived in Trinidad to begin tackling the job.

It is hard to escape the concern that someone with regulatory responsibility was sleeping on the job.  As lead agency, the Ministry of Energy and Energy Affairs was far too absent from the scene in the critical first hours of this disaster. Indeed, the Minister of Energy did not emerge publicly until more than 100 hours after the problem emerged.

Whether or not ministry personnel were liaising with Petrotrin’s management, it was its clear responsibility to take command of the situation and address the issue publicly within the first 24 hours of the leak and to begin activating the Plan’s Incident Command System. Notably, when activated, the NOSCP is managed by a Standing Cabinet-appointed committee, which would seem to have been nowhere in sight as the southern coastline was turning into oil. Equally absent was the Information officer of the Ministry of Energy who is built into the top of the NOSCP’s response team for Tier 3 spills.

Of particular interest is Petrotrin’s reference to the leaking oil as a “mystery”. In the context of oil spills, the term “mystery” has a very precise meaning as a reference to  spills from an indeterminate source. There is no doubt that the source of the current spill is Petrotrin. The question now is whether a claim of “mystery” can be extended to the cause of the spill and, so, cast doubt on our assumption of Petrotrin as the Responsible Party in this case.According to the NOSCP, in cases where the Responsible Party (RP) in an oil spill cannot be identified, the Government acting through the Ministry of Energy will assume clean-up costs by accessing the NOSCP Fund until such time as the RP is identified, assuming that party is ever identified.

So far, the PM and the Minister of Energy seem to accept Petrotrin’s assertion of a mystery. Whether their interpretation of “mystery” opens a channel to the NOSCP Fund for Petrotrin now remains to be seen.

Interestingly, the NOSCP states that where there is dispute over responsibility, a three-member Fact-finding commission of enquiry must be launched within seven days of the dispute.

Many, many questions linger, not least of which is the notion of “full and final” payment of compensation to affected residents, the mushrooming of other “mysterious” spills, and the integrity of Petrotrin’sclean-up efforts. Given the indistinguishable relationship between the government, as regulator, and Petrotrin, as Responsible Party, we might have to depend on Parliament, or whistle blowers, to spill the beans on this oil spill.
The Conquering Lion of Judah shall break every chain.

Offline fishs

  • I believe in the stars in the dark night.
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3856
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2014, 11:27:58 PM »

 Petrotrin's infrastructure is a mess. From gathering systems to distribution and refining.

 Years ago ARCO was faced with similar problems, aging infrastructure and facilities and they end up selling out to BP.

 Expect more of the same soon, once pipelines start to leak because of age and attendant non maintenance the only option is to shut down start an extensive NDE program and then do an assessment of what you can bring back online safely, what you can repair and still be commercialy viable and then what you have to shut in.

But when you shut in or put a pipeline out of service permanently you are required to remove that line clean it and dispose of it. Costs could be horrendos for TT.

On the refinery I understand that a lot of the refining trains are shut in and instead of refurbishing and doing TAR's they hhad decided to install new process plants, of course we all know about the massive overruns they have had.

The thing is there are systems that are tied in or connected , old to new and I would not be surprised if PAP does not become a time bomb.

No Government has the will or knowledge to fix it, information to the public is withheld and corruption will still make any fixs a waste of time.


Heading for disaster.
Ah want de woman on de bass

Offline zuluwarrior

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 3048
  • use your tongue to count your teeth
    • View Profile
    • http://pointalive.com
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2014, 09:24:22 PM »
Published:
Sunday, January 26, 2014
 
Text Size: 
I don’t believe a word that comes out of any politician’s mouth these days, and I certainly look with a skewed eye at any statement that a company representative may put forth. These people have their own agenda, and, unfortunately, they think the rest of us have the inability to think. So I’ve done my own Internet search on Corexit, and none of it is positive. I watched a YouTube video done by an Australian “60 Minutes’” programme, called Crude Solution, and it made for very grim viewing.
 
Much of what is known today about the hazards of this product is due to its use in the massive BP Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Two million gallons of Corexit were used to disperse the oil. It was dropped from the air and sprayed by hand. And if the people who actually did the spraying and the people who were inadvertently sprayed on are to be believed, they are suffering some serious health problems. But where does that leave us and our oil spill?
 
First of all, we should know how much of the chemical was put into our environment. Since the BP disaster, people now know that the chemical is toxic to marine life, and it “bioaccumulates,” which means that it builds up in the system. And contrary to what was originally thought, it does not disperse the oil in the true sense. What it does is combine with the oil, breaks it into smaller globs, and these globs drop to the bottom of the ocean, where they are rolled about by the sea and are still being washed ashore on the Gulf Coast today.
 
And what is frightening about these globs is that they are 52 more times toxic than the original oil, because they are a combination of oil and Corexit. The chemical in the globs glows yellow under a blue light and can be absorbed directly into the skin when touched. Apparently you can’t see it under normal conditions and you can’t even feel it.
 
I am not an alarmist, but the facts speak for themselves. As Mr Aboud says, all you need to do is look at everything on the Internet and judge for yourselves. Every site I looked at says that Corexit, mixed with oil, makes it 52 times more toxic.
 
 
After reading the Guardian today (January 25), I looked up the listed ingredients in Palmolive Dish Soap and Corexit; unless these ingredients go by several different names, they are quite different.
 
 
However, you can wash your dishes and hands quite safely in dishwashing detergent; but if you wash your fish tank with it, and if you don’t rinse out every bit of that soap, then your fish will die when you put them back in. If you take soap powder and mix it with water and pour it on your grass, any mole crickets in there will come flying out and die.
 
So, in conclusion, having done my own research, I would think that anyone who says Corexit is harmless is misguided. It’s not harmless. But we need to know how much was used on our oil spill to give a better evaluation of the possible damage done. Remember, they used a whopping two million gallons along the Gulf of Mexico. Some environmentalists say it would be better to let nature take care of small oil spills, rather than add more chemicals to the mix.
 
If I had a choice of losing a stretch of mangrove or further polluting the sea with accumulative poisons, then I’d have to sacrifice the mangrove. I think any oil left on the sea floor and on the beach should be removed by vacuuming, taken to a secure facility and made inert.
 
 
Anne Murphy,
via e-mail
.
good things happening to good people: a good thing
good things happening to bad people: a bad thing
bad things happening to good people: a bad thing
bad things happening to bad people: a good thing

Offline boss

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 2159
  • When I grow up I want to be Dennis Lawrence
    • View Profile
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #10 on: April 12, 2014, 08:15:35 PM »
The Petrotrin lie
Trinidad Express
Story Created: Apr 12, 2014 at 9:35 PM ECT
Story Updated: Apr 12, 2014 at 9:35 PM ECT

On a fateful December day when Christmas shopping occupied the minds of most people, a 16-inch diameter sea line broke at the State-owned refinery, sending a rush of black fuel oil into the Gulf of Paria and along the south-western coastline. The effect of that spill is still being felt today by fisherfolk and people in poor coastal communities. The Sunday Express takes a close look at the chain of events that led to this country’s worst environmental disaster. This is the fifth in a series of articles by Camini Marajh, Head, Express Investigative Desk

State oil and gas giant Petrotrin told outright lies on several key points about the December oil spills, including the so-called sabotage claim related to Riser Platform 5 (RP), Sunday Express investigations have found. And, the Kamla Persad-Bissessar Government played a part in facilitating the pattern of deceit instead of holding the State energy company to account.

Internal investigation reports and other company documents obtained by this newspaper indicate the Persad-Bissessar administration and Petrotrin misled the Parliament and the public about the events of the December oil spills.

Petrotrin lied to the country when it reported a spill incident involving RP No 5 on the afternoon on December 17. The incident in fact happened on December 18, according to Petrotrin’s own documents. The company took four days after No 10 sea line ruptured to acknowledge there was an incident at its Pointe-a-Pierre refinery and even then failed to provide critical information that it had close to 7,500 barrels of unaccounted-for fuel oil somewhere in the Gulf of Paria.

The company which repeatedly asserted that unknown saboteurs were responsible for the series of so-called mystery leaks hid the facts relating to the No 10 incident for long critical days and told an outright lie about the timeline relating to the RP No 5 spill.

An internal company document said that the RP No 5 incident took place on December 18 and not on the 17th as the company made out. The report also contradicts claims by the board and management of Petrotrin and Government officials that foul play was involved. Sabotage was not even a distant spectre on the Soldado horizon, according to the company’s own investigation report into the incident.

The report by company man Dexter Hector put the blame squarely on a blown rubber gasket which, according to him, should never have been put on the line to start with. As previously reported in this series, Petrotrin has ignored its own safety warnings and used band-aid fixes to keep the refinery operating in a dangerous game of Russian roulette.

The Hector Report found the rubber gasket which blew on December 18 was badly flawed and did not meet the API industry standard for offshore platform piping systems. There was no Management of Change (MOC) document related to the change-out of the rubber gasket in 2005 and no “fitness for service” certificate that the rubber gasket was a safe substitute for the required metal part.

For reasons not clear, Petrotrin lied and shaded the truth about much of the facts related to the December spills, including spill incidents that never happened.

It reported a total of three oil leaks involving its joint venture partner, Trinity Exploration and Production. A spokesman for the company told the Sunday Express of a single oil leak at an onshore facility at Rancho Quemado which was contained in the space of a day with 80 of the 90 barrels of crude recovered.

He confirmed the company did report its suspicion that the line had been tampered with but admitted there was no evidence to prove this and “nothing more has come to light”. The company spokesman, who declined to speak on the record, made clear Trinity had no oil leaks at sea. He said there was an incident on December 24 in Brighton but this related to “a tiny but not measurable gas leak”.

In throwing up its sabotage conspiracy, the Petrotrin board and executive made heavy weather of an unprecedented 11 leaks in ten days. In fact there were seven. A review of the company’s own data and other information show that the company counted coastal sites impacted by the oil spills as actual spills.

The seven identified spills are Petrotrin’s four, Trinity’s two (counting the tiny gas leak) and Neal and Massy Energy Resources Ltd one.

1. The No 10 sea line at the Pointe-a-Pierre refinery on December 17 responsible for 7,453 barrels of fuel oil being spilled into the sea.

2. RP No 5 in the main Soldado Field on December 18 (crude).

3. Platform 17 in the company’s East Soldado Field on December 19 (crude).

4. No 15 sea line at the Pointe-a-Pierre refinery on December 26 (fuel oil).

5. Lease operator Trinity’s Rancho Quemado incident on December 21 (single suspected case of sabotage for which no evidence has been presented) crude.

6. The miniscule natural gas leak in the Brighton Field on December 24.

7. And Neal and Massy’s loss of three barrels of crude in a forested area in Moruga on December 24. Investigations suggest an agricultural vehicle called a timberjack went over a line which sprang a leak. Two-and-a-half barrels were recovered.

And, as the Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) found, in both preliminary and final test results, all of the weathered oil samples collected except from a barge at the LABIDCO Industrial Estate, tested positive for “bunker C type fuel oil” which carried the same characteristics as the samples taken from the No 10 refinery spill on December 17.

In the immediate aftermath of the No 10 spill, Petrotrin added to the confusion by suggesting the thick black sludge that was washing up on the coastline along the south- western peninsula was crude. But as this Sunday Express investigation has found, the timeline of Petrotrin’s deceit is important.

Company logs and records show the company knew by 6 a.m. on December 17 that No 10 sea line had ruptured and spilled over 7,000 barrels of fuel oil into the sea.

It knew it had missed two crucial inspections on the physically weakened line, knew that No 10 had serious problems long before the accident, knew it had failed to heed its own safety warnings and knew the financial consequences of its negligent behaviour.

Company photographs taken from a helicopter fly-by at 11.30 a.m. on December 18 showed an oil sighting at the Oropouche bank (north of La Brea), a full 24 hours before the RP No 5 blew a gasket leak and spewed crude into the sea—the second leak on the December record.

Petrotrin went further, declaring that preliminary laboratory tests conducted on samples collected at the different points of impact made crude the likely culprit. And to make sure nobody connected the crude spilled in the Soldado field to what was blackening the La Brea shoreline, the company asserted aerial and marine sightings found no connection among the four company spills caused by its own negligence.

It fails to explain how an oil and gas giant, in the business for 100 years, and conducting a multitude of tests on petrochemical product on a daily basis, could get it so wrong, how it managed to mistake a refined fuel for crude. It also fails to address the $64-million question of its thinking on where exactly its fuel oil went to. 

Continues on Wednesday

Offline Flex

  • Administrator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18038
  • A Trini 4 Real.
    • View Profile
    • Soca Warriors Online
Re: Trinidad Oil Spills
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2014, 03:39:42 AM »
Fishy situation in La Brea—Ganga
Probe into trawler ‘dumping’ report...
By Gail Alexander (Guardian).


State-owned Petrotrin is investigating information that a certain southern-based vessel allegedly dumped the fish which washed up on La Brea beaches last month, raising fears of a “fish kill” caused by toxins used in the Petrotrin oil spill clean-up operations. This after tests by the Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) and Environmental Management Agency (EMA) concluded that the dead fish were not poisoned by toxic substances and instead may have been caught and dumped. Petrotrin confirmed the situation yesterday after receiving reports on the issue from the various agencies.

Also confirming the matter was Water Resources and Environment Minister Ganga Singh, who said yesterday: “It is reasonable to conclude, after reading the reports, that the fish which washed up on Coffee beach, La Brea, were caught and dumped and therefore serious questions—indeed, a fishy situation—have arisen.” The fish which washed ashore had sparked fears in some quarters that they may have been killed by chemicals used in the clean-up following Petrotrin’s December 2013 oil spill. Following questions on the issue by the T&T Guardian, Petrotrin on Wednesday confirmed it had received information that a trawler (name given), fitting the description of one operating out of the Otaheite port had allegedly dumped by-catch (fish) on its way back to port, offshore at Coffee beach and the Aripero River, at the time the fish washed ashore.

Information also had been received that the vessel did not return to port every day and that would have accounted for the periodic “fish-kill reports” by La Brea residents. Petrotrin stated that the investigation’s focus included the motive for any such dumping, whether accidental or deliberate,  and its Security Department was handling the issue.

The company said: “These are very serious allegations and one should avoid speculating on motive. Suffice to say, the company condemns in the strongest manner such action if it is proven true. “Not only did it cast blame on the company for something of which we are innocent but more importantly it created a health hazard for the residents of La Brea, deprived users of the enjoyment of the affected beaches, generated unnecessary hysteria and panic among consumers of fish and adversely affected the livelihood of innocent fisherfolk. “Fisherfolk operating in the Gulf of Paria have already been impacted by low sales as a result of protest action taken by a few.”

Petrotrin declined comment on how far the probe had reached, who owned the vessel and what sanctions may be imposed. The company also declined to say if the vessel’s owner was doing any other work for Petrotrin or any contractor attached to Petrotrin. Asked if the vessel might be doing any other type of work and if that would be in breach of the agreement the company has with the fishing association of that area, Petrotrin replied: “The company had an agreement with the Otaheite Fisherfolk Association for payment for loss of earnings to boat-owners arising from the oil-spill incident of December 2013.

Final payment in this regard is still to be processed. The last date for which payment is due was April 8.” On whether the company is probing if any vessel owner may be working in collusion with other people to create hysteria over the issue, Petrotrin declined comment, save to state: “Based on the relevant findings, the company stands ready to take the appropriate action it deems necessary.”

Final IMA report soon

Institute of Marine Affairs (IMA) chairman, Professor Indar Ramnarine, says the IMA’s final report on the fish kill issue will be completed this week. He said the IMA had been probing the issue since its inception and IMA officers had gone to the area almost daily to monitor and collect samples and do analysis.

The team includes researchers from IMA, UWI’s Departments of Life Sciences and Chemistry, the Veterinary School and Fisheries Division. Ramnarine said the mission had concluded that only one species, white mullet (Mugil curema), was involved in the issue. He said that in itself did not suggest it was a classic “fish kill” resulting from poisonous or chemical substances.

Ramnarine said in the case of a classic type of “fish kill” different species of all sizes would die and wash up, since any  toxic substance would affect everything in the water in which the substance was found and not just one species or size of fish. “So this isn’t a typical fish-kill,” he added.

He said the fish they tested were found to be well-muscled and not starving. The condition factor was greater than one, which suggested they had been feeding well, he added. Ovaries and testes were in a state of development but the fish were not yet breeding, he said. The peak breeding season for white mullet is June/July. Ramnarine said many parasitic nematodes were found in the fish but that did not usually kill them.

He said samples were also taken to look for bacteria and other micro-organisms. “But to date, we have not identified any bacteria that would have killed the fish, so it’s highly unlikely there was a bacterial cause of death. “We also examined the stomach contents and so far seen nothing that would have killed them either,” he added. However, Ramnarine said, researchers found external marks on the fish.

He said: “Also the fish were killed suddenly. It appears to have an external cause and it is possible the fish might have been dumped, This is the direction to which the conclusions are leading. “We are now focusing on the external marks found on fish to determine what caused this.” Ramnarine said researchers in the Department of Life Sciences were also analysing the stomach contents of the female bottlenose dolphin which washed ashore more recently at Vessigny.

We don’t dump— vessel owner

Raffick Khan, owner of the fishing trawler Falcon, said yesterday  his vessel had not dumped any fish off Coffee beach, La Brea. Khan made the comment as he updated the T&T Guardian on the state of the fisherfolk community in the wake of the Petrotrin oil spill and the washing up of dead fish at La Brea. His family owns the majority of the 80-plus vessels operating out of the Otaheite port. Khan said fisherfolk had not received the “all-clear” from the IMA or EMA to return to catching fish or to sell fish to the public and that was causing a problem with sales, since the public was unaware of the situation and was not buying fish.

He said that situation had been affecting fishermen since last December when the oil spill occurred. He, however, maintained fishermen were not dumping their catch. He said Petrotrin had been compensating fisherfolk for not fishing and fishermen were only fishing two days a week instead of five. Khan, however, said Petrotrin had given the all-clear to fisherfolk to return to work, but the company had not asked fishermen about any dumping.

He said the fisherfolk had also not heard any results pertaining to tests on the fish which washed up in La Brea. He also noted that a large dolphin had washed up last week. Denying any by-catch was dumped, he said the dolphin was not by-catch.

Khan said fisherfolk have been working with Fishermen and Friends of the Sea activist Gary Aboud “65 per cent” since Aboud “researched things,” and they had asked him to find out how many drums of the chemical Corexit had been used in Petrotrin’s oil spill clean-up and over what area of water this had been used. Khan accused Petrotrin’s seismic testing, which Aboud has protested, for affecting fishing stocks Khan also announced that fishermen were preparing for a protest march tomorrow in La Brea, alongside other groups.

EMA: No poison in fish

Environmental Management Authority (EMA) chairman Dr Allan Bachan said its April 7 statement noted that the results of toxicology and other tests on the fish did not validate claims that the fish were poisoned. The EMA’s preliminary finding was that cause of death was not due to the chemical Corexit used to clean beaches after the oil spill. Bachan said the fish were feeding well and were all of one species and in a localised area. He could not say if fishermen could return to work full time, until scrutiny was concluded next week.

An EMA report on the situation, which the T&T Guardian obtained a copy of, indicated the EMA had requested that samples be analysed by Cariri, the Aquatic Animal Health Diagnostic lab and UWI’s Veterinary school.  In points similar to the IMA’s findings, it stated that if the fish were ailing for some time they would have had empty intestines and been “starved-looking”.

The noteworthy point, according to the report, was that all samples had increased activity of Melano Macrophage Aggregates (MMAs), “symptomatic with conditions of environmental stress, bio-markers for water quality in terms of both deoxygenation and istragenic chemical pollution.” The document stated that it could also be attributed to fish caught in nets and stress attributed to capture.

The document said based on lab tests, petro-chemical toxins were not the cause of death and it was unlikely there was a correlation to the December 2013 oil spill or dispersants used for that, due to the specific, small area affected. The EMA report stated that another scenario that could not be ruled out was that the fish were caught and dumped at the site.

“It should be noted that these fish so caught, would be symptomatic with conditions of environmental stress and as such will have high levels of MMAs due to deoxygenation,” the report stated. The EMA suggested circular lesions on the heads of the fish needed to be investigated and “this could be gillnet marks or a physiological condition.”

The real measure of a man's character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.

Offline Flex

  • Administrator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18038
  • A Trini 4 Real.
    • View Profile
    • Soca Warriors Online
Oil in T&T.
« Reply #12 on: August 09, 2019, 12:32:26 AM »
BHP approves $3b Ruby & Delaware T&T project
By Curtis Williams (Guardian).


The board of Aus­tralian out­fit BHP has ap­proved its more than $3 bil­lion Ru­by and Delaware project in T&T. The com­pa­ny to­day an­nounced the de­ci­sion to go ahead with the project which it ex­pects will add 16,000 bar­rels of oil to T&T’s crude pro­duc­tion, or at cur­rent lev­els in­crease the coun­try’s to­tal pro­duc­tion by 27 per cent.

It not­ed that its con­tri­bu­tion to the project will be $1.92 bil­lion with the oth­er $1.08 bil­lion com­ing from Stare-owned Her­itage Pe­tro­le­um and Na­tion­al Gas Com­pa­ny.

In a re­lease on the com­pa­ny’s web­site it said: “The project has es­ti­mat­ed re­cov­er­able 2C re­sources of 13.2 mil­lion bar­rels of oil and 274 bil­lion cu­bic feet of nat­ur­al. First pro­duc­tion is ex­pect­ed in the 2021 cal­en­dar year and is es­ti­mat­ed to in­crease pro­duc­tion by 16,000 bar­rels of oil per day (bop/d) and 80 mil­lion stan­dard cu­bic feet per day (MM­scf/d) gross at its peak.”

The Ru­by Project is lo­cat­ed in the Block 3(a) de­vel­op­ment area of the North East coast, close to To­co.

“The project con­sists of five pro­duc­tion wells tied back util­is­ing the la­tent ca­pac­i­ty of the ex­ist­ing pro­cess­ing fa­cil­i­ties, proven tech­nol­o­gy of the ex­ist­ing op­er­at­ed as­set, and new­ly ac­quired ocean bot­tom node seis­mic imag­ing.” The com­pa­ny’s re­lease read.

BHP Pres­i­dent Op­er­a­tions Pe­tro­le­um Geral­dine Slat­tery said: “This is an im­por­tant mile­stone for BHP in Trinidad and To­ba­go. Ru­by aligns well with our strat­e­gy of max­imis­ing val­ue from our ex­ist­ing as­sets, bring­ing com­pet­i­tive near term val­ue and vol­ume growth.”

BHP, as the op­er­a­tor, holds a 68.46 per cent in­ter­est, and Her­itage Pe­tro­le­um and the Na­tion­al Gas Com­pa­ny of Trinidad and To­ba­go (NGC) hold the re­main­ing 20.13 per cent and 11.41 per cent in­ter­est, re­spec­tive­ly. The Block 3(a) Joint Op­er­at­ing Agree­ment re­quires at least two par­ties and 65 per cent of the work­ing in­ter­est to ap­prove the in­vest­ment.

The real measure of a man's character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out.

Offline maxg

  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 6463
    • View Profile
Re: Oil in T&T.
« Reply #13 on: August 24, 2019, 05:02:30 AM »
I stand by my stupidity statement - as he leans towards ppl dotish especially when it involves national finance. Possibly just ignorant to the decisions of the ppl they elect. Just throw way money at foreigners. Yet if you is ah expatriate, the job filled or you should pay we to work for we .  :devil:

The last paragraph doh, wow

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/fired-heritage-ceo-can-get-3m-6.2.916449.f0498089b5
« Last Edit: August 24, 2019, 05:18:50 AM by maxg »

Offline asylumseeker

  • Moderator
  • Hero Warrior
  • *****
  • Posts: 18072
    • View Profile
Re: Oil in T&T.
« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2019, 06:59:45 AM »
I stand by my stupidity statement - as he leans towards ppl dotish especially when it involves national finance. Possibly just ignorant to the decisions of the ppl they elect. Just throw way money at foreigners. Yet if you is ah expatriate, the job filled or you should pay we to work for we .  :devil:

The last paragraph doh, wow

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/fired-heritage-ceo-can-get-3m-6.2.916449.f0498089b5


The kind of work that's good if yuh can get it. Classic definition of smiling all the way to the bank.

He get that $$$$$$$ faster than Shamfa could say "subvention".Think he would be interested in leveraging a deal with the Pro League?  :)

 

1]; } ?>