Eacop and pipeline of perspectives

Africa boasts of 18 crude oil producers. This includes seven OPEC members – Algeria, Angola, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Libya and Nigeria – which collectively account for an estimated 21 percent of global oil production. Africa also has an increasingly growing role in liquefied natural gas (LNG) production; LNG is in growing demand as Europe weans itself off Russian gas pipelines, and Asia retires coal power stations.

Against this backdrop, the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline (Eacop) project has become a subject of intense debate following a recent report by Human Rights Watch (HRW). Unfortunately, the report presents a lopsided view and fails to acknowledge the substantial efforts made by project stakeholders to identify and mitigate negative impacts. These stakeholders have demonstrated a commitment to international standards, which are crucial for responsible project development.

The report includes a number of unbelievable statements. For instance, they claim that the oil transported through the Eacop pipeline will contribute more greenhouse gas emissions than Australia. This claim is beyond ludicrous. Australia is the 11th largest emitter globally, consuming more than one million barrels of oil per day and millions of tonnes of coal per day.

It is also home to some of the world’s largest mines. In contrast, Eacop will export approximately 200,000 barrels per day. The idea that Uganda’s 200,000 barrels would emit more greenhouse gases than Australia’s one million barrels of oil or million tonnes of coal is a scientific wonder that HRW fails to explain.

The report also argues that while oil projects generally disturb ecosystems, Eacop should be “distinguished” due to the scale of the project and the sensitivity of the impacted ecosystems. However, it is worth noting that in New York City, where HRW’s offices are located on the 34th floor of the Empire State Building, there are seven pipelines transporting oil underneath the Hudson River. As HRW published this report from their plush offices, an oil pipeline was moving millions of barrels of oil just a few miles away.

The claim that our lands in Kyotera are more environmentally sensitive than the Hudson River, Alaska, or the North Sea is incredible but unsurprising. We have become accustomed to outlandish claims from the poverty conservation industry masquerading as environmental conservationists. Clearly, for HRW, charity does not begin at home.

While we acknowledge the complexity of the land acquisition process, and we welcome serious review and criticisms, even from HRW, regarding how this process is working. The fact is that Eacop has taken steps to provide fair compensation and support livelihoods. Ongoing efforts are being made to address concerns and ensure that affected households receive the necessary support throughout the project’s lifecycle.

The report alleges that families are being pressured and intimidated to accept inadequate compensation. However, Eacop has emphasised fair compensation and implemented measures to uplift payments. These efforts aim to mitigate the effects of delays caused by legal and Covid-19 constraints. It is crucial to differentiate between the challenges faced during the process and intentional mistreatment of affected communities. Nonetheless, we must not allow our people to be used as Trojan horses for these groups to hide behind in their fight against the project.

Contrary to the suggestions made in the report, Eacop has indeed presented options for replacement land and has adhered to international standards.

The report notably fails to acknowledge the extensive environmental impact assessments and mitigation measures that Eacop has put in place. These assessments play a pivotal role in minimising harm to sensitive ecosystems, such as the magnificent Murchison Falls National Park and the Murchison Falls-Albert Delta Ramsar site. Responsible practices and ongoing monitoring efforts are diligently implemented throughout the project’s lifecycle to prioritize environmental protection. It is crucial to recognise that responsible development of fossil fuel projects can contribute to sustainable growth.

Fostering constructive dialogue enables us to collectively work towards sustainable development that addresses energy security and paves the way for a brighter future for all.

The writer is an advocate and partner at Kampala Associated Advocates

[email protected]