we hold on the subsequent day a press conference. At it, we present the preliminary findings of our expedition and call upon the government of Sudan to take effective action. The statements given by eyewitnesses that we have gathered suffice to prove the existence of a massive damaging of the health of local residents and the environment.
We then return to Germany, where we deliver on February 18th the samples of water to a renowned laboratory, which is to scientifically analyze them. The results confirm our assumption. The water taken from the wells in Rier turns out to be strongly contaminated. The analysis revealed a total amount of salt of 6,600.50 milligrams per liter of water (mg/l) and its contamination with strontium of 6.7 mg/l. The water in this sample evinces nitrates amounting to 81.6 mg/l. The USA’s Environmental Protection Agency’s recommended ceilings42 for the total amount of salt permissible in potable water has been set at 500 mg/l. The sample investigated thus exceeds this ceiling 13-fold. The ceiling for nitrate has been established to be 10 mg/l and has thus been exceeded 8-fold. A concentration of nitrates in such amounts can cause infants to take seriously ill. The failure to treat these illness can lead to death. The findings from points of sample collection further afield do not give rise to concerns.
The result is terrifying, since the commercial-scale production of oil in the region has after all just been launched. It has yet to be fully ramped up.43 The failure to take countermeasures will give rise to a horrible environmental catastrophe in this area. The results of the analysis of the water samples are presented in a press release that forms the subject of a large number of reports in the media in Germany and abroad.
*
→ Further information:
Where does the contamination come from?
Water is of elementary importance in drilling. It serves as the basis for rinsing solutions.44 This drilling fluids plays a key role in the drilling process because it ensures a disturbance-free pursuing of it. “Drilling fluids” refer to the liquids circulating during the drilling of the hole. These liquids transport the ’cuttings’ upwards. They also cool the drill bit and shaft, and secure the wall of the drill hole against collapsing. Chemicals are added to the rinse solutions when drilling in non-firm sediments, which in turn characterize the area being described.45 These chemicals force the formation of a filter crust that seals the porous layers of the rock.46 This prevents a collapsing of the drill hole. The amount of drilling fluids is to be minimized. The solution permeates the porous layers until the point that they are sealed. The solution has another function. It is to preclude an uncontrolled seepage of fluids or gases from the rock into the drill hole. Reasons of costs also dictate the configuration of the solution’s accordance with the respective geological conditions.
To prevent the corrosion of the drill shaft, an oxygen-free environment has to be maintained. The danger of corrosion of steel is negligibly small at pH values of between 10 and 12.5. To accordingly increase the pH values, sodium, calcium and potassium alkalis are added to the solution. In cases in which the pH values are lower in the solution, phosphates, borates, chromates or special tensides have to be added to the solution. The alkalis include KCI (stabilizes clay) and potashes (K2CO3).
A number of solution additives have two or more functions to fulfill. The drilling fluids’ composition accordingly varies according to the material being drilled: be it bedrock, loose rock, sediments or sedimentary rock. Clay and argillaceous rock are found in and around Thar Jath. This requires the stabilization of drilling holes through the addition of sodium chloride, calcium chloride or potassium sulfate. These additions replace the sodium ions found in clays with potassium or calcium. The result is the reduction of the clays’ absorption of water. Potassium-based drilling fluids are especially important when drilling in clays and argillaceous rocks. This is because they optimally prevent the absorption of water—due to the anti-osmotic characteristics of potassium ions—in formations whose makeup is unknown.
The extremely great potential dangers emanating from the use of chemicals in drill drilling fluids cause it to be strictly regulated by internationally-applicable guidelines. Augmenting this peril is another technique employed when extracting oil. Highly-concentrated salts-containing solutions are injected into the oil deposits, so as to increase the pressure in them. The crude oil and the previously-injected salts-containing solutions are pumped to the surface, where the crude oil is separated from the so-called “produced water”. The extraction of each liter of crude oil requires the employment of from 3 to 9.5 liters of produced water47 — an incredible amount. This produced water often has a higher content of salt than does ocean water. The produced water also often contains noxious metals and radioactive materials.48 The general practice is to inject the produced water—via another injection hole—deep enough into the ground, with this meaning its being transported to layers of rocks that are far away from potable water.49 Should, however, the produced waster be disposed of via in-feeds into surface waters, or via shallow drilling into layers containing ground water, the risk arises that this polluted water will—via wells—be incorporated into humans’ food cycle.
That Sudan has this problem has been well-known for quite some time. This problem was the topic at a conference held in Juba in 2006. The conference was about revamping the production of oil in the era commenced by the conclusion of the peace agreement, and marked by a possible participation in the industry by Southern Sudan.50 This conference showed that Chevron, the US petroleum giant, used the proven—but expensive—procedure ensuring the safe disposal of produced water upon its drilling of Sudan’s first oil wells in the period until 1983. Chevron injected the contaminated water into deeply-laying layers of ground. It was Chevron’s successors in the country’s oil industry that developed the methods yielding the damaging of the environment now becoming apparent to all.51 The oil field at Thar Jath is estimated to contain 149.1 million barrels.52 A barrel of oil is comprised of 159 liters. Taking a mean of 7 liters of produced water per liter of oil, and extrapolating that to account for the entire potential of oil to be transported yields the figure of 1,659,483.3 million liters of waste water to be disposed of.
*
On March 18, 2008, Sign of Hope sends a letter to the operator of the refinery in Thar Jath. The letter requests the operator to make a statement presenting its position on the results of the tests. This operator is the White Nile Petroleum Operating Company Ltd. (WNPOC). This consortium is based in Khartoum. Some 67.875% of its shares are held by Petronas Caligari Overseas, a subsidiary of Petronas, a company owned by the government of Malaysia; with 24.125% being owned by the India-based Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Videsh Ltd.; and 8% by Sudapet (Sudan National Petroleum Corporation), the Southern Sudan state oil company.53 Petronas’ holding of two thirds of the consortium’s equity arose from its acquisition in 2003 of the shares held by Lundin, a Swedish company.54 Petronas is the most important partner of the government of Sudan in the area of oil production and processing. This applies to all areas of licensing. The company is thus the most influential stakeholder in oil in Sudan.55
Sign of Hope’s letter courteously requests the operators to comment upon the results of the collection of samples of water, and to elucidate how the wastes arising in the production process are disposed of. The operators are also called upon to detail the measures they plan to institute to provide the residents of Rier with safe water. The operators do not respond.
*
On March 28th, in response to urgings by Spain and Germany, the Human Rights Council of the United Nations publishes a resolution calling for the integration of the rights to have safe drinking water and proper sanitary facilities into the catalog of human rights. The resolution is in response to a report issued by the UN High Commissioner. It states that more than a billion people in the world have been denied access to safe water, and that 2.6 billion people have to endure not having sanitary facilities. The UN High Commissioner has issued an urgent call for the recognition of the right to have clean water as a human right.
An independent expert panel
