• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
UNEP OEA Environment Assessment of Ogoniland
 

UNEP OEA Environment Assessment of Ogoniland

on

  • 4,122 views

Oil and Gas Spillage in Nigeria OEA report on Environment Assessment of Ogoniland

Oil and Gas Spillage in Nigeria OEA report on Environment Assessment of Ogoniland

Statistics

Views

Total Views
4,122
Views on SlideShare
4,122
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
19
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    UNEP OEA Environment Assessment of Ogoniland UNEP OEA Environment Assessment of Ogoniland Document Transcript

    • EnvironmentalAssessmentof Ogoniland United Nations Environment Programme
    • First published in 2011 by the United Nations Environment Programme.© 2011, United Nations Environment Programme.ISBN: 978-92-807-3130-9Job No.: DEP/1337/GEUnited Nations Environment ProgrammeP.O. Box 30552Nairobi, KENYATel: +254 (0)20 762 1234Fax: +254 (0)20 762 3927E-mail: uneppub@unep.orgWeb: http://www.unep.orgThis publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without specialpermission from the copyright holder provided acknowledgement of the source is made. UNEP would appreciate receiving acopy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any othercommercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from UNEP. The designation of geographical entities in thisreport, and the presentation of the material herein, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of thepublisher or the participating organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory or area, or of its authorities, orconcerning the delimination of its frontiers or boundaries.This publication and other data on which it is based are available online at: www.unep.org/nigeriaPhotography: Mazen Saggar and Victor Temofe Mogbolu. Unless otherwise credited,all other photographs in this publication were taken by UNEP staff.Layout: Matija Potocnik UNEP promotesCover image: Victor Temofe Mogbolu environmentally sound practicesPrinted on Recycled Paper globally and in its own activities. This publication is printed on recycled paper using vegetable-based inks and other eco- friendly practices. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint.
    • Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland United Nations Environment Programme
    • Table of contentsForeword 6Executive summary 8Chapter 1: Introduction 181.1 Nigeria and the Niger Delta .................................................................................................................................20 Rivers State ..........................................................................................................................................................22 Ogoniland............................................................................................................................................................221.2 Impacts of oil exploration and production............................................................................................................241.3 The Ogoni struggle and the cessation of oil exploration and production...............................................................251.4 Reconciliation process ..........................................................................................................................................26Chapter 2: Background to Environmental Degradation in Ogoniland 282.1 Environmental setting in Ogoniland and the Niger Delta ....................................................................................30 Geology ...............................................................................................................................................................30 Groundwater........................................................................................................................................................30 Surface water ........................................................................................................................................................31 Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................................32 Local communities ...............................................................................................................................................32 Ogoni interaction with neighbouring regions .......................................................................................................35 Institutional framework........................................................................................................................................362.2 Petroleum hydrocarbons: origin and environmental consequences .......................................................................36 Origin and use .....................................................................................................................................................36 Environmental consequences of hydrocarbons .....................................................................................................37 Non-hydrocarbon environmental issues related to the oil industry .......................................................................412.3 Oil industry-related infrastructure in Ogoniland ..................................................................................................43 SPDC facilities in Ogoniland ...............................................................................................................................43 Non-SPDC oil industry facilities in Ogoniland ....................................................................................................46Chapter 3: Objectives, Scope and Methodologies 503.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................523.2 Scope of the investigation.....................................................................................................................................52 Geographical scope ..............................................................................................................................................52 Technical scope of the assessment .........................................................................................................................533.3 Structure of the study team ..................................................................................................................................53 Project management .............................................................................................................................................54 Technical teams ....................................................................................................................................................54 Cross-cutting teams..............................................................................................................................................55 Support teams ......................................................................................................................................................55 Use of local resources ...........................................................................................................................................58 Laboratories .........................................................................................................................................................593.4 Assessment methodologies ...................................................................................................................................59 Community engagement......................................................................................................................................613.5 Phase 1: Scouting exercises, desktop reviews and reconnaissance ..........................................................................623.6 Phase 2: Intensive fieldwork .................................................................................................................................642
    • Assessment of soil contamination .........................................................................................................................64 Assessment of groundwater contamination...........................................................................................................66 Assessment of naturally occurring radioactive materials ........................................................................................68 Assessment of surface water and sediment contamination ....................................................................................68 Assessment of fish contamination .........................................................................................................................70 Assessment of impact of oil contaminants on vegetation ......................................................................................71 Assessment of damage to mangroves.....................................................................................................................72 Assessment of impacts on air pollution and public health .....................................................................................72 Remote sensing ....................................................................................................................................................79 Sample management ............................................................................................................................................81 Field measurements ..............................................................................................................................................83 Analytical measurements ......................................................................................................................................83 Field data collection for remote sensing ................................................................................................................84 Review of institutional issues ................................................................................................................................853.7 Contamination assessment criteria .......................................................................................................................85 Standards for soil..................................................................................................................................................86 Standards for groundwater ...................................................................................................................................87 Standards for drinking water ................................................................................................................................87 Air quality standards ............................................................................................................................................883.8 Limitations, challenges and constraints ................................................................................................................88 Scientific constraints ............................................................................................................................................88 Security constraints ..............................................................................................................................................90 Access restrictions.................................................................................................................................................91 Information constraints ........................................................................................................................................92 Sample management constraints ..........................................................................................................................93 Ill-defined boundaries ..........................................................................................................................................93 Vertical delineation of contamination...................................................................................................................93 Time frame ..........................................................................................................................................................93Chapter 4: Assessment of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater 944.1 Field observations of the current situation on land ...............................................................................................96 Habitation on or close to oilfield facilities ............................................................................................................96 Unmanaged vegetation .........................................................................................................................................98 Facilities not in operation .....................................................................................................................................98 Decommissioned and abandoned facilities ...........................................................................................................99 Well blowouts ....................................................................................................................................................1004.2 Field observations concerning illegal oil-related activities ...................................................................................101 Illegal tapping of oil wells and pipelines .............................................................................................................101 Artisanal refining................................................................................................................................................1024.3 Geological observations ......................................................................................................................................105 Groundwater......................................................................................................................................................1054.4 Contamination assessments ................................................................................................................................108 Soil and groundwater contamination .................................................................................................................108 Case study 1 SPDC pipeline right of way – 001-001 Ejama-Ebubu, Eleme LGA .............................................110 Case study 2 SPDC suspended facilities – Bomu Manifold, K-Dere, Gokana LGA ..........................................115 Case study 3 SPDC legacy site – 008-010 Korokoro flow station .....................................................................119 Case study 4 NNPC trunk line spill – 019-013 1990 pipeline leak in K-Dere .................................................122 3
    • Case study 5 NNPC product line spill – 001-005 Nsisioken Agbi, Eleme LGA ...............................................127 Case study 6 Fly tipping of oilfield waste - 001-022 – oil waste dump site .......................................................130 Case study 7 SPDC remediation site 008-002 – Korokoro Well 3, Korokoro, Tai LGA ...................................132 Background concentration of hydrocarbons .......................................................................................................136 Barium pollution................................................................................................................................................136 Naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) results ..................................................................................1364.5 Discussion of institutional issues ........................................................................................................................138 Multiple institutions with unclear mandates.......................................................................................................138 Resolving the issue .............................................................................................................................................142 Review of SPDC’s practices and performance.....................................................................................................142 SPDC operational practice at oil spill sites .........................................................................................................150Chapter 5: Assessment of Vegetation, Aquatic and Public Health Issues 1525.1 Impact of oil on tide-dominated delta swamps and mangroves ...........................................................................154 Case study 8 Artisanal refining of crude oil at 020-001 Bodo West oilfield, flow station and manifold .............1615.2 Impact of oil on land-based vegetation ...............................................................................................................1675.3 Contamination of surface water, sediments and fish ...........................................................................................169 Presence of oil ....................................................................................................................................................169 Water quality .....................................................................................................................................................169 Petroleum hydrocarbons in water .......................................................................................................................173 Impacts of oil on sediments ................................................................................................................................175 Impacts of oil on fisheries ...................................................................................................................................1755.4 Impacts of oil on public health ...........................................................................................................................183 Exposure and health questionnaires ....................................................................................................................183 Case study 9 Groundwater pollution at Nsisioken Ogale, Eleme LGA .............................................................189 Ogoniland is not an island .................................................................................................................................200Chapter 6: Recommendations 1026.1 Operational recommendations ...........................................................................................................................205 Maintenance of oilfield facilities .........................................................................................................................205 Decommissioning of oilfield facilities .................................................................................................................205 Prevention of illegal activities .............................................................................................................................205 Oil spill response ................................................................................................................................................206 Ongoing remediation of contaminated sites .......................................................................................................2066.2 Technical recommendations for environmental restoration.................................................................................207 Clean-up of contaminated soil and sediments ....................................................................................................207 Decontamination of groundwater ......................................................................................................................210 Rehabilitation of mangroves ...............................................................................................................................2116.3 Recommendations for public health ...................................................................................................................214 Communities exposed to petroleum hydrocarbons in their drinking water .........................................................214 Communities living on rights of way .................................................................................................................215 People involved in bunkering and artisanal refining............................................................................................2156.4 Recommendations on follow-up monitoring ......................................................................................................215 Preventive surveillance........................................................................................................................................216 Monitoring of groundwater................................................................................................................................217 Monitoring of water bodies, fish and aquatic sediments .....................................................................................217 Monitoring of vegetation and fauna ...................................................................................................................2174
    • Air quality monitoring .......................................................................................................................................217 Public health monitoring ...................................................................................................................................2176.5 Recommendations for changes to regulatory framework.....................................................................................217 Legislative matters ..............................................................................................................................................217 Institutional arrangements..................................................................................................................................2196.6 Recommendations for follow-up ........................................................................................................................219Chapter 7: Ogoniland’s Path to Sustainability 2227.1 Recommendations for Government ...................................................................................................................224 Creation of an Ogoniland Environmental Restoration Authority .......................................................................224 Creating an Environmental Restoration Fund for Ogoniland .............................................................................226 Creating a Centre of Excellence for Environmental Restoration .........................................................................227 Declare the intent to make the wetlands around Ogoniland a Ramsar site..........................................................228 Mount a campaign against environmental degradation.......................................................................................2287.2 Recommendations for oil industry operators ......................................................................................................2287.3 Recommendations for the Ogoniland community .............................................................................................2297.4 Interim actions to move forward ........................................................................................................................2297.5 Transition Phase .................................................................................................................................................231AppendicesAppendix 1: Acronyms and abbreviations .................................................................................................................234Appendix 2: Glossary................................................................................................................................................236Appendix 3: References.............................................................................................................................................240Appendix 4: Collaborating partners ..........................................................................................................................245Appendix 5: List of contributors ...............................................................................................................................246 5
    • ForewordThe history of oil exploration and production in In order to ensure the independence of the studyOgoniland is a long, complex and often painful and provide the logistics necessary, a frameworkone that to date has become seemingly intractable for cooperation was negotiated in which all partiesin terms of its resolution and future direction. were involved and a recognized team of national and international experts then recruited for theIt is also a history that has put people and politics two year assessment.and the oil industry at loggerheads rendering alandscape characterized by a lack of trust, paralysis This report details how that team carried outand blame, set against a worsening situation for their work, where samples were taken andthe communities concerned. the findings that they have made. Over a 14-month period, the UNEP team examinedThe reality is that decades of negotiations, more than 200 locations, surveyed 122 kmsinitiatives and protests have ultimately failed to of pipeline rights of way, reviewed more thandeliver a solution that meets the expectations and 5,000 medical records and engaged over 23,000responsibilities of all sides. people at local community meetings. Detailed soil contamination investigations were conductedIn an attempt to navigate from stalemate to action, at 69 sites. Altogether more than 4,000 samplesthe Government of Nigeria, in consultation with were analyzed, including water taken from 142many of the relevant actors, invited UNEP groundwater monitoring wells drilled specificallyto consider undertaking an assessment of oil for the study and soil extracted from 780pollution in Ogoniland. boreholes.UNEP has acquired an international reputation The findings in the report underline that therefor assembling expert teams, coordinating are, in a significant number of locations, seriousdemanding assessments and bringing scientific threats to human health from contaminatedand empirical evidence to policymakers. drinking water to concerns over the viability and productivity of ecosystems. In additionUNEP initially consulted with a wide range that pollution has perhaps gone further andstakeholders and the United Nations Country penetrated deeper than many may have previouslyTeam in Nigeria in order to consider the scope supposed.and indeed the feasibility of the assessment. This report represents the best available understand-We were confronted with a unique challenge: ing as to what has happened to the environment oflack of trust between actors; political tensions Ogoniland – and the corresponding implicationsbetween communities; regional and national for affected populations – over many years of oilgovernment; gaining access to Ogoniland; security industry operations. It provides the government,considerations and technical and logistical stakeholders and the international communitychallenges. with invaluable, baseline information on the scale of the challenge and priorities for action in termsDespite imperfect conditions, UNEP in the end of clean-up and remediation.agreed to undertake the study as it representedthe only tangible option for possibly breaking It does not address all scenarios and answerthe decades of deadlock while providing the all questions which have arisen over the years,government and stakeholders with a potential particularly in respect to legal questions whichfoundation upon which trust might be built and were beyond the terms of reference of theaction undertaken to remedy the multiple health, undertaking.environmental and sustainable developmentissues facing millions of people in Ogoniland But UNEP believes it can provide a firm foundationand beyond. upon which all the stakeholders concerned can, if6
    • they so wish, draw up a response to the findings of Rivers State, the Right Honourable Rotimipresented here. Chibuike Amaechi, along with the faculty and students at the Rivers State University of ScienceBefore and during the assessment, the consensus and Technology led by Vice Chancellor Professorthat has allowed this work to proceed in the first Barineme Beke Fakae.place was at times fluid and sometimes fractiousand fragile. Many questions were raised, not least We also appreciate the assistance of our colleaguessurrounding how the study was financed and by at the UN Nigeria Country Team, in particularwhom. The report and its long list of annexes the UN Resident Coordinator, Mr Daouda Touré,needs to speak for itself. the Country Director of the United Nations Development Programme, Ms Ade MamonyaneBut it is important to point out that from the Lekoetje, and the Resident Representative andoutset UNEP deemed it right and appropriate Resident Security Coordinator in Port Harcourt,that key actors in the petroleum sector should Mr Larry Boms.bear the financial costs for this assessment andthis was spelt out in the project document which I would also like to thank the national andis publicly available. international members of the assessment team including UNEP staff members.To date all parties have honoured thosecommitments and the rigor, independence and For the first time, there is systematic and scientificimpartiality of the study and its conclusions has evidence available in the public arena on thebeen maintained which we hereby acknowledge. nature, extent and impacts of oil contamination in Ogoniland. The report also provides clearThis study would not have been possible without operational guidelines as to how that legacy canthe local knowledge and cooperation of the Ogoni be addressed.people and the support of many other stakeholdersin Nigeria. We wish to sincerely thank the The oil industry has been a key sector of themembers of the Presidential Implementation Nigerian economy for over 50 years. But manyCommittee, under the Chairmanship of The Nigerians have paid a high price, as this assessmentMost Reverend Matthew Kukah, Bishop for the underlines. It is UNEP’s hope that the findings canDiocese of Sokoto; the former Federal Minister catalyze not only significant environmental andfor the Environment, The Hononourable John social improvements in the region but a strategicOdey; the traditional rulers of Ogoniland, in policy on how the oil industry there will functionparticular the Paramount Ruler, His Majesty King in a way that truly benefits the lives and livelihoodsGodwin N.K. Gininwa; the Executive Governor of these communities now and in the future. Achim Steiner United Nations Under-Secretary-General Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme 7
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND operational guidance as to how that legacy can beExecutive Summary addressed.Introduction Assessment processCovering around 1,000 km2 in Rivers State, Involving desk review, fieldwork and laboratorysouthern Nigeria, Ogoniland has been the site analysis, the two year study of the environmentalof oil industry operations since the late 1950s. and public health impacts of oil contaminationOgoniland has a tragic history of pollution from in Ogoniland is one of the most complex on-the-oil spills and oil well fires, although no systematic ground assessments ever undertaken by UNEP.scientific information has been available about theensuing contamination. UNEP recruited a team of international experts in disciplines such as contaminated land, water,With this independent study, conducted at the forestry and public health, who worked underrequest of the Federal Government of Nigeria, the the guidance of senior UNEP managers. ThisUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) team worked side-by-side with local experts,reveals the nature and extent of oil contamination academics and support teams comprised ofin Ogoniland. logistics, community liaison and security staff.The Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland covers The UNEP project team surveyed 122 kms ofcontaminated land, groundwater, surface water, pipeline rights of way and visited all oil spill sites,sediment, vegetation, air pollution, public health, oil wells and other oil-related facilities in Ogoniland,industry practices and institutional issues. including decommissioned and abandoned facilities, that were known and accessible to UNEP during theThis report represents the best available under- fieldwork period, based on information providedstanding of what has happened to the environment by the Government regulators, Shell Petroleumof Ogoniland – and the corresponding implications Development Company (Nigeria) Ltd (SPDC) andfor affected populations – and provides clear community members in and around Ogoniland.Public meetings staged throughout Ogoniland during each phase of the study helpedto build understanding of UNEP’s project and to foster community participation8
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARYDuring aerial reconnaissance missions, UNEP Ogoniland is widespread and severely impactingexperts observed oil pollution which was not readily many components of the environment. Evenvisible from the ground, including artisanal refining though the oil industry is no longer active insites. Information provided by Ogoniland residents Ogoniland, oil spills continue to occur withabout oil contamination in their communities alarming regularity. The Ogoni people live withsupplemented official oil spill data supplied by the this pollution every day.Nigerian Government and SPDC. As Ogoniland has high rainfall, any delay inFollowing its initial investigations, UNEP cleaning up an oil spill leads to oil being washedidentified 69 sites for detailed soil and groundwater away, traversing farmland and almost always endinginvestigations. In addition, samples of community up in the creeks. When oil reaches the root zone,drinking water, sediments from creeks, surface crops and other plants begin to experience stresswater, rainwater, fish and air were collected and can die, and this is a routine observation inthroughout Ogoniland and in several neighbouring Ogoniland. At one site, Ejama-Ebubu in Elemeareas. Altogether more than 4,000 samples were local government area (LGA), the study foundanalyzed, including water drawn from 142 heavy contamination present 40 years after an oilgroundwater monitoring wells drilled specifically spill occurred, despite repeated clean-up attempts.for the study, and soil extracted from 780 boreholes.The UNEP project team also examined more than The assessment found that overlapping authorities5,000 medical records and staged 264 formal and responsibilities between ministries and acommunity meetings in Ogoniland attended by lack of resources within key agencies has seriousover 23,000 people. implications for environmental management on- the-ground, including enforcement.The samples were collected following internationally-accepted sample management procedures and Remote sensing revealed the rapid proliferation indispatched for analysis to accredited (ISO 17025) the past two years of artisanal refining, wherebylaboratories in Europe. The analytes examined in the crude oil is distilled in makeshift facilities. The studystudy included certain groups of hydrocarbons that found that this illegal activity is endangering livesare known to have adverse impacts and which are and causing pockets of environmental devastationtherefore dealt with selectively in oil-spill assessment in Ogoniland and neighbouring areas.and clean-up work. The most important of these areBTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes) Contaminated soil and groundwaterand PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons). The report concludes that pollution of soilVolatile organic compounds (VOCs) were the main by petroleum hydrocarbons in Ogonilandtarget of UNEP’s air quality investigations. is extensive in land areas, sediments andExtensive remote sensing analyses complemented swampland. Most of the contamination is fromthe fieldwork. Reviews of legislation, institutions, crude oil although contamination by refinedoil industry practices and available remediation product was found at three locations.technologies were also undertaken by international The assessment found there is no continuousexperts to complete the study. clay layer across Ogoniland, exposing the groundwater in Ogoniland (and beyond) toA selection of the study’s key findings and recom- hydrocarbons spilled on the surface. In 49 cases,mendations are summarized below. Given the vast UNEP observed hydrocarbons in soil at depths ofamount of data generated during the assessment, at least 5 m. This finding has major implicationsthe following content should not be considered in for the type of remediation required.isolation. At two-thirds of the contaminated land sitesSummary of findings close to oil industry facilities which were assessed in detail, the soil contaminationUNEP’s field observations and scientific exceeds Nigerian national standards, as setinvestigations found that oil contamination in out in the Environmental Guidelines and 9
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Standards for the Petroleum Industries in Aquatic Nigeria (EGASPIN). The UNEP investigation found that the At 41 sites, the hydrocarbon pollution has surface water throughout the creeks contains reached the groundwater at levels in excess of hydrocarbons. Floating layers of oil vary from the Nigerian standards as per the EGASPIN thick black oil to thin sheens. The highest reading legislation. of dissolved hydrocarbon in the water column, of 7,420 μg/l, was detected at Ataba-Otokroma, The most serious case of groundwater con- bordering the Gokana and Andoni LGAs. tamination is at Nisisioken Ogale, in Eleme LGA, close to a Nigerian National Petroleum Company Fish tend to leave polluted areas in search of product pipeline where an 8 cm layer of refined cleaner water, and fishermen must therefore oil was observed floating on the groundwater also move to less contaminated areas in search which serves the community wells. of fish. When encountered in known polluted areas, fishermen reported that they wereVegetation going to fishing grounds further upstream or downstream. Oil pollution in many intertidal creeks has left mangroves denuded of leaves and stems, leaving Despite community concerns about the quality roots coated in a bitumen-like substance of fish, the results show that the accumulation sometimes 1 cm or more thick. Mangroves of hydrocarbons in fish is not a serious health are spawning areas for fish and nurseries for issue in Ogoniland but that the fisheries sector juvenile fish and the extensive pollution of these is suffering due to the destruction of fish areas is impacting the fish life-cycle. habitat in the mangroves and highly persistent contamination of many of the creeks, making Any crops in areas directly impacted by oil them unsuitable for fishing. spills will be damaged, and root crops, such as cassava, will become unusable. When farming Where a number of entrepreneurs had set recommences, plants generally show signs of up fish farms in or close to the creeks, their stress and yields are reportedly lower than in businesses have been ruined by an ever-present non-impacted areas. layer of floating oil. When an oil spill occurs on land, fires often The wetlands around Ogoniland are highly break out, killing vegetation and creating a degraded and facing disintegration. The study crust over the land, making remediation or concludes that while it is technically feasible to revegetation difficult. restore effective ecosystem functioning of the wetlands, this will only be possible if technical Channels that have been widened and the and political initiatives are undertaken. resulting dredged material are clearly evident in satellite images, decades after the dredging Public health operation. Without proper rehabilitation, former mangrove areas which have been converted to The Ogoni community is exposed to petroleum bare ground are being colonized by invasive hydrocarbons in outdoor air and drinking species such as nipa palm (which appears to be water, sometimes at elevated concentrations. more resistant to heavy hydrocarbon pollution They are also exposed through dermal contacts than native vegetation). from contaminated soil, sediments and surface water. In Bodo West, in Bonny LGA, an increase in artisanal refining between 2007 and 2011 Since average life expectancy in Nigeria is less has been accompanied by a 10% loss of than 50 years, it is a fair assumption that most healthy mangrove cover, or 307,381 m2. If left members of the current Ogoniland community unchecked, this may lead to irreversible loss of have lived with chronic oil pollution throughout mangrove habitat in this area. their lives.10
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARYContaminated river at Sugi Bodo, Gokana LGA. The report provides baseline information on the scaleof the challenge for Ogoniland and priorities for action in terms of clean-up and remediation Of most immediate concern, community the United States Environmental Protection members at Nisisioken Ogale are drinking Agency (USEPA) report as corresponding to a water from wells that is contaminated with 1 in 10,000 cancer risk. Many of the benzene benzene, a known carcinogen, at levels over 900 concentrations detected in Ogoniland were times above the World Health Organization similar to those measured elsewhere in the (WHO) guideline. The report states that this world, given the prevalence of fuel use and other contamination warrants emergency action sources of benzene. However, the findings show ahead of all other remediation efforts. that some benzene concentrations in Ogoniland were higher than those being measured in more Hydrocarbon contamination was found in economically developed regions where benzene water taken from 28 wells at 10 communities concentrations are declining because of efforts adjacent to contaminated sites. At seven wells to reduce benzene exposure. the samples are at least 1,000 times higher than the Nigerian drinking water standard of 3 μg/l. Institutional issues Local communities are aware of the pollution and its dangers but state that they continue to First issued in 1992, the EGASPIN form the use the water for drinking, bathing, washing operational basis for environmental regulation and cooking as they have no alternative. of the oil industry in Nigeria. However, this key legislation is internally inconsistent with Benzene was detected in all air samples at regard to one of the most important criteria for concentrations ranging from 0.155 to 48.2 oil spill and contaminated site management – μg/m3. Approximately 10 per cent of detected specifically the criteria which trigger remediation benzene concentrations in Ogoniland were or indicate its closure (called the ‘intervention’ higher than the concentrations WHO and and ‘target’ values respectively). 11
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND The study found that the Department of on the assumption that given the nature of the Petroleum Resources (DPR) and the National oil, temperature and an underlying layer of clay, Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency hydrocarbons will not move deeper. However, this (NOSDRA) have differing interpretations of basic premise is not sustainable as observations EGASPIN. This is enabling the oil industry to made by UNEP show that contamination can close down the remediation process well before often penetrate deeper than 5 m and has reached contamination has been eliminated and soil the groundwater in many locations. quality has been restored to achieve functionality for human, animal and plant life. Ten out of the 15 investigated sites which SPDC records show as having completed The Nigerian Government agencies concerned remediation, still have pollution exceeding lack qualified technical experts and resources. the SPDC (and government) remediation In the five years since NOSDRA was closure values. The study found that the established, so few resources have been contamination at eight of these sites has allocated that the agency has no proactive migrated to the groundwater. capacity for oil-spill detection. In planning their inspection visits to some oil spill sites, In January 2010, a new Remediation the regulatory authority is wholly reliant on Management System was adopted by all Shell the oil industry for logistical support. Exploration and Production Companies in Nigeria. The study found that while the new The oilfield in Ogoniland is interwoven changes are an improvement, they still do with the Ogoni community. The fact that not meet the local regulatory requirements or communities have set up houses and farms international best practices. along rights of way is one indicator of the loss of control on the part of the pipeline operator and the government regulator. Summary of recommendations The UNEP project team observed hundreds The study concludes that the environmental of industrial packing bags containing 1,000- restoration of Ogoniland is possible but may take 1,500 m3 of waste, believed to be cuttings 25 to 30 years. The report contains numerous from oil drilling operations, dumped at a recommendations that, once implemented, former sand mine in Oken Oyaa in Eleme will have an immediate and positive impact on LGA. The open disposal of such waste in Ogoniland. Further recommendations have longer an unlined pit demonstrates that the chain timelines that will bring lasting improvements for of custody in the region between the waste Ogoniland and Nigeria as a whole. generator, transporter and disposal facility is not being followed. The hydraulic connection between contaminated land and creeks has important implications for the sequence of remediation to be carried out. Until theOil industry practices land-based contamination has been dealt with, it The study concludes that the control, will be futile to begin a clean-up of the creeks. maintenance and decommissioning of oilfield infrastructure in Ogoniland are inadequate. Due to the wide extent of contamination in Industry best practices and SPDC’s own Ogoniland and nearby areas, and the varying procedures have not been applied, creating degrees of degradation, there will not be one single public safety issues. clean-up technique appropriate for the entire area. A combination of approaches will therefore need Remediation by enhanced natural attenuation to be considered, ranging from active intervention (RENA) – so far the only remediation method for cleaning the top soil and replanting mangrove observed by UNEP in Ogoniland – has not to passive monitoring of natural regeneration. proven to be effective. Currently, SPDC applies Practical action at the regulatory, operational and this technique on the land surface layer only, based monitoring levels is also proposed.12
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIt is recommended that the restoration of mangroves Operational recommendationsbe viewed as a large-scale pilot project in whichmultiple approaches to clean-up and restoration, Immediate steps must be taken to preventonce proven, can be replicated elsewhere as needed existing contaminated sites from beingin the Niger Delta. secondary sources of ongoing contamination while further risk assessments and investigationsEmergency measures are undertaken for detailed planning of the clean-up of Ogoniland during a recommendedThe report identifies eight emergency measures Transition Phase.which, from a duty of care point of view, warrantimmediate action. All sources of ongoing contamination, including the artisanal refining which is currently ongoing in the creeks, must be brought to a swift end Emergency Measures before the clean-up of the creeks, sediments and mangroves can begin. A campaign in Ogoniland to end illegal oil- related activities should be jointly conducted by the government, oil companies and local authorities. It should include an awareness component highlighting the disproportionate environmental footprint of artisanal refining (borne by all sections of the community) and spell out training, employment and livelihood incentives that will encourage people away from participating in this illegal activity. Technical recommendations for environmental restoration Surface water. Clean-up activities of the mangroves and soil should not be initiated before all possible measures are taken to stop ongoing pollution from reaching the creeks. Restoration of swamplands. The most extensive area in terms of treatment of To begin prioritizing specific locations to contamination will be the topsoil from the be cleaned up, restored or rehabilitated, the swamplands. The two main options are manual report suggests the following framework: cleaning of contaminated topsoil and low- – Priority 1. All instances where the Ogoni pressure water jetting. A portable facility which community is known to be at risk can be fixed on a barge, move through the bigger creeks and act as a base for decontamination – Priority 2. Instances where contamination crews, should be considered. could potentially affect the community (e.g. where groundwater, fishing grounds A proposed Integrated Contaminated Soil or agricultural land are impacted) Management Centre will be a modern – Priority 3. Instances where a community’s industrial enterprise in Ogoniland employing livelihood support base is impacted, and hundreds of people. On-site ‘mini treatment – Priority 4. Instances where there is no centres’ for bioremediation and excavation immediate risk to people but where there water will also act as staging areas feeding the is non-compliance with the law. main soil treatment centre. 13
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Treatment of contaminated sediments. Mangrove restoration. Local nurseries should Decisions on intervention for sediment be established so that healthy, indigenous treatment are more complicated than simply plants will be available to regenerate heavily basing them on an intervention value. Issues impacted mangrove stands. Rehabilitation will of erosion, vegetation damage and impact on focus on red mangroves along the waterfront local aquatic ecosystems as well as potential and on white mangroves inland – which have for natural recovery all need to be part of been most severely impacted – and also on the decision-making process. In some cases, containing the spread of invasive species. contaminated sediments will have to be dredged as part of the clean-up or they will Recommendations for public health act as reservoirs of pollution after the ongoing pollution has been eliminated. Everyone who has consumed water from contaminated sources should be requested Decontamination of groundwater. The to undertake a comprehensive medical issue of hydrocarbon contamination needs to examination by physicians knowledgeable be addressed in a comprehensive manner, but about the possible adverse health effects of the clean-up actions must be site-specific. In making hydrocarbons detected. decisions about the clean-up of groundwater, additional factors such as proximity to the A focussed medical study should be initiated community, absorption characteristics of the soil to track the health of the Ogoni community and all possible pathways must be considered, and over their lifetimes to ensure any possible this will require additional data to be gathered as health impacts are identified early enough and part of the detailed clean-up planning process. acted upon.During and following clean-up operations in Ogoniland, a monitoring programme should be put in placewhich includes monthly monitoring of surface water and quarterly monitoring of sediments14
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARYMonitoring sector Monitoring approach FrequencyPreventive surveillance Aerial scouting Weekly Surveillance from boats Weekly Surveillance of facilities and incident sites WeeklyGroundwater Household visits in impacted communities One-off Wells around impacted sites and facilities MonthlyWater bodies Surface water Monthly Sediments Quarterly Fish Quarterly Benthic organisms QuarterlyVegetation Transects in creeks and oilfield sites Once a year Mangrove fauna Once a year Analysis of satellite imagery Once a yearAir quality Particulate measurements, hydrocarbons MonthlyPublic health Cohort registry of highly exposed communities Yearly Public health registry of entire Ogoniland community YearlyRecommendations on monitoring Environment, with the concurrent transfer of staff or by recruiting and training new staff. During and following clean-up operations in Ogoniland, a monitoring programme should Comprehensively review existing Nigerian be put in place in consultation with the legislation on contaminated site clean-up national institutions mandated to deal with considering recent international developments specific environmental issues. All monitoring in regulation and incorporating community activities should be communicated to the consultation to determine remediation closure community and all results should be publicly levels so that decisions on new legislation are available. seen as both transparent and inclusive. Comprehensive air quality monitoring Recommendations for Government across Ogoniland should be initiated to detect ongoing pollution, to help establish The report recommends that the Government guidelines for protecting public health and of Nigeria establishes an Ogoniland to track improvements at sites where clean-up Environmental Restoration Authority activities are under way. to oversee implementation of this study’s recommendations. With a fixed initial lifespan A public health registry should be established of 10 years, the Authority will have a separate for the entire Ogoniland population in order budget which will accrue from an Ogoniland to determine health trends and take proactive Environmental Restoration Fund and its staff action individually or collectively where will largely be seconded from relevant national impacts related to long-term exposure to and state institutions. hydrocarbon pollution are evident. The overall cost of the clean-up should not beRecommendations for changes to an obstacle to its implementation. Therefore,regulatory framework an Environmental Restoration Fund for Ogoniland should be set up with an initial Transfer oversight of the EGASPIN legislation capital injection of USD 1 billion contributed from DPR to the Federal Ministry of by the oil industry and the Government. 15
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDIt is UNEP’s hope that the findings can catalyze significant environmental and social improvementsin the region To be managed by the Authority, the Fund A public awareness campaign should be mounted should be used only for activities concerning to improve the community’s understanding of the the environmental restoration of Ogoniland, environmental and health impacts arising from including capacity building, skills transfer and hydrocarbon contamination in Ogoniland. This conflict resolution. should include a formal education component in the academic curricula in the Niger Delta. A Centre of Excellence for Environmental Restoration should be established in Ogoniland Recommendations for oil industry to promote learning in other areas impacted by operators oil contamination, in the Niger Delta and elsewhere in the world. Offering a range of SPDC procedures for oil spill clean-up and activities and services, the Centre could run remediation need to be fully reviewed and training courses in environmental monitoring overhauled so as to achieve the desired level and restoration and ultimately become a of environmental restoration. In addition to model for environmental restoration, attracting procedures and clean-up methods, contracting international attention. and supervision also need to be improved. Build the capacity of government agencies to SPDC should conduct a comprehensive review enable them to fulfil their mandates, through of its assets in Ogoniland and develop an ‘Asset such actions as increasing human resources Integrity Management Plan for Ogoniland’ and and equipment, and improving the technical a decommissioning plan. These plans should be skills of staff. communicated to the Ogoni people.16
    • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is recommended that SPDC works with the Community members should avoid protracted Nigerian regulators to clarify the paradox of negotiations over access by oil spill response remedial intervention and target values being teams as this means that responses to spills are the same. The parties should also agree on a delayed, resulting in a far greater environmental consultative approach to setting site-specific impact. clean-up values. The community should take a proactive stand In the event that a decision is made to restart against individuals or groups who engage oil exploration and production activities in in illegal activities such as bunkering and Ogoniland, the region should be treated as artisanal refining. a green-field site of high environmental and social sensitivity. This would mean applying the latest technologies and environmental The way forward guidelines, such as re-evaluating pipeline Restoring the livelihoods and well being of future routes to minimise environmental damage and Ogoni generations is within reach but timing is allocating a percentage of all project costs for crucial. Given the dynamic nature of oil pollution environmental and sustainable development and the extent of contamination revealed in initiatives in Ogoniland. UNEP’s study, failure to begin addressing urgent public health concerns and commencing a clean-Recommendations for the Ogoniland up will only exacerbate and unnecessarily prolongcommunity the Ogoni people’s suffering. The Ogoni community should take full ad- A Transition Phase is recommended to maintain vantage of the employment, skills development momentum and begin detailed planning in the and other opportunities that will be created intervening period between the release of UNEP’s by the clean-up operation which is aimed environmental assessment and the commencement at improving their living conditions and of a clean-up operation guided by an Ogoniland livelihoods. Environmental Restoration Authority.While fishing was once a prime activity in Ogoniland, it was evident from community feedbackand field observations that it has essentially ceased in areas polluted by oil 17
    • Introduction Ogoniland is a kingdom situated in the Niger Delta – the largest river delta in Africa and the third largest in the world © Mazen Saggar
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Nigeria gained independence from the UnitedIntroduction Kingdom in 1960. With a population in excessThis report presents the results of an environmental of 158 million people, Nigeria is a multi-ethnicassessment undertaken by the United Nations federation divided into 36 states and the FederalEnvironment Programme (UNEP) in Ogoniland, Capital Territory, within which lies the capital cityNigeria. The study covers thematic issues of of Abuja. More than 250 ethnolinguistic groupscontaminated land, groundwater, surface water and are scattered across the country, but the threesediments, vegetation, air pollution and public health. dominant groups are the Hausas living in the north, the Ibos in the south-east and the YorubaOgoniland has witnessed recurrent social unrest mainly in the south-west [1].during the past several decades over concerns relatedto oil industry operations, its revenue and petroleum- Nigeria is rich in natural resources, includingrelated contamination. Although oil industry natural gas, petroleum, tin, iron ore, coal,operations were suspended in Ogoniland in 1993, limestone, niobium, lead, zinc, timber andwidespread environmental contamination remains. extensive arable land. Prior to the discovery of oilUpon a request from the Federal Government of in the 1950s, agriculture was the mainstay of theNigeria, UNEP undertook an independent study to economy, with agricultural produce exported todetermine the extent of the environmental impacts the more industrialized regions of the world. Byarising from oil industry operations in Ogoniland. 1971 there had been a shift from agriculture toThis report sets out the background and context to petroleum production, such that between 1973the present-day conditions in Ogoniland, provides and 1981 the value of agricultural exports fella synthesis of UNEP’s findings, and gives a set of from more than USD 1.5 billion to about USDoverarching recommendations to deal with the 0.3 billion [2]. Currently, oil provides 80 per centmulti-faceted environmental challenges currently of budget revenues and 95 per cent of foreignfacing the Ogoni people. exchange earnings.1.1 Nigeria and the Niger DeltaNigeria, one of Africa’s largest countries and itsmost populous, is situated in West Africa. Thecountry covers an area of 923,768 km2, with anestimated 4,049 km of land boundaries, sharedwith Cameroon in the east, the Republic of Nigerin the north, Chad in the north-east and Beninin the west. In the south, Nigeria’s 853-km longcoastline opens onto the Atlantic Ocean.The southern lowlands merge into the central hillsand plateaus, with mountains in the south-east andplains in the north. The country’s largest river is theNiger, which joins with the Benue River to forma confluence at Lokoja. The Niger Delta, locatedin the southernmost part of Nigeria and coveringan area of some 70,000 km², is the largest riverdelta in Africa and the third largest in the world(Map 1). From a coastal belt of swamps, stretchingnorthwards the land becomes a continuousrainforest which gradually merges with woodlandand savanna grasslands in central Nigeria. The A farmer tends her maize crop in Horo, Tai LGA.swamp, forest and woodland areas occupy about Prior to the discovery of oil in the 1950s, agriculture12 per cent of the delta’s land surface. was the mainstay of Nigeria’s economy20
    • 1 INTRODUCTION ! ( Akure ° ONDO ENUGU EDO Enugu ( ! Benin City ( ! Asaba Awka ( ! ( ! ANAMBRA IMO D E LTA Umuahia Owerri ( ! ( ! ABIA N i g e r D e l t a Uyo ( ! RIVERS AK WA ( ! IBOM Port Harcourt Ogoniland B AY E L S A Atlantic Ocean Niger Legend Kilometres State boundary 0 50 100 ( ! Cities Nigeria Geographic Coordinate SystemBenin Main roads WGS 84 ! Abuja Railroad r ¬ Sources: Lagos Airport VMap0, SALB. ( ! Port Harcourt Rivers ( ! Cameroon Kilometres Water bodies Atl ant ic Ocean 0 200 400 Niger Delta UNEP 2011 21
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 450 400 350 300 Average rainfall, mm 250 200 150 100 50 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month of the yearRivers State flow patterns are responsible for the deposition of fine-grained sediments in the delta.Rivers State – in which Ogoniland, the study areafor this report, is located – is situated in the coastal Rainfall, which is variable but heavy across muchplain of the eastern Niger Delta. Its topography is of the country, occurs throughout the year,mainly characterized by rivers, lakes, creeks, lagoons decreasing from around 4,700 mm/year in theand swamps of varying dimensions. The land south to around 1,700 mm/year in the north ofsurface can be grouped into three main divisions the state. The rainy season, which in coastal andfrom north to south: the freshwater zone, mangrove south-eastern parts of Nigeria begins in Februaryswamps and the coastal sand ridge zone. or March, lasts about 330 days, with 250 mm or more of rain per day at times. The state’s capital,The riverine area, with a land surface between 2 Port Harcourt, has about 180 rainy days per yearand 5 metres above sea level, covers about 40 per (Figure 1). Temperatures range from 28°C tocent of the state, while drier uplands occupy the 33°C. The hottest months are February to May,remainder. Most water channels in the freshwater with high relative humidity throughout the year,zone are bordered by natural levees that provide the decreasing slightly in the dry season.basis for settlements and agriculture. The uplandarea varies in height from 10 to 45 metres above Ogonilandmean sea level (msl), but the majority is below 30metres asl. Its surface is interspersed by small ridges Ogoniland is a region covering some 1,000 km2 inand shallow swamp basins, as well as by gently the south-east of the Niger Delta basin (Map 2).sloping terraces intersected by deep valleys that It has a population of close to 832,000, accordingcarry water intermittently. The southern part is to the 2006 National Census, consisting mainlysubject to tidal influences and is highly susceptible of the Ogoni people. The region is dividedto recurrent inundation by riverine flooding. These administratively into four local government areas:22
    • 1 INTRODUCTION ° EBERI/ OMUMAIKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA AKPAJO OYIGBO PORTHARCOURT EBUBU ABAM TEKA-SOGHO TAI ELEME SIME JOR-SOGHO KOROKORO KPITE OGU KHANA KPORGHOR DEKEN GIO OPUOKO LUEGBO-BEERI WAKAMA BORI OKRIKA BOLO BERA OGU/BOLO GOKANA ZAAKPON BERE KAPNOR KIBANI IMO RIVER KAA BONNY OLOMA BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVERDEGEMA OPOBO/ NKORO Legend Kilometres Umuahia Owerri ( ! DELTA 0 10 20 ( ! Local Government Area limits IMO Projection: UTM 32N ABIA Datum: WGS84 ! Settlements AKWA IBOM Hydrographic network Sources: RIVERS SPDC, River State Administrative map, Port Harcourt UNEP. ( ! Rail networkBAYELSA Express Way UNEP 2011 23
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDHis Majesty King Godwin N.K. Gininwa, Ogoniland’s Paramount RulerEleme, Gokana, Khana, and Tai. Traditionally the (SPDC), a joint venture between the Nigerianarea is formed by six kingdoms (Babbe, Eleme, National Petroleum Company (NNPC), ShellGokana, Ken-Khana, Nyo-Khana and Tai) with International, Elf and Agip.His Majesty King Godwin N.K. Gininwa as thearea’s Paramount Ruler. While to the outside Oil exploration and production projects may haveworld the communities of Ogoniland may appear impacts on the natural environment long beforesimilar, they have distinctive differences, including any oil is actually produced. These are complex,traditional institutional structures, languages and multi-faceted projects, with many different phases,cultural features. including: land survey, land clearance for seismic lines, establishment of seismic and drilling camps, site preparation, infrastructure construction,1.2 Impacts of oil exploration drilling for oil (even when the effort is unsuccessful) and production and development of transportation infrastructure.Oil exploration in Ogoniland commenced in the Once a facility begins operating other issues have1950s and extensive production facilities were to be dealt with, such as spills caused during oilestablished during the following three decades production and the disposal of water (often salty(Table 1). These operations were handled by Shell and known as ‘produced water’) and flaring ofPetroleum Development Company (Nigeria) Ltd gas (‘produced gas’) generated alongside the oil. All of these activities and their effects leave an environmental footprint. The oil industry’s environmental awareness and standards in the 1960s were very different and lower SPDC facility Number compared to those of the present day. This impact Oilfields 12 was exacerbated by the Nigerian Civil War (known Wells drilled 116 widely as the Biafran War) in the late 1960s, during Wells completed 89 which oil industry infrastructure was targeted and a Flow stations 5 number of facilities were damaged, with consequent Flow station capacity (barrels per day) 185,000 spillage of oil and widespread pollution.24
    • 1 INTRODUCTION1.3 The Ogoni struggle and the 300,000 Ogoni on a march to demand a share in cessation of oil exploration oil revenues and greater political autonomy [4]. The conflict within the region, however, was not and production resolved in a peaceful manner. As a consequence ofWhile oil exploration and the associated social the ensuing violence, oil exploration and productionand environmental consequences in Ogoniland activities in Ogoniland ceased in 1993.began prior to Nigeria’s independence, thesituation did not improve when the country In November 1995, following a trial by a militarygained independence in 1960. Environmental tribunal, Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoniincidents, such as spills and uncontrolled flares, leaders were hanged in Port Harcourt. Continuedcontinued to occur in the area and responses were social upheaval in the area further alienated theslow and inadequate. Ogoni community from SPDC, and MOSOP has since been campaigning for the total expulsion ofPartly in response to the environmental consequen- Shell from Ogoniland.ces of oil production, the Movement for the Survivalof the Ogoni People (MOSOP) was founded under While no oil production has taken place inthe leadership of the Nigerian author Ken Saro- Ogoniland since 1993, the facilities themselvesWiwa. A staunch defender of the rights of the have never been decommissioned. Some oilOgoni people, Saro-Wiwa criticized oil companies pipelines carrying oil produced in other parts ofand the government’s oil policy and brought Nigeria still pass through Ogoniland but these areinternational attention to the Ogoni cause. not being maintained adequately. Consequently, the infrastructure has gradually deteriorated,In 1990, MOSOP presented the Ogoni Bill of through exposure to natural processes, but alsoRights to the Federal Government of Nigeria as a result of criminal damage, causing further[3]. The Bill included a number of references to pollution and exacerbating the environmentalenvironmental issues. In 1993, Saro-Wiwa joined footprint.A UNEP project team member at a wellhead at Ebubu Ejama, Eleme LGA, typical of the oilinfrastructure progressively installed in Ogoniland since the late 1950s 25
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND1.4 Reconciliation process Accordingly, in July 2006, UNEP received an official request from the Federal Government ofIn 1999, democracy was re-established in Nigeria Nigeria to conduct a comprehensive assessmentand legislation to increase revenue sharing within of the environmental and public health impactsoil-producing regions soon followed. However, as of oil contamination in Ogoniland, Riversthe Ogoniland oilfield lay dormant, the Ogoni State, together with options for remediation.people were unable to benefit from these reforms. In response, the Executive Director of UNEPThe country’s political leadership therefore deployed a high-level mission to Nigeria in orderdecided to establish a mechanism whereby the to gain a fuller understanding of the backgroundoil industry operator could enter a process of to the request and the expectations of the Nigerianreconciliation with the Ogoni community, Government. Extensive discussions took placeenabling oil production to recommence and the with various stakeholders, including the Presidentcommunity to benefit from the new revenue- of Nigeria, local government officials and SPDCsharing legislation. management. The UNEP team also conducted field visits to Ogoniland and met with the keyIn 2005, His Excellency Olusegun Obasanjo, Ogoni stakeholders. A series of pre-arranged,President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, well-publicized and well-attended public meetingsappointed Reverend Father Matthew Hassan helped the mission to understand local communityKukah as mediator between the Ogoni and Shell. perspectives and expectations.As part of the reconciliation process, an impartial,international agency would be appointed to Following these preparatory consultations, UNEPundertake an environmental assessment and presented a proposal (including workplans andsupervise the clean-up of the areas damaged by budgets) to the Nigerian Government in Januarythe effects of oil operations in Ogoniland. 2007 for a two-phase project:A typical market in Ogoniland26
    • 1 INTRODUCTIONA community meeting in Ogoniland, 2006. UNEP representatives consulted the communityprior to commencing the environmental assessment1. A comprehensive Environmental Assessment These suggestions were agreed to by all parties. of Ogoniland, and UNEP also made it clear that the assessment2. An environmental clean-up to follow, based would be completely independent, and this too on the assessment and subsequent planning was accepted by all parties. and decisions. While the project was approved in 2007,The President agreed with UNEP’s proposals and administrative delays meant that fieldwork couldmade two suggestions: not start until late 2009. Fieldwork and laboratory analysis were completed in January 2011. The A Presidential Implementation Committee, under study resulted in tens of thousands of analyses and the chairmanship of Bishop Kukah should photographs, all illustrative of the environmental be formed to oversee the work, and would situation in Ogoniland. The many separate reviews consist of HM King Gininwa, the Paramount and findings have been synthesized in this final report King of Ogoniland, and representatives of the – the main output of the Environmental Assessment Federal Environment Ministry, the Rivers State of Ogoniland component of UNEP’s work – to Ministry of Environment, the National Oil Spill present the information in a relevant and useful Detection and Response Agency (NOSDRA), manner. Before discussing the scientific findings, a SPDC and MOSOP, and series of field observations are described. The data on All expenses relating to the environmental which this report is based are being made available assessment should be borne by SPDC under online (www.unep.org/nigeria) to enable those who the ‘polluter pays’ principle. wish to undertake more in-depth analyses to do so. 27
    • Background toEnvironmental Degradation in Ogoniland An Ogoni woman draws water from an open well. With a rich and diverse culture, the Ogoni have lived in the Niger Delta for hundreds of years © UNEP
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Agbada Formation and Akata Formation. TheBackground to Benin Formation is comprised of multiple layersEnvironmental of clay, sand, conglomerate, peat and/or lignite, all of variable thickness and texture and covered byDegradation in overburden soil. Clay beds are discontinuous and groundwater is therefore present both as localizedOgoniland aquifers or in hydraulically interconnected aquifers. The ground characteristics are consistentOgoniland is characterized by typically deltaic with deltaic environments, where erosion andfeatures: uneven terrain, numerous creeks, shallow deposition of sediments constantly shift the coursebrackish water bodies and a variety of vegetation of channels, tributaries and creeks.types including swamp forest. The following sectiondescribes in detail Ogoniland’s environmental Groundwatersetting and oil industry operations. Ogoniland’s aquifers are a crucial resource upon2.1 Environmental setting in which the region’s entire population depends for drinking water. The protection of these aquifers is Ogoniland and the Niger Delta therefore vital. These aquifers are very shallow, with the top-most groundwater levels occuring anywhereGeology between close to the surface and a depth of 10The Niger Delta is the product of both fluvial metres. To tap the aquifers, Ogoni communitiesand marine sediment build-up since the upper typically construct open, hand-dug wells aboutCretaceous period, some 50 million years ago. 60 cm in diameter and water is abstracted eitherOver time, up to 12,000 metres of shallow manually or with pumps. In some areas affected bymarine sediments and deltaic sediments have localized pollution of water closer to the surface,accumulated, contributed mainly by the Niger wells can be up to 50 metres deep. In such cases,River and its tributaries. The main upper immersible pumps are used to draw water. Watergeological layers consist of Benin Formation, levels in these aquifers are highly seasonal.An Ogoni fisherman30
    • 2 BACKGROUND EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIO/AKPOR OYIGBO ELEMEPORT HARCOURT TAI KHANA OKRIKA OGU/BOLO GOKANA IMO RIVER BONNY RIVER ANDONI RIVERDEGEMA ANDONI BONNY OPOBO/ NKORO Kilometres Satellite : Landsat Acquisition date : 1986 0 5 10 ©NASA UNEP 2011Fresh groundwater can also be found in the Surface watershallow, sandy and unconfined aquifers of thecoastal beach ridges, river bars and islands in The Rivers State region is drained by the Bonnythe mangrove belt, as well as at varying depths and New Calabar river systems and numerousin confined aquifers. A large number of wells associated creeks and streams. Ogoniland itselfdrilled in the coastal area produce brackish (salty) is bounded to the east by the Imo River and towater which is not fit for drinking. In some areas, the west by a series of creeks (Map 3). The Imobrackish groundwater can be found at depths receives freshwater inflow during the rainy seasongreater than 200 metres below ground level. but is also influenced by tidal variations. The 31
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDwidth and velocity of freshwater creeks increase They live in close-knit rural communities, theirdownstream to form meandering or braided livelihoods based on agriculture and fishing. Thechannels in the delta. total population of the four local government areas (LGAs) – Eleme, Gokana, Khana and TaiTidal systems are confined to the southern part – according to the 2006 National Census wasof the UNEP study area and comprise saline andbrackish mangrove swamps with meandering tidal approximately 832,000 (Table 2).creeks. Within Ogoniland, four main languages are spoken, which although related are mutually exclusive:Vegetation Eleme, Gokana, Khana and Tai. Linguistic expertsThe coastal area comprises three vegetation zones: classify Eleme, Gokana and Khana as a distinct(i) beach ridge zone, (ii) saltwater zone and (iii) group within the Beneu-Congo branch of Africanfreshwater zone. The beach ridge zone is vegetated languages or, more specifically, as a branch in theby mangroves on the tidal flats and by swamp New Benue-Congo family.trees, palms and shrubs on the sandy ridges. Thesaltwater zone is mainly vegetated by red mangrove(Rhizophora mangle). The coastal plain andfreshwater zone is vegetated by forest tree species andoil palm. The Niger River floodplains are covered LGA Inhabitantsby rainforest trees, oil palm, raffia palms, shrubs, Eleme 190,884lianas, ferns and floating grasses and reeds. Gokana 228,828 Khana 294,217Mangroves have traditionally provided a variety ofecosystem services and products to the community, Tai 117,797including fishing grounds, timber for housing, and Total 831,726fuelwood. Tree and shrub cover remains importantin uncultivated areas. Other non-timber forestproducts which are important, especially for poorerhouseholds, include grass cutters, bamboo forstaking of yam (edible perennial herbaceous vines),medicinal plants, vegetables, fruits and snails.An agriculture-based economy and an increasingpopulation have meant that most of the rainforestthat once covered Ogoniland has been cleared forfarming. In many places the practice of integratingfarming and forestry remains, covering large areasof land and consisting mainly of oil palm andrubber plantations. The farm animal populationtoo has increased with population density, with theanimals also involved in nutrient recycling [5].In Ogoniland, only small-sized sacred forests(shrines) of usually less than 1 ha remain in arelatively undisturbed state, while most of theremaining vegetation is highly degraded. Originalvegetation consists mainly of mangroves.Local communitiesThe Ogoni are a distinct people who havelived in the Niger Delta for hundreds of years. Ogoni women carrying wood and produce32
    • 2 BACKGROUNDOgoniland is home to an estimated 832,000 people 33
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDThe creeks in Ogoniland also form important transportation routesEleme LGA occupies the western end of Ogoniland. Gokana LGA was created out of the formerIt has 10 clans within two administrative political Gokana Tai Eleme LGA and came into being onblocs or units: the Nchia bloc with six clans (Akpajo, 23 September 1991. It comprises 17 autonomousAleto, Alesa, Alode, Ogale and Agbonchia) and communities. The Gokana people are mostlythe Odido bloc with four clans (Onne, Ebubu, fishermen and farmers. Gokana is located withinEteo and Ekporo). Each clan has numerous sub- the South East Senatorial Zone and has bothcommunities; the Ebubu clan for example includes riverine and upland communities. It was also onethe Ejamah, Ochani, Obollo, Egbalor and Agbeta of the major oil-producing areas in Rivers State. Itcommunities. shares boundaries with Tai in the north, Khana in the east, Ogu/Bolo in the west and Bonny in theThe oilfields in Eleme LGA, which encompass south. The LGA is situated about 50 km south oflocations in Ebubu (Ejamah, Agbeta, Obollo, Port Harcourt and 30 km from Onne industrialEgbalor), Ogale (Ajioepuori, Nsisioken, Obajeaken, area.Nsisioken) and Onne (Ekara), were discovered inOctober 1956. Oil from operations in Eleme was Khana LGA is the largest of the four LGAs inincluded in the first shipment of 22,000 barrels Ogoniland, with a total of 106 communities andof crude oil exported from Nigeria to Europe in a population of 294,217 (as at the 2006 census).1958. The people are also predominantly farmers and fishermen. The LGA has four districts: Babbe,The communities of Eleme host several major Ken-Khana, Nyorkhana and Bori Urban. The Yorlanational and international establishments. oilfield lies in Khana LGA.Eleme’s main river is the Imu Ngololo, along Tai LGA was created out of the former Tai-which the Nigerian Naval College is based. Eleme LGA in 1997, which in turn was a34
    • 2 BACKGROUNDsuccessor in 1991 to Gokana Tai Eleme LGA. Its that the problems of Ogoniland cannot be solvedadministrative headquarters are at Saakpenwa. It in isolation.is one of the major oil-producing LGAs in RiversState and is composed of 27 communities and These issues are particularly significant withvillages inhabited predominantly by farmers and regard to pollution in creeks. Oil pollution, oncefishermen. The LGA has three districts – Tua-Tua it reaches the creeks, can move back and forthDistrict, Nonwa Area and Kira Central District with the tides. Consequently, an oil spill, even(Tai Central) – and is bounded by Oyigbo to around Bonny Island at the southern edge ofthe north, Gokana to the south, Khana to the Rivers State, can reach the coast and waters ofeast and Eleme to the west. Korokoro Tai, in Ogoniland. Similarly, pollution from OgonilandTua-Tua district, is one of the Tai LGA’s major can reach downstream villages such as Andoni,oil-producing communities, with one flow station and eventually as far as the sea.and nine oil wells. It was discovered by SPDC in1968. Cross-border environmental impacts are also relevant for oil industry infrastructure. While oilOgoni interaction with neighbouring production no longer occurs in Ogoniland, cruderegions and refined oil products transit the region via pipelines. The main SPDC oil pipeline, or trunkMetaphorically and practically speaking, Ogoniland line, from upstream production areas runs to theis not an island. This has two implications. The first export terminal at Bonny, while the pipelinesis that pollution from Ogoniland has the potential from Bonny terminal to Port Harcourt refineryto reach and cross its boundaries, as well as entering and from Port Harcourt refinery to Umu NwaOgoniland from external sources. The second is Nwa also pass through Ogoniland.Pipelines in neighbouring Okirika LGA. The environmental impacts of oil operations are a shared legacy 35
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDInstitutional framework management or regulation of the oil industry, but have de facto involvement with both issues becauseThe institutional set-up and legislation related to of their physical presence ‘on the ground’.environmental management of the oil and gasindustry in Nigeria have evolved over the past 50 The long history of environmental problemsyears and are very complex. caused by oil spills also gives the Nigerian judicial system a prominent role as it deals withThe Department of Petroleum Resources (DPR) penalties and punishments for environmental andunder the Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources oil-related offences and crimes, as well as withplays a key role in regulating and enforcing compensation claims for victims.environmental law in Nigeria. The DPR regulation‘Environmental Guidelines and Standards forPetroleum Industry in Nigeria’ (EGASPIN) [7], 2.2 Petroleum hydrocarbons:first issued in 1992 and reissued in 2002, forms origin and environmentalthe basis for most environmental regulation of the consequencesoil industry. Origin and useIn 1999, the Federal Ministry of Environment wasformed, followed in 2006 by the establishment ‘Petroleum’ originates from two Latin words: ‘petra’of the National Oil Spill Detection and Response meaning rock, and ‘elaion’ meaning oil. HydrocarbonsAgency (NOSDRA). Both of these institutions refer to chemical substances formed exclusively frombase their operations on the DPR Environmental carbon and hydrogen. Petroleum hydrocarbons areGuidelines and Standards. thus naturally occurring hydrocarbon substances and, depending on the length of the carbonThere are also ministries at the state level; the chain, can occur in gas, liquid or solid form.Rivers State Ministries of Environment and Hydrocarbons are formed by the decay of organicWater Resources both have the management substances trapped within sedimentary rocks. Highof environmental issues in Ogoniland within temperatures and pressure convert the trappedtheir mandates. Local government bodies do matter into hydrocarbons. Liquid hydrocarbonnot have an official role in either environmental found in nature is also referred to as crude oil [8].Visible hydrocarbon pollution on surface water in Ogoniland36
    • 2 BACKGROUNDCrude oil consists of a complex mixture of hydrocarbons. But there are other possible sources,hydrocarbons of various molecular weights. In such as vehicle and generator emissions, burning ofaddition nitrogen, oxygen and sulphur occurs vegetation and trash (including domestic waste),in small quantities. The hydrocarbons consist of food processing and use of cooking fuels. All thesealkanes (paraffins) and cycloalkanes (naphtalenes) activities are commonplace in Ogoniland.that are saturated hydrocarbons with strait orbranched chains of hydrocarbon molecules. Alkanes In looking at the environmental consequencesand cycloalkanes which normally constitute the of hydrocarbons, it is important to rememberdominating part of the oil, about 80%, have similar that ‘hydrocarbons’ is an umbrella term used forproperties but cycloalkanes have higher boiling hundreds of different organic compounds. Secondly,points. The remaining hydrocarbons are aromatic, hydrocarbons can cause environmental consequencesmeaning the molecules are unsaturated made up of due to their chemical properties (e.g. toxicity) orbenzene-rings. To this group of molecules belongs physical properties (e.g. smothering). And lastly,the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs – also owing to the very large number of hydrocarbonsknown as polyaromatic hydrocarbons or polynuclear present in crude oil, the environmental and healtharomatic hydrocarbons), some of which are know for impacts of all the constituent parts have not yet beentheir carcinogenic properties. One additional group fully studied or understood.of hydrocarbons that occur in varying amounts up Impacts on soilto 10% in crude oil is the asphaltenes, which aremolecules with relatively high weight. Oils consisting Hydrocarbon pollution of soil can occur in severalof a relatively high proportion of asphaltenes tend ways, from natural seepage of hydrocarbonsto be thick almost like asphalt. in areas where petroleum is found in shallow reservoirs, to accidental spillage of crude oilThe use of crude oil has created at least four major on the ground. Regardless of the source ofindustrial groups: contamination, once hydrocarbons come into1. The exploration and production industry, which contact with the soil, they alter its physical and searches for, finds and then produces crude oil chemical properties. The degree of alteration depends on the soil type, the specific composition2. The oil and gas tanker industry, which of the hydrocarbon spilled and the quantity transports crude oil and refined products spilled. In the least damaging scenario, such as around the world a small spill of a volatile hydrocarbon onto dry sand, the hydrocarbons evaporate fast, causing no3. The refining sector, which breaks down crude chemical or physical damage to the soil. In other oil into a number of products, including diesel, situations, for example a spill of heavy crude oil petrol and specialty oils onto clay soil, the chemicals can remain within the4. The petrochemical industry, which takes crude soil for decades, altering its permeability, causing oil-derived hydrocarbons as feedstock and toxicity and lowering or destroying the quality of converts them into a range of everyday products the soil. In such circumstances, the soil itself will used in modern living become a source of pollution. Contaminated soil can affect the health of organismsEnvironmental consequences through direct contact or via ingestion or inhalationof hydrocarbons of soil contaminants which have been vaporized. Soil also acts as a reservoir of residual pollution,While the economic significance of hydrocarbons releasing contaminants into groundwater or air overas the primary source of fuel and its versatile extended periods of time, often after the originalapplication in downstream industries are obvious, source of pollution has been removed [13].the product may also have major environmentalconsequences [9]. Impacts on waterOil exploration, production and processing Hydrocarbons can enter water through directrepresent prime sources of exposure to petroleum spills or from a spill originally occurring on land 37
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDUNEP expert examining vegetationand subsequently reaching water bodies through the type and quantity of the chemical(s) involved,the effects of wind, rain, surface or sub-surface to the life-cycle development stage of the plantsflow. Regardless of the means of entry, there will concerned, and the means through which thebe adverse impacts though the nature and severity plants came into contact with the hydrocarbon.of such impacts is dependent on the specific Different vegetation types also have varyingchemical composition and physical characteristics sensitivity to hydrocarbons.of the hydrocarbon involved and the degree ofconcentration/dilution. Hydrocarbons can cause In the case of Nigeria, where spillages are notboth physical and chemical effects in water; even immediately attended to, oil spills often leadvery small quantities of hydrocarbon can prevent to fires, causing total or partial destruction ofoxygen transfer in the water column, thus affecting vegetation. While such fires tend to be localized,aquatic life-support systems. The presence of more extensive fires, especially in forested regions,mere traces of a highly toxic hydrocarbon, such have the capacity to change species diversity overas benzene, may render water unfit for human significant areas.consumption [10]. Impacts on aquatic and terrestrial wildlifeImpacts on vegetation Oil spills can affect wildlife, both aquatic andHydrocarbons can come into direct contact terrestrial, in many ways. The severity of damagewith vegetation in many ways: through spillage will depend on the type(s) of hydrocarbononto roots, stems or leaves; through spillage involved, the quantity spilled, the temperatureonto soil; through dissolved hydrocarbons in the at the time of the incident, and the season.groundwater in the root zone of the vegetation; or Dissolved or emulsified oil in the water columnvia air surrounding the vegetation [11]. Impacts can contaminate plankton, algae, fish eggs andon vegetation depend on a range of factors, from invertebrate larvae [12].38
    • 2 BACKGROUNDIntertidal benthic invertebrates located in sediments Impacts on peoplesubjected to tidal variations are particularlyat risk, due more to the smothering effects of Petroleum hydrocarbons can enter people’s bodiesthick, weathered oil reaching the coastline. when they breathe air, bathe, eat fish, drink waterSediments often become reservoirs of hydrocarbon or accidentally eat or touch soil or sediment thatcontamination. Meanwhile, fish can be affected via is contaminated with oil (Figure 2).their gills or by ingesting oil or oil-contaminatedprey. Fish larvae are equally at risk, particularly Crude oil contains many compounds, primarilywhen oil enters nursery areas such as mangroves volatile and semi-volatile organic compoundsor other wetlands. (VOCs and SVOCs), including some PAHs, as well as some other sulphur- and nitrogen-Physical contact with oil destroys the insulation containing compounds and metals. When oilproperties of fur and feathers, causing various is burned, additional PAHs can be formed aseffects in birds and fur-bearing mammals. Heavily combustion by-products along with inhalableoiled birds can also lose their ability to fly, as well fraction PM10 (particles measuring less than 10as their buoyancy, causing drowning. In efforts microns), and respirable fraction PM2.5 (particlesto clean themselves, birds often ingest oil, which measuring less than 2.5 microns). Petroleummay have lethal or sub-lethal impacts through, hydrocarbons differ with respect to their behaviourfor example, liver and kidney damage. in the environment and it is this behaviour that defines whether they are more likely to be in air,For a more comprehensive discussion of the biological water, soil, sediment, food or other media thatimpacts of oil pollution, refer to the Guidelines onBiological Impacts of Oil Pollution prepared by the people might come in contact with.International Petroleum Industry Environmental Petroleum products can contain hundreds orConservation Association (IPIECA) [13]. even thousands of individual compounds that differ with respect to their potential impacts on people with regard to both exposure and degree of toxicity. The dose and duration of exposure has a direct influence on the effects that may follow. Some petroleum hydrocarbons are soluble in water, while others might be present in water as a separate phase of oil. People of all ages might be exposed to petroleum-contaminated surface water or groundwater when used for bathing, washing, cooking and drinking. People of all ages can also be exposed to petroleum that evaporates into the air. Members of fishing communities risk exposure to petroleum if they drink, bathe or collect shellfish in contaminated water, or if they come into contact with or accidentally ingest contaminated sediment while engaged in any of these activities. Petroleum hydrocarbons are not efficiently taken up by plants or animals, and finfish – unlike shellfish – metabolize PAHs, preventing accumulation in edible tissue. While most foods are therefore unlikely to be important sources of exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons, farmers can suffer direct exposure from contaminated soilAn Ogoni farmer harvesting plantain during their day-to-day work. 39
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDThe types of chemical present in crude and refined might include cancer and neurotoxicity [19].oils and released during its combustion may lead to Aguilera et al. (2010) reviewed human healthshort-term respiratory problems and skin and eye evaluations associated with oil spills around theirritation if concentrations are sufficiently high. world and found that most provided evidenceAcute health effects of exposure to petroleum are of a relationship between exposure to spilledreasonably well understood: dermal exposure can oils and acute physical and psychologicallead to skin redness, oedema, dermatitis, rashes effects, as well as possible genotoxic andand blisters; inhalation exposure can lead to red, endocrine effects [17]. Effects of oil exposurewatery and itchy eyes, coughing, throat irritation, on the developing foetus are also not wellshortness of breath, headache and confusion; and understood, although adverse effects haveingestion of hydrocarbons can lead to nausea and been observed in studies involving individualdiarrhoea [14, 15, 16]. In addition, environmental petroleum hydrocarbons, including benzenecontamination associated with oil spills and its and some PAHs [19, 20].effect on livelihoods and general quality of lifecould reasonably be expected to cause stress Impacts of specific hydrocarbons onamong members of affected communities, and environment and healthstress alone can adversely affect health [17, 18]. Given that there are many hundreds of differentChronic effects from comparatively low-level hydrocarbons, which may occur individually orexposure are not so well understood and in combination, their impacts on the natural Sources Primary Exposure Secondary Exposure Exposure Exposed Media Media Route Subpopulations Indoor air Outdoor air Inhalation, (particles and vapors) ingestion deposition volatilization deposition Agricultural resuspension products; wild Ingestion edible species Soil People living in or consum- ing dietary Oil spills e.g., leaching items from areas where oil-related Groundwater contamination Dermal has come to Drinking water ingestion, be located discharge inhalation Surface water Fish and shellfish; other Ingestion resuspension deposition edible aquatic species Dermal Sediment ingestion40
    • 2 BACKGROUNDenvironment and health of organisms are not Bariumfully understood. However, there are certaingroups of hydrocarbons that are known to have Barium is a heavy metal and excessive uptakeadverse impacts and which are therefore dealt of water-soluble barium may cause a person towith selectively in oil-spill assessment and clean- experience vomiting, abdominal cramps, diarrhea,up work. The most important of these groups difficulties in breathing, increased or decreasedare BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene blood pressure, numbness around the face, andand xylenes) and PAHs. There are many muscle weakness [26]. Barium chemicals are usedpublished documents worldwide that provide by the oil industry in drilling mud, which is thencomprehensive information on these groups. often left in the mud pits around wellheads orThe following gives a brief overview. dumped offshore [27]. In the past, no particular effort was made either to transport the mudBTEX compounds contain one aromatic carbon away from the drilling location or to handle(benzene) ring. They have low molecular weight, it in an environmentally appropriate manner.high volatility and are comparatively highly Consequently, it is not uncommon to find highsoluble in groundwater. BTEX is naturally concentrations of barium in the drilling pits.present in crude oil, often in small quantities. Naturally occurring radioactive materialsThe concentration of these substances is increasedduring petroleum cracking (the breaking down of Naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM)high-molecular weight hydrocarbons into low- includes all radioactive elements or isotopesmolecular weight compounds) [21, 22]. found naturally in the environment. Long-lived radioactive elements, such as uranium, thoriumBTEX substances are highly mobile and able and any of their decay products, including radiumto find their way into human beings through and radon but also the radioisotope potassium-40,air or water relatively quickly. In addition, their are examples of NORM. These elements havetoxicity also makes them more potent. Benzene, always been present in the Earth’s crust and withinfor example, is a known carcinogen, in addition the tissues of all organisms.to having numerous other short-term effects. NORM encountered in oil and gas exploration,PAHs are potent pollutants that occur in crude oil, development and production operations originatesas well as in wood or coal. They are also produced in subsurface formations. It can be brought to theas by-products of fuel burning particularly at low surface by the oil or gas itself, or by formation water,temperatures leading to incomplete combustion which is the by-product of the formation of oil and(whether fossil fuel or biomass). As pollutants, gas in the ground.they are of concern because some compoundshave been identified as causing cancer, changing NORM concentrations in crude oil and natural gasgenetic structures and affecting embryos and are known to be low and therefore do not pose afoetuses [23, 24, 25]. radiological problem. Oil and gas production and processing operations sometimes cause NORM toNon-hydrocarbon environmental accumulate at elevated concentrations in by-productissues related to the oil industry waste streams [28] . An accumulation of NORM, such as in pigging wastes, can be problematic andIn addition to chemical pollution by hydrocarbons, must be avoided, something that the oil industry isthere are other environmental concerns linked now well aware of. As an example, radium isotopeswith oil industry operations. These range have a tendency to co-precipitate from waterfrom clearance of land for oilfield facilities, phases through temperature and pressure changeshydrological changes due to construction of in the presence of other elements such as barium.roads and pipelines, and contamination from Precipitates can then be found on the surface ofchemicals other than hydrocarbons (three of equipment and in sludge and ashes. The decaywhich are discussed below). Table 3 summarizes product of radium is radon gas which, if inhaledthe typical impacts of oil industry operations on may pose radiological problems. NORM generallythe environment. occurs as radon gas in the natural gas stream. 41
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDWorkers employed in the area of cutting and gas that can cause odour nuisance even at veryreaming oilfield pipes, removing solids from small concentrations. At higher concentrationstanks and pits, and refurbishing gas processing it is lethal.equipment may be exposed to NORM, henceposing health risks if inhaled or ingested. Produced waterHydrogen sulphide Water is often produced along with hydrocarbons [30]. More often than not it is salty, the saltSince hydrocarbons are formed by anaerobic concentration often exceeding that of sea water.decomposition of organic matter, hydrocarbon Disposal of produced water, even after removaldeposits (of both crude oil and natural gas) are of hydrocarbons, onto either land or water canoften found in association with hydrogen sulphide cause adverse environmental impacts due to itsgases[29] . Hydrogen sulphide is a foul-smelling high salinity. Exploration and production activity Physical activity Impacts Seismic activity Setting up base camps Land clearance Access creation Abstraction of groundwater Hydrological changes Sewage Solid wastes Light and noise pollution Introduction of alien and invasive species Cutting lines Removal of vegetation Access Creation Seismic operation Vibration Noise Drilling operations Setting up base camps Land clearance Access creation Abstraction of water Hydrological changes Sewage Solid wastes Light and noise pollution Introduction of alien and invasive species Setting up drilling pads Land clearance Access creation Hydrological changes Drilling operations Noise Drill cuttings and drilling wastes Spills and leaks Light and noise pollution Nuisance odours Production operations Facility installation Land clearance Access creation Abstraction of water Hydrological changes Introduction of alien and invasive species Pipeline installation Land clearance Access creation Hydrological changes Spillages and leaks Fires Nuisance odours Pigging wastes Facility operation Noise Discharge of water Waste, e.g. from tank bottoms Spillages and leaks Fires Nuisance odours42
    • 2 BACKGROUND2.3 Oil industry-related of trunk lines that pass through the region. infrastructure in Ogoniland According to SPDC the oil wells are capped and currently not producing. As a consequence, flowAs previously mentioned, oil industry operations lines, flow stations and some of the manifolds arein Ogoniland have been going on for more than also not operational. Map 4 shows the extent ofhalf a century. Activities involve both upstream oil industry infrastructure in Ogoniland.(exploration, production) and downstream(processing and distribution) operations. As in oil The study area for UNEP’s environmentaloperations worldwide, these processes are managed assessment contained 116 oil wells which wereby different entities. The two key companies with constructed between 1955 and 1992, as well as fiveoperational facilities in Ogoniland are the Shell flow stations and 12 manifolds. Potential sourcesPetroleum Development Corporation (Nigeria), of contamination remain, such as disused technicalwhich manages the upstream activities, and the installations and infrastructure that was damaged orNigerian National Petroleum Company, which completely destroyed during the Biafran War.deals with the downstream activities. Oil wellsSPDC facilities in Ogoniland Waste streams potentially generated by wellOil production in Ogoniland ran from 1958 drilling operations are drilling fluids, cuttings/until 1993 when it was shut down in the face of tailings, formation waters and sanitary waste.a massive campaign of public protest against the Drill tailings were stored in pits which can stillcompany’s operations in Ogoniland. SPDC has be identified in the wellhead areas.not produced oil in Ogoniland since. Typical infrastructure of a well drilling site inThe company’s technical installations in Ogoniland Ogoniland as it appears today is shown in thecomprise oil wells, flow lines, flow stations, image below; the tailings pit and water reservoirsmanifolds (junctions of pipes) and a number are still visible. At other sites, water reservoirs wereTypical well Infrastructure (009-002 Well Korokoro 10, Tai LGA) 43
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA AKPAJO OYIGBO EBUBU ABAM TEKA-SOGHO TAI JOR-SOGHO ELEME SIME PORT KOROKORO KPITEHARCOURT OGU KPORGHOR DEKEN GIO KHANA OPUOKO LUEGBO-BEERI WAKAMA GOKANA BORI OKRIKA BOLO BERA OGU/BOLO ZAAKPON BERE KAPNOR KIBANI IMO RIVER KAA OLOMA BONNY RIVER BONNY ANDONI ANDONI RIVERDEGEMA OPOBO/ NKORO Legend Kilometres DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries 0 10 20 ( r ¬ Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities Datum: WGS84 ABIA ` y Wells AKWA IBOM " ) Manifold Sources: r ¬ # * FlowStation Administrative: SPDC, River State Map. Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. RIVERS Port Harcourt Pipeline ! ( BAYELSA NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation UNEP 201144
    • 2 BACKGROUND Flow station Commissioning year Remarks Bomu (K-Dere) -1 1958 Legacy infrastructure Bomu (K-Dere) -2 Not available Destroyed during Biafran War Ebubu 1959 Legacy infrastructure Bodo West 1963 Decommissioned Korokoro 1965 Legacy infrastructure; 5 spills reported by SPDC Yorla 1973 Legacy infrastructure; 3 spills reported by SPDC Onne Not available Decommissionednot present and one or more tailings pits were only According to information supplied by SPDC,visible as shallow rectangular depressions in the the flow stations in Ogoniland were constructedground close to the wellhead. between 1958 and 1973 (Table 4).1Flow stations Apart from oil and gas separators, the only water treatment facilities observed by the UNEP teamWellheads produce a mixture of crude oil, were simple gravimetric oil separators which wereproduced water and produced gas, all of which used to skim oil from the surface and dischargeare transported to a flow station via so-called ‘flow wastewater into neighbouring trenches, wetlandslines’. In the flow station, oil, gas and water are or borrow pits. The gas was reportedly flaredseparated in order to produce crude oil which is during operation of the flow stations.then transported towards a manifold. ManifoldsThe gases consist largely of methane and ethane,other gases including carbon dioxide and hydrogen Manifolds collect oil streams from flow stations andsulphide, along with organosulphur compounds transmit the flow into one or more pipelines. Theyknown as mercaptans. Whereas methane, ethane consist mainly of inflowing and outflowing bundlesand similar gases have a commercial value and can of pipelines, as well as pumps, shutters, valves andbe used for energy generation, carbon dioxide and generators. Given the large amounts of oil that arehydrogen sulphide can act as asphyxiants, potentially pumped through these systems, if there is a rupture,putting oilfield workers at risk. In addition, the potential for contamination is high.hydrogen sulphide and mercaptans have a certaincorrosive potential which may reduce the lifespan Ten manifolds were located in the UNEP studyof pipelines, pumps, etc. if not removed from the area (Table 5). Of these, six were operationalsystem. Since produced water is often saline, it is and four had been decommissioned. Nonecessary to separate it from crude oil at the earliest information was available about commissioningpossible stage to reduce its corrosive potential. or decommissioning dates.1 GIS layers on SPDC-operated infrastructure and rights of way, supplied in 2009. 45
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDTypical flow station and associated infrastructure (Ebubu Ejama, Eleme LGA) Manifold Status Remarks Alesa Operational Not accessible (in refinery) Bomu Operational Partially operational; seven spills reported by SPDC Bodo West/Patrick Waterside Operational None Ebubu Operational One spill reported by SPDC New Ebubu I Operational One spill reported by SPDC Elelenwa/New Elelenwa Operational None Bodo West Decommissioned None Botem Decommissioned Two spills reported by SPDC Horo Decommissioned None Yorla Decommissioned NoneNon-SPDC oil industry facilities distribution, petrochemicals, engineering andin Ogoniland commercial investments.The Nigerian National Petroleum Company The Port Harcourt Refining Company (PHRC), a(NNPC), fully owned by the Federal Government subsidiary of NNPC, is composed of two refineries:of Nigeria, has interests across Nigeria’s entire oil one commissioned in 1965 with a current capacity of 65,000 barrels per stream day2 and the secondindustry. In 1988, NNPC was commercializedinto 12 strategic business units covering the 2 The maximum number of barrels of input that a distillationfull spectrum of oil operations: exploration facility can process within a 24-hour period when running atand production, gas development, refining, full capacity under optimal conditions.46
    • 2 BACKGROUNDcommissioned in 1989 with a capacity of 150,000 the petroleum products used in the country werebarrels per stream day. The latter has a crude imported. PPMC was created in 1988, duringdistillation unit (CDU), a vacuum distillation unit the reorganization of NNPC, to manage the(VDU), a fluid catalytic cracking unit (FCCU) distribution of refined products to all parts ofand a liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) unit. The Nigeria and to ensure they are sold at uniformrefinery has a captive power plant with an installed prices.capacity of 14 MW and four boilers each capable ofgenerating 120 tons of steam per hour [31]. Eleme Petrochemicals Company is a polyolefin producer located in Eleme, Ogoniland. EstablishedPHRC produces the following products: in 1988, the company was a 100 per cent subsidiary LPG of NNPC until, in 2006 as part of a privatization Premium motor spirit drive, the Indorama Group of Indonesia was Kerosene (aviation and domestic) declared core investor by the Nigerian Government- sponsored National Council on Privatization [32]. Automotive gas oil (diesel) Low pour point fuel oil The Eleme complex is designed to produce High pour point fuel oil 240,000 metric tons per year of polyethylene and Unleaded gasoline 95,000 metric tons per year of polypropylene. To produce these resins, natural gas liquidsPipelines and Products Marketing Company are cracked in an olefin plant. In addition, the(PPMC), is also a subsidiary of NNPC. Until complex has the capacity to produce 22,000Nigeria established its own refinery in 1965, all metric tons of Butene-1 (a colourless, flammable,Manifold at the intersection of pipelines (Ebubu Ejama, Eleme LGA) 47
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDOil-related infrastructure in Ogonilandliquefied gas) per annum, used as a comonomer in For the purposes of this report, the key agencies ofthe production of linear low-density polyethylene. interest are the Port Harcourt Refining Company,Currently occupying 400 ha of land, Indorama is which operates the refinery in Ogoniland, and theplanning to expand the complex to make it the Pipeline and Products Marketing Company, whichpetrochemical hub of Africa. has product pipelines running through Ogoniland.48
    • 2 BACKGROUNDOil industry infrastructure was progressively installed in Ogoniland between the 1950s and 1990s,when oil production in the kingdom was shut down in 1993 49
    • Objectives, Scope andMethodologies A multidisciplinary team of international and Nigerian experts conducted fieldwork for the UNEP assessment over a 14-month period © Mazen Saggar
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 6. Provide recommendations for sustainableObjectives, Scope environmental management of Ogonilandand Methodologies 7. Enhance local capacity for better environmental management and promote awareness of sound3.1 Objectives environmental management and sustainable developmentBased on the initial request from the Government 8. Be part of the peace dividend and promoteof Nigeria and the background work undertaken ongoing peace building efforts.by UNEP, the following objectives were formulatedfor the assessment: The full project document approved by the PIC1. Undertake a comprehensive assessment of all is available online. environmental issues associated with the oilfield related activities in Ogoniland, including the 3.2 Scope of the investigation quantification of impacts2. Provide useful guidance data to undertake Geographical scope remediation of contaminated soil and The geographical scope of the investigation groundwater in Ogoniland concerned the areas in and around Ogoniland,3. Provide specific recommendations regarding with a specific focus on the four Ogoniland the scope, modalities and means of remediation local government areas (Eleme, Gokana, Khana of soil and groundwater contamination and Tai). However, the precise location of the boundaries between these LGAs and neighbouring4. Technical evaluation of alternative technologies LGAs was not always evident on the ground. Nor which could be employed to undertake such did official information necessarily correspond to remediation local community understanding. Consequently,5. Provide recommendations for responding to some of the assessment and sampling work future environmental contamination from straddled the officially mapped boundaries of the oilfield operations four LGAs.UNEP technical assistant obtaining fish at a local market52
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESBodo West is an area within the extensive network by measuring drinking water quality around spillof deltaic creeks. Though uninhabited it includes sites and by a review of public health data obtaineda number of oil wells. The wells themselves are from medical centres in Ogoniland. To gain a bettersubmerged, while the associated production understanding of the data, a preliminary socialstation (now decommissioned) is on land. Bodo survey of local communities was undertaken.West is officially mapped as belonging to Ogu/Bolo LGA but since there are no local settlements, In reviewing the institutional and legal structuresit has been regarded by both SPDC and the Ogoni related to the environment and the petroleumpeople as part of the Ogoniland oil facilities. industry in the Niger Delta, UNEP looked atBodo West was therefore included in the scope the governmental institutions directly involved:of UNEP’s work. the Federal Ministry of Environment, NOSDRA and the DPR – an agency under the Ministry ofUNEP’s investigations of surface water, sediments Petroleum Resources which has a statutory roleand aquatic biota focused on two major water in environmental management.systems, namely the Imo River in the east ofOgoniland and the numerous creeks that extend SPDC has internal procedures dealing with a rangetowards Ogoniland from the Bonny River. of issues that have environmental consequences. UNEP’s review of SPDC practices andIn order to demonstrate that the environmental performance included company documentationproblems affecting Ogoniland are being felt in on responses to oil spills, clean-up of contaminatedneighbouring areas, limited investigations were sites and abandonment of sites. In addition, thealso carried out in the adjoining Andoni LGA. assessment also examined whether clean-up of oil spills and contaminated sites in Ogoniland wasTechnical scope of the assessment implemented in accordance with SPDC’s internal procedures. The assessment also checked whetherThe investigation into soil and groundwater environmental clean-up operations accorded withcontamination focused on the areas impacted by Nigerian national standards.oilfield operations in Ogoniland. These includedthe locations of all oil spills reported by SPDC Lastly, the assessment considered the impact ofor the local community, all oilfield infrastructure illegal operations. In addition to the licensed(whether still in operation or abandoned) and operators undertaking legitimate oil production,all the land area contaminated by floating oil in transport and refining activities in Ogoniland,creeks. In a number of these locations SPDC a number of groups and individuals carry outhad reportedly initiated or completed clean-up unlicensed, and therefore illegal, oil-relatedoperations. activities which also have serious environmental consequences.Investigations into aquatic pollution were carriedout along the Imo River and the creeks, focusingon surface water quality, sediment contamination 3.3 Structure of the study teamand contamination of fish. Since not all the fishconsumed by Ogoni communities come from local A major scientific study of this complexity, withwater bodies, fish sold at local markets were also extensive geographical and thematic scope, canexamined to establish whether contaminated food only be executed using a large team equippedis reaching Ogoniland from external sources. with diverse skills and expertise. The task required scientific teams to work side by side with supportSurveys of vegetation contaminants were also teams composed of community, logistics andmade of vegetation around spill sites and mangroves security personnel. This demanded a high levelimpacted by oil pollution. of coordination and oversight. At the peak of its work, the Ogoniland assessment team numberedThe impact of pollutants on public health over 100 people, with daily convoys into the fieldwas assessed in three ways: by taking air quality requiring up to 15 vehicles. The study team wasmeasurements in communities around spill sites, organized as follows. 53
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDProject managementThe study team was managed by an internationalUNEP project coordinator in Port Harcourt. Theproject was overseen by UNEP’s Post-Conflict andDisaster Management Branch, based in Geneva,in conjunction with the UNEP headquarters inNairobi.Technical teamsFieldwork was conducted simultaneously bytechnical teams covering four thematic areas:contaminated land, water, vegetation and publichealth. Each team was composed of internationalexperts supported by national experts, employed byUNEP as project staff, and by senior academics andtechnicians primarily from Rivers State Universityof Science and Technology (RSUST).As the assessment of contaminated land wasthe most critical part of the assessment, theContaminated Land Team contained the largestnumber of international experts, primarilycontaminated site assessment professionals with Early morning field trip by members of theextensive experience. aquatic team, Khana LGA, August 2010 © GODWIN OMOIGUI, THIS DAYProfessor Roselyn Konya, Bishop Matthew Kukah, Chairman of the Presidential ImplementationCommittee, and HM King Gininwa attending a project briefing at State House, Abuja, August 201054
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESThe Aquatic Team dealt with issues of surface RSUST to establish the level of local environmentalwater, sediments and aquatic biota, and was led knowledge and to understand local concerns andby experts from the World Maritime University perceptions of issues related to the oil sector. Inin Sweden. addition, a team of Nigerian nationals, led by an international laboratory expert, ensured that allThe Vegetation Team was led by an international samples of water, soil, sediments and fish tissueexpert from Bern University in Switzerland and collected by the thematic teams reached the correctthe team’s studies covered agriculture, forestry and laboratories for analysis within the shortest possiblemangroves, all important aspects of the interface time, together with appropriate documentationbetween environment and livelihoods. and in compliance with relevant international protocols.The Public Health Team looked primarily at airquality as well as public health impacts associated Support teamswith environmental conditions in Ogoniland.The team was led by an international expert from A series of support teams provided specific services toBoston University, USA and supported by an the thematic teams, helping to ensure timely completionexpert team of Nigerian nationals. of project assignments. These teams covered:Cross-cutting teams Well-drilling. Assessment of contaminated water, soil and sediment, as well as understandingWorking in parallel with the thematic teams were a the shallow geology of the Niger Delta, requirednumber of smaller teams whose role was to provide a large number of groundwater monitoringdata on cross-cutting issues. These involved remote wells to be drilled throughout the study area.sensing (analysis of satellite imagery and provision Following an international bidding exercise,of aerial photography); legal and institutional this work was assigned to Fugro Internationalreviews; and community surveys undertaken by (Nigeria).Members of the UNEP project team with Rivers State University of Science and Technologyacademic staff and students 55
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDUNEP team preparing to depart into the field Topographical surveys. In order to obtain out in an area with serious challenges to public information about groundwater flow directions health, road safety and personal security, and quantitative information on subsurface with personnel arriving and departing via the contamination, an accurate topographic international airport in nearby Port Harcourt. survey of selected locations throughout the A project office comprising over 30 national study area was necessary. This work was staff was established to assist the dozens of undertaken by Universal Survey Services experts, national and international, who (Nigeria). were constantly moving around the study area, visiting multiple sites each day. A team Data management. The survey generated large of safety and logistics experts was on hand quantities of scientific data in various formats, throughout the fieldwork period. At the peak varying from completed site checklists in paper of the project, up to 15 vehicles were in use for format to video records of aerial surveys. A fieldwork, airport pick-ups and office runs. team of national and international data experts ensured that all data collected in the field were Security. UN Department of Safety and backed up as quickly as possible on a local Security (UNDSS) guidelines were followed server at Port Harcourt, with a secondary back- throughout the project and operational safety up in Geneva. The Data Management Team was provided by the Nigerian Government. also verified the completeness of information Through the cooperation of the Governor provided on field data sheets and cross checked of Rivers State, a contingent of 16 Nigerian the accuracy of the sample identification codes Mobile Police (MOPOL) officers provided with corresponding GPS data. security cover during all field deployments, as well as travel to and from the project Health, safety and logistics. The work office, accommodation and the international undertaken by the study teams was carried airport.56
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES Land access. Facilitating access to specific sites where UNEP specialists needed to collect data was a major exercise and one that needed to be handled delicately as ownership was not always clear, with attendant potential for local conflict. Multiple negotiations were often required, involving traditional rulers, local youth organizations and individual landowners or occupiers. A Land Access Team, provided by RSUST, working in conjunction with UNEP’s Communications Team, managed these challenging issues, explaining precisely what the UNEP team would be undertaking, where and at what times. Community liaison and communication. The environmental assessment of Ogoniland was constantly in the public eye, such that there was continual demand for information. A dedicated Communications Team consisted of UNEP communications staff and community liaison staff who were familiar with the local languages. The team was responsible forA project team safety and logistics expert and explaining the purpose of the project and theMOPOL superintendent discussing field trip plans specific activities to be carried out and forUNEP distributed project information as part of its ongoing outreach to local communities 57
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND ensuring that entry of the scientific teams into with local institutions. In addition to helping any community had the necessary approval to secure the success of the project, this would from all sections of the local population (LGAs, enhance local capacity building and resource- traditional rulers, youth, police, etc.). The team sharing opportunities. The participation of provided regular project updates, for example local institutions was achieved in several ways. online at the project’s dedicated website and via Firstly, 30 national staff were engaged in various a monthly newsletter, and also sought ongoing capacities (technical, logistics, security, liaison, community input. administrative) as part of the UNEP project team in Port Harcourt. Secondly, UNEP formed Administration. The Administrative Team partnerships with the four LGA secretariats, included staff from UNEP and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and was based in three geographical locations: a project office in Port Harcourt, with support teams in Abuja and Geneva, which between them covered critical functions such as finance, travel, human resources and procurement. Presidential Implementation Committee (PIC). The PIC met periodically, typically once every quarter, and was briefed by the project coordinator on progress, challenges and impediments, and future work programmes.Use of local resources The UNEP-Rivers State University of Science andIt was decided during the project planning Technology Project Collaboration Coordinator,phase that the team of international experts Mrs Iyenemi Ibimina Kakulu, and the university’sleading the assessment would work closely Vice Chancellor, Professor Barineme Beke FakaeUNEP experts during a reconnaissance exercise at Ebubu Ejama, Tai LGA, in January 201058
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESthrough their respective chairmen, which enabled appropriate accreditation, in order to ensure qualityaccess to local community leaders and gave UNEP and independence. Two separate laboratoriesa presence in each LGA, where its community were contracted: Al Control Geochem, Unitedliaison staff were allocated office space. Thirdly, Kingdom, an ISO/IEC 17025:2005-accreditedeach of the international thematic teams was laboratory; and ALS Scandinavia AG, Sweden, apaired with local experts and academics provided specialist in fish tissue analysis. NORM analysesby RSUST, giving the teams ready access to local were done at the Spiez Laboratory in Switzerland,knowledge and sites, while RSUST students were which is also accredited to ISO 17025.brought in as technical assistants both in the fieldand in the project office. In addition, support 3.4 Assessment methodologiesteams were recruited locally wherever possible toundertake specific assessments. The wide scope of the environmental assessment of Ogoniland, both geographically and thematically,Laboratories is evident from Chapter 2 and sections 3.1 to 3.3 above. To overcome the challenges this presentedAnother decision taken early in the planning stage and to achieve satisfactory outcomes for allwas that all analyses of samples collected during the parties involved, it was clear from the outset thatstudy would be carried out, wherever technically a combination of standard approaches as well asfeasible, by international laboratories with innovative methodologies would be needed.A training session at Port Harcourt, October 2009, was part of UNEP’s commitment to capacity building 59
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDMore than 4,000 people attended a town hall meeting at Bori, Khana LGA, in November 2009, at whichthe UNEP assessment project was launched. Pictured (from left to right) at the event are Senior SpecialAdviser to the President, Magnus Kpakol; MOSOP President, Ledum Mitee; HM King Gininwa; and HMKing Barnabas B. Paago Bagia, Gbenemene GokanaThe different disciplines conducted investigations aquatic life, vegetation, and public health),within their individual specialisms, backed by backed by cross-cutting issues teams andwell-resourced support teams. While everything support teams, were deployed for the monthspossible was done to enable interdisciplinary of intensive field and office work.learning in terms of both approach and substance,the various strands had to work in parallel to 3. Analysis and writing of the report. Thecomplete the assessment within a reasonable time teams were brought together to assess progressframe. Completion of the project was achieved in and review the initial analytical results. Basedthree phases: on this review, a final round of data gathering and analyses was carried out, after which the1. Scouting/reconnaissance exercises. A team thematic experts prepared the individual of experts conducted a series of scouting contributions that form the basis for this missions to the region, with two aims: (i) synthesis report. to become familiar with the area and (ii) to obtain community acceptance for the Phases 1 and 2 are described below in more detail. assessment. This was followed by structured Phase 3 results are presented in chapters 4 and 5. reconnaissance of the areas where information about an oilfield facility or an oil spill incident UNEP opened its project office in Port Harcourt already existed. The information documented in October 2009. In November 2009, senior from questionnaires and photographs allowed UNEP staff met with key stakeholders in town prioritization of a number of sites for follow- hall meetings in the four local government areas up assessment. (Eleme, Gokana, Khana and Tai). The final sampling visit was completed in January 2011.2. Intensive fieldwork. Individual thematic The period of most intensive fieldwork ran from teams (covering soil and groundwater, water/ April 2010 to December 2010.60
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESCommunity engagementIn terms of stakeholder interest, the environmental LGA Number of Number of peopleassessment of Ogoniland was unlike any other meetings held presentenvironmental assessment previously undertaken Eleme 52 3,323by UNEP. In particular, it warranted community Gokana 87 5,552involvement and updates at all stages. This almostcontinuous engagement gave UNEP access to vital Khana 55 9,107local knowledge concerning areas contaminated Tai 70 5,289by oil, as well as consent for access to land andwaterways for study purposes.Public meetings staged throughout Ogonilandduring each phase of the study helped to buildunderstanding and acceptance of the project and tofoster community participation. Between November2009 and January 2011, more than 23,000 peopleparticipated in 264 formal community meetings(Table 6). Initially town hall meetings were held ineach LGA with over 15,000 people participating.These meetings were then followed up with a seriesof sensitization sessions, or secondary meetings, invillages and community centres.To provide an additional forum for open discussionof issues surrounding the study, UNEP formed aCommunity Consultation Committee composedof representatives from a wide cross section ofproject stakeholders. The committee met on UNEP project team members meeting withaverage once every two months. community women leaders, November 2009UNEP community liaison assistant addressing a public meeting, Gokana LGA, April 2010 61
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDEight schools in Ogoniland took part in the Scoping exercises were done in two stages: anpilot phase of a schools programme called ‘Green aerial survey of the study area (Map 5), includingFrontiers’, initiated by UNEP to raise environmental SPDC facilities, followed by ground visits toawareness among Ogoni children and youth and look at oilfield infrastructure, contaminated sitesto inspire practical action for conserving their and pollution-affected creeks. Where available,environment. anecdotal information about environmental damage in Ogoniland informed this work.Great care had to be exercised in areas where internalfrictions surrounding the UNEP assessment were Once the scouting survey was completed, a desktopapt to arise. In many cases this meant that even review was conducted of all available informationthough permission was granted initially, the on oilfield infrastructure in Ogoniland andproject team had to withdraw as tempers became known associated environmental contamination.frayed. UNEP’s community liaison staff were key Information on oil spills came from the SPDCintermediaries between the project team, local oil spill database, air and ground observationsleaders and interest groups, helping to broker by the UNEP team, information provided byagreement. While team members were never at local communities and information gatheredserious risk of physical attack, UNEP had to remain from satellite images. All accessible oil wellsvigilant that a project aimed at peace-building and pipelines were visited, even if there were noshould not engender division or violence. reported spills at these locations. With all the initial information assimilated, a3.5 Phase 1: Scouting exercises, three-step reconnaissance phase began: desktop reviews and reconnaissance 1. Town hall meetings with community leaders (kings, chiefs, representatives of communityThe initial part of the project involved visits to the elders, women and youth leaders) at whichstudy area by experts with a view to understanding UNEP community liaison staff gave backgroundthe key issues, geographical scope and practical information about the study, the tasks to beconstraints – fundamental to designing the performed and the approach to be taken byappropriate methodology for the assessment. the UNEP assessment teamsA UNEP technical team examines infrastructure during the reconnaissance phase62
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES ° OBIO/AKPOR EGBERU ! OYIGBO KOROMA TAI ! OGAN-AMA ! YAA ELEME ! BRALI PORT OKRIKA-ISLAND ! ! GBAM HARCOURT ! OKRIKA ! AMAKIRIBOKO GOKANA BORI OGU/BOLO ! LEWE ! BOMU ! KIBANI ! OWOKIRI ! BONNY BONNY RIVER ANDONI RIVER EBERI/ OMUMA LegendIKWERRE ETCHE LGA boundaries Helicopter flight - November 2010 OBIO/AKPOR Oil Facilities OYIGBO ` y Wells Kilometres ELEME TAI " ) Manifold # * FlowStation 0 5 10 OKRIKA KHANA OGU/BOLO Pipeline Projection: UTM 32N GOKANA Datum: WGS84 NNPC CrudeDEGEMA NNPC Refined product BONNY ANDONI T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. UNEP 2011 63
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND2. Verification of landowners by land access During the course of the second visit, locations for staff who negotiated access to property and groundwater monitoring wells were delineated and scheduled site visits the landowners involved were consulted about the planned works.3. Location of reported spill points identified by an advance party comprised of national Inevitably, additional information gathered from on- UNEP technical staff site observations and field testing made it necessary to modify the work programmes at different sites,With the preparatory work done, UNEP technical making site access and site characterization anteams started to visit sites, equipped with standard iterative process. To achieve this, the teams onquestionnaires, GPS and GPS cameras. The basic site were required to have expertise in analyticalinformation collected about each site included chemistry, geology, geochemistry, hydrogeologyGPS coordinates, photographs, proximity to and risk analysis.oilfield facilities, proximity to communities, anyother significant environmental features, and Assessment of soil contaminationmatters of importance from a logistics and securitypoint of view. In all, 202 locations were visited and The objective of site-specific sampling was to122 km of pipeline rights of way were surveyed. identify: (i) whether a site was contaminated and (ii) if so, whether the contamination had migrated3.6 Phase 2: Intensive fieldwork laterally and vertically. In many instances the pollution was found to have spilled over into nearbyOnce the data from the reconnaissance phase creeks and, in the case of older spills, vegetationhad been consolidated, a prioritized list of sites had started growing again. Thus it was not alwaysfor follow-up assessment was drawn up, based on easy to identify the geographical extent of a spill.the observed contamination, potential receptors Given the security conditions, access restrictionsand size of the impacted area. A total of 69 and the large number of sites to be investigated, thecontaminated land sites were shortlisted for further UNEP team could only stay at a specific site for ainvestigation (Map 6 and see also section 4.4). Of limited duration, often just one day. Consequently,these 67 sites were situated close to oil industry an adaptive sampling strategy was the norm forfacilities. Subsequent site visits to these locations the sites assessed, the priority being to identify thewere carried out after further negotiations with, and epicentres of pollution and the depth of penetration.permissions from, the appropriate communities. A combination of deep sampling and surface sampling points soil contamination spill transects64
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA h " ! h " AKPAJO hh "" ! h " " h h " h " OYIGBO h " EBUBU ABAM h h " " ! hh h h h "" " " " h " h" "h ! h " h " TAI TEKA-SOGHO h " ! h " JOR-SOGHO SIME ELEME ! h " ! h " hhh """ PORTHARCOURT h " h " KOROKORO hh ""h "h " KPITE ! OGU h " ! ! h " hh "" h "KPORGHOR DEKEN ! GIO h " h " ! OPUOKO ! h " LUEGBO-BEERI ! WAKAMA "h h " ! OKRIKA ! BOLO h " GOKANA ! BORI KHANA ! BERA OGU/BOLO h "h " hh "" h "h " ! h " hh "" hh "" h " ! ZAAKPON BERE h h " " ! KAPNOR h " ! KIBANI ! h " h " h " h h " " h h " " h " IMO RIVER KAA BONNY ! OLOMA ! BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries ( r ¬ " h UNEP- investigated NNPC Crude contaminated land sites ABIA AKWA NNPC Refined product IBOM r ¬ SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 65
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDsampling was undertaken. The approach was alwaysto identify the primary direction of spill migrationand carry out cross-sectional transects covering thepolluted area (Figure 3). However, this strategy oftenhad to be modified to adapt to the prevailing groundsituation and time constraints. Where the groundsituation had unusual features, such as a waste pitor swamp, samples (often of sediment) were takenfrom the most accessible part of the area.Using hand augers operated by two trained assistants,soil samples were taken out of the boreholes andspread onto a polythene sheet. The soil was segregatedtypically into intervals of 60 cm and samples werecollected from each interval for analysis. In the firstround of investigations, sampling was only carriedout to a depth of 2 metres. However, after reviewof early results, the sampling depth was increasedto 5 metres. Where monitoring wells were drilled,deeper soil samples were also collected.In situations where extensive surface contami-nation was observed, composite soil samples werecollected for analysis (Figure 4). In this situation,special grass plot sampling equipment was usedto gather samples from a number of points. Theindividual samples were then amalgamated to forma composite sample. These samples are also referredto as grass plot samples.All soil samples were analysed for hydrocarbonsand non-hydrocarbon parameters. A soil sample is spread onto a polythene sheet Assessment of groundwater contamination On larger and more heavily contaminated sites, groundwater monitoring wells were installed by Fugro. This process was based on an adaptive sampling strategy. The primary intent was to verify if there was indeed groundwater contamination and if yes identify the farthest reach of the pollutant plume (Figure 5). The wells drilled by a contractor using hand-augering systems followed standard monitoring well construction practices. Wellheads were secured with lockable covers. Subsequent to the initial phase of the assessment, 25 per cent of the wells were found to have been vandalized, making samples from such wells unreliable for inclusion in the final report. A decision was therefore taken during the later phase66
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESof the analyses to take water samples from boreholes To widen the monitoring of groundwater, aon the same day that the boreholes were drilled. number of existing community wells (bothNo wells were installed in these locations. dug wells and boreholes) were included in the sampling. To ensure proper quality control, each groundwater well was given a unique identifier, marked inside the well cover. During sampling, the well identifiers were noted in the sampling protocol. An interface meter was used to measure the depth to groundwater in the wells and to verify the presence and thickness of any floating hydrocarbon product in the groundwater. Groundwater sampling was carried out with bailers. Conductivity, pH, temperature and oxygen were all documented, along with the depth to the groundwater table. When a floating free product was observed, the groundwater underneath the floating layer was not collected. The equipment used to measure water levels was properly decontaminated between samples to avoid cross-contamination. For the same reason, disposable bailers were used for each well. Where used, the foot valve pump and hose were left securely inside the well for return visits. All water samples were analysed for a series of hydrocarbon and non-hydrocarbon pollutants. As with the soil and sediment samples collected,Fugro staff installing a groundwater monitoring each sample was assigned a unique identificationwell, April 2010 number and the exact location was registered. 67
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDAssessment of naturally occurring be noticed even at very low concentrations.radioactive materials Hydrocarbon layers were photographed using a GPS camera, which automatically fixed theAn assessment of naturally occurring radioactive coordinates.materials (NORM) in the study area was carriedout by an expert accredited under ISO/IEC In terms of field monitoring, a portable multi-17025:2005 between late November and mid parameter analyser was used to collect informationDecember 2010. Wellheads, pumping stations on pH, temperature and conductivity, and theand fresh and old spill sites were sampled. coordinates of sampling locations were logged.Dose-rate measurements, including surfacecontamination measurements, were performed at Surface water samplingeach location. In addition, freshly spilled crude oil In order to determine contamination of surfaceat one site, old crude oil from a closed pumping water samples were taken from estuaries, rivers,station at another site and crude oil-contaminated streams and ponds (Map 7). Samples were collectedsoil from an old spill site were also collected as near to the middle of the water body as could be[33]. For analytical purposes, a zero-reference reached using wading gear and a 2-metre extendablesoil sample (an old termite mound) was taken metal grab. Samples were collected against the flowfrom a clearly uncontaminated location in the of the water, where any flow was discernible. Theassessment area. sampling bottles were submerged to a depth of 10-20 cm under the surface and rinsed once withAssessment of surface water and the water at that depth before the water sample wassediment contamination taken. If a boat was used, samples were collected at 50 cm depth by a Limnos water collector.The study area was bounded on two sides by openwater bodies, the Imo River on one side and anetwork of creeks on the other. The creeks wrappedaround the study area but also extended via smallside arms into inland areas. Neither the river northe creeks were confined to the study area; the Imooriginating beyond Ogoniland and flowing past itbefore reaching the sea and the creeks extendingthrough and interconnecting with numerous otherbranches in other areas of Ogoniland.Surface water contamination was assessed by: (i)aerial observations over the creeks, (ii) observationof water bodies from boats, (iii) observationof water bodies from land, (iv) water qualitymonitoring and (v) monitoring of sediments. Thefirst three approaches were primarily based on visualobservations and documented by photography.Water quality monitoring was conducted using acombination of field kits and laboratory analysis ofsamples taken. The monitoring of sediments wasdone entirely by laboratory analysis of samples.In terms of visual observation, the focus wason identifying the presence of hydrocarbons onthe surface of water bodies and, where possible,identifying the possible source of the contamination.Hydrocarbons can form very thin layers in water UNEP technical assistant collecting surfacebodies and are therefore distinct enough to water sample68
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES ° OBIO ! OBIGBO AKPOR AYAMA h " ! h " AKPAJO hh "" OYIGBO ! h " h " )( ) "! " !h (" ! ( h " h " EBUBU ABAM h h " " ! "" " ) " )" hh h " ! h" "hh "h h " ! ! ( ( h " TEKA-SOGHO " h h " TAI ! ! ( ! ( h " SIME JOR-SOGHO ELEME " )h" h "" ! ¡ [ ! ! ) " ! ! ( ( ( )h "h KOROKORO " h "! ( h(hh "!"" ) "h " h " h " OGU h ( " ! ) " KPITE ! ( ! ! ! h " hh "" h " KPORGHOR DEKEN )) "" h " ! ( ! ¡ [ ) " ! ! h " OPUOKO OKRIKA ) " ! ( ! ( GIO h " ( ! ) " ) " ! ( ! ( ) " ! LUEGBO-BEERI h " ! ( ! WAKAMA h " ! h " GOKANA ) " ! ( BORI KHANA )) "" BOLO ! ! ( ! OGU/BOLO ! hh "" h " )" "h h " ¡ [ BERA ( ) " ! ( )¡ ) ) "[ " " h " hh "" ! ( ! ! (! ( h " ! ) ( " ! ( ! ( h h " " ZAAKPON h " ! ) "! ( BERE h h " " ! ) " ! ( ))" ""h ! ) ( " ! ( ! ( KIBANI ! KAPNOR ! ) " ! ( )) "" h " h " " ) h " )" "h ! ( ! ( ! ( IMO RIVER ! ( BONNY ! ( h " h h " " )) "" )) "" h " !! ¡ [ ) " ! ( ) " KAA ) " ! ( ! ( (( ¡ [ ! (! ! ( ) ") " ( ¡ [ ) " ! ( ! ( ! ¡ [ ) " ! ( ) " ) " ) " ! ( ! ( ¡ [ ¡ [ ! ( ! ( OLOMA ¡¡ [[ ! ! ( ! BONNY RIVER ) " ! ( ( ANDONI [ ¡ ANDONI RIVERA OPOBO/ NKORO Legend Aquatic team investigations IMO Umuahiar DELTA¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries ! ( ( Water samples r ¬ ABIA NNPC Crude ) " Sediment samples AKWA NNPC Refined product ¡ [ Fish samples IBOM h " UNEP-investigated contaminated land sites r ¬ SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! ( BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 69
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDSediment sampling Assessment of fish contaminationAreas of calm water where sedimentation occurs In order to determine the concentrations ofmay accumulate pollutants which are later pollutants in the tissues of fish and shellfish,released through re-suspension due to tidal samples were collected for analysis of petroleummixing or flooding after heavy rains or as a hydrocarbons, including PAHs.result of biological processes. Suitable areas forthe collection of accumulated pollutants in the Fish and shellfish were collected from 28 sitesbottom sediment are therefore sites which consist (Map 7), usually where sampling of water andof fine organogenic mud, sand and silt. sediment were carried out. In most cases, fish were purchased directly from local fishermenSediment samples were collected at 37 locations either in the process of fishing or transporting fish(Map 7). At each location, five sub-samples were they had just caught. A number of fish samplescollected in a plastic bucket and mixed before from unknown origins were also purchased frombeing transferred to a glass sampling jar. In most local markets; although these samples could notcases a piston sampler with a diameter of 6 cm be used to determine pollution at specific sites,was used for sampling. Only the top 10 cm of their value lay in demonstrating health risks tothe sediment core were used for the samples and the community where fish were found to becare was taken to avoid flushing away the surface contaminated.floc on top of the more solid sediment. In somelocations deeper cores were taken to examine For analytical purposes, tissue samples fromwhether pollution had penetrated further down. four to six different fish were pooled to form aThe samples were stored frozen until the analyses composite sample. Fish tissues were obtained bywere performed. cutting the dorsal muscle from the fish with aSediment samples were collected at 37 locations70
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES Assessment of impact of oil contaminants on vegetation Two types of impact can be distinguished: (i) impacts related to physical disturbance, such as the cutting of seismic lines and seismographic survey, development of access infrastructure (roads, dredging of channels in wetlands) and drilling; and (ii) impacts related to oil spills and fires and disposal of other hazardous materials. From a livelihood point of view, no relevant statistical data were available about the average productivity of agricultural crops and forest trees in Ogoniland and changes over time. © J. PALSSON Aerial and field observations were conducted as part of the scouting surveys. Photographic records were gathered along with reference coordinates soA snapper (genus Lutjanus) is dissected for analysis. as to cross-reference them with observations fromFish and shellfish were collected from 28 sites other study segments.scalpel and transferring it to a glass jar. In mostcases about 50 g of tissue was collected for eachsample. All the samples were frozen and shippedto the laboratory following standard quality-control procedures.Each sample was analysed for metals, extractablehydrocarbons, PAHs and pesticides, followinginternationally recognized analytical methods.The samples were homogenized prior to analysis.Preparation of samples (homogenization,extraction and clean-up) was carried out ina laboratory room used exclusively for bioticsamples. Specially pre-cleaned glassware was usedfor organic analyses, and specially pre-cleanedTeflon beakers were used for analysis of metalsamples. All preparation and analysis were carriedout in a clean room environment.PAHs and chlorinated pesticides were analysedby a process of chemical extraction, evaporationand measurement through gas chromatographequiped with a mass spectroscopy (GC-MS).Petroleum hydrocarbons were also solventextracted and analysed using a similar process,through a gas chromatograph-flame ionizationdetector (GC-FID). Samples were analysed formetals using high-resolution inductively coupledplasma mass spectroscopy (ICP-MS). Swampland vegetation (Bara, Gokana LGA) 71
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDAssessment of damage to mangroves data from field sampling and a comparison made between the highly exposed communities andThe scouting missions revealed extensive damage reference communities to identify any healthto the mangroves in the Ogoni study area and effects that might be related to oil spills.it was clear that the geographical extent was sowide that a combination of approaches would Preparatory workbe needed to assess the overall condition ofmangroves. This involved: Before gathering medical records or field samples, the Public Health Team participated in focus group aerial observations (from a helicopter) of the discussions and sensitization meetings and listened extent of mangrove damage, documented by to community concerns about the effects of oil. This aerial photography to show the progression information helped guide the selection of sampling of damage from the edge of the water to locations and types of sample to be collected. landward areas In addition, and prior to the collection of medical analyses of high-resolution satellite images to records, J.W. Igbara, working in cooperation with delineate impacted areas and to estimate the RSUST, undertook a review of public health total mangrove area impacted by oil issues associated with oil production in Ogoniland observations made from both land and water [34]. This study, which included visits to health to understand the specific nature of the institutions and interviews with health-care impacts, documented by photography workers, took into account community complaints about fish kills, impacts on agricultural land, sampling of soil on the substrata of mangrove odours, drinking water tasting of kerosene, and a vegetation, with a view to correlating it with wide range of health effects from mild coughing the stresses on the vegetation and eye irritation to death. Many people expressed the view that environmental contamination from sampling of hydrocarbons attached to the the oil industry had caused increased morbidity mangrove vegetation and mortality. Oral interviews with health-care workers and other key informants provided insightsAssessment of impacts on air into health-care provision and the prevalence ofpollution and public health disease and oil pollution issues in the study area. Some medical personnel believed that industrialThe Public Health Team designed an exposure and activities were the cause of increased frequencyhealth questionnaire to ascertain how exposure to of respiratory disorders (e.g. broncho- and lobaroil occurs and whether it is associated with adverse pneumonia, upper respiratory tract infections,health effects. Students and faculty members asthma), skin conditions and gastroenteritis. Somefrom RSUST administered the questionnaire also suggested that environmental contaminationsystematically in 10 highly exposed communities might be adversely affecting immune systems, thusacross the four LGAs. Reference communities increasing susceptibility to infectious disease.(i.e. one with no documented oil spills orother significant known sources of petroleum Interviews and questionnairehydrocarbons) were also selected (Okwale inKhana, Koroma in Tai and Intels camp in The Public Health Team supplemented Igbara’sEleme). work through interviews with pharmacists, a traditional birth attendant and health-careMedical records from four primary health-care professionals at facilities serving areas in each ofcentres (one in each LGA) serving the same highly the four LGAs where larger oil spills had occurredexposed communities and from one primary (Table 7). Interviewees were asked about the typehealth-care centre serving the reference community and number of staff, dates of operation, medicalin each LGA were also collected and analysed. record-keeping protocols, the number of patients seen daily, the number of beds, type of treatmentInformation from the questionnaire survey and provided and catchment area. There appearedreview of medical records was combined with to be five categories of primary health care:72
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESWomen leaders at Kpean community, Khana LGA, raising their health concernsduring a sensitization meetinggovernment clinics, private clinics, pharmacists, some of the communities in which air samplingtraditional healers and the church. These are not and medical record collection were implemented.mutually exclusive and the available options and The questions asked – based on meetings withchoices made are changing with time. Choices are community members, community leaders andbased, among other factors, on cost, accessibility, health-care providers – covered the respondent’savailability of services when needed (e.g. night/day), demographic characteristics; pathways of exposureeffectiveness and tradition/cultural preferences. to petroleum from oil spills and other sources ofPrenatal (called antenatal care in Ogoniland) care petroleum hydrocarbons (e.g. cooking practices,seems to be provided increasingly by government- smoking, local food consumption, drinkingfunded health clinics. At least some government water source); and health information (e.g.clinics provide free prenatal care and care for young health history and current symptoms, source andchildren. However, it was not clear what fraction level of satisfaction with health-care services).of the population chooses to give birth at health Respondents were not asked directly about oilcentres rather than at home and/or with traditional contamination.birth attendants. The questionnaire was reviewed by two individualsResponses from community members and medical with detailed knowledge of the community beingprofessionals helped guide selection of both the studied, and pilot-tested by several Ogonilandcommunities in which an exposure and health residents working in UNEP’s project office.survey was conducted by questionnaire, and the RSUST students, who had been given advancehealth-care facilities where medical records were training to ensure accuracy and consistency,collected. conducted the questionnaire survey orally, with the assistance of an interpreter where needed. HeadsThe questionnaire was used in those communities of household were interviewed systematically untilexpected to have incurred some of the highest approximately 20-25 per cent of the dwellings inexposure to petroleum from oil spills, and included each community had been covered. 73
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Drinking Medical Health LGA Community Village VOCs PM2.5 & PM10 Rainwater water records questionnaires Agbi-Ogale x x Agbonchia Okpee x x x Akpajo Nsisioken x x x Aleto x x Alode Nkeleoken x x Eleme Ebubu Ejamah x x x x x Ebubu Obolo x x Ebubu Oyaa-Ejamah x Ebubu Egbalor x Obajioken-Ogale x x Ekporo x Biara/Botem x x Gio x x Korokoro Aabue x x x x x Koroma x x Tai Kpite LGA Headquarters x x x Kpite Muu Boogbara x x x Sime Omunwannwan x Sime Aabue Norkpo 1 x x K. Dere x x x B. Dere x Bera x Bodo Debon x x x Gokana Bodo Sugi-Sivibirigbara x x Bodo Kegburuzo Junction x Bodo-West x x Kpor Orboo-Ooodukor x x Kpor Kpalaade x x Kwawa Wiikuekakoo x x x Kaa x Kpean WIIYAKARAGU x x x Khana Kpean Wiiborsi x x x x Uewaagu x x Okwale x x x x RSUST-Nkpolu- x x Port Harcourt Oroworukwo Intels Camp xField sampling and analysis samples of soil, sediment, surface water, drinking water, groundwater, fish and agricultural cropsAll field sampling took place between July and collected by other UNEP scientists from the sameDecember 2010 in those communities where or nearby communities, shed light on humanbigger oil spills had occurred. Sampling locations exposure to oil-related contamination. Togetherwere selected according to information gathered these samples allowed for assessment of cumulativefrom community members, community leaders and exposure across different media including soil andhealth-care providers, as well as from environmental drinking water.monitoring data and historical information thatindicated the location and extent of oil spills. The Rainwater and drinking watersampling programme is summarized in Table 7. Sampling of drinking water was warranted givenThe Public Health Team’s environmental that UNEP detected petroleum hydrocarbonsmonitoring programme included collection of in surface water and groundwater samples. Indrinking water and rainwater used for domestic response, the Public Health (PH) Team collectedpurposes and measurements of outdoor air from drinking water samples in addition to thoseboth highly exposed communities and reference already collected by the Contaminated Landcommunities. These samples, combined with (CL) Team.74
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESSome community members expressed concern from a catchment system and/or aerial depositionabout rainwater quality, reporting that they onto uncovered rainwater storage vessels.historically used rainwater for drinking and otherpurposes, but that it is now contaminated and can Drinking water and rainwater sampling locationsno longer be used for this purpose. In response included places where the community hadto this concern, UNEP collected 35 rainwater complained about rainwater quality; this appliedsamples from rainwater collection vessels and three also to the reference community. Drinking waterrainwater samples directly from the atmosphere. and rainwater from collection vessels were sampled and analysed using the same methods employedRainwater from collection vessels represents actual by the Contaminated Land Team. Rainwaterexposure because people are using it for washing, was sampled from the atmosphere using stainlessbathing, cleaning food and drinking. These steel containers placed on a stool 1 metre offsamples reflect any contamination that originates of the ground in an open area without trees orin the rainwater, from the rainwater catchment other elevated vegetation or structures. The timesystem, and, if the collected rainwater is uncovered between onset of direct collection of rainwater andfor any period of time, from contamination that storage of the rainwater in a freezer ranged fromdeposits from the air (e.g. bird droppings). Most a matter of minutes to six hours, depending onoften, the catchment system collected rainwater how long it took to collect a sample of sufficientfrom a roof into a metal or plastic collection quantity and transport it to the freezer.vessel. Samples of rainwater collected directlyfrom the atmosphere reflect contamination found Rainwater and drinking water samples were notin rainwater in the absence of any contribution filtered before laboratory analysis.UNEP expert consulting health-care centre staff 75
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDOutdoor air communities. Nearly all the samples were collected during the dry season, which lasts from March toOil spills can influence air quality. Ubong (2010) November. However, two sampling locations werereviewed air quality data available for Ogoniland, re-sampled in December to allow for comparisonsome of which reflected conditions near oil spills, between wet season and dry season air quality.including some measurements of total VOCs [35].UNEP’s air sampling programme expanded on On each sampling day, air samples were collectedthis work by collecting air samples from spill areas from the oil spill area and from the communitywhere the highest concentrations of petroleum area nearest the oil spill. Samples from the oilhydrocarbons were expected in air, based on results spill location provided a ‘fingerprint’ of VOCfrom UNEP’s investigation of soil and surface release from the worst oil spills in each LGA.water. Priority was given to locations where UNEP Samples taken from the closest communitydetected and/or observed the highest concentrations location provided measures of exposure to theseof oil contamination on or near the ground surface worst spills, combined with background exposureor sheens on surface water. In addition, air samples from other sources of petroleum hydrocarbons,were analysed for individual VOCs rather than total such as vehicle exhausts. Air samples were alsoVOCs because the toxicity of total VOCs depends collected from the reference community inon the composition of the mixture. Okwale; these samples represented conditions in Ogoniland with limited land development andThe outdoor air sampling programme is no known petroleum-related operations, bothsummarized in Table 7 and Map 8. It included of which can influence the concentration of22 VOC samples from oil spill areas, 20 VOC petroleum hydrocarbons in air. Air samples weresamples from nearby communities, 2 VOC also collected from two urban reference locationssamples from reference locations and 23 respirable just outside Ogoniland, at the Intels Camp andparticulate samples from oil spill areas and nearby RSUST Campus in Port Harcourt.A Thermo Scientific Particulate Monitor DataRAM 4 is used to measure air quality, Bodo West76
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! * # OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA "" hh * # ! AKPAJO * hh # "" Reference community ! * #* # h " * # h " h " * " # h OYIGBO v ®* # h " "# h* * #EBUBU h " * # ABAM * # ! h * " # hh h h h "" " " " * # hh "" ! * # h " h " * # TEKA-SOGHO h "* # * # TAI h " ! * # SIME JOR-SOGHO ELEME ! h* "# h " ! PORT h " * # * # KOROKORO """ hhh hh "" * # h " h " h " v ® KPITE !HARCOURT OGU h " ! ! *h #" * # hh "" KPORGHOR# h " * DEKEN GIO * # !* # h " h* "# ! OPUOKO ! h " LUEGBO-BEERI ! WAKAMA "h h " ! ! h " GOKANA BORI KHANA v OKRIKA ®# BOLO ! OGU/BOLO ! * # "* h" BERA h "h " "h h " h" ! h " h h* "# hh "" ZAAKPON h " ! BERE h h " " * # ! * # KAPNOR h " v ® KIBANI * # * # ! * # ! * # h " h "* # * * # # h h " " h "* # h h " " h " IMO RIVER KAA BONNY ! OLOMA ! BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ Owerri ! ( ! ( LGA boundaries * # Air monitoring station r ¬ ABIA NNPC Crude v ® Public Health Center investigated AKWA NNPC Refined product h " UNEP investigated contaminated land sites r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 77
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDSamples were collected and analysed for selected client records. Some general hospitals and primaryVOCs using USEPA Method TO-17, which health-care centres held records for as long as 10involves sampling with thermal desorption tubes years, some even longer, while others only hadand laboratory analysis with gas chromatography/ records for the previous six months. Medical recordsmass spectroscopy. Thermal desorption sampling available at primary health-care centres and generaltubes were manufactured by Markes International hospitals generally included the patient’s name, age,(Markes Part No: CI-AAXX-5017 Stainless Steel sex, community and LGA names, complaint orTD sampling tube (industrial standard 3 1/2 “x1/4”; diagnosis, and treatment. Some included additionalprepacked with Carbopack [Mesh 60/80]) and information such as body weight and occupation.conditioned and capped with brass long-term caps. Diagnoses are not confirmed by testing at primaryAir was drawn through the thermal desorption tube health-care centres.at a flow rate of approximately 50 ml per minuteusing an SKC AirCheck 2000 pump. The sampling All records reviewed by the Public Health Teamtrain was affixed to ladders to elevate sample tubes to were maintained in handwritten log books andabout 1.5 metres (i.e. approximate breathing height). summarized on forms provided by the RiversThe pump calibration was checked in the field at the State Ministry of Health. The primary health-carebeginning and end of each sampling period. A dual centres were selected for collection of medicaltube sampler was set up at each sampling location, records because, unlike general hospitals, they servewith one tube sampled for approximately one hour localized areas that could be matched to oil spilland the other tube sampled for approximately locations. In addition, a general hospital that servedfour hours from mid-morning to mid-afternoon. the reference community could not be identified.Security constraints prevented longer deploymentof air samplers, though desired laboratory detection The team selected one primary health-care centrelimits were still achieved. One field blank tube was from each LGA that serves communities wherecollected on each sampling day. large oil spills had occurred and a fifth primary health-care centre in the reference community.Air concentrations of respirable particulate Medical records for the previous year (i.e. 1matter (PM2.5 μm and PM10 μm) were measured September 2009 to 31 August 2010) were collectedat each community sample location on each air using a portable scanner so that data analysis couldsampling day using a DataRam4 (Thermo Electron be performed using original records. As notedCorporation, DR-4000 Model). PM2.5 and PM10 earlier, some medical facilities maintain records forconcentrations were each measured for a ½-hour as long as 10 years, but many do not. Therefore, theto 1-hour period with the instrument elevated to one-year period was selected because most primaryan approximate breathing height of 1.5 metres. health-care centres keep records for this length of time, allowing for comparison among them.Particulate sampling locations largely overlappedVOC air sampling locations and included areaswith varying amounts of nearby vehicle traffic, wasteburning and garri (cassava) processing, all of whichcan contribute to particulate concentrations in air.In all locations the DataRam4 was placed in open,outdoor areas. The ground surface varied widelyamong sites, from sand to dense vegetation.Medical recordsThe Public Health Team considered that medicalrecords could be helpful in identifying unusualsymptoms or disease patterns associated with livingnear oil spills. Many community members reportedthat they sought health care from pharmacistsand traditional healers, but the team did not find UNEP expert examining medical recordsevidence that these providers maintained patient or in a handwritten log book78
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES Remote sensing The components of the environmental assessment Primary Number of medical of Ogoniland in which remote sensing (Table 9) health-care centre records analysed played a key role were: land-use study, for example Agbonchia 1,196 tracking changes in land cover; vegetation surveys, K’Dere 1,581 including impacts of oil on mangroves; assessing Kpite 543 pollution of creeks and other water bodies; and Kwawa 1,421 research into the artisanal refining of crude oil in Okwale 268 primitive stills (see ‘Artisanal refining’, page 102). Unlike all other components of UNEP’s study forAfter agreeing to participate and indicating that which it was only possible to obtain a snapshot atrecords were available for the previous year, the the time of the assessment, for those issues studiedprimary health-care centre in Agbonchia, Eleme through remote sensing analyses of changes overcould not provide records prior to February time were achievable. However, since satellites did2010, despite repeated attempts to obtain earlier not exist when oil industry operations commencedrecords from current and retired staff. There in Ogoniland in the 1950s, a baseline comparisonwas insufficient time within the study schedule dating back to this period was not possible.to select and collect records from an alternativecentre. While these missing data are important In addition, satellite images were used intensivelyfrom a temporal perspective, their exclusion did as a primary source of information for dailynot adversely affect the number of records relative operations in the field. These included:to other primary care centres. The total number navigation, from scouting exercises throughof records analysed for each primary health- to full site assessmentscare centre is given in Table 8, with differences land-cover mappingattributable to the relative number of recordsavailable from each centre. change-detection analysis – images acquired on different dates were available for mostOriginal medical records were transcribed onto a of the sites, showing changes over time insingle database (in Microsoft Excel) and a subset vegetation, new houses, fire, etc.of records from each primary health-care centre oil-spill detection – radar images were used towas reviewed to ensure accurate data entry. detect oil spills outside Ogoniland Satellite Spatial resolution Acquisition New acquisition / Primary use Source dates Archive WorldView 2 50 cm 02/01/2011 New acquisition Detailed mapping; Change detection DigitalGlobe Ikonos 1m 2006-2007 Archive Detailed mapping; Change detection GeoEye SPOT 5 2.5 m 17/01/2007 Archive Detailed mapping; Change detection SPOT IMAGE Aster 15 m 19/01/2007 Archive Land-cover mapping ERSDAC 03/01/2007 Landsat TM 30 m 08/01/2003 Archive Land-cover mapping GLOVIS 17/12/2000 19/12/1986 Landsat 80 m 15/05/1976 Archive Land-cover mapping GLOVIS MSS SPOT 4-5 1 km 1998-2010 Archive NDVI trend VITO VEGETATION 10-day synthesis ENVISAT 90 m 26/09/2010 Archive Oil spill detection ESA SRTM 90 m 2000 Archive Digital elevation model CGIAR Helicopter 10 cm November 2011 New acquisition On site verification 79
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND carried out, for instance on shifts in land cover, changes to land-cover classification and areas of Software Use land impacted by contaminated sites. In addition, ESRI ArcGIS Cartography; geocoding; digitization groundwater modelling was carried out to generate ESRI SpatialAnalyst Spatial analysis contaminant-plume contours and to depict ErMapper Satellite image compression groundwater flow direction. ErMapper Satellite image compression GoogleEarth / Data visualization; real time tracking Land cover classification methodology GoogleEarth PRO Erdas Ortho-rectification; image mosaics The Landsat archive contains a number of images Idrisi Image classification of Ogoniland dating back as far as 1976. The best Surfer Contour modelling early image, from 1986, was used to develop a Strater Borehole log production classification for that year. The best readily available MapWindow Garmin waypoints and tracks recent imagery came from Advanced Spaceborne management software Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) images from 2007. Initially, it was thought that 2007 was sufficiently recent to provide a goodGIS/cartography indication of the current status of land cover in Ogoniland. This may have been true for some partsGIS mapping/cartography was used extensively in of the terrestrial area but further research showedthe Ogoniland assessment (Table 10), with more that major changes have taken place since Januarythan 200 maps generated at a scale of 1:5,000. A 2009 in the mangroves adjoining Ogoniland.1:50,000 cartographic atlas was also produced,giving all those working in the field access to the Since no recent images were available, UNEPsame information. The atlas was frequently updated requested that the very high-resolutionas new data arrived from the field. WorldView-2 satellite be programmed for acquisition in the study area. Due to the highSpatial analyses included proximity analysis, which cost of this acquisition, only a portion of therecorded the distances between contaminated sites entire Ogoniland region could be captured. Theand community wells and settlements, as well as image was taken on 7 January 2011 to provide ancontaminant dispersion. Statistical analyses were example of the current status in a selected area.Example of an area classified as an industrial zone80
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESThe classification method adopted for the project The output of this stage was a first estimate ofwas a two-stage hybrid procedure which used both land cover in Ogoniland.spectral measurement from satellite images andstratification of the area into broad zones; the latter Different land-cover types generally have differentwas used to make sure that within each zone the visual characteristics – but only to a certain extent.assignment of classes was appropriate. For example, Some land-cover types may appear spectrally similar;pixels classified as mangrove should only occur in for example areas of freshwater swamp forest maythe mangrove zone, and pixels classified as urban appear very similar to mangroves but are differentshould only occur in the urban zone. land-cover classes. Similarly, some urban areas may appear very similar to bare soil in rural areas. ToFirst, the satellite-derived spectral information in ensure consistency of the land cover classification, athe visible, near infrared and short-wave infrared set of zones or strata were defined and each processedregions of the spectrum were clustered by an to ensure internal consistency according to a set ofunsupervised algorithm into spectrally similar simple rules. The following zones were defined:clusters based solely on their spectral properties Terrestrial zone(colours). How these clusters related to land-coverclasses was not known at this stage. It was assumed Mangrove zonethat different land-cover types in the landscape Freshwater riparian vegetation zonecould be distinguished by their spectral properties. Forest zone (non-riparian)This is generally true of a range of landscape features Coastal zone– water, urban areas, vegetation and bare soil all Urban / industrial zonehave rather different visual characteristics. Rural village zone Bare areas (areas with no vegetation)To fully capture the range of diversity in theimages, it was found that approximately 60 A series of GIS procedures was developed toclusters had to be identified. The next step was apply a set of generic principles in each zone;to assign land-cover class names to each of the for example, mangroves can only occur in thespectral clusters. This was done by a manual mangrove zone. If mangrove pixels were found inprocess of image interpretation, referring to any other zones, they were reassigned to an appropriateancillary information that was available, including land-cover class in the relevant zone.ground photographs and GoogleEarth images. Sample management The field component of the UNEP study was a massive undertaking. Over 4,500 samples were collected and submitted to two international laboratories, both accredited to meet the international standard (ISO 17025) for testing and calibration laboratories. Thus, a robust sample management programme was an absolute necessity, the main objective being to safeguard the integrity and quality of the samples sent to the laboratories for analysis – essential if the laboratories were to generate a quality result. Samples collected in the field were kept in a cool box and were brought to the project office where they were stored in a freezer while chain of custody and customs forms were completed. Within 24 hours of collecting the samples, they were sent to the appropriate laboratories, again in cool boxes with sufficient iceEach sample was assigned a unique identification packs. Figure 6 depicts the sample managementnumber and the exact location was registered flowchart used in this project. 81
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Pre sampling Calibration, sample containers, trip blanks, freezing elements, and planning cooling boxes Sample Documentation, labeling, preservation collection Sample In situ analysis and logging transportation QA / QC Sample condition, breakage, categorization of samples inspection (soil/water/tissue/air/microbiology) Data and record Database preparation, parameter selection, analysis request, chain management of custody Preparation for Documentation, packaging sample bottles in cooling box with freezing transport & packaging elements, bubble wrap Shipment to laboratory Labeling, proper sealing, signing shipment documentsQuality control samples sample preservation, packing, shipping and storageA majority of the errors in environmental analysiscan be attributed to improper sampling, cross Field blank – an analyte-free sample thatcontamination and improper sample storage and is collected in a sample bottle and sent to apreservation. Quality control samples are a way laboratory for final analysisto measure precision, accuracy, representativeness,comparability and completeness. Essentially, two Field blanks and trip blanks were collected fortypes of quality control samples were considered only a subset of the water samples. When sampleduring the scientific investigation period of the concentrations were close to concentrationsOgoniland project, namely: detected in blanks, they were qualified accordingly. Detected concentrations less than two times the Trip blank – a sample that originates from field blank were negated (qualifier ‘U’) and analyte-free water taken from the laboratory detected concentrations between two and five to the sampling site and returned unopened times the field blank were qualified as estimated to the laboratory with the VOC samples. with potential high bias (qualifier ‘J+’). This One trip blank accompanies each cooling approach is consistent with the United States box containing samples submitted for VOC Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) analysis. The trip blanks are used to assess the National Functional Guidelines for Organics and quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) of Inorganics.82
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESField measurements alpha-beta-gamma probe 6150 AD-17 (0.1- 10000 cps) surface contamination probe.The various on-site measurements were performedwith standard, calibrated equipment which Analytical measurementsdiffered from one parameter to another. Though contaminated site assessment is an estab-A Hatch Multimeter was used for monitoring lished industry, there is still no consistency in settingbasic parameters such as pH, conductivity and standards on measurement of hydrocarbons.temperature. The main issue is that crude oil, or petroleumTo monitor fine particulate matter in outdoor hydrocarbon, is a mix of thousands of individualair, with different fractions such as the inhalable hydrocarbons. Individually identifying each of themfraction PM 10, respirable fraction PM 2.5 and and setting standards presents a very complex –ultrafine fraction PM1 (particles measuring less and expensive – challenge. Simply lumping all thethan 1 micron), a portable Thermo Scientific hydrocarbons together to create a single standardParticulate Monitor DataRAM 4 (DR-4000) would prevent differentiation between a hydrocarbonwas used. The same instrument was also used to that is very toxic and another which is not.measure air temperature and humidity. The Nigerian legislation, EGASPIN, is based onTo determine naturally occurring radioactive a parameter referred to as mineral oil, though nomaterials, an Automess 6150 AD 6/H calibrated specific analytical methods or carbon range aredose-rate meter was used along with an Automess specified. The Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Criteria Working Group (TPHCWG) in the United States developed a methodological approach that takes into account the carbon chain length, solubility and toxicological effects of hydrocarbons in the mixture. TPHCWG divided petroleum hydrocarbons into two main groups: aromatic and aliphatic compounds. As leaching factors and volatilization factors span many orders of magnitude, the TPHCWG classified aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons into a number of fractions with leaching factors and volatilization factors that lie in the same order of magnitude. With these so-called transport fractions, their transport and fate in the environmental compartments can be modelled more appropriately than with a single TPH value. For this reason, UNEP used the TPHCWG method of carbon banding (Table 11). Since relevant Nigerian legislation is based on a single parameter, for the purpose of this report the broadest possible range of hydrocarbons analysed (C5-C44 for soil and C5-C35 for water) was used for comparison with mineral oil and reported as TPH. Where appropriate, individual parameters (e.g. benzene) or groups (e.g. BTEX or TPH) areOver 4,500 samples were collected for analysis reported and explained. 83
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND map the road network and accessibility for the purposes of planning daily transportation to and Hydrocarbon banding from sampling sites. Samples Aliphatics Aromatics Using GPS cameras (Caplio 500SE GPS embedded >C5-C6 >EC6-EC7 >C6-C8 >EC7-EC8 model), more than 10,000 geo-referenced >C8-C10 >EC8-EC10 photographs were taken in Ogoniland during >C10-C12 >EC10-EC12 the course of the study. The photographs were Soil used extensively during the scouting exercise, >C12-C16 >EC12-EC16 >C16-C21 >EC16-EC21 reconnaissance, boat trips and helicopter flights, >C21-C35 >EC21-EC35 allowing for geo-traceability of the information >C35-C44 >EC35-EC44 photographed in the field. The photographs were >C5-C6 >EC6-EC7 also used as ground truthing for the land-cover >C6-C8 >EC7-EC8 mapping work, which served to improve the >C8-C10 >EC8-EC10 accuracy of the land-cover classification. Water >C10-C12 >EC10-EC12 >C12-C16 >EC12-EC16 GPS-embedded, rugged laptop computers were >C16-C21 >EC16-EC21 used in the field to verify any spill reported by >C21-C35 >EC21-EC35 SPDC, record new spills reported by Ogoni communities or spills discovered by the UNEP team during fieldwork.Laboratory analyses of NORMGamma spectrometry for the determination ofnatural radioactivity in collected samples wasperformed in Switzerland at the Spiez Laboratory’sISO/EN 17025-accredited testing laboratory forthe determination of radionuclide concentration(accreditation number STS 028). Gammaspectrometry was performed with high-purityGermanium (HPGe) CANBERRA detectors withhigh relative efficiencies.The same testing laboratory was used to carry outinductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry(ICP-MS) of the collected samples. This processis able to determine the existence of medium-and long-living radioisotopes, as well as non-radioactive elements. For this analysis, a FinniganElement XR high-resolution (sector field) massspectrometer was used.The procedures applied and measurements takenfor both analyses fulfilled the international norm.Field data collection forremote sensingA large number of GPS (Model GPS 60 TM)instruments were used to record geographiccoordinates of pollution on the ground and thepoints from which samples were collected by the UNEP technical assistant using a GSP instrumentdifferent thematic teams. GPS was also used to during a reconnaissance exercise, January 201084
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESReview of institutional issues pollutant against which a judgement is made as to whether or not it is acceptable. Criteria need toNational legislation and institutions be differentiated from standards and guidelines.UNEP’s review attempted to cover the whole Standards are specifications set by a statutory body,range of institutions dealing with legislation often national, and are therefore legally enforceable.related to environmental management and oil Guidelines on any given issue, on the otherand gas production in Nigeria, touching also on hand, whether made by government, industrycross-cutting issues such as community-company- organizations or international organizations,government interaction, transparency, fiscal issues present ideals that are considered desirable butand law enforcement. The assessment was carried which are not legally enforceable. From a technicalout by a thorough review of available documentation point of view, criteria, guidelines or standards are(published reports, legislation, research papers, etc.). almost always derived from the same scientific basisIn addition, many institutions, both at federal and and could often be the same.state level, were contacted and interviewed, thoughnot all those contacted were available. Community Contamination assessment criteria – a numericalmembers were interviewed to the extent possible value above which a site could be deemed to begiven the challenges of accessibility and security. contaminated – are of importance from several angles. Firstly, the degree to which observed valuesSPDC procedures vary from the assessment criteria is an indication of the degree of contamination, and thereforeThe Shell Petroleum Development Corporation the degree of risk to which the environment ishas a set of documents which form the operational subjected. Secondly, assessment criteria determinebasis for handling oilfield assets and emergencies. the degree of environmental clean-up andA review of these procedures was undertaken restoration required at a site. This in turn dictatesfor the purpose of this assessment, based on the the policy and technological approaches to be used,following documents: both of which have a direct bearing on the cost of SPDC Corporate Oil Spill Response, Clean- the clean-up operations. up and Remediation Manual, SPDC 2005- 00572, April 2005 A chemical substance is considered a pollutant when its concentration is above a harmful threshold. Overview of Process and Standards for Oil Such thresholds can have different connotations in Spill Clean-up and Remediation, SPDC different contexts. A chemical substance could be Document, April 2006 harmful to people directly; it could be harmful to the quality of air or water, which may in turn harmIn addition, three specific advisories issued by people; or it could be harmful to other biota, forShell Global Solutions and which form the basis of example animals, but may or may not harm people.SPDC internal procedures were also reviewed: However, it is fair to say that in most situations Framework for Risk Management of harm is ultimately defined from an anthropocentric Historically Contaminated Land for SPDC perspective. Table 12 shows the comparison of risk- Operations in Niger Delta, OG.02.47028 based screening levels for some of the frequently regulated hydrocarbon pollutants [65]. It can be Framework for Risk Management of seen that the screening levels for the same parameter Historically Contaminated Land for SPDC can vary, and vary substantially, between countries. Operations in the Niger Delta: Mangroves There are scientific and policy reasons, such as a and other Swamp Areas, OG.03.47062 society’s risk tolerance, as to why different countries Remediation Management System, 2010 may have different values for contamination criteria for the same pollutant.3.7 Contamination assessment criteria Though the international community has more than 30 years of experience in different parts ofContamination criteria, in the context of this the world on systematic assessment and clean-upreport, are specifications of concentration of a of oilfield contamination, there is not yet an 85
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Country Parameter Canada China Netherlands Thailand UK Benzene 0.0068 0.2 1 6.5 0.33 Toluene 0.08 26 130 520 610 Ethyl Benzene 0.018 10 50 230 350 Xylenes 2.4 5 25 210 230All values are in mg/kg clarification, it has been done. Until such revisions or clarifications are made, however, the existing legislation will have to be complied with. Standards for soil The Nigerian legislation dealing with soil and water contamination from oil operations is handled by the Federal Government’s Department of Petroleum Resources. The Environmental Guidelines and Standards for the Petroleum Industries in Nigeria (EGASPIN), issued in 1992, set out the standards which are currently the minimum operating requirement for the oil industry in Nigeria [7]. EGASPIN proposes two possible options for pollution incidents: (i) application of the Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Action Applied at Petroleum Sites, prepared by the American Society for Testing of Materials (E1739-95, reapproved 2010); or (ii) an approach based on ‘interventionSoil caked into a crust of dried crude oil values and target values’. Even though the EGASPIN document itself was reissued in 2002, no further guidance has been produced in the last 20 years, suchinternationally accepted guideline on what level that the approaches suggested in 1992 still form theof hydrocarbons constitutes contamination. It operational basis for the oil industry in Nigeria.is against this background that the Ogonilandassessment team had to review the available EGASPIN defines intervention values as those thatcriteria and make its recommendations. “indicate the quality for which the functionality of the soil for human, animal and plant life are,It must be stated that defining the level of or threatened with being seriously impaired.environmental clean-up is ultimately a policy Concentrations in excess of the interventiondecision for the Federal Government of Nigeria, and values correspond to serious contamination”.wherever national legislation exists with regard to a Target values are defined as those which “indicateparticular issue, it is recommend that the legislation the soil quality required for sustainability orbe followed, except in cases where there are sound expressed in terms of remedial policy, the soilscientific reasons to adopt a more stringent line quality required for the full restoration of theto protect public health and welfare. In addition, soil’s functionality for human, animal and plantwhen it is felt appropriate to point out instances life. The target values therefore indicate the soilwhere particular legislation may need revision or quality levels ultimately aimed for”.86
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESIn reviewing site contamination, UNEP has Standards for drinking waterused the EGASPIN standards for soil (Table 13), WHO guidelines on drinking waterwhich demonstrate the presence of higher levelsof hydrocarbons and reveal continuing legislative The World Health Organization (WHO) hasnon-compliance. However, this report makes developed and issued guidelines on drinking waterrecommendations for review of the EGASPIN quality for over 60 years. These guidelines – based(see Chapter 5). It is therefore expected that on best available information on the risks associatedbefore the final clean-up is undertaken, a new set with the consumption of water – have become theof standards will be introduced. universal benchmark for setting drinking water standards. The risks associated with drinkingStandards for groundwater water are constantly evaluated by WHO and the guidelines updated accordingly [36].The safety limits for groundwater pollutionare also set out in the EGASPIN as both Nigerian national drinking water standardsintervention and target values. Since some The Nigerian Industrial Standard (NIS) 554:2207Ogoniland communities (those within the study deals with standards for drinking water qualityarea at least) use groundwater for drinking, without nationally [37]. The standard was developed by theany treatment or monitoring, it is important that Ministry of Health, working through a technicalcontamination levels of groundwater are compared committee of key stakeholders. Table 14 provides aagainst the criteria for drinking water quality. comparison of the maximum levels of contaminantsEGASPIN standards for groundwater are also permissible according to Nigeria’s drinking waterpresented in Table 13. standard and the corresponding WHO guideline. Soil/sediment # Groundwater Substance Target value Intervention value Target value Intervention value A. Aromatic compounds (mg/kg dry material) (μg/l) Benzene 0.05 1 0.2 30 Ethyl benzene 0.05 50 0.2 150 Phenol 0.05 40 0.2 2,000 Toluene 0.05 130 0.2 1,000 Xylene 0.05 25 0.2 70 B. Metals Barium 200 625 50 625 E. Other pollutants Mineral oil 50 5,000 50 600# The values given for soil are for 20 % soil organic matter with a forumula given for calibrating for other soil organic matter concentrations Contaminant Nigerian drinking water standard (μg/l) WHO guideline (μg/l) Benzene No standards set 10 Toluene No standards set 700 Ethyl benzene No standards set 300 PAHs 7 No standards set Arsenic 10 10 Barium 700 70 Mercury 1 6 Mineral oil 3 No standard set 87
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 3.8 Limitations, challenges Standard PM2.5 PM10 and constraints Annual mean 10 μg/m3 20 μg/m3 In carrying out a project of this scope, some 24-hour mean 25 μg/m3 n 50 μg/m3 constraints are inevitable. While every effort was made by the UNEP assessment team to limit the impact of these constraints on the scientificAir quality standards integrity of the study, the issues encountered are summarized here so that those who read this reportNo local air quality standards currently exist in may understand the context in which the work wasNigeria. In 2006, the WHO published guidelines undertaken.for respirable particulate matter [38], as shown inTable 15. Scientific constraintsIn the absence of local standards, the WHO There is no baseline information available onguidelines are used as a reference. either the nature of the environment or socio- economic status of the community prior to theThere are certain chemicals which were analysed in the initiation of oil exploration. In fact, useful, recentassessment but for which no internationally recognized and robust information covering Ogoniland isguidelines exist. In such cases, reference to any available also not available. This includes a lack of reliablestandard is provided, primarily to give the observed data about the quantity of oil spilled in the region.values some context. No specific recommendations Consequently the observed situation has to beare made by UNEP on such standards. compared with a presumed baseline condition.Despite many challenges, there was generally a strong spirit of cooperationbetween UNEP and Ogoniland communities88
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIES EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR ! AYAMA AKPAJO ! OYIGBO EBUBU ABAM ! ! TEKA-SOGHO TAI ! SIME JOR-SOGHO PORT ELEME ! ! KOROKORO KPITE F G !HARCOURT FF GG ! OGU ! KPORGHOR DEKEN ! F G ! OPUOKO GIO ! ! LUEGBO-BEERI ! WAKAMA ! GOKANA BORI KHANA OKRIKA BOLO ! F G ! BERA OGU/BOLO F G F G F GF G F G ! ZAAKPON ! BERE ! KIBANI G F ! KAPNOR ! G GG G F FF F F G KAA F G IMO RIVER BONNY ! OLOMA ! BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries ( r ¬ F G Vandalized wells NNPC Crude ABIA AKWA NNPC Refined product r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 89
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDThe Nigerian Navy provided support during some field visits (note the navy vessel in the background)In a number of sectors, the report lacks statistical standards or other international guidelines. Thecoverage. For example, monitoring of drinking findings based on this could be used as a basis forwater was done on an opportunistic basis around initiating public health protection measures on acontaminated sites. There are thousands of drinking preventive basis. This could also be used as a legallywater wells in Ogoniland (and there is no record acceptable basis for site clean up. However, a moreof how many or where). This study did not seek resource efficient approach will be to undertake site-to identify all possible locations of drinking water specific risk assessments followed by consultationswells and then undertake a statistically appropriate between the operator, regulator and community tosampling approach. establish clean-up levels for each site.As the time available at individual sites was Security constraintsalways restricted and the possibility of returningto a site was never known in advance, the study United Nations Department of Safety and Securityfocused on collecting the minimum number of (UNDSS) specifications are contractually bindingsamples needed to form a reasonable picture of the and non-negotiable. In the UNDSS classification,contamination. The study could not, therefore, Port Harcourt is a Phase III duty station, meaning thatinvolve collecting duplicate samples. special security precautions must be observed. This was an aspect that the UNEP team working on theThis assessment compares the measured value of environmental assessment of Ogoniland had to keeppollutants on the ground with established legal in mind at all times, especially when in the field.90
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESWhile the UNEP project team was rarely under (Map 9, page 89) and could no longer be usedany threat and maximum security was provided by for sampling.the local government authorities, there were timeswhen UNDSS advised the UNEP team to refrain Access restrictionsfrom fieldwork. This obviously had an effect onthe pace of on-the-ground surveys. Traditional practices in Ogoniland are such that an elaborate procedure of consultation isOf the 180 groundwater monitoring wells mandatory prior to visiting a specific site. Twodrilled by the project team, 38 were vandalized teams, a Community Liaison Team and a LandThe number of samples taken at each location was influenced by safety and access considerations 91
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDAccess Team, were deployed to facilitate access to Ogoniland that may be contaminated but whichsites of interest. A considerable amount of time UNEP was unable to assess.was invested in this essential activity, but howeverwell the advance planning was carried out, there Information constraintswere repeated occasions when the project teamwas prevented from entering specific sites. In It was the intention of the UNEP team to identifyevery instance the UNEP team complied with the all possible locations in Ogoniland that havewishes of the community, although the underlying been contaminated by oil industry operations.reasons for denial of access often remained UNEP solicited, and received, information fromunclear. A policy was adopted whereby once a all stakeholders, both the Ogoni communityteam had twice been prevented from visiting a and SPDC, regarding such sites. Whenever suchsite, the site was documented as ‘inaccessible’. information was received, reconnaissance visitsAs a consequence, there are still some sites in were arranged, subject to the security constraintsSamples were transported from field locations to laboratories in the shortest possible time92
    • 3 OBJECTIVES, SCOPE & METHODOLOGIESmentioned above. The project team also visited Ill-defined boundariesoilfield infrastructure even when there was nospecific information on contamination. While it was agreed that the geographic scope of the environmental assessment be limited to Ogoniland,One of the observations made by UNEP during there is no clearly agreed official definition of whatthe course of the study was that vegetation had constitutes Ogoniland. Boundaries, even betweencontinued to grow and cover contaminated areas local government areas in Ogoniland, are not welleven though remediation measures had not been defined and always disputed. Consequently, thecarried out. This was partly because some vegetation UNEP study may have captured some informationtypes can vigorously survive hydrocarbon pollution from outside Ogoniland while inadvertently leavingand partly because many vegetation types need out areas that may be perceived by some as part ofonly limited, comparatively clean amounts of Ogoniland. At all times, the project team tried totopsoil to re-establish. Thus, even in cases where err on the side of caution. Whenever there weresevere contamination had penetrated deeply, people living in an area, their opinion on whethersuperficial vegetation cover gave the site a healthy or not the area lay within Ogoniland was takenappearance. Given that the oil industry has been as correct. Greater difficulty was experienced inoperating in Ogoniland for more than 50 years while areas where oil industry operations were apparentcontamination records only go back 25 years, there but there was no community presence, such as atcould easily be other locations where contamination Bodo West.still exists below the surface but is obscured byvegetation. Vertical delineation of contaminationUnfortunately, UNEP received insufficient While the horizontal delineation of contaminationinformation to enable it to undertake comprehensive was challenging (no visible signs on the surface),assessments of oil operations in Ogoniland by vertical delineation was even more difficult givencompanies other than SPDC. This included Port the wide fluctuations in groundwater levels. OnHarcourt Refinery Company and Pipelines and reaching groundwater, any contamination canProducts Marketing Company. Consequently, penetrate to considerable depths. The UNEPonly spills that were apparent on the surface, and/ survey used only shallow augers for groundwateror reported by the Ogoni community in the case analysis, with a maximum sampling depth ofof non-SPDC properties, were assessed by the 5 metres. At a number of locations, chemicalUNEP team. The implication is that there may still analyses revealed that contamination may havebe contaminated areas in Ogoniland about which gone deeper.there is currently no intelligence available to UNEPon which to base further surveys. Time frameSample management constraints The assessment of contaminated sites always calls for decisions on the number of samples to beAs previously described, analysis of all the samples taken at a particular location. In general, this iscollected in Ogoniland was undertaken in primarily driven by the cost of subsequent analysisappropriately accredited laboratories in Europe. of the samples. However, in Ogoniland thereMany of the analytical parameters (e.g. VOCs) was an additional variable to be dealt with: theare sensitive to the temperature at which they amount of time available to the UNEP team toare preserved. While all efforts were taken to work safely at a site, with the added considerationmaintain temperatures at the required levels that a second visit, while highly desirable, mightduring transportation of sample materials, and to not prove feasible. Consequently, the samplingget samples to laboratories in the shortest possible approach had to be tailored to capture the breadth,time, some degree of loss of contaminants is to depth and intensity of contamination from thebe expected in the analytical results. Therefore, lowest feasible number of samples. However,the reported results could be lower than the whenever access was more freely available, theactual concentration in the sample when it was opportunity was always taken to supplementcollected. initial sampling. 93
    • Assessment ofContaminated Soil and Groundwater Soil samples were taken at multiple locations and at multiple depths and investigated for hydrocarbon contamination. Groundwater was studied where it was possible to reach the groundwater table © UNEP
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND habitation. In any well-functioning oil industryAssessment of operation, maintaining rights of way is bothContaminated Soil essential to and indicative of good environmental management.and Groundwater On the whole, maintenance of rights of way in Ogoniland is minimal, arising in part from the4.1 Field observations of the fact that the oilfield has been closed since 1993 current situation on land and access for the operator is somewhat limited. The entire gamut of oil operations in OgonilandThough oil production in Ogoniland has ceased, the took place on soil which is very productive. ThisUNEP assessment team visited accessible oilfields means that, unless regularly maintained, theand oil-related facilities in the region, including land on which oil facilities and rights of way areboth pipeline and facility rights of way as well as located can very quickly become overgrown withdecommissioned and abandoned facilities. vegetation. There are several locations within rights of way where lack of maintenance is evidentRights of way consist of land along pipelines and and of serious concern.around other oilfield infrastructure which are,by law, owned and managed by oil companies to Habitation on or close tofacilitate easy access for routine maintenance as oilfield facilitieswell as emergency response. SPDC practice is forrights of way around facilities to be fenced, while The UNEP team observed that the oilfieldthose along pipelines are kept clear of habitation in Ogoniland is interwoven with the Ogoniand vegetation but not fenced. In most cases community, with many families living closepipelines are buried. Rights of way act as buffer to oilfield facilities. In some cases it is unclearzones between oil facilities and local communities, whether the settlements came before or after theso that any incident, such as an oil spill or fire, oil installations. This is true for both pipelinedoes not impinge directly upon areas of human rights of way and rights of way to facilities.A house constructed on a well pad (Yorla 9, Khana LGA)96
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERA traditional house, made from combustible material, adjacent to a pipeline (Ebubu Obolo, Eleme LGA)In at least one instance, at Yorla 9, the assessment With respect to pipeline rights of way, threeteam came across a family that had built its house concerns arise:within metres of the oil well, on the well pad itself.The family, with very young children, was also Communities living very close to or onusing the land around the well pad, within the oil rights of way are at personal risk fromwell right of way, for farming. This observation pipelines which are operational. While thereis disturbing in many ways. To begin with, from is no obvious day-to-day danger from burieda safety point of view, especially where children pipelines, where there are open well pads theare concerned, it is wholly inappropriate that the potential for oil spillages and associated firefamily home is located so close to the wellhead. An could put vulnerable communities at risk,immediate hazard is that the children may fall and both physically and legallydrown in the (currently unprotected) well pit aroundthe wellhead. Moreover, surrounding the well site As communities along rights of way goare a number of other mud and water pits which, about their daily lives, the possibility thateven if uncontaminated, are also potential hazards some of their activities may inadvertentlyto both children and adults. In addition, the family cause an accident cannot be ruled out.is unprotected from fire, which is not unusual at Drilling of a well for drinking water ordisused oil wells in Ogoniland. digging out a septic tank, for example, can both cause damage to a pipeline which mayIn some locations the project team observed result in a leak, leading to a fire and possiblebuildings very close to rights of way; indeed in explosion, endangering workers as well as theextreme cases the right of way itself had ceased neighbouring communityto exist owing to the construction of farms andhouses along it. An entire village of the Hausa The establishment of a community or individualcommunity, for instance, lies along what appears homes on or close to a right of way defeats theto be a flare pipeline next to a flow station. very object of the right of way and preventsFurthermore, the Hausa houses are made of rapid access to the facility should an accidentreadily combustible materials. needing specialist intervention occur 97
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDChief Vincent Kamanu at part of an SPDC facility overgrown with vegetation (Gio, Tai LGA)That communities have been able to set up houses individuals wishing either to make use of theand farms along pipeline rights of way is a clear site for building or farming, or to tap intoindication of the loss of control on the part of the facility. Consultations with SPDC on thisboth the pipeline operator and the government matter revealed that in a number of situationsregulator. This is a serious safety breach. In where there appeared to be a lack of control,addition, other poor and marginalized families the pipelines were listed as “abandoned” and nomay follow suit and construct their own houses longer operational. However, no informationwithin rights of way of other oilfield facilities. was available on whether these facilities were decommissioned following international bestUnmanaged vegetation practice in terms of site remediation or, literally, abandoned. It is not uncommon in many pipelineThe project team observed overgrown wellheads abandonments for oil to remain in the pipeline.and pipeline rights of way at several sites. In some Until such time that pipelines – and associatedcases, excessive vegetation growth prevented access rights of way – are closed down in a professionalby the UNEP team. manner, they will continue to pose potential risks to the community.While overgrown vegetation does not causean immediate danger to the facilities, there are Facilities not in operationconcerns. Firstly, a small spill around the facility oron the right of way may not be noticed as quickly Some oil facilities that are no longer in operationas it would be in a cleared area. This may, in turn, have never been formally decommissioned andlead to a fire, causing damage to the facility, the abandoned. Left without maintenance andvegetation and the local community. exposed to the elements in a coastal region these facilities are vulnerable to corrosion. In the specificDense vegetation at these sites also indicates context of Ogoniland, where site security is at besta lack of regular attention from the operator. irregular and unauthorized access commonplace,This in turn will encourage encroachment by such facilities are highly prone to damage.98
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERVisits to a number of facilities confirmed this on ‘Well and Field Assets Abandonment Standardsunderstanding. Most alarming was the situation and Strategy’.at Bomu flow station in K-Dere. When the UNEPteam first visited this location, the fences (since In the case of Ogoniland, the situation is ratherfixed) were broken and oil contamination was more complex. Because SPDC departed thevisible within the site. Given that the area around Ogoni oilfield in an abrupt and unplannedthis facility is densely populated, this is a very manner, within a volatile security context, aserious situation from the point of view of both number of resources were left abandoned evencommunity safety and security of the facility. though that was not the intention. Decisions were taken subsequently to abandon other facilities. InConditions such as these at oilfield facilities indicate fact, records show that a number of facilities werea lack of control on the part of the operators. In a abandoned prior to the 1993 close-down.properly maintained facility, a flow station shouldbe secure, with no oil on the ground and minimal While the SPDC database shows a number offugitive emissions. pipelines and assets referenced as “abandoned” or “decommissioned”, the way in which some facilitiesDecommissioned and abandoned were left does not seem to have adhered to SPDC’sfacilities own standards. UNEP’s reconnaissance routinely came across oilfield resources which had evidentlyIn any oilfield operation some assets are routinely been abandoned in an uncontrolled fashion.decommissioned when they no longer serve a This varied from pipelines left open and lying inproductive purpose, or are no longer economically trenches (possibly deserted midway through pipe-viable. Typically, such assets are first operationally laying operations), to oil facilities left standing butabandoned by decoupling them from the without subsequent maintenance. The bottom linemain infrastructure, mothballed (left without is that the current state of the abandoned facilitiesmaintenance) and at an appropriate time properly of oil field structure in Ogoniland do not meetdecommissioned. SPDC has internal guidelines with international best practices.A view of the Bomu flow station (K-Dere, Gokana LGA) 99
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND massive fire was raging at the Yorla 13 oil well and apparently continued burning for over a month. Such fires cause damage to the vegetation immediately around the well site and can produce partly burned hydrocarbons that may be carried for considerable distances before falling on farmland or housing. No blowouts were reported during the main field period of UNEP’s assessment in 2009 and 2010. The control and maintenance of oilfield infrastructure in Ogoniland is clearly inadequate. Industry best practice and SPDC’s own documented procedures have not been applied and as a result, local communities are vulnerable to the dangers posed by unsafe oilfield installations. The oil facilities themselves are vulnerable to accidental or deliberate tampering. Such aAbandoned oil field infrastructure situation can lead to accidents, with potentially(Bodo West, Bonny LGA) disastrous environmental consequences.The abandoned facilities in Ogoniland poseboth environmental and safety risks. From anenvironmental point of view, there is no indicationas to whether the various containers lying around arefull or empty, or what they contain(ed). Corrosionof metallic objects leads to ground contaminationby heavy metals. Attempts by criminal elements torecover objects for sale as scrap may lead to safetyrisks, both on and off oilfield sites, while childrenplaying on these facilities also face health risks.Well blowouts‘Blowout’ is oil industry terminology for a situationin which control of a well is lost during drillingor operation. More frequent during drilling,blowouts lead to the release of hydrocarbons (crudeoil, produced water and associated gas) into theenvironment. Often, the mixture will catch fire andburn until such time as the well is brought backunder control – a process which may take weeksor even months if control is to be achieved by thedrilling of a relief well. Although the Ogonilandoilfield has been closed since 1993, formationpressure, corrosion and illegal tapping can causewells to blow out, leading to oil spills and fires.The UNEP team witnessed one such incident in2006 during aerial reconnaissance of Ogoniland. A An oil well on fire (Yorla 13, Khana LGA)100
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERThe cumulative impact of artisanal refining puts significant environmental pressure on Ogoniland4.2 Field observations was either transferred to larger boats for onward concerning illegal shipment or used locally for illegal artisanal refining (see following section). oil-related activities SPDC informed UNEP that by November 2010Illegal tapping of oil wells all the wells had been sealed and capped. Noand pipelines further tapping was observed by the UNEP teamBunkering is an oil industry term for supplying oil during subsequent visits.to a ship for its own use. In Ogoniland (and thewider Niger Delta) this term refers to the illegal Similarly, there are SPDC and NNPC pipelinestapping of oil industry infrastructure with a view through Ogoniland that still carry crude oil.to procuring oil illegally. There are frequent reports of these pipelines being tapped illegally, in some cases leading to spills andA number of defunct SPDC oil wells are located fires. Though UNEP did not directly observe suchin the Ogoniland creeks. However, the wells still incidents on the ground, this does not mean thatcontain oil and are self-flowing, such that by such incidents did not take place during UNEP’soperating the well valves, crude oil (along with fieldwork period. As there are no externally visiblegas and water) can be produced. During one visit signs while pipelines are being tapped for oilthe assessment team observed a group of people (unlike the highly visible artisanal refining – seetapping into these wells and transferring oil to next section) and access to sites always had tosmall boats. This happened in broad daylight, be negotiated days in advance, only with precisewithout any apparent hesitation, even in the intelligence and community support would it bepresence of the UNEP team. The oil collected possible to observe live operations. 101
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDArtisanal refining tech refineries in Biafra to make up for the loss of refining capacity during the course of the conflict.The process of artisanal refining typically involves The same low-tech methods of refining continue inprimitive illegal stills – often metal pipes and drums the Niger Delta to the present day and hundreds ofwelded together – in which crude oil is boiled artisanal refineries are to be found along the creeks.and the resultant fumes are collected, cooled and Their presence is obvious, even from a distance,condensed in tanks to be used locally for lighting, marked by dark plumes of smoke rising from theenergy or transport. The distilleries are heated on fires. The practice represents a huge environmental,open fires fed by crude oil that is tipped into pits health and safety problem.in the ground. As part of the oil burns away, someseeps into the ground. A typical artisanal refinery Owing to security constraints, UNEP could onlymay comprise just one operating still and the entire observe live refining operations from the air. Oncerefinery may be no more than 100 square metres in refining operations are complete, those taking partarea. Others, however, are much bigger, containing usually leave their tools on site, presumably with themultiple stills operating simultaneously. Stills are intention of returning at a later date. It was evidentalways located at the water’s edge, primarily to to the UNEP surveyors that the operation is run onfacilitate the transportation of both the crude oil a very small scale, with minimal investment.and refined products. The crude is usually storedin open containers or open pits, increasing the For reasons that could not be determined, therisk of fire. number of artisanal refineries has proliferated in Ogoniland since January 2009. Satellite imagesArtisanal refining of crude oil has a tradition of the region taken in January 2009 and again inreaching back to the Biafran War, when the Biafran January 2011 show the increase in this activityGovernment advocated the development of low- (Map 10).Aerial view of artisanal refining site (Bodo West, Bonny LGA)102
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER ° ETCHEOBIO/AKPOR OYIGBO ELEME TAIOKRIKA KHANA OGU/BOLO GOKANADEGEMA BONNY ANDONI OPOBO/ NKORO Forest Artisanal refineries Satellite : WorldView-2 Meters Acquisition date : 26/01/2009 Acquisition date : 02/01/2011 ©GoogleEarth © DigitalGlobe 0 100 200 Aerial Photograph Acquisition date : 29 nov 2010 ©MazenSaggar 103
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDAerial view of a typical artisanal refining site in operation (Bodo West, Bonny LGA)UNEP is fully aware that unemployment and the spread of pollution beyond the refinery areaabsence of new job opportunities in the region may – any crude left behind after the refiningdrive some of the local community members to take process can be picked up by higher tides andup this occupation. There is a high risk of self-harm transported over a wider areafrom artisanal refining – a large number of accidents, contamination of water in the creeks andfires and explosions on refining sites claim dozens coastal and mangrove vegetation, as well asof lives every year, quite apart from the longer-term soil exposed to layers of oil at low tidehealth effects of ingestion, absorption and inhalation ofhydrocarbons. Given the circumstances under which air pollution – those involved in the artisanalthese refineries operate (regularity of the practice; refining process are at high risk of exposuredozens of workers to be transported in and out, to extreme levels of hydrocarbons, which canaccommodated and fed; huge smoke plumes above have both acute and chronic impacts, whilethe distilleries all day indicating the locations even the smoke blowing from the area can adverselyfrom a distance, etc.), it is hard to understand why no affect entire communitiesaction is taken by the local and regional authorities,police, army or navy to stop the practice. Although the impacts of each illegal refinery are small, the cumulative effect risks an environmentalWhile the footprint of individual artisanal catastrophe, the costs of which would far outweighrefining operations is localized, the cumulative the short-term economic benefits derived. Unlessimpact exerts a significant environmental stress artisanal refining of crude oil is brought to aon Ogoniland. The main problems are: swift end through effective regulatory action, in conjunction with developmental and educational clearance of coastal vegetation when setting initiatives, it has the capacity to cause further up an illegal artisanal refinery, leaving land serious damage to the ecosystem and livelihoods vulnerable to erosion of the coastal communities in Ogoniland and beyond. contamination of soil and groundwater in the immediate vicinity The fact that these operations are ongoing and proliferating in full view of the enforcement damage to surrounding vegetation from fire agencies is indicative, at best, of a lack of effective and smoke preventive measures and, at worst, of collusion.104
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER4.3 Geological observations 1.5 metres above sea level, while the northernmost point lies 20.6 metres above sea level.The geological profile of Ogoniland, including thedepth and quality of groundwater, is a key factor when Three observations are evident from this profile: (i)assessing contaminated sites. Soil type and grain-size the shallow geology of Ogoniland is highly variabledistribution are crucial to the mobility of crude oil with wide variations over short distances; (ii) thein soils and to the groundwater conditions that shallow formations range from gravelly sand todetermine the spread of contamination plumes. clay and everything in between; and (iii) there is no continuous clay layer across Ogoniland. ThisSoil information itself is not surprising. No uniform layering can be assumed for Delta sediments, asFor soil sampling, UNEP drilled some 780 boreholes erosion and deposition from the rivers’ side armsto depths of up to 5 metres, along with a further cause vertical and lateral discontinuities that provide180 boreholes down to a maximum of 14 metres pathways for the migration of liquid hydrocarbonsfor groundwater monitoring. In addition, UNEP and contaminated groundwater. The diversity ofhad access to one deeper borehole of 50 metres, soil types and the extent of sedimentary layers ondrilled by a local contractor. Based on the data from drilling sites showed little lateral correlation.approximately 960 boreholes, the soil properties inOgoniland can be described reasonably well. GroundwaterFigure 7 presents a number of logs of soil sectioned Of the 180 groundwater monitoring wells drilledfrom north to south in Ogoniland. The southernmost by UNEP in Ogoniland, a topographic survey waspoint lies on the edge of the creeks at an elevation of conducted for 142. The shallowest observed water 105
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND106
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERlevel was 0.7 metres below ground level while the to the creeks, the water table lies close to surface.deepest was 14 metres below ground level. In intertidal areas in the mangrove zones, the groundwater level rises and falls with the tidalFigure 7 shows the profile of groundwater on a rhythm, while in the interior there are localizednorth-south cross section, in which the depth of swamps into which groundwater drains. The waterthe water table varies with the prevailing land table fluctuated seasonally in all wells, especiallyprofile. The groundwater situation in Ogoniland those furthest from the coast.is typical of a delta environment. In areas close While investigating groundwater contamination at one site, UNEP came across a family drilling deeper boreholes to obtain clean water. Here, the opportunity was taken to obtain a deeper geological profile of the area (Figure 8). The geological profile indicated that there is indeed only one aquifer, which is being tapped by both shallow wells and deeper boreholes. As impermeable layers of clay are highly localized in Ogoniland, interconnectivity with underlying aquifers could not be excluded any of the sites investigated. While no general flow direction was detected of groundwater in Ogoniland, the flow was typicallyUNEP technical assistant and Rivers State university directed towards the nearest creek or swampstudents collecting groundwater samples (Figure 9). 107
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND4.4 Contamination Two further sites were investigated in detail: an assessments artisanal refinery site and a ‘fly-tipping’ site (i.e. where waste of unknown origin was being disposedSoil and groundwater contamination of within Ogoniland).As discussed in Chapter 3, the study investigated The locations of the sites investigated are presented69 different sites for contamination of soil and, in Map 11. All sites were investigated for hydro-where possible, groundwater. Samples of soil were carbon contamination in soil, while groundwatertaken at multiple locations within each site, and was investigated where it was possible to reach theat each sampling location within a site, samples groundwater table.were taken at multiple depths. Groundwatersamples were taken either from dedicated wells In the following section, findings from representativedrilled for that purpose or from boreholes made sites in each of the above categories are presentedto take soil samples. as case studies. The studies serve to illustrate the prevailing environmental situation in Ogoniland.The sites investigated fall into the following groups: For each of the sites, site-specific observations, SPDC pipeline rights of way results and conclusions are given, along with site-specific recommendations. Information on SPDC legacy sites (e.g. abandoned facilities) all other sites is then presented in tabular form. Suspended SPDC facilities (e.g. wells, Taken together, this information provides an flow stations and manifolds never formally overview of the nature and extent of hydrocarbon abandoned) contamination in Ogoniland. NNPC crude oil pipelines NNPC product lines To accompany this summary report, individual reports for 67 of the sites investigated have beenTable 16 provides a summary of the sites prepared. Each report contains site-specificinvestigated, categorized into the above groupings. information on soil profiles, soil and groundwaterAt a number of locations within Ogoniland, contamination, proximity to community and depthNNPC pipelines and SPDC pipelines share rights of penetration of hydrocarbon contamination,of way. In such instances these were classified as concluding with site-specific recommendations.SPDC pipelines, though it was not evident if the Together, the reports amount to more than 1,000spill investigated originated from an SPDC or pages. They will be submitted to both SPDC andNNPC crude pipeline. the Government of Nigeria and will be available online to interested stakeholders. The supporting database, complete with the analytical data, will also be made publicly available. The recommendations given in this report are Site classification Number meant to achieve immediate risk reduction. SPDC pipeline rights of way 34 However, prior to initiating comprehensive SDPC legacy sites 6 clean-up, consultation with the regulators, risk Suspended SPDC facilities 22 assessments and community consultations need NNPC crude oil pipelines 2 to be undertaken during the next phase of the NNPC product line 3 project.108
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA " hh " ! AKPAJO h "h " ! h " h " h "" h OYIGBO hh " " EBUBU h h " " ABAM h"hhh "h""" h " ! h " h " ! h " TEKA-SOGHO h " SIME h " TAI JOR-SOGHO ! ELEME h hh " "" ! " KOROKORO h h " ! PORTHARCOURT h " OGU hh h h "" " " h " h "KPITE ! ! h " KPORGHOR " DEKEN ! h h " h " ! h h " " ! OPUOKO GIO ! WAKAMA "h " ! LUEGBO-BEERI h GOKANA ! OKRIKA BOLO h " BERA ! ! BORI KHANA h h " " hh ""h " ! OGU/BOLO h h " " h h " " ! hh "" h " ZAAKPON BERE hh "" ! ! KAPNOR h " KIBANI ! ! h " h " h " h hh " ""h " KAA h " IMO RIVER BONNY ! OLOMA ! BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries UNEP investigated contaminated land sites ( r ¬ h " Soil and Water Samples taken NNPC Crude ABIA NNPC Refined product h " Soil Samples taken AKWA r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 109
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDCase study 1 SPDC pipeline right of way – 001-001 Ejama-Ebubu, Eleme LGASite description.Land use. Manihot esculentaSpill and remediation history.Community guide at Ejama-Ebubu, Eleme LGA110
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER UNEP site code qc_001-001 Site name Ejama-Ebubu LGA Eleme Site description SPDC pipeline right of way Total Investigated Area (m2) 169,712 Number of soil samples 92 Number of groundwater samples 15 Number of drinking water samples 2 Number of surface water samples 1 Deepest investigation (m) 6.00 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 49,800 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 36 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 6.00 Number of wells where free-phase hydrocarbon was observed 1 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) 485,000 Number of water measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 8 Presence of hydrocarbons in drinking water No Number of soil measurements below 1 metre 62 Number of soil measurements below 1 metre greater than EGASPIN intervention value 23 Total volume of soil above intervention value (m3) 105,302 Total volume of soil above target value (m3) 236,077Visual observations on site.Sample analysis.Conclusions. 111
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND in situSite-specific recommendations:112
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER ELEME OYIGBO ° TAI KHANA OGU/ BOLO GOKANA BONNY ANDONI EBUBU-003 28 " RU M UE 6 KP ) " E 2057 ) " TO 550 ) " BO MU 2092 " ) TR UN 31900 K 20200 LIN 8947 2 ) " " ) " ) 17782 6 " ) E 97 ) " ) " 19333 10500 37625 13800) " ) " " 9245 2833 1090 1550 ) ) ) " 14113 " 11858 ) " 4590 ) " 5319 ) " 13540 ) " 415 ) " 3 ) " 2 ) " 128 ) " 983 8305 23 ) " ) " ) " 1102 ) " 25508 387 ) " ) "Oil Facilities Metres Contamination contours (mg/kg) SPDC Right of way (ROW) > 5 000 0 125 250 W Wells 50 - 5 000 < 50 Projection: WGS 84 ) " Manifold UTM Zone 32 N*# FlowStation Soil samples ) " Soil samplesPipeline ) " Grassplot centroid NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product Grassplot sampling area Investigated areaT SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Groundwater flow direction UNEP 2011 113
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDUNEP site LGA Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Hydrocarbons Number of water Number of samplescode of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) in community TPH measurements with TPH samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) wells >EGASPIN >EGASPIN below 1 mqc_013-002 Tai 48 10 5 9,200 7 5 1760000 5 6qc_012-001 Eleme 132 10 5 36,900 17 5 133000 5 14qc_009-006 Tai 62 2 5 12,300 4 3 162000 1 3qc_009-003 Tai 1 1 8.5 645 53.1 yesqc_005-009 Tai 68 5 6.5 2,930 26900 yes 2qc_003-005 Obio/Akpor 13 1 5 629 9540 1qc_002-002 Eleme 43 4 3.8 4,220 16500 4qc_019-045 Bonny 11 3 3.4 1,400 277000 1qc_019-044 Gokana 30 4 5 9,990 1 2 109000 3 1qc_019-020 Gokana 70 7 5 52,200 18 5 29600 yes 7 13qc_019-002 Gokana 27 5 5 34,500 10 4 32000 2 7qc_019-001 Gokana 18 8 2.5 10,400 1 2.5 116000 6 1qc_010-009 Tai 9 1 2 5,620 1 1.2 1qc_010-004 Tai 38 8 5 36,200 4 4 543 2qc_009-010 Tai 274 4 5 34,100 63 5 1140000 3 48qc_005-002 Eleme 42 7 11.8 8,580 11 3.08 2740000 3 9qc_004-004 Eleme 6 1 2.58 3,740qc_003-002 Eleme 23 3 13,400 3 3 91.7 2qc_003-001 Obio/Akpor 77 13 8 3,680 427qc_002-004 Eleme 4 3 2.32 126 11600 1qc_002-003 Eleme 7 2 9 15,300 1 25100 1qc_008-008 Tai 45 4 5 567 10qc_009-004 Tai 125 5 5 23,100 51 5 74700 2 45qc_019-006 Gokana 46 5 2,640 10qc_010-005 Gokana 18 5.2 10,500 5 4.6 4qc_010-001 Tai 58 5 10 6,210 3 5 130000 2 2qc_019-009 Gokana 27 5 43,600 10 5 15 yes 7qc_019-007 Gokana 4 5.1 14,600 4 5.1 43900 2 4qc_004-001 Eleme 151 16 5.2 7,570 2 2.6 1720000 9 2qc_002-009 Eleme 7 2 7,370 1 0.5qc_002-007 Eleme 16 3 5,810 1qc_002-006 Eleme 46 5.2 11,100 5 4 4qc_001-009 Eleme 51 4 5 841 12 yes114
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERCase study 2 SPDC suspended facilities – Bomu Manifold, K-Dere, Gokana LGASite description.Land use.Arial view of the Bomu manifold (K-Dere, Gokana LGA)3 The fence was mended and security provided after the initial UNEP site visit. 115
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDSpill history.Visual observations on site.Sample analysis.Conclusions. in situ116
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER UNEP site code qc_019-005 Site name Bomo Manifold LGA Gokana Site description SPDC operating site Area Investigated (m2) 37,988 Number of soil samples 56 Number of groundwater samples 5 Deepest investigation (m) 5.00 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 63,600 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 21 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 5.00 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) 3,410 Number of water measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 1 Presence of hydrocarbons in surface water yes Number of soil measurements below 1 m 38 Number of soil measurements below 1 m greater than EGASPIN intervention value 17 Total volume of soil above intervention value (m3) 38,257 Total volume of soil above target value (m3) 62,775Site-specific recommendations: 117
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDUNEP site LGA Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Hydrocarbons Number of water Number of samplescode of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) in community TPH measurements with TPH samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) wells >EGASPIN >EGASPIN below 1 mqc_019-014 Gokana 16 2 3.2 389 11,500 yes 2qc_019-021 Gokana 26 5 7,620 2 3 2qc_009-002 Tai 44 2 5 1,040 10,900 1qc_008-002 Tai 58 2 5 1,880 42,800 yes 1qc_007-001 Eleme 58 3 6 442 10qc_019-035 Gokana 16 1 2.6 3,480 10,300 yes 1qc_019-032 Gokana 21 2 2.2 1,220 49qc_019-010 Gokana 32 5 5.2 139,000 5 2 172,000 5 1qc_019-004 Gokana 18 1 5 23,200 8 2.6 32 4qc_015-003 Khana 36 3 8,830 1 1.5 10 1qc_015-002 Khana 45 2 5 20,400 3 3.5 288 3qc_015-001 Khana 42 2 3.5 8,200 5 3 358,000 1 2qc_014-004 Khana 18 3 2.6 198 519qc_014-001 Khana 24 2 2.6 157 2,140 1qc_008-007 Tai 75 1 7.4 11,200 25 5.6 22qc_008-004 Tai 72 2 5 4,860 47qc_008-003 Tai 127 2 5.2 10,800 9 5 22,600 2 9qc_001-002 Eleme 25 4 3 10,400 6 3 1,980 yes 3 3qc_001-004 Eleme 8 4 6.5 533 13,200 2qc_008-010 Tai 60 3 5 6,700 5 5 360 5qc_008-009 Tai 53 2 5 4,030 1,180,000 1118
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERCase study 3 SPDC legacy site – 008-010 Korokoro flow stationSite description.Land use.Spill history.Visual observations on site.Sample analysis. UNEP site code qc_008-001 Site name Korokoro flow station LGA Tai Site description SPDC legacy site Investigated area (m2) 41,052 Number of soil samples 204 Number of groundwater samples 4 Number of drinking water samples 4 Deepest investigation (m) 5.20 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 14,200 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 13 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 5.00 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) 769 Number of water measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 2 Presence of hydrocarbons in drinking water no Number of soil measurements below 1 m 171 Number of soil measurements below 1 m greater than EGASPIN intervention value 12 Total volume of soil above intervention value (m3) 3,390 Total volume of soil above target value (m3) 48,501 119
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND ELEME OYIGBO ° TAI 88 38 ) " OGU/ KHANA " ) BOLO GOKANA 31 ) " BONNY 60 ANDONI ) " 111 555 ) " ) " 185 ) " 1354 D) " ) SE 2684 I SU ) " 43 (D e ) " 382 lin ) " ry 68 live 2500 ) " ) " De 21 1132 ) " MF ) " 4281 2287 29 ) " ) " 50 ) " m ) " ete 6825 ) " 6280 oB 41 ) " St ) " iF 60 316 ) " TaKOROKORO-008 0 356 ) " / ) " or o 120 253 39 ) " ) " 664 ) " k oro 153 ) " 3440 K 28 14 56 29 ) " 6" 120 ) " 4770 ) ) " " 64 ) " 48 ) " ) " KOROKORO" ) 27 24 ) " 50 ) " " ) 83 ) " 60,700001 40 175 ) " ) " 246 429 ) " ) " 97 ) " 76 ) " 2960 ) "Oil Facilities Metres Contamination contours (mg/kg) SPDC Right of way (ROW) > 5 000 0 60 12 W Wells 50 - 5 000 < 50 Projection: WGS 84 ) " Manifold UTM Zone 32 N * # FlowStation Soil samples ) " Soil samplesPipeline ) " Grassplot centroid NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product Grassplot sampling area Investigated areaT SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Groundwater flow direction UNEP 2011120
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER Soil sampling Depth interval TPH borehole (m) (mg/kg)General conclusions. 0.0-0.4 14,200 0.4-1.4 6,810 008-010 B180 1.4-2.6 6,020 2.6-4.0 5,630 4.0-5.0 6,530 0.0-0.7 433 0.7-1.0 285 1.0-2.0 13,500 008-010 B600 2.0-3.0 6,460 3.0-4.0 5,620 4.0-5.0 5,430Site-specific recommendations:UNEP site LGA Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Hydrocarbons Number of water Number of samplescode of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) in community TPH measurements with TPH samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) wells >EGASPIN >EGASPIN below 1 mqc_016-001 Khana 85 13 5.2 8,820 2 0.4 77,000 3qc_019-033 Gokana 6 2 331 10qc_009-001 Tai 21 6 3 9,030 2 2 213,000 4 1qc_005-001 Eleme 35 3 9 9,220 6 3 3,590 2 6qc_019-012 Gokana 49 3 5 29,600 11 5 588,000 4 11 121
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDCase study 4 NNPC trunk line spill – 019-013 1990 pipeline leak in K-DereSite description.Land use.Spill history.Visual observations on site.NNPC trunk line spill (K-Dere, Gokana LGA)122
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER UNEP site code qc_019-013 Site name NNPC pipeline rupture LGA Gokana Site description NNPC crude pipeline Investigated area (m2) 40,348 Number of soil samples 52 Number of groundwater samples 4 Number of surface water samples 1 Number of free-phase water samples 1 Number of CL sediment samples 1 Deepest investigation (m) 5.50 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 32,600 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 13 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 5.00 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) (CL samples) 5,650 Number of water measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 2 Presence of hydrocarbons in sediment (CL) above EGASPIN intervention value yes Total volume of soil above intervention value (m3) 4,818 Total volume of soil above target value (m3) 26,843Sample analysis. Soil sampling Depth interval TPH borehole (m) (mg/kg) 0-0.10 32,600 0.10-0.50 20,200 0.50-1.00 11,000 019-011-SOI- 1-2 7,060 B5000 2-3 10,300 3-4 10,400 4-5 10,100 0-0.40 16,900 0.40-1 12,900 019-011-SOI- 1-2 9,720 B5010 2-3 28,300 3-4 21,300 4-5 12,600 123
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND ELEME OYIGBO ° TAI KHANA OGU/ BOLO GOKANA 20 00 BONNY ANDONI 40 00 30 00 90 2798 00 531 ) " ) " 565 60 00 " ) 00 0 13 00 30 50 00 0 110 00 40 0 17284 ) " 10692 70 00 0 " ) 00 1364 14 12 00 ) " 0 10 00 0 00 80 1305 ) " 0 10 0 1486 ) " 156 ) " 29 ) " ) " MetresOil Facilities Contamination contours (mg/kg) SPDC Right of way (ROW) > 5 000 0 30 60 W Wells 50 - 5 000 < 50 Projection: WGS 84 ) " Manifold UTM Zone 32 N * # FlowStation Soil samples ) " Soil samplesPipeline ) " Grassplot centroid NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product Grassplot sampling area Investigated areaT SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Groundwater flow direction UNEP 2011124
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER 125
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDGeneral conclusions.Site-specific recommendations:UNEP site LGA Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Hydrocarbons Number of water Number of samplescode of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) in community TPH measurements with TPH samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) wells >EGASPIN >EGASPIN below 1 mqc_019-046 Gokana 72 3 5 2,900 2,320 2126
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERCase study 5 NNPC product line spill – 001-005 Nsisioken Agbi, Eleme LGASite description.Land use.Spill history.Visual observations on site.Sample analysis.General conclusions.Site-specific recommendations: Field work in Nsisioken Agbi, Eleme LGA 127
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Summary of investigation of soil and groundwater at the Nsisioken Agbi Ogale NNPC pipeline rupture site, Eleme LGA UNEP site code qc_001-005 Site name Nsisioken Agbi LGA Eleme Site description NNPC product pipeline Investigated area (m2) 26,995 Number of soil samples 66 Number of groundwater samples 7 Number of drinking water samples 20 Number of surface water samples 2 Number of free-phase water samples 2 Number of sediment samples 2 Deepest investigation (m) 6 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 7,310 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 2 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 2 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) (samples) 86,100 Number of water measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 5 Presence of hydrocarbons in drinking water yes Presence of hydrocarbons in surface water (CL) yes Presence of hydrocarbons in sediment (CL) above EGASPIN intervention value yes Number of soil measurements below 1 m 48 Number of soil measurements below 1 m greater than EGASPIN intervention value 2 Total volume of soil above intervention value (m3) 10,025 Total volume of soil above target value (m3) 38,366UNEP site LGA Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Hydrocarbons Number of water Number of samplescode of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) in community TPH measurements with TPH samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) wells >EGASPIN >EGASPIN below 1 mqc_002-008 Eleme 13 3 2,950qc_004-006 Eleme 38 5 13,200 6 2 181 3128
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER ELEME OYIGBO ° TAI 28 KHANA " OGU/ RU BOLO GOKANA M U EK PE BONNY ANDONI TO BO M U TR UN KL IN E 30 ) " 14 50 ) " 46 ) " ) " 65 ) " 652 2831 ) " ) " 50 1454 ) " ) " 1357 221 ) " ) " 51 403 ) " )) " " 18 2034 ) " 1142 ) " 6054 ) " 731 ) " 1 ) " 403 125 ) " ) " 24 ) "Oil Facilities Metres Contamination contours (mg/kg) SPDC Right of way (ROW) > 5 000 0 150 300 W Wells 50 - 5 000 < 50 Projection: WGS 84 ) " Manifold UTM Zone 32 N*# FlowStation Soil samples ) " Soil samplesPipeline ) " Grassplot centroid NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product Grassplot sampling area Investigated areaT SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Groundwater flow direction UNEP 2011 129
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDCase study 6 Fly tipping of oilfield waste - 001-022 – oil waste dump siteSite description. ≤Land use.Spill history.Sample analysis.Fly tipping of oilfield waste in Ogoniland (Oken Oyaa, Eleme LGA)130
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERGeneral conclusions.Site-specific recommendations: 131
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDCase study 7 SPDC remediation site 008-002 – Korokoro Well 3, Korokoro, Tai LGASite description.Land use.Spill history.Visual observations on site.Korokoro Well 3 (Tai, LGA)132
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER UNEP site code qc-008-007 Site name Korokoro Well 3 LGA Khana Investigated area (m2) Number of soil samples 74 Deepest investigation (m) 7.6 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 11,200 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 25 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 5.6 Number of soil measurements below 1 m 57 Number of soil measurements below 1 m greater than EGASPIN intervention value 22 Volume of soil exceeding the EGASPIN intervention value (m3) Volume of soil exceeding the EGASPIN target value (m3) Sampling station Depth from (m) Depth to (m) TPH (mg/kg) 008-002-SOI- 0 0.4 10,600 B210 0.4 1.0 4,830 1 1.5 6,210 1.5 2.0 11.1 008-002-SOI- 0 0.6 2,240 B250 0.6 1.0 4,300 1.0 3.0 7,340 3.0 4.0 5,880 4.0 5.0 6,890 008-002-SOI- 0 0.8 2,060 B350 0.8 1.5 3,260 1.5 2.3 2,850 2.3 4.2 5,280 4.2 5.0 4,310 008-002-SOI- 0 0.4 8,310 B450 0.4 1.2 9,050 1.2 2.4 10,700 2.4 4.6 4,200 4.6 5.0 6,120 008-002-SOI- 0 1.0 2,330 B252 1.0 2.0 2,920 2.0 3.0 6,990 3.0 4.6 8,060 4.6 5.0 9,510General conclusions.Site-specific recommendations: 133
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND ELEME OYIGBO ° TAI KHANA OGU/ BOLO GOKANA BONNY ANDONI 6508 5451 ) " ) " 576 ) " 6214 ) " 157 6876 ) " ) " 7976 2784 ) " ) " 1152 ) " 0 6103 ) " 224 7018 " ) 2483 ) " ) " KOROKORO-003 450 6829 ) " 4370 3938 ) " ) " 11 ) " ) " 904 ) "Oil Facilities Metres Contamination contours (mg/kg) SPDC Right of way (ROW) > 5 000 0 30 60 W Wells 50 - 5 000 < 50 Projection: WGS 84 ) " Manifold UTM Zone 32 N * # FlowStation Soil samples ) " Soil samplesPipeline ) " Grassplot centroid NNPC Crude NNPC Refined product Grassplot sampling area Investigated areaT SPDC Oil Pipe in operation Groundwater flow direction UNEP 2011134
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERUNEP site LGA Site Number Number of Deepest soil Maximum Number of soil Deepest soil Maximum water Number of Number of Number of soilcode category of soil groundwater investigation soil TPH measurements sample TPH (ug/l) water samples community measurements below samples samples (m) (mg/kg) >EGASPIN >EGASPIN (m) (CL samples) >EGASPIN wells with TPH 1 m >EGASPINqc_009- Tai SPDC right 62 2 5 12,300 4 3 162,000 1 3006 of wayqc_019- Gokana SPDC right 27 5 5 34,500 10 4 32,000 2 7002 of wayqc_010- Tai SPDC right 38 8 5 36,200 4 4 543 2004 of wayqc_003- Eleme SPDC right 23 3 13,400 3 3 91.7 2002 of wayqc_019- Gokana SPDC 26 5 7,620 2 3 2021 suspended facilityqc_008- Tai SPDC 58 2 5 1,880 42,800 1 yes002 suspended facilityqc_019- Gokana SPDC 16 1 2.6 3,480 10,300 1 yes035 suspended facilityqc_019- Gokana SPDC 21 2 2.2 1,220 49032 suspended facilityqc_019- Gokana SPDC 32 5 5.2 139,000 5 2 172,000 5 1010 suspended facilityqc_019- Gokana SPDC 18 1 5 23,200 8 2.6 32 4004 suspended facilityqc_015- Khana SPDC 36 3 8,830 1 1.5 10 1003 suspended facilityqc_015- Khana SPDC 42 2 3.5 8,200 5 3 358,000 1 2001 suspended facilityqc_014- Khana SPDC 18 3 2.6 198 519004 suspended facilityqc_014- Khana SPDC 24 2 2.6 157 2,140 1001 suspended facilityqc_016- Khana SPDC 85 13 5.2 8,820 2 0.4 77,000 3001 legacy site 135
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Community/LGA Closest Cont- Distance to Cobalt Arsenic Barium TPH minated Site Contaminated mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg mg/kg Site (m) AKPAJO, ELEME qc_003-001 322 0.92 0.3 9.8 Not Detected OKULUEBO, ELEME qc_005-006 444 2.12 1.54 21.9 Not Detected KPITE, TAI qc_009-001 425 0.72 1.07 13 Not Detected NWIKARA-AGU, KHANA qc_014-001 180 0.59 1.99 166 95.300 GBE, GOKANA qc_019-034 168 0.21 0.3 1.25 4.140Background concentration mg/kg, a value that was exceeded in five samples inof hydrocarbons two locations examined during the UNEP study. Values at these sites ranged from 1,000 mg/kg toEven though hydrocarbons are natural organic 3,050 mg/kg.substances, unlike heavymetals, hydrocarbons arenot generally present in the surface soil. A number Since barium is not a pollutant that can be visuallyof soil samples were taken during the assessment observed on the ground like hydrocarbon, thesefrom locations away from areas contaminated by values represent individual sampling locationshydrocarbons and the results are presented in Table only and no conclusions can be drawn as to the32. While in most locations there is no presence of full extent of the contamination problem. Thus,hydrocarbons, in two of the locations hydrocarbon additional investigation is needed to discover ifis observed even 100 metres beyond the spill site. there is indeed extensive contamination by barium.This could be symptomatic of the situation in Based on the results, a risk reduction strategy –Ogoniland where after oil spills, the hydrocarbon possibly involving local containment, or excavationspread laterally by runoff contaminates soil much and transport – should be developed.beyond the original perimeter of the spill. Thisvalue has particular importance while discussing Naturally occurring radioactivethe target value for clean-up. material (NORM) resultsBarium pollution On-site measurements. The ambient dose rates at all sites investigated, even at ‘worst case’ sites withIn extracting oil from the ground in Ogoniland, as fresh spillages of oil, was always found to be withinelsewhere, the oil industry used barium sulphate the natural background level of 80±40 nanosievertto increase the density of the fluid used in drilling per hour (nSv/h).operations. During the drilling process, thecuttings which come up with the drilling fluid are On-site measurements confirmed that NORM isseparated and often disposed of in a pit next to present in very low concentrations in Ogoni crudethe wellhead. Historically, these pits were unlined oil and that it makes no detectable additionaland, on close inspection, it is not uncommon to contribution to the ambient dose rate, withinfind a range of contaminants in them, including measurement uncertainties. An ambient dose ratebarium and hydrocarbons. Barium was therefore a in the range of about 100 nSv/h is of no radiologicalsubject of limited investigations during the UNEP concern. As a reference, the annual dose limit –assessment. above background – for human beings is 1,000,000 nSv per year. Surface contamination measurementsBarium (chemical element Ba), a soft silvery at all investigated sites were all within the naturalmetallic alkaline earth metal, was detected in background level of 3±2 counts per second (cps);all the collected samples. However, this is not this result is similar to the ambient dose ratesurprising since most heavy metals occur naturally finding.and the presence of barium, does not, in itself,denote oilfield contamination or obvious harm. Laboratory measurements. Uranium-235,The Nigerian intervention value for barium is 625 Thorium-234, Actinium-228, Radium-226,136
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERBismuth-214, Bismuth-212, Lead-212, Lead- These results confirm the on-site findings: NORM214, Lead-210, Thallium-208 and Potassium-40 is present in the environments assessed by UNEPactivity concentrations, measured by gamma in concentrations – in the low parts per millionspectrometry, were all above detection limits range – that would be expected for the geologyfor soil samples but not for liquid samples. of the region. Soil samples heavily contaminatedRadium-226 and Uranium-235 activities were with old spilled crude match the zero blank/calculated from the peak at 186 kilo-electron reference sample and are within analytical orvolts (keV) assuming radioactive equilibrium of expected natural uncertainties. The conclusion ofRadium-226 with its parent Uranium-238 and of the laboratory analysis therefore is that NORM isnatural Uranium-235/Uranium-238 ratio. Liquid by factors lower in crude oil than it is in the soil.samples were measured by ICP-MS expressed This is confirmed by measurements of the liquidsin activity concentrations of Uranium-238, using ICP-MS. Uranium and measured daughterUranium-235, Uranium-234, Thalium-232, product concentrations in crude oil are lower – byThalium-230 and Radium-226. a factor of 1,000 or more – than in local soil.Visible hydrocarbon pollution on surface water and vessel used to transport oil 137
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND4.5 Discussion of institutional 1992 Environmental Guidelines and Standards for issues Petroleum Industries in Nigeria (EGASPIN). This confers a statutory role on the DPR to manageUNEP’s review of institutional issues in Nigeria all environmental issues arising from oil industryled to a series of observations that have a direct activities, including clean-up of contaminatedbearing on the current environmental situation sites. However, the National Oil Spill Detectionin the country. There are also implications for and Response Agency (NOSDRA), created inhow jurisdictional gaps and overlaps between 2006, has since also assumed responsibility forinstitutions can be improved so that sustainable the latter role, though NOSDRA’s mandateenvironmental improvements can be achieved does not cover supervision of contaminated sitein Ogoniland. Some of the key observations are remediation. More importantly, the two agenciesdetailed below. have differing interpretations of EGASPIN, which further undermines clean-up operationsMultiple institutions with unclear in Ogoniland.mandates The overlap of authorities and responsibilitiesNigeria has a three-tier administration: federal, between state ministries and federal ministries isstate and local government. Both the federal and another issue which has an impact on environmentalstate governments have ministries of environment management on-the-ground. In the Nigerianbut the Department of Petroleum Resources system, central government agencies also have(DPR) – the ‘technical arm’ of the Ministry of state or regional administrative offices. SeparatePetroleum Resources – continues to have a role state government agencies, which sometimesin regulating environmental issues as well. have similar mandates, often end up doing the same work. These overlapping efforts are notThe most important piece of legislation on always coordinated and can lead to suboptimalenvironmental management in Nigeria is the environmental management.Undergrowth shrouds a warning sign at Ogale, Eleme LGA138
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERNOSDRA mandate and resources licenses and regulates oil industry operations, a keyare not aligned ministry in Nigeria. In 1990, when the ministry, through its Department of Petroleum ResourcesThe National Oil Spill Detection and Response (DPR), developed the EGASPIN, there was no federalAgency came into being under the National Oil Spill Ministry of Environment (environment is currentlyDetection and Response Agency (Establishment) part of the Federal Ministry of Environment, HousingAct, 2006. The Act states that the organization’s and Urban Development). Moreover, it seemedmandate “shall be to coordinate and implement the logical at that time for the Ministry of PetroleumNational Oil Spill Contingency Plan for Nigeria” Resources to oversee the oil industry because of the[39]. The main focus of the Contingency Plan is on strategic nature of the country’s oil reserves as well asemergency response in the event of an oil spill. The the technical nature of the industry and the specializedNOSDRA Act also legislates for emergency response skills therefore needed to regulate it.systems and capacity. However, there is clearly a conflict of interest inHowever, in the five years since its establishment, very a ministry which, on one hand, has to maximizefew resources have been allocated to NOSDRA, such revenue by increasing production and, on the other,that the agency has no proactive capacity for oil-spill ensure environmental compliance. Most countriesdetection and has to rely on reports from oil companies around the world, including in the Middle East whereor civil society concerning the incidence of a spill. It oil is the mainstay of the regional economy, havealso has very little reactive capacity – even to send placed environmental regulation within the Ministrystaff to a spill location once an incident is reported. of Environment or equivalent. It is noteworthy toIn the Niger Delta, helicopters or boats are needed mention in this context that after the 2010 Deepwaterto reach many of the spill locations and NOSDRA Horizon incident, it came to light that the US Offshorehas no access to such forms of transport other than Energy & Minerals Management Office (under thethrough the oil companies themselves. Consequently, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulationin planning their inspection visits, the regulatory and Enforcement) responsible for the developmentauthority is wholly reliant on the oil company. Such of the offshore oilfield was also the body that issuedan arrangement is inherently inappropriate. environmental approvals. Even though other federal and local agencies had commented on the industryEqually important is the question of mandate when it plans, President Obama called this a “cosy relationshipcomes to cleaning up a contaminated site. NOSDRA between the oil companies and the federal agency thatundertakes supervision of contaminated site assessment permits them to drill” [40]. Consequently, a newbased on EGASPIN provisions. However, since Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement,the agency did not exist at the time EGASPIN was under the US Department of the Interior, has beenformulated in 1992 and reissued in 2002, the Act created, which is independent from the Departmentitself does not empower NOSDRA. Consequently, of Energy Resources.little training and few resources have been providedto enable NOSDRA to carry out this task. Lack of resourcesAt the time that NOSDRA was created, a clear Resource limitations, both physical and human, aredirective should have been issued delineating the a feature of all Nigerian ministries. There are alsooperational boundaries between NOSDRA and other issues at play, involving various ministriesthe DPR. In the absence of such clarification, both at federal level as well as the contrasts betweenbodies continue to deal with contaminated site ministries at federal and state level. For example:clean-up, coordination between the two is poor, Both DPR and NOSDRA suffer from a shortageand in extreme cases they take differing approaches of senior and experienced staff who understandto interpreting the rules. the oil industry and can exercise effectiveConflict of interest technical oversight. The main reason for this is that individuals with technical knowledge in thePetroleum resources account for 80 per cent of field of petroleum engineering or science findnational revenue and 95 per cent of export earnings, substantially more rewarding opportunities inmaking the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, which the oil industry 139
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDInadequate regulatory requirements and enforcement are leaving communities exposed A typical pattern in Nigeria (as in other absence of such resources, government agencies countries) is that offices in the federal capital are at the mercy of oil companies when it comes of Abuja are better equipped with staff and to conducting site inspections. resources than regional offices. This may not be a financial issue but staff may be reluctant to Inadequate regulatory requirements and serve in the regions owing to poorer working enforcement conditions and opportunities, ranging from The oil and gas sector in Nigeria is subject to security to schooling for children and career comprehensive legislation which includes detailed advancement prospects. This is certainly an environmental and technical norms. The most issue impacting both DPR and NOSDRA detailed and exhaustive standards and guidelines – the EGASPIN – were issued by the DPR in 1992 and All government departments, both federal reissued in 2002. However, the original Act dealing and state, lack office equipment and vehicles. with the oil industry in Nigeria is the Petroleum Act, Even when such resources are allocated there 1969, which empowers the Minister of Petroleum is often a shortage of funds for maintenance (e.g. maintaining vehicles and buying fuel for Resources to regulate for the prevention of pollution generators) of water courses and the atmosphere. It is not entirely clear from reading EGASPIN if it was issued under State ministries of environment are even less the 1969 Act. Consequently, whether EGASPIN is a well provided for in terms of human resources, legally enforceable instrument or a non-enforceable equipment and infrastructure, and attracting guideline is also unclear. This issue was discussed quality staff is especially difficult with both DPR and NOSDRA officials, who all have varying interpretations on the legislative status of Shortage of equipment is particularly troublesome EGASPIN. UNEP’s institutional assessment was not for agencies having to respond to oil spills, which able to verify whether EGASPIN’s legislative standing are often in areas inaccessible by road. In the has been tested in the Nigerian courts.140
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERRegardless of its formal status, for all practical While in the provisions discussed above EGASPINpurposes EGASPIN currently forms the basis for is clear and in line with the terminology as appliedenvironmental management of the oil industry elsewhere (e.g. in the Dutch Soil Act of 1987in Nigeria. It is a substantial document running which pioneered the use of intervention and targetto 361 pages divided into eight sections dealing values), there is internal contradiction elsewhere.with all aspects of environmental management of The more stringent part of the provision states, inoil activities ranging from exploration to terminal section 2.11.3 of Part VIII:operations. “Any operator or owner of a facility that isUNEP’s review examined two specific elements responsible for a spill that results to (sic)of EGASPIN: impact of the environment shall be required to monitor the impacted environment alongside Part VIIIB, contingency planning for the the restorative activities. The restorative process prevention, control and combating of spills of shall attempt to achieve the minimum oil content oil and hazardous substances, and and other target values (quality levels ultimately aimed for) for BTEX, metals and polycyclic Part VIIIF, management and remediation of aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHS) in the impacted contaminated land. environment (also See Part VIII F).For the purposes of this study, the most important (i) For all waters, there shall be no visible oilaspect is the approach EGASPIN takes with sheen after the first 30 days of the occurrenceregard to the criteria for clean-up operations of the spill no matter the extent of thefollowing an oil spill. spillEGASPIN recommends the use of the Risk-Based (ii) For swamp areas, there shall not be anyCorrective Action (RBCA) approach pioneered in sign of oil stain within the first 60 days ofthe United States. However, section 8.1 of Part occurrence of the incidenceVIIIF states: “In the interim period whilst suitableparameters are being developed, the guidelines (iii) For land/sediment, the quality levelson remediation of contaminated land shall make ultimately aimed for (target value) is 50 mg/use of two parameters, i.e. intervention values kg of oil content (See part VIII F).”and target values (Table VIII F1).” Even thoughEGASPIN was first issued in 1992, the required However, section 6.6 of Part VIII of the EGASPINguidance for a risk-based approach has not yet states:been developed and the ‘intervention and targetvalues’ approach remains the operating principle “Remedial Action Closure. When Remedialin Nigeria today. Action Treatment has been undertaken and the intervention values (Risk Based ScreeningEGASPIN defines ‘intervention value’ (8.1.1) as Levels (RBSLs) or Site Specific Target Levelsindicating “the quality for which the functionality (SSTLs) if RBCS (Risk Based Corrective System)of soil for human, animal and plant life are, is used) have been demonstrated to be achievedor threatened with being seriously impaired. at the point of compliance, or containmentConcentration in excess of the intervention values or institution controls have been installed andcorrespond to serious contamination”. ‘Target monitoring and site maintenance are no longervalue’ (8.1.2.1) is defined as indicating “the soil required to ensure that conditions persist, thenquality required for sustainability or expressed in no further action shall be necessary, except toterms of remedial policy, the soil quality required ensure that suitable institutional controls (if any)for the full restoration of the soils functionality for remain in place.”human, animal and plant life. The target valuestherefore indicate the soil quality levels ultimately This latter section is an incorrect interpretation ofaimed for”. A list of intervention and target values is the ‘intervention value’ and ‘target value’ approachprovided in Appendix VIII F1 of the EGASPIN. to contaminated site management. Intervention 141
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDvalue is not expected to be the point of compliance International best practice on contaminated sitefor close out of remedial action. The triviality of remediation currently depends on developmentthe above-quoted interpretation can be explained of site-specific clean-up targets based on a robustby taking as an example a site that has been source, pathway and receptor model. However,contaminated with 5,001 mg/kg of hydrocarbons. application of this model has to be done in aSince it is above the intervention value of 5,000 transparent manner so that the regulators fullymg/kg, a treatment plan has to be prepared and comprehend what input data are used to obtainimplemented. However, remediation work at the the clean-up targets and the sensitivity of eachsite can stop when the value has reached 4,999 of these parameters. It has also been acceptedmg/kg – in effect, by achieving just a 2 mg/ internationally that health is just one of thekg reduction of hydrocarbons. In other words, risks to be managed through contaminatedthe site can be considered to have moved from site remediation. Situations could arise wherea situation where “the functionality of soil for non-health risks, such as commercial reputationhuman, animal and plant life are, or threatened or community perception, would require thewith being seriously impaired” to a situation government and oil operator to agree on morewhere it is legally acceptable to stop the treatment stringent targets than would strictly be necessaryand even stop monitoring. from a health-risk management point of view.Discussions with the DPR clarified that they Making legislation accessibleindeed expect the operator to achieve the target Another problem with current Nigerian legislationlevels at which a remediated spill site can be closed. is its inaccessibility. Few texts are available onlineOn the other hand, discussions with NOSDRA and many are not easily available even in paperconfirmed that they use the intervention values form. In addition, printed copies of legislation,as the closure criteria for sign-off. NOSDRA also such as the ‘Laws of the Federation of Nigeria’, arementioned that, in their judgement, 5,000 mg/kg extremely expensive and therefore limited to thoseis a high target and that in their new legislation, able to bear the costs. Moreover, many secondarycurrently in preparation, this will be lowered to or very recent texts are available only at the issuing2,500 mg/kg. agency or from the government printing house in Lagos. Inaccessibility of legislation leads not onlyResolving the issue to a lack of transparency, but also to a loss of trustIt is evident from the above that Nigerian in the legal system. Making legislation readilylegislation is internally inconsistent with regard accessible, cheaply and in a variety of forms, willto one of the most important criteria for oil spill help build confidence at all levels.and contaminated site management; specificallythe criteria triggering or permitting remediation Review of SPDC’s practicesclosure. This is enabling the oil industry to and performancelegally close down the remediation process well As an oil company with decades of experiencebefore contamination has been fully eliminated in Nigeria, and as part of a larger, internationaland soil quality has been restored to achieve full organization with global reach, it is not surprisingfunctionality for human, animal and plant life. that the Shell Petroleum Development CompanyThis situation needs to be resolved for the whole of has established procedures for the range ofNigeria, and in particular prior to initiation of the environmental issues resulting from its oil explorationclean-up in Ogoniland. It should be mentioned and production. SPDC is also backed up technicallyin this context that the Government of The by Shell which provides a broad policy frameworkNetherlands, which pioneered the intervention with corporate guidelines and specific technicaland target value approach, has discontinued assistance through Shell Global Solutions.setting a target value for soil. Since both DPR SPDC proceduresand NOSDRA mentioned that they are workingon new legislation, it may be opportune to make SPDC has documented procedures on all aspects offundamental changes. its business management. It was not the objective142
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERof the current study to undertake a systematic audit SPDC’s approach to remediationof all SPDC procedures and their implementation The SPDC Oil Spill Clean-up and Remediationon the ground. However, in matters where there Procedure (SPDC-2005-005716), the company’sis a direct interface with the environmental main operating document in guiding clean-contamination of Ogoniland, it was important first up activities, was subjected to examinationto identify the situation on the ground and then by UNEP. This procedure is based on a Shellto verify whether that situation was a consequence Global Solutions report, ‘Framework for Riskof lack or deficiency of procedures, or laxity in Management of Historically Contaminatedenforcement of those procedures. Land for SPDC Operations in the Niger Delta (OG.02.47028)’. The report states:Of the three SPDC procedures dealing withenvironmental issues – oil spill response, oil “As the crude ages the lighter end will be lostspill clean-up and abandonment – quantitative through natural attenuation processes and asassessment was only possible regarding site clean- a result the viscosity will increase and verticalup. A review of SPDC’s performance in cleaning migration will further decrease. The high waterup contaminated sites is given below. table in many locations will also prevent deep infiltration of free product. It is expected thereforeIn undertaking this review, UNEP did not that any spills within the Niger Delta willproactively look for SPDC-contaminated sites migrate predominantly along the ground surfacefor assessment. Rather, once the on-the-ground from areas of high topography to areas of lowassessment of contaminated sites had been topography. Trial pits have confirmed the shallowcompleted, the team checked SPDC records to see extent of soil contamination in many SPDC sites.”how many of the sites were classified as ‘remediationcompleted’. Where this was the case the site was The report was based on a desk study and no fieldassessed as to whether (i) it was still contaminated work was undertaken. So the trial pits, underlinedaccording to Nigerian legislation and (ii) the site in the above statement, refer to those excavatedmet with SPDC’s own internally set standards. by SPDC as part of its own vertical delineationEasily accessible disused wellhead (Bomu 27, Gokana LGA) 143
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDAn Ogoniland site showing remediation by enhanced natural attenuation (RENA)of contamination. It is useful to note that SPDC’s 3. For groundwater the document statesinternal procedures for vertical delineation of that “remediation of impacted potablecontamination state: (usable) groundwater shall be undertaken in conformity to the EGASPIN recommended“…trial pit should be excavated to at least 0.5 target level of 10 ppm of dissolved TPH”.metres and no more than 1.5 metres below ground However, there is no location in Ogonilandlevel (bgl)” where groundwater remediation has been attempted“…hand augering should be down to at least 1metres bgl and preferably to 2 metres bgl” A number of criticisms can be made of the above approach:As already seen from UNEP’s field sampling,contamination of hydrocarbons has migrated to The RENA approach to remediation.depths of more than 5 metres in some instances. Hydrocarbons, once released to land, can beHence, Shell Global Solutions’ guidance note transferred and degraded through a number ofand the SPDC procedure for vertical delineation natural processes, including:need to be revised to incorporate this newinformation. evaporation to the atmosphere combustionThree points of particular interest in the SPDCdocument are: infiltration, alone or along with rainwater, to soil and eventually to groundwater1. Remediation by enhanced natural attenuation overflow into swamps and water bodies (RENA) is given as the primary method of remediation of oil-impacted sites runoff with rainwater to swamps and water bodies2. Soil remediation criteria are defined and, microbial degradation on the ground surface, though the document makes provisions for or in soil, swamps, water or groundwater using risk-based screening levels to indicate satisfactory completion of remedial activities The principle of enhanced natural attenuation to acceptable risk levels, a TPH value of 5,000 for clean up of contaminated land is to augment mg/kg (same as the EGASPIN intervention one or more of the above processes so that the value) was validated as the end point concentration of contaminants can be reduced.144
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERAfter reviewing contaminated land clean-up out hydrocarbon, which can then run offissues in Nigeria, Shell Global Solutions endorsed into nearby farms, communities, swampsthe RENA approach. Hence it is SPDC’s or streams, contaminating a much widerpreferred procedure and 100 per cent of oil spill area. Rain falling up-slope can also runremediation in Ogoniland has been undertaken off through the windrows. No measuresusing the RENA approach. are taken to prevent rainwater from reaching windrows, directly or throughUnder RENA, contaminated land (topsoil) is runoff, and no systems exist to collectinitially ploughed over, either mechanically or runoff before it escapes from the site.manually, to increase aeration. Fertilizer is added Moreover, no system is in place even toto supplement the nutrient requirements of the monitor whether this is happeningbacteria as they break down the pollutants. Theploughed soil is then piled into neat windrows to (iii) Soil remediation occurs in situ with nofurther enhance the aeration process. Samples are impermeable layer to prevent infiltrationtaken from the windrows every quarter and once of oil, either by itself or with water,the SPDC specification of 5,000 mg/kg of TPH into the subsoil and then into theis reached, the windrows are levelled. groundwater. There is no monitoring of this issueThe implicit assumption in the RENA approachapplied by SPDC is that the natural process 2. Not all hydrocarbons are amenable tobeing enhanced is bioremediation. All enhancing bacterial biodegradation, rendering theactions, whether ploughing, adding nutrients process unfeasible in situations where:or windrowing, are applied to further natural (i) hydrocarbons are too toxic for thebiodegrading processes. In an ideal situation this bacteria, and/or too recalcitrant forapproach is scientifically defendable. However, biodegradation and/or present in toothe reality on the ground in Ogoniland speaks high a concentrationotherwise. The RENA process is failing to achieveeither environmental clean-up or legislative (ii) fire has occurred on the ground and thecompliance. As seen in the analyses and case studies hydrocarbons have been burnt into apresented in this report, it is also failing to achieve crust, mixing bituminous hydrocarbonscompliance with SPDC’s own procedures. with clayey soilThe case against RENA in Ogoniland. (iii) the soil is very clayey in nature, makingThe following arguments could be made for oxygen transfer difficultdiscontinuing the use of RENA as an approachto remediation in Ogoniland: 3. Currently, SPDC undertakes RENA on the land surface layer only, based on the assumption1. The effects of temperature, rainfall and that given the nature of the oil, temperature and topography hamper the RENA approach at an underlying layer of clay, hydrocarbons will oil-impacted sites because no controls are in not move deeper. However, this basic premise place to manage the following processes: of limiting remediation to the surface soil is not sustainable since observations made by UNEP (i) Oil-impacted sites are open and exposed show that contamination can often penetrate to sun and air, leading to hydrocarbons deeper than 5 metres. The RENA approach, if evaporating and being carried away, using bioremediation as the primary process to risking exposure to on-site workers, be enhanced, will not work at depths below 1 neighbouring communities and nearby metre due to difficulties with oxygen transfer agricultural workers. No air monitoring, on-site or off-site, is undertaken In addition, the UNEP team also noted the following on-site practices which further argue (ii) They are continually exposed to rain, the case against RENA as an appropriate choice which falls on the windrows, leaching for site remediation: 145
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND4. Trenches cut from RENA sites to nearby water runoff, infiltration and other processes, and (ii) courses preferentially channel away spilled oil monitoring and supervision. and runoff SPDC clean-up specifications5. In practice the top 1 metre of topsoil is not being tilled and mixed properly. Only the top The second most important element of SPDC 15-20 cm of soil is dug out and piled onto procedures, after the primacy given to RENA, is unploughed soil, so while the windrow may the recommended values for clean-up. appear to be 30-40 cm high (i.e. the top of the windrow is 30-40 cm above the bottom SPDC uses 5,000 mg/kg TPH as its remediation of the excavated area), the depth of soil that criterion for soil. While no specific reason has been has been broken down is, in fact, only 15-20 given for choosing this value, it was the assumption cm, thus also limiting any bioremediation to of NOSDRA that the value was taken from the those 15-20 cm. EGASPIN intervention value of 5,000 mg/kg.There are enough theoretical and practical As discussed previously, the EGASPIN document,reasons to recommend discontinuation of the which forms the basis for the SPDC procedure,RENA approach in Ogoniland for cleaning suffers from issues of internal inconsistency.up contaminated land. While bioremediation In one section the legislation defines a ‘targetor enhancing natural processes are workable value’ of 50 mg/kg TPH as the desired endapproaches to achieving clean-up, they should point for restoration after oil spill, while in aonly be adopted after proper characterization section on remediation of contaminated land anof affected sites, with adequate provision made ‘intervention value’ of 5,000 mg/kg TPH is givenfor (i) controlling transfers of oil off-site due to for remediation closure.A trench made from a RENA site to a nearby watercourse (Bodo West, Bonny LGA).The fluid in the channel is degraded crude oil146
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERDuring the early phase of discussions with SPDC,UNEP was informed that the remediation close-out value of 5,000 mg/kg TPH set by SPDC was Description Maximum Minimumnot drawn from the EGASPIN but was based on a score (%) score (%)risk assessment. If this was a corporate decision, it is Past performancenot stated as such in the SPDC documentation, nor Regulatory certification of 10 6is it communicated to the authorities as required completed siteby EGASPIN. However, the SPDC procedure does HSE performance or (HSE 6 3mention the guidance provided by the Shell Global plan in case of new vendors)Solutions document mentioned above. Managerial competence 4 2 Nigerian content 5 3Development of contaminated site clean-up criteria developmentbased on health risk assessment was first proposed HSE recordby the American Society for Testing of Materials Leadership and commitment 8 5(ASTM) ‘Standard Guide for Risk-Based Corrective Toolbox documentation 5 3Action Applied at Petroleum Release Sites’ [41]. The Manpower resources & 7 4basic philosophy of this approach is to model potential competence assuranceexposure of a sensitive receptor to hydrocarbon Hazards & effects 10 6contamination through viable pathways. A target managementlevel of contamination in the environment is set Timely service deliverybased on acceptable exposure of the receptor. This Adequate manpower 10 6approach has many merits as it makes the decision Financial capability 8 6more objective and more resource efficient. However, Technical competence 5 2in developing a risk-based screening level of 5,000 Management of communitymg/kg TPH, applicable to all sites in the Niger Delta, issuesthe following key issues have been overlooked: Evidence of previous work in 5 3 the community/a community1. The varied geology of the Niger Delta differs Knowledge of community 7 4 significantly over short distances. Applying a sensitivities uniform set of input data parameters (e.g. soil Evidence of successful 10 7 organic matter) across all sites is therefore not completion appropriate unless the sensitivity of clean-up levels Total 100 60 to such generic inputs is properly considered.2. Different countries have different thresholds 3. There are scientific uncertainties as to what for policy-driven parameters, such as acceptable constitutes a reasonable health criteria value for additional cancer risk. Thresholds ranging from a pollutant. A decision on what is appropriate 1 per 10,000, to 1 per 1,000,000 people have for Nigeria should not be taken in isolation, been used. WHO guidelines are based on 1 without consultation, and without explaining per 100,000. Shell Global Solutions has used what impact it may have on the clean-up the acceptable risk threshold of 1 per 10,000 criteria. as there was no applicable national legislation. However, this was done without consulting It is recommended that SPDC works with the the national authorities and explaining the Nigerian regulators to clarify the paradox of likely impact on clean-up criteria. For example, remedial intervention and target values being the using a risk threshold of 1 per 100,000, as used same. They should also agree on a consultative by WHO, would have resulted in a clean-up approach to setting site-specific clean-up values. threshold of 500 mg/kg in some instances. This lower threshold would have needed a different The final point of interest concerning the SPDC technological approach to clean-up and would documentation is their selection criteria matrix for have significantly increased the costs of clean- appointing contractors to undertake remediation up to the company. work (see Table 33). 147
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDFlare arrangements at disused flow stationTwo issues are instructive here: (i) ‘technical Incidences of poor clean-up leading to secondarycompetence’ in the table represents just 5 per cent clean-up before remediation were prevalentof the potential score allocated; and (ii) the relative (meaning that the first clean-up after the oilimportance assigned to past performance in spill was not appropriate or adequate andobtaining a ‘regulatory certification of completed necessitated a second clean-up before the RENAsite’ compliance versus technical competence. approach could be initiated at the site)In its ‘Execution Strategy for Oil Spill Response, SPDC Remediation Management System. InClean-up and Remediation of Impacted Sites in January 2010, a new document, ‘RemediationEast and West’, SPDC identifies some of the major Management System’ (RMS), was adopted by allweaknesses of its old strategy [42]. The following Shell Exploration and Production Companieswere some of the observations made in 2007: in Nigeria (SEPCiN) [43]. A revised version of this document was made available to UNEP in Lack of timely and effective oil-spill containment and recovery were identified as the major causes January 2011. As the document only came into of escalated spread of spills in the environment force recently, the SPDC sites assessed by UNEP and consequently higher clean-up costs were not managed according to the RMS and no direct comparisons between the previous and new Clean-up cost estimates were based on the system have therefore been possible. However, estimated volume of a spill and the estimated the document is reviewed here with a view to area of impact prior to recovery of the free- understanding the key changes and to consider, if phase product. Thus the actual area requiring the new system were to be implemented, whether clean-up was often exaggerated, which past attempts at remediation would have been translated into exaggerated cost estimates different and whether the new procedure would improve things in the future. No process was put in place to ensure that resources paid for in contracts were actually The following are the key changes from the provided and utilized previous remediation procedure:148
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATER The RMS has set a TPH value of 3,000 mg/ in situ RENA as it recognizes both infiltration kg as the cut-off value for completion of and runoff from contaminated soil as issues to remediation work, as against the former value be addressed. However, the new approach still of 5,000 mg/kg has major limitations that are not acknowledged in the document. Since no practical application An ex situ RENA approach has been proposed, of the RMS has been observed in Ogoniland, making use of a high-density polyethylene the conformity of provisions in the RMS with (HDPE) membrane to prevent contamination situations on the ground could not be verified. of the location where the ex situ remediation is undertaken. The previous document had no In the ex situ RENA approach (Figure 13), a 400- provision for ex situ RENA and the possibility mm thick layer of clean sand (or clay/lateritic that hydrocarbons may infiltrate to lower layer) is placed over the HDPE liner as a treatment layers was not considered a process risk layer (prescribed in a cross-sectional diagram in the RMS document). This layer will invariably A leachate collection system has been become contaminated either through infiltration of proposed in the ex situ RENA process. In the leachates or during mixing of the contaminated soil previous system no cognizance was given to for aeration. It is not evident from the procedure the possibility of leaching of hydrocarbons if, at the end of the treatment cycle, this layer will through runoff stay in place or be removed and disposed of along The RMS brings sediments and groundwater with the contaminated soil. If the treatment bed is into the purview of the materials to be removed with every cycle (which will be necessary remediated. with a sand base), the volume of contaminated material will increase during the treatment process,It is clear that SPDC has been learning internal diluting the actual contaminant and making itlessons regarding clean-up. The changes proposed possible to achieve the clean-up target value withoutin the RMS are certainly an improvement on the having achieved full clean-up. On the other hand, ifexisting situation. However, they do not meet the the layer of sand is left in place for multiple cycles,local regulatory requirement or international best quite how the layer will be treated once the sitepractices, as elaborated below. clean-up is over is not elaborated. In both cases, further refinement and clarifications are needed.Remediation close-out value. The RMS sets a newremediation intervention value of 3,000 mg/kg Leachate management. The ex situ RENATPH to demonstrate commitment to remediation approach has a leachate collection system, but theexcellence. This compares to the EGASPIN approach taken to managing the collected leachateintervention value of 5,000 mg/kg TPH and is is to put it back on the treatment bed. Sincepresented as the company doing “more than” the Nigeria experiences heavy rainfall, relying solelylegislation requires. However, as elaborated in earlier on the treatment bed to manage leachate will besections, the use of an ‘intervention value’ as the hampered by flooding of the treatment area, thus‘target value’ for remediation close-out is not in line jeopardizing the treatment itself and causing runoffwith EGASPIN philosophy and its interpretation by into adjoining areas, and negating the benefit ofDPR. The proposed SEPCiN value, while certainly introducing a leachate collection system. In orderan improvement on the previous value, does not to achieve the desired objectives, a separate leachaterepresent full compliance. Expert-level discussions monitoring, treatment and disposal system integralare needed between DPR, NOSDRA and the oil to the treatment unit is needed.companies to arrive at a technologically feasibletarget value. These discussions should include post- Management of sediments and groundwater.clean-up use of the remediated site (e.g. human use, While the opening part of the RMS mentions thatwildlife site, linkages to wetland) – in other words, the document covers treatment of sediments anda risk-based approach. groundwater, these topics are not in fact elaborated.Ex situ RENA approach. Conceptually, the ex It clear from the review of the new RMS thatsitu RENA approach is an improvement over SPDC has been trying to address some of the 149
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDlimitations of the previous clean-up system. Poor due diligence. An oil spill is one of the possibleHowever, the proposed modifications alone are technical risks anticipated by an oil company. Allincapable of fully resolving the limitations of the oil industry operators have systems and resourcescurrent approach identified by UNEP. SPDC in place to deal diligently with spills within theprocedures for oil spill clean-up and remediation shortest possible time. In Nigeria, both SPDCneed to be fully reviewed and overhauled so as and NNPC have their own dedicated resources toto achieve the desired level of environmental deal with smaller oil spills (referred to by the oilrestoration. In addition to procedures and clean-up industry as Tier 1). PPMC has its own Pollutionmethods, contracting and supervision also need Control Centre to deal with bigger spills. Together,to be improved. the oil industry operators in Nigeria have set up a consortium called ‘Clean Nigeria Associates’ toSPDC operational practice deal with larger (Tier 2) oil spills. Truly large (Tierat oil spill sites 3) spills will need international assistance from specialized oil spill response agencies.It is evident from the UNEP field assessment thatSPDC’s post-oil spill clean-up of contamination In summary, there are systems and resources indoes not achieve environmental standards according place in Nigeria to deal with most oil spills, smallwith Nigerian legislation, or indeed with SPDC’s and large. Even though the oil industry is noown standards. During its reconnaissance survey, longer active in Ogoniland, oil spills continue toUNEP came across dozens of locations where oil happen with alarming regularity. Three minimalspill incidents had occurred in the past. The spills operational interventions are absolutely necessarymay have happened decades ago or weeks ago, with in the event of an oil spill:multiple spills at some locations. Some of theselocations had actually been documented by the 1. Ensure that the source of the spillage is shutoperator as assessed and cleaned up, while others off by closing the valves on the facilitywere still to be cleaned up. The difference between 2. Contain the oil within the spill site to preventa cleaned-up site and a site awaiting clean-up was runoff by blocking culverts and diggingnot always obvious. Results from the sites that were interceptor gulliesstudied in detail are presented in case studies 1 to 7;however, there are a few general observations that 3. Clean up pooled or standing oil whichmerit attention. presents a safety hazard SPDC procedures for oil spill clean-up and remediation need to be fully reviewed and overhauled150
    • 4 CONTAMINATED SOIL & GROUNDWATERA typical spill site within Ogoniland, many of which remain unaddressed for long periods of timeOnce these actions have been achieved, contami- The oil industry often cites access restrictions placednation of the site should be assessed and the clean- by the community as reason for the delay betweenup process initiated. the reporting of an incident and addressing it. While this may be true in the early days of theThe UNEP project team visited a number of spill, the time-lag between the spill event and thelocations with recent spills. One observation site being comprehensively cleaned up shows thatmade consistently through the entire survey was issues of access are not the sole cause of delays. Inthat there was always a time-lag between the addition, the substandard approach to containmentspillage being observed and dealt with. In the and the unethical action of channelling oil intoworst case situations, standing oil left on the creeks cannot be laid at the door of community.ground posed an imminent safety hazard andan ongoing environmental hazard. It was not Loss of control. Various factors at a spill location,possible at these locations to say how long these if not properly attended to by the oil operator,pools had been standing. Nor was it possible to can lead to loss of control. Ogoniland has veryascertain whether the source of the spill had been high rainfall and though there is a so-called rainyshut off or was continuing to leak oil. All these season, it rains virtually every month. Any delayfactors increase percolation of hydrocarbons into in cleaning up an oil spill will lead to oil beingpermeable ground surfaces. washed away by rainwater, traversing communities and farmland and almost always ending up in theWhere the oil operator appeared to have taken creeks. At a number of locations it was evidentintervention measures, such as laying a skirt that fire had broken out following the oil spill.boom or absorbent boom to contain the spill, Where oil is standing, it evaporates, creating athe equipment used was often observed to be in flammable mixture that can easily ignite. Standingpoor condition, rendering it ineffective. In such oil also percolates into soil and kills vegetation,cases, pollution continued to spread well past which itself becomes a combustible fuel, furthercontainment points. increasing the risk of fire. 151
    • Assessment ofVegetation, Aquatic and Public Health Issues Issues of contamination and ensuing environmental damage are consequences of oil industry operations that are impacting the health, welfare and livelihoods of the Ogoni community © Mazen Saggar
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND environmental damage are consequences of oilAssessment of industry operations that are impacting the health,Vegetation, Aquatic and welfare and livelihoods of the Ogoni community. If sustainable environmental improvement and,Public Health Issues indeed, sustainable development of Ogoniland are to become a reality, the issues discussed in thisChapter 4 dealt with site-specific land contamination chapter need to be addressed concurrently withissues where the focus was on soil and groundwater clean-up of contaminated sites.contamination. Sites were assessed on a case-by-case basis, where it was often possible to pinpointthe source of the contamination and identify 5.1 Impact of oil on tide-the operator responsible for clean-up. Soil and dominated delta swampsgroundwater contamination is a regulated issue in and mangrovesNigeria and operators have procedures in place tomanage such incidences. Mangrove ecosystems, together with seagrasses and coral reefs, are among the world’s most productiveIn this chapter, contamination of non-site specific natural ecosystems. They are characterized by aenvironmental media, such as air and surface dynamic equilibrium between flooding, erosionwater, is discussed, as is the fate of receptors and sediment deposition and are adapted tosuch as human beings, fish and mangroves, frequent changes in the shoreline. The mangroveall of which can receive pollution from more trees and bushes are keystone species of centralthan one source. As pollution incidents are importance for brackish wetland ecosystemsdiffuse, responsibility cannot be assigned to a and the terrestrial and aquatic organisms whichsingle event or single operator. In the specific inhabit them. Consequently, mangroves arecontext of Nigeria, ambient environmental not just ecologically significant but are criticalmonitoring and compliance are not well regulated. to the livelihood and food security of the deltaHowever, issues of contamination and ensuing community. © MAZEN SAGGAROgoni people live with contamination of air and surface water every day154
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES seismic linesSeismic lines at Ogu Bolo, November 2010In addition to its productive functions, increasingly The red mangroves (Rhizophora spp.) are by far theother ecosystem services of mangroves are being most abundant. R. racemosa is the most commonunderstood. Key among these is protection and tallest of the genus, reaching a height of upagainst storm surges and smaller Tsunami waves. to 40 metres in favourable conditions, but oftenA comprehensive review of the mangroves in forming shrubby tangles up to 10 metres high,Western and Central Africa, including their with stilt roots – tall arching roots originatingcrucial importance to the livelihood in that from trunks and branches which supply air toregion is presented in a recent publication from the underlying roots and provide support andUNEP [44]. The following sections provide some stability. It fruits at most seasons and the wood isinformation relating to Ogoniland. very hard, suitable for durable construction poles and firewood of high calorific value. R. racemosaA number of species typical for mangrove is a pioneer species and has a high salt tolerance,ecosystems found in West Africa occur in colonizing the mud on the outermost fringes ofNigeria: Acrostichum aureum (an introduced erect, vegetation between high and low tide. As the mudmangrove fern from the neotropics), Avicennia dries out closer to land, it disappears.germinans, Conocarpus erectus, Laguncularia Lasting impressions of seismic surveysracemosa, Rhizophora mangle, Rhizophora harrisonii,Rhizophora racemosa and the mangrove palm Nypa Oil exploration activities started to have an impactfruticans. All were found in Ogoniland during on the Niger Delta vegetation even before a wellUNEP’s fieldwork, with the exception of C. erectus was drilled or oil produced, and the footprint leftand R. harrisonii, although in all likelihood both by seismic surveys over 50 years can still be seen.are present. In addition, Raphia spp. and Phoenix Though not extensive in scope or devastating inreclinata are present as mangrove associates. nature, it is instructive to note that even decades 155
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDafter this disturbance, natural processes have not influx of freshwater to mangrove communities, mayyet managed to close the gap created by the seismic lead to degradation and ultimaltely destruction oflines. Some reports state that oil industries continue the mangrove community [46].to keep the seismic lines open for future use [45].Seismic lines may make the interior of some While no dredging was seen to be taking place inwetland areas more accessible, potentially leading the creeks around Ogoniland during the UNEPto further degradation. assessment period, evidence of dredging can be seen from satellite images. Channels that have beenImpact of dredging dredged or widened and the resulting spoil are all clearly evident in satellite images even now, decadesThe large number of meandering water courses after the dredging operation.makes access to oil exploration and productionsites difficult in delatic region. The development Without proper rehabilitation, former mangroveof oilfield infrastructure in the mangrove zones areas have been converted to bare ground whichtherefore requires dredging and/or vegetation eventually may become colonized by invasive speciesclearance and the creation of canals to open such as nipa palm. The impacts of dredging onnavigable routes. During dredging, soil, sediments mangroves are far reaching because it affects almostand vegetation along the access route of the all components of the ecosystem, including theproposed site are removed and typically disposed of mangrove vegetation itself, benthic invertebrates,over banks, in most cases upon fringing mangroves, fisheries, plankton, wildlife, soil, sediment and waterand then abandoned (Map 17). The abandonment quality – and ultimately the local communities whoof the resulting dredged material has a number of depend directly on the rich mangrove ecosystem forenvironmental impacts. These include smothering of their subsistence [47, 48].fringing mangroves, alteration of surface topographyand hydrology, acidification, accumulation of heavy Impact due to physical disturbancemetals and water contamination, which together inthe Niger Delta have resulted in damage to vegetation Mangroves in the creeks around Ogoniland haveand killing of fish [45]. Importantly, hydrological been very badly affected by physical disturbance,changes, such as increased salinity or lack of regular both through increasing use of the mangroveA right of way more than 30 metres wide cut through mangroves156
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES ELEME ° TAI GOKANA OGU/BOLO Dredged channels OKRIKA BONNY ETCHEOBIO/AKPOR OYIGBO ELEME TAIOKRIKA KHANA OGU/BOLO GOKANA Satellite : Landsat Acquisition date : 1986 © Nasa BONNY Meters ANDONIDEGEMA 0 1 300 2 600 157
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDforests by a growing human population in the (saturated hydrocarbons) and dominance ofcoastal zone and in particular from oil exploration pristine/phytane isoprenoids (naturally occurringand production activities. When the pipeline for organic chemicals). In practical terms this meanscarrying product from Bodo West flow station that the material sticking to the vegetation iswas laid, for example, it was partly routed through highly bituminous, and will not biodegrade ormangroves. A right of way 30 metres wide was cut dissolve in water, even if the water is in constantand was observed during the UNEP study to be contact with the hydrocarbon.still clear of vegetation. The edges of the right ofway appear to have been dredged, allowing floatingoil to spread over the soil along the entire right ofway, gradually destroying the fringing mangrovesand contaminating land (Map 18).Impact due to oil pollutionThe impact of oil on mangrove vegetation inOgoniland has been disastrous, as was evident tothe UNEP team during an early reconnaissancemission along the creeks. Impacts vary fromextreme stress to total destruction. In the mostimpacted areas, only the roots of the mangrovesremains, with no stems or leaves. The roots arecompletely coated in oil, sometimes with a 1 cmor more thick layer of bituminous substance. Thepollution has accumulated over a very long period,perhaps over decades.Mangroves coated with oil will probably dieFrom a typical GC fingerprint of the hydrocarboncoating the mangrove roots (Figure 14), it can beseen that the hydrocarbon is highly degraded with Mangroves roots heavily coated by a thick layerextensive depletion of low molecular mass alkanes of bituminous material (Bodo West, Bonny LGA)158
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES ° W BODO WEST-001 y Wa t of R igh W BODO WEST-004 y Wa t of W R igh BODO WEST-010 W BODO WEST-002 W BODO WEST-005 ETCHE Metres Satellite image detailOBIO/AKPOR 0 100 200 OYIGBO Datum: WGS 84 W WELLS Projection: UTM Zone 32N " ) ELEME TAI ManifoldOKRIKA KHANA * # FlowStation NNPC Pipeline Satellite : WorldView-2 OGU/BOLO GOKANA Acquisition date : 02/01/2011 Crude © DigitalGlobe Refined product BONNY T Oil Pipe in operationDEGEMA ANDONI UNEP 2011 159
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDNipa palm competing with native mangrove (Imo River, Khana LGA)In estuarine areas where the water is calmer Bonny and the shoreline of the Imo estuaryand where there is regular inflow of freshwater (up to 25 km upstream from the open sea) areand nutritious silt, nipa palm, an invasive alien particularly infested [49], thereby drasticallymangrove species from the Asia-Pacific region, changing the physiognomy of the mangrovebecomes more abundant. The plant has a forest. Nipa was introduced into eastern Nigeriahorizontal trunk which grows beneath the ground, in 1906 and has since invaded extensive intertidalthe leaves and flower stalk growing upwards above areas in the four coastal states, including Riversthe surface to a height of up to 9 metres. The State, where more than 200 square kilometresplant’s habit of growing from underground stems (over 10 per cent) of the mangrove zone haveresults in almost pure stands of nipa palm. It can been taken over by nipa palm [50].tolerate infrequent inundation as long as the soildoes not dry out for too long. Nipa is not utilized by local communities in Nigeria [44] and is regarded as a “nuisance palm” becauseAny disturbance of the mangrove ecosystem favours it lacks economic potential. Visual observations atthis opportunistic plant, which propagates itself multiple locations indicated that the plant is moreprodigiously, either by vegetative reproduction or resilient to hydrocarbon pollution than nativethrough floating seeds. Red and white mangroves mangrove species. If measures are not taken toare progressively being outcompeted and replaced stem the severe oil pollution, nipa has the capacityby nipa and monospecific stands can be found to overwhelm the native vegetation, thus makinginland as far as the tide can deposit seeds, which entire wetland areas economically less useful tomay even germinate as they float. The area around local communities.160
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESCase study 8 Artisanal refining of crude oil at 020-001 Bodo West oilfield, flowstation and manifoldSite description.Spill history.Visual observations on site.Bodo West oilfield: artisanal refineries are indicated by arrows 161
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDBodo West artisanal refining location showing UNEP investigated area162
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESSample analyses. UNEP site code qc_020-001 Site name Bodo West LGA Bonny Site description Artisanal refining Number of soil samples 16 Number of ground water samples 3 Deepest investigation (m) 3.30 Maximum soil TPH (mg/kg) 33,200 Number of soil measurements greater than EGASPIN intervention value 6 Deepest sample greater than EGASPIN intervention value (m) 3.00 Maximum water TPH (μg/l) (CL samples) 399 Presence of hydrocarbons in surface water (CL) yes Number of soil measurements below 1 m 13 Number of soil measurements below 1 m greater than EGASPIN intervention value 4Remnants of the artisanal refinery (Bodo West, Bonny LGA). The locations at which artisanal refininghas been carried out present a picture of total environmental devastation 163
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDGeneral conclusions.Proliferation of artisanal refining in Bodo West Classification Description Mangrove In mangrove and was mangrove Mangrove, open Natural areas with open mangrove canopies (on very slightly higher ground which are distinctive and have not changed Mangrove, dead Vegetation, or part of, still in place, but no photosynthetic activity Mangrove, degraded What was mangrove but now degraded Vegetation on Vegetation the slightly raised areas of dredged soil dredged soil Bare soil, dry The very bright slightly raised areas, both dredged spoils not covered by vegetation and roads Bare soil/mud falt, The darket soils with generally no or little vegetation, this includes rights of ways and areas moist which were previously mangroves Artisanal refineries The burnt/black areas, previously vegetation on raised and dredged spoils Industrial Areas cleared by oil industry for its facilities such as flow stations164
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESLanduse Class Area 2007 (m²) Area 2011 (m²) ChangeArtisan refining 0 110,503 110,503Bare soil 47,442 49,199 1,757Bare soil / mud flat, moist 31,829 31,829 0Coast / water interface 38,411 46,690 8,279Industrial 18,157 18,157 0Mangrove 3,658,938 3,347,663 -311,274Mangrove degraded 381 307,762 307,381Mangrove, open 74,999 40,327 -34,672Mud flat / dead mangrove 6,743 25,671 18,928Vegetation on dredged soil 272,108 171,206 -100,902Water 914,559 914,559 0 Visible hydrocarbon pollution on surface water in Bodo West, November 2010 165
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND ETCHEOBIO/AKPOR OYIGBO ° ELEME TAIOKRIKA KHANA OGU/BOLO GOKANADEGEMA BONNY ANDONI OPOBO/ NKORO Meters0 500 1 000 Landcover 2007Land cover classes Farmland, low tree cover Vegetation on dredged soil Mangrove Mangrove degraded Mangrove open Bare soil, dry Bare soil, mud flat, moist Industrial Land Artisanal refinery Coast/Water interface, tidal Water W Bodo West wells Landcover 2011166
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES5.2 Impact of oil on land-based nearby farms, ponds, swamps or creeks. When oil vegetation reaches the root zone, plants begin to experience stress and, in extreme cases, death follows. This is observed routinely in Ogoniland, for exampleAs evident from Chapter 4, oil spills are frequent within swamp vegetation. Any crops in the areaevents in Ogoniland. When a spill occurs on land, directly impacted will also be damaged, and rootvarious scenarios can arise, among them: crops, such as cassava, will become unusable. No remedial action is taken, leaving the However, in due course, even when no remedial contamination in place and exposed to the action is initiated, thick layers of oil will eventually elements wash off from the soil, making it possible for Fires break out, killing vegetation and creating more tolerant plant species to re-establish, giving a crust over the land, making remediation or the area an appearance of having returned to revegetation difficult healthy stage. When farming recommences, Remediation by natural attenuation is plants generally show signs of stress and yields are attempted at the site before fires occur reportedly lower than in non-impacted areas. This naturally has an impact on the livelihood of theWhen spills have occurred on land but no remedial community though statistical information on thisaction is taken, the oil seeps to the ground and issue was not available. Also farming in soil whichflows to low lying areas. This spread is exacerbated is contaminated also exposes the community toby rainfall, which enables oil to run off into dermal contact with hydrocarbons.Fire on a pipeline right of way (Deebon community, Bodo, Gokana LGA) June 2011 167
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Date Location of fire incident 9 March 2001 Bomu flow station 10-inch delivery line to Bomu manifold 16 June 2001 24-Inch Nkpoku-Bomu Trans-Niger Pipeline at Sime 24 August 2001 28-Inch Bomu–Bonny Trans-Niger Pipeline at K-Dere near Bomu manifold 30 May 2002 24-Inch Trans-Niger Pipeline at Bara-Ale Community 18 September 2003 28-Inch Nkpoku–Bomu Trans-Niger Pipeline at Gio 23 May 2004 36-inch Trans-Niger Pipeline at Nkpoku January 2005 Bomu Well 2 January 2005 Bomu Well 18 February 2005 Korokoro W 3 February 2005 24-inch Bomu trunk line 14 August 2006 Yorla Well 13 31 October 2006 Bomu Well 15 30 November 2006 Bomu Well 12 17 December 2006 Bomu flow station and Well 6 3 January 2007 Bomu flow station and Wells 41 and 50 April 2007 Yorla Well 16 May 2007 Yorla Well 16 18 June 2007 28-inch Trans-Niger Pipeline at K-Dere and Bodo 19 June 2007 24-inch Trans-Niger Pipeline at K-Dere 19 June 2007 24-inch Trans-Niger Pipeline Nkpoku–Bomu at Bera 21 October 2007 28-inch Ebubu-Bomu Trans-Niger Pipeline at Eteo June 2008 Bomu Well 8 December 2008 24-inch Bomu trunk line April 2009 Bodo 28-inch pipeline April 2009 Yorla Well 16 March 2010 Bomu Well 44 April 2010 24-Inch Bomby–Bonny trunk line May 2010 24-inch Bera trunk line March 2011 24- and 28-inch MOGHOR Trans-Niger Pipeline March 2011 24-inch K-Dere Trans-Niger Pipeline*This listing is as complete as available information permits, as at May 2011, but may not include all fire incidents occurring at Ogoniland oil facilities during the period in question.In a number of cases, especially following major oil While most oil pipeline fires are short-lived, fires inspill events, SPDC initiated remedial action through oil wells can burn for extended periods, sometimeenhanced natural attenuation (RENA). Initiation of for months. Such fires are more intense as they arethis process precludes farming or regrowth of natural continually supplied with crude from the well andvegetation while clean-up actions are ongoing. can generate extremely high temperatures aroundHowever, as discussed in Chapter 4, the location the wellhead, killing off surrounding vegetationcontinues to remain a source of pollution through and severely damaging vegetation beyond the killrainwater runoff to neighbouring areas. Current zone. Moreover, smoke from fires can travel longclean-up standards require soil contamination to distances, depositing partly burnt hydrocarbons onbe less than 5,000 mg/kg TPH. However, even vegetation far beyond. Such deposits on healthywhen remediation is achieved to this level, a residual leaves can adversely affect their photosyntheticimpact on vegetation will persist. ability, eventually killing the plant.When not attended to immediately, many pipeline While oil well fires are not uncommon in Ogonilandspills or ruptures result in fires that can cover large (Table 35), none occurred during the period ofareas, sometime even visible from satellite images UNEP’s fieldwork, probably due to SPDC’s ongoingand kill extensive tracts of vegetation as indicated by programme of capping all wells. UNEP was thereforeTable 37. Fires also leave behind a thick, burnt crust of unable to take any measurements concerning thebituminous substances fused with topsoil. Until such impact of fires on vegetation.time as the crust is broken down, the affected area willremain unsuitable for vegetation/crop growth.168
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES5.3 Contamination of surface clear and continuous source of spilled oil was water, sediments and fish observed or reported during UNEP’s site visits.Assessment of contamination of surface water Water qualitywas conducted in two phases. In the first phase,reconnaissance observations were made on the In addition to visual observations in the creeks,ground, from boats and from the air. In the second scientific monitoring of water, sediments and fish wasphase, monitoring and sampling of water, fish and also undertaken along the Imo River and the creekssediments were undertaken. The key observations in the Bodo area. The results are presented below.are presented below. Water temperature was consistently measured atPresence of oil 25-30°C in the creeks, the exact temperature being dependent on the time of day and the quantityFloating layers of oil in the creeks in Ogoniland of sunlight absorbed, especially in the shallower,were present right through the 14-month slow-flowing streams. Mangrove sites may havefieldwork period of the UNEP assessment. These somewhat elevated temperatures, owing to the extralayers varied from thick black oil (which was often time it takes to heat and cool a larger body of waterfound along the coastline in places where the water flowing in from the ocean.was more stagnant) to thinner, silvery or rainbow-coloured sheens in the faster-flowing parts of the Salinity, as measured as conductivity, showed lowImo River (Map 20). The field observations in readings as expected (Map 21), except for mangroveOgoniland clearly indicated ongoing entry of oil stations affected by the tidal flow of the Gulf of Guineainto the creeks from many sources, and no single water through the Bonny and Andoni Rivers.An aerial view of the pollution within the creeks 169
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA h "" ! h AKPAJO h" "h ! h " 9" 9 h h " h " OYIGBO " h EBUBU 9 ABAM h h " " ! hh h h h "" " " " h " hh "" ! h " h " TAI TEKA-SOGHO h " ! h " JOR-SOGHO 9 SIME ELEME ! h " ! h " """ hhh PORTHARCOURT h " h " KOROKORO hh ""h "h " KPITE ! OGU h " ! ! h " hh "" 99 "" 9 h " KPORGHOR DEKEN 9 h " 9 ! ! OPUOKO h " 9 " GOKANA GIO h ! LUEGBO-BEERI ! h h ! WAKAMA OKRIKA ! h " BOLO ! BORI KHANA 9 9 ! BERA OGU/BOLO h "h " h " 9 hh "" h " h " hh "" hh "" h " ! ZAAKPON 9 BERE 9 9 9 "" " ! h h ! 9h KAPNOR KIBANI ! 9h h ! 9" " 99 9 h " h h " " h h " " 9 9 9 9 9h " 9 IMO RIVER 9 9 KAA BONNY ! BONNY RIVER 9 9 9 9 ! OLOMA ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ Owerri ! ( 9 ! ( LGA boundaries r ¬ Oil sheen on surface NNPC Crude ABIA h " UNEP investigated contaminated land sites AKWA NNPC Refined product r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011170
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA "" hh ! AKPAJO "" hh ! h " h " , , % % , % h " h " OYIGBO h " EBUBU h " hh h,h "" "%" ABAM ! hh , h "" % " ! " " h h h " , % TEKA-SOGHO h " h " TAI ! h " , % SIME JOR-SOGHO ELEME ,hh %"" ! , % h " ! PORT h " KOROKORO ,h %" hh" ""h ,h %" h "HARCOURT OGU h "h " , % , % ! KPITE ! ! h " hh "" h " DEKEN , % KPORGHOR , % ! , %h " ! , % OPUOKO GIO h " h " ! , % , % WAKAMA % , " ! LUEGBO-BEERI h " h ! ! h " GOKANA , % BORI KHANA OKRIKA BOLO ! ,, %% , % ! BERA %% % % ,, , , OGU/BOLO h "h " h " ,h %" h "h " ! h " hh "" hh "" , % BERE ZAAKPON h " ! h h " " ! , % , ,h % %" ! KIBANI ! KAPNOR , % ,h %" h " , % h , " %h " h " h h " " , % ,, %% h " , % , % IMO RIVER , % , % KAA , % BONNY % , ! % , , , % % , % , % ! OLOMA BONNY RIVER , % ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries Conductivity (μS/cm) ( r ¬ , % < 500 NNPC Crude ABIA , % 500 - 5000 NNPC Refined product AKWA , % 5000 - 10000 r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation , % > 10000 RIVERS Port Harcourt h " UNEP investigated contaminated land sites ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011 171
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA hh "" ! AKPAJO hh "" ! h " h " , , % % , % " h h " OYIGBO h " EBUBU h " hh h,h "" "%" ABAM ! hh , h "" % " ! " " h h h " , % TEKA-SOGHO h " h " TAI ! h " , % SIME JOR-SOGHO ELEME ,hh %"" ! , % h " ! PORT h " KOROKORO ,h %" hh" ""h ,h %" h "HARCOURT OGU h "h " % , , % ! KPITE ! ! h " hh "" h " DEKEN , % KPORGHOR , % ! , %h " ! , % OPUOKO h " , % , % GIO h " ! WAKAMA % , " ! LUEGBO-BEERI h " h ! ! h " GOKANA , % BORI KHANA OKRIKA BOLO ! ,, %% % , ! BERA %% % % ,, , , OGU/BOLO h "h " h " ,h %" h "h " ! h " hh "" hh "" , % BERE ZAAKPON h " ! h h " " ! , % , % h " ! KIBANI ! KAPNOR , % ,h %" h " h , " %h " , % h " h h " " , % ,% %, h " , % % , IMO RIVER % , , % KAA , % BONNY , % ! , % , , % % , % , % ! OLOMA BONNY RIVER , % ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries ( Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) r ¬ NNPC Crude , % <2 ABIA NNPC Refined product , % 2 to 5 AKWA , % >5 r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation h " UNEP investigated contaminated land sites RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011172
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESOxygen levels were within normal levels at many Petroleum hydrocarbons in waterstations (Map 22), though at some stations lowconcentrations were observed. At 25°C 8.4 mg/l The presence of a hydrocarbon sheen on theoxygen can theoretically be dissolved in water, water in the creeks has already been mentioned.falling to around 8.1 mg/l at 28°C. Levels of Hydrocarbons may reach the creeks from a spilldissolved oxygen below 5 mg/l start to cause stress on land – at an SPDC facility or NNPC pipelinein fish and at levels below 2 mg/l fish kill could – which either flows into, or is carried by runoffhappen. Dissolved oxygen is a transient parameter water into, a creek, from vessels carrying oil, orand several factors influence the levels of oxygen from illegal artisanal refining. Tidal influencesin the water, such as the amounts of decomposing also mean that spilled oil can be carried upstreamorganic matter, including of hydrocarbons in as well as downstream of a given spill location.the water or at the seabed, the turbulence of the Concentrations at the monitored locations arewater (turbulent flow increases oxygen levels), and given in Table 38.oxygen input from aquatic plants during daylighthours. As field monitoring of dissolved oxygen Internationally there are no specific quantitativepresents analytical challenges, it is important guidelines regarding the presence of total hydro-to measure this parameter regularly and to take carbons in surface water. WHO Guidelines fornecessary corrective actions. If dissolved oxygen safe recreational water environment, object toat location is monitored below 5 mg/l regularly, the presence of hydrocarbons on water bodiesfurther investigation as to the reason should be on three grounds, aesthetic impact on sight,undertaken and remedial action will be needed smell and possibility of dermal absorption duringto the health of the water body. contact recreational activity such as bathing. Sampling location reference Community Number of samples TPH CWG (μg/l) 001-001 Ejama 3 218 009-010 Bara 1 716 100-001 Ebubu 3 74 101-001 Agbonchia 3 132 101-002 Aleto 3 267 103-002 Korokoro 3 148 103-003 Korokoro/Kpite 3 112 104-002 Ataba 3 963 104-003 Ataba-Otokroma 2 3 7,420 104-004 Ataba 3 2,880 105-002 - 3 28 105-003 Ikot Abasi 4 46 107-001 Eyaa-Onne 3 338 109-001 Kporghor 3 121 110-001 Kporghor 3 12 114-001 Botem-Tai 3 131 115-001 Luyor Gwara 3 239 116-001 Kwawa 3 1,070 117-001 Luegbo-Beeri 2 135 118-001 Kozo 2 1,350 119-001 Bodo 1 11 119-002 Bodo 1 13 120-001 Kpador-Bodo 2 13 120-003 Bodo 1 15 124-001 Yeghe 2 27 125-001 Bodo 1 2,030 130-001 Kolgba 1 2,350 173
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDA hydrocarbon sheen on the water surface of the creeks was an everyday reality during the periodof UNEP’s fieldworkTwo provisions of Nigerian legislation are also explain the lack of action, as Section VIII 4.0 ofimportant in this context. Section VIII, 2.11.3 the EGASPIN addresses such situations.of the EGASPIN, dealing with clean-up andmonitoring of oil spills, states: “Any operator or Section 4.1 states: “An operator shall be responsibleowner of a facility that is responsible for a spill for the containment and recovery of any spillthat results to impact of the environment shall be discovered within his operational area whether orrequired to monitor the impacted environment not its source is known. The operator shall takealongside the restorative activities.” prompt and adequate steps to contain, remove and dispose of the spill. Where it is proven beyondIn sub-section (i) it further states: “For all waters, doubts that an operator has incurred costs inthere shall be no visible sheen after the first 30 cleaning up a spill for which he is not responsible,days of the occurrence of the spill no matter the the operator shall be reasonably compensated, upextent of the spill.” to the extent of recovering all expenses incurred, including reimbursement of any payment forAnd sub-section (ii) states: “For swamp areas, any damage caused by the spill, through fundsthere shall not be any sign of oil stain within the established by the Government or the oil industryfirst 60 days of the occurrence of the incident.” for that purpose.”Over the course of more than a year of fieldwork It is not clear whether a fund was actuallyin Ogoniland, the presence of a hydrocarbon established as implied in the EGASPIN. Butsheen was an everyday reality and it is clear that it is evident that there are provisions for thethe above provision is not enforced. One reason clean-up of such spills and removal of floatingfor this is that according to both the regulator hydrocarbons from the environment. There areand the oil industry the majority of this oil comes multiple technical resources available in Nigeriafrom illegal operations and therefore nobody took to respond to oil spills, but these resources haveaction to clean it up. However, this alone cannot not been put to use.174
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESAn oily sheen is ever-present on the water surface observed concentrations of hydrocarbons whereof the creeks around Ogoniland. This same water they exceeded EGASPIN values.is used by local communities for fishing, bathingand in some cases for drinking. Information The locations where aquatic sediments wereshould be made available to local people about above the EGASPIN values are presented inlocations that are dangerous for drinking, fishing Map 23.or bathing due to the presence of hydrocarbons.Effective action is needed to clean up the existing There are many studies of petroleum hydro-contamination and to prevent further release of carbon concentrations in freshwater andhydrocarbons into the environment. marine sediments. The results for the marine environment have been summarized by the US National Research Council [51] andImpacts of oil on sediments show that concentrations of total petroleumAlthough oil exploration and extraction have hydrocarbons in sediments far from urbanizedcontinued for decades in Ogoniland, and clean- coastal areas are often in the range of 20-50 mg/up of contaminated land has been undertaken kg. Concentrations in the range 50 to severalat hundreds of locations, clean-up of wetland hundred mg/kg are frequently found in coastalsediments has not yet been attempted. Such sediments where anthropogenic activities arework has, however, been undertaken in other intensive. In busy shipping channels and nearparts of the world and is key to restoring aquatic marinas, levels often show concentrations ofecosystems to health. Lack of proper clean-up several hundred mg/kg. Close to direct pointcan prevent the re-establishment of benthic sources of oil contamination, such as water-activity, which affects ecosystem functioning cooled oil refineries and oil terminals, TPHand productivity. Anaerobic degradation of concentrations may be 1,000 to several thousandhydrocarbons can release foul-smelling gases. mg/kg. From a toxicological standpoint it isContaminated sediments can also act as reservoirs generally considered that biological effects startof pollution, releasing hydrocarbons when to occur among more sensitive organisms at levelsdisturbed (e.g. by the propeller action of a in the range of 50-100 mg/kg. More resistantmotorboat) into the aquatic environment long organisms can tolerate concentrations of 1,000after the original source of pollution has been to a few thousand mg/kg.removed. With regard to the EGASPIN, the interventionPetroleum hydrocarbons in sediments. In value for hydrocarbons in sediments is 5,000 mg/all, sediment samples from 37 locations in the kg, against a target value of 50 mg/kg. There arefour LGAs were analysed. Table 39 presents the 10 samples above the intervention value, most substantially so (Table 39). Impacts of oil on fisheries The aquatic resources of Ogoniland constitute a Sampling location Community TPH significant cultural heritage of the Ogoni people, reference (mg/kg) representing an all-important aspect of their 001-001 Ejama 12,100 history and identity. They play a major role in 009-010 Biara 19,600 determining settlement patterns, in particular 104-004 Ataba 8,630 the location of fishing communities along the 119-001 Bodo West 15,100 estuaries. Aquatic resources are also a source of 120-001 Kpador-Bodo 12,100 employment generation. A sample survey of the 120-002 Bodo 6,570 communities undertaken concurrently with the 121-001 Sugi-Bodo 12,100 UNEP survey indicated that while agriculture 122-001 K and B Dere 12,000 remains the major occupation, in some areas 123-001 K-Dere 16,500 fishing could be the main occupation (Figures 130-001 Kolgba 17,900 15 a and 15 b). 175
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND EBERI/ OMUMA °IKWERRE ETCHE OBIGBO ! OBIO/AKPOR AYAMA hh "" ! AKPAJO hh "" ! h " , , % % " h " h h " OYIGBO h " EBUBU h " " h , % ABAM ! hh h h h "" " " " h " hh "" ! h " h " TAI TEKA-SOGHO h " ! h " JOR-SOGHO SIME ELEME , % ,hh %"" ! h " ,h %" ! hh" ""h ,h %" PORT h " , % KOROKOROHARCOURT " h OGU h "h " ! KPITE ! ! h " hh "" h " , % KPORGHOR DEKEN , % , %h " ! , % , % ! OPUOKO GIO h " h " , % ! ! LUEGBO-BEERI WAKAMA "h h " ! OKRIKA ! BOLO h " GOKANA , % ! BORI KHANA ,, %% , % ! BERA ,h %" ,, , , %% % % OGU/BOLO h "h " h " h "h " ! h " hh "" hh "" , % ZAAKPON h " ! BERE , % h h " " ! ,, h %% " , % ! KIBANI ! KAPNOR , ,, % %% ,h %" h " % , h h " " h " , %, % " " h h h " ,% %, KAA , % , % IMO RIVER , % BONNY , % ! % , , % , , , % % % OLOMA ! BONNY RIVER ANDONI ANDONI RIVER OPOBO/ NKORODEGEMA Legend DELTA IMO Umuahiar¬ ! Owerri ! ( LGA boundaries ( Average TPH mg/kg r ¬ NNPC Crude , % < 50 ABIA NNPC Refined product , % 50 - 5000 AKWA , % > 5000 r ¬ IBOM T SPDC Oil Pipe in operation h " UNEP investigated contaminated land sites RIVERS Port Harcourt ! (BAYELSA Kilometres 0 5 10 Sources: Administrative: SPDC, River State. Projection: UTM 32N Oil Facilities: SPDC Geomatic Dept. Datum: WGS84 UNEP 2011176
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESTransfer of land ownership within Ogoniland is by permission is usually granted by the owner to anyoneinheritance, donation, purchase or, in the past, by who wishes to fish in the swampland. Such swampsconquest. Land can be owned by an individual, a can also be leased on a seasonal basis.family or the entire community. Community landsinclude fishing ports/rights and designated portions At fishing ports, markets and in local communitiesof the water body. Fishing ports and locations are the UNEP assessment team met with artisanalcommonly owned by communities but are generally fishermen who earn their living from fishing,bestowed by the local chief. Although individuals commercial fishmongers and subsistence fishermen/can own fishing ponds in their family swamps, women. 177
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDArtisanal fishermen are involved directly in fishing Destruction of fish habitatactivities as a means of livelihood and either ownor occupy surface-water fishing grounds. There Given the socio-economic status of Ogoniland,are small subsectors specialized in estuarine and and surrounded as it is by extensive creeks, fishinginshore canoe fishery. Fishing is carried out by should be an integral part of the community’sthe use of small, open craft which may or may livelihood. While fishing was indeed oncenot be motorized. a prime activity, it was evident from local community feedback and field observations thatFishmongers may or may not own or occupy it has essentially ceased in areas polluted by oil,fishing grounds, or be involved directly in fishing especially where physical impacts are evident.activities, but they act as intermediaries between When encountered in known polluted areas,the fishermen and the end consumer. This category fishermen reported that they were going to fishingis made up predominantly of women. grounds further upstream or downstream.The final category is comprised of fishermen or Where a number of entrepreneurs had previously setwomen who undertake fishing activities on a very up fish farms in or close to the creeks, they reportedsmall scale, either for subsistence or leisure. that their farms and businesses had now been ruined by the ever-present layer of floating oil.Since fishing grounds and ports are the backbone ofthe fishing industry (as farmland is to agriculture), No scientific assessments of the fishing pressure inalmost all fishing families and communities Ogoniland are available. However, judging fromtend to acquire their own fishing location(s) the fact that large portions of the catch are madeand establish prerogative rights over them. This up of juvenile and sub-adult fish, it is reasonableaccounts for the abundance of fishing locations to conclude that overfishing is a major problemin Ogoniland. affecting the fisheries in Ogoniland.An Ogoni woman selling periwinkles at a local market, Kozo, Gokana178
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESLocal fisherman with his catch (note the sheen in the water, Bonny River) 179
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDA fish farm with significant oil sheen (Bodo West, Bonny LGA)Fish consumption Analytical resultsFigure 16 summarizes reported fish consumption There is recurring concern among local com-in Ogoniland by species. Among all communities, munities that accumulations of hydrocarbonsperiwinkle, ice fish, tilapia, catfish and crayfish could be building up within the fish tissues thatare consumed most frequently. However, the they consume. Fish tissue analyses were conductedimportance of species varies considerably. In some to determine if this is indeed the case.communities, such as in the fishing village of Kaa, noone species dominates. Among those who reported Concentrations of 16 PAHs in fish, oysters andconsuming a variety of different types of fish, the mussels from the four Ogoniland LGAs arespecies reportedly most consumed (i.e. number of given in Figure 17a-c. The concentrations ofmeals per unit time) across all communities were PAHs in biota were low in all samples. In freshcrayfish, periwinkle and ice fish. Combined with fish and seafood, concentrations were below thechemical concentration data, this information detection limit for most of the different PAHs.could be used to estimate the level of petroleum In a few cases, measurable but low levels werehydrocarbons ingested by fish consumers. found.180
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESIt is worth noting that smoked fish purchased inlocal markets showed elevated levels of PAHs.WHO recommends a maximum intake of 20μg/kg (human) body weight. Hypothetically,assuming a human body weight of 75 kg and theconcentrations of PAH’s in smoked fish found inthe present investigation, a person could eat upto half-a-kilo of smoked fish per day and still bebelow the WHO recommended maximum dailyintake. Thus, fish consumption in Ogoniland,either of those caught locally or purchased frommarkets, including smoked fish, was shown notto pose a health risk to the community.Total PAH concentrations in bivalves after oilspills and in chronically polluted areas oftenshow concentrations in the range 10-50 mg/kg.Following the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska in1989, the concentration of PAHs in mussels wasfound to be in the range 0.002-6 mg/kg [52]. The fisheries sector is sufferingMussels from the North Sea show concentrationsof 0.05-1 mg/kg and up to 4 mg/kg near analuminium smelter in Scotland [53]. After an oil The possible presence of hydrocarbons in fishspill in Laguna de Terminos, Mexico, oysters were was a matter of serious concern for the Ogonifound to contain 2-42 mg/kg [54]. In Galveston community. This investigation showed that theBay, Texas, concentrations in oysters were up to or accumulation of hydrocarbons in fish tissue isabove 9 mg/kg [55]. An analysis of mussels along not a serious health risk in Ogoniland. However,the north-west Mediterranean coast of France and the fisheries sector itself is suffering due to theItaly showed average concentrations of around destruction of fish habitat in the mangrove zone0.05 mg/kg, with generally higher concentrations and highly persistent contamination of manynear large harbours [56]. creeks, making them unsuitable for fishing. 181
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 0.016 0.014 0.012 0.010 mg/kg 0.008 0.006 0.004 0.002 0.000 N=2 N=1 N=1 N=7 N=2 N=2 Barracuda Catfish Croaker Mudskipper Mullet Tilapia Sphyraena sp, Chrysichthys Pseudotolithus sp, Periophthalmus Mugil cephalus Tilapia guineensis nigrodigitatus barbarus 0.040 0.035 0.030 0.025 mg/kg 0.020 0.015 0.010 0.005 0.000 N=12 N=9 N=1 Bloody Cockle Oyster Periwinkle Anadara Senilis Crassostrea gasar Tympanotonus fuscatus 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6mg/kg 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 N=4 N=6 N=1 N=3 N=17 N=1 N=1 N=6 N=1 N=3 N=4 Bloody Oyster Periwinkle Barracuda Catfish Croaker Mullet Tilapia Smoked Smoked Red Smoked Cockle Catfish Snapper Sardine Anadara Crassostrea Tympanotonus Sphyraena Chrysichthys Pseudotolithus Mugil Tilapia Chrysichthys Lutjanus Sardinella Senilis gasar fuscatus sp, nigrodigitatus sp, cephalus guineensis nigrodigitatus goreensis sp,182
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES5.4 Impacts of oil on public health Community Completed questionnairesExposure and health questionnaires Agbonchia 88 Bera 38The design of the exposure and health questionnaire Bodo 103meant that responses from those communities Dere 51selected to complete it were reflective of the general Ebubu 181population, although some selection bias is possible Kaa 41given that participation was voluntary. Korokoro 70A total of 881 questionnaires were completed by 474 Kpean 64male and 401 female heads of household, with the Kpite 94gender of respondents unclear in six questionnaires. Kwawa 66Most respondents were between 25 and 55 years Okwale 85of age. The number of questionnaires circulated Total 881among each community was proportional to thepopulation of that community, with a goal ofinterviewing 20-25 per cent of each community. Oil spills represent one of numerous sources ofTable 40 summarizes the number of questionnaires exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons. Others arecompleted in each community. commercial refineries, petrochemical plants, vehicle emissions, generator exhausts, bush burning, trashAs noted in section 5.3, agriculture is the dominant burning on the side of the road, food processingoccupation across Ogoniland while fishing is (e.g. gari processing, abattoirs), gas flaring fromlocally significant. Those involved in agricultural oil production in nearby LGAs, artisanal refining,work may be exposed to petroleum hydrocarbons burning of domestic waste, cigarette smoking andpresent in soils, through oral, dermal and even cooking fuels. The questionnaire asked respondentsinhalation exposure. Fishermen may be exposed to specify sources to which they might be exposed.to petroleum hydrocarbons present in sediments While this section was generally left blank,and surface water, as well as via oral, dermal and questions regarding smoking and home cookinginhalation exposure routes. practices were answered.The UNEP team consulting community members on health issues in Eleme LGA 183
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Percentage reporting use of cooking fuel type All communities Wood Petrol Kerosene Cooking gas Stove Indoor cooking (n=522) 83 4.2 15 4.8 4.4 Outdoor cooking (n=348) 93 2.9 6.6 0 0.3Smoking. Smoking of cigarettes, cigars and other was rare relative to the other sources but was reportedsubstances, which result in exposure to benzene more frequently for communities in Khana (Kpean,and some PAHs, turned out to be relatively rare, Kwawa, Okwale) than for communities in otherwith approximately 85 per cent of all respondents LGAs, possibly due to Khana’s comparatively ruralreporting that they had never smoked. Those nature. Less frequently reported sources were bottledwho smoked reported using cigarettes, cigars and water and sachet water (water in plastic bags).Indian hemp. Bathing and washing water. As for drinkingCooking location and fuel. More than half of all water, the most commonly reported sources ofrespondents (522 of 881) reported cooking indoors bathing and washing water across all communitiesand, of these, 83 per cent relied on wood for fuel, were, in order of frequency, bore-wells, dug-outfollowed by kerosene (14.6 per cent), cooking gas wells and surface water (Figure 19). One or more(4.8 per cent) and petrol (4.2 per cent) (Table 41). of these three sources were reportedly dominantFewer respondents (348 of 881) reported cooking within individual communities. In Okwale,outdoors and, of these, 93 per cent relied on wood for rainwater was reported to be more importantfuel, followed by kerosene (6.6 per cent) and petrol for bathing and washing than for drinking. Use(2.9 per cent). The responses are summarized in of sachet water was the least frequently reportedTable 39. (Note: These percentages total more than source, with bottled water not used at all.100 per cent because some respondents reportedusing more than one fuel type.) In consequence, Health-care services. On the question of healththey are likely to be experiencing potentially high care, some respondents indicated that they usedindoor exposure to some petroleum hydrocarbons more than one location (Figure 20). As well asas well as respirable particulates. primary health-care centres, many people also visit local pharmacists. The reported frequency of usePathways of exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons. of private clinics, primary health-care centres andRoutes of possible exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons general hospitals varied among communities. Bodooriginating from oil spills are summarized in respondents, for example, most often sought healthFigure 5. In addition to the pathways noted above care at a general hospital, while respondents in Kpitefor agricultural workers and fishermen, other and Kwawa were more likely to use primary health-community members might experience oral, dermal care centres. Some reported visiting traditionaland inhalation exposure to petroleum hydrocarbons healers but less frequently than other sourcesthrough drinking water, bathing water and washing of health care. These responses confirmed whatwater, as well as oral exposure to any foods that are was learned through interviews with communitycontaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons. Thus, members and health-care professionals, namely thatit is important to determine the sources of food and people seek help from pharmacists as a first resort, followed by care at various medical facilities, thewater used by community members and to combine choice depending on factors such as accessibility,this information with chemical concentration data cost and quality of care.for these media in order to determine if exposures ofconcern are occurring. RainwaterDrinking water. The most commonly reported A recurrent complaint from the Ogoni communitysources of drinking water across all communities during the reconnaissance phase concernedwere, in order of frequency, bore-wells, hand-dug rainwater contamination, reported at times towells and surface water (Figure 18). Use of rainwater be black and the cause of skin irritation. Since184
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESa number of communities use rainwater as a collected from households which had a rainwatersource of drinking water, it was important for collection system. Some opportunistic samplesUNEP to include rainwater in its investigations. were also collected while it was raining. Table 42Given the unpredictability of rainfall, however, provides information on the basic parameters andthis was not an easy task, so samples had to be observations on rainwater samples. 185
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDCommunity Electrical pH Temp (deg C) Colour Odour Method of collection / remarks conductivity [μS/cm]Kwawa 10.32 6.62 26.1 None None Roof while it was rainingAgbonchia 30.7 7.13 24.5 Blackish None Rainwater harvesting container; black sooty substance in waterOkwale 69.6 7.73 25.9 None None Rainwater harvesting container; black sooty substance in water.Okwale 30.1 7.13 25.9 None None Rainwater harvesting containerOkwale 25.7 6.91 27.8 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKorokoro 57.5 8.01 27.6 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKorokoro 32.7 8.96 34.8 Greenish Slight Rainwater harvesting container; rain collected from a thatched roof house used as kitchenKorokoro 31.01 6.85 29 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKorokoro 120.5 5.43 32.3 None None Rainwater harvesting containerK-Dere 27.7 6.92 25.9 None None House very close to spill siteK-Dere 13.71 7.13 25.3 None None Rainwater harvesting containerNorkpo 10.7 6.99 29.9 None None Rainwater harvesting containerNorkpo 32.1 7.18 23.7 None None Rainwater harvesting containerNorkpo 47.3 7.43 45.2 None None Rainwater harvesting containerEbubu-Ejamah 58.2 8.19 31.8 None None Rainwater harvesting containerEbubu-Ejamah 26.7 6.97 28.1 None None Rainwater harvesting containerEbubu-Ejamah 35.8 7.18 28 None None Rainwater harvesting containerObajioken-Ogale 317 4 27.5 None None Previous night rainfall harvested with a containerObajioken-Ogale 12.88 5.2 27.2 None None Rainwater harvesting containerObajioken-Ogale 25.3 7.91 30 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAgbi-Ogale 23.7 6.3 29.8 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAgbi-Ogale 26.1 5.53 27.5 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpite 16.06 5.91 26.1 None None Aluminium roof top systemKpite 7.6 6.21 26.4 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpite 10.39 6.48 30.1 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpite 47.4 7.12 31.4 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAabue-Korokoro 17.76 8.4 23.7 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAabue-Korokoro 29.5 6.85 24.1 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAabue-Korokoro 20.4 6.85 24 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAabue-Korokoro 17.13 6.85 24.3 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKorokoro 52.92 2.39 26.5 None None Thatched roof systemKorokoro 15.4 5.76 26.6 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpean 28.3 5.18 28.8 None None Premises of a ChurchKpean 11.6 5.84 25.7 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpean 15.73 6.19 28.5 None None Rainwater harvesting containerKpean 8.65 5.79 8.65 None None Rainwater harvesting containerAkpajo 26.1 5.69 23.2 None None Directly sampled in open airAkpajo 25.4 5.72 25.4 None None Directly sampled in open airAkpajo 26.2 6 22.7 None None Directly sampled in open air186
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES LGA Sample ID qc_label TPH (μg/l) Eleme 004-006-RW-103 water: community rainwater samples 52 Tai 008-002-RW-102 water: community rainwater samples 189 Tai 008-002-HW-110 water: community rainwater samples 68 Tai 013-002-RW-103 water: community rainwater samples 1,520 Tai 013-002-RW-102 water: community rainwater samples 3,250 Tai 013-002-RW-101 water: community rainwater samples 98Table 42 lists pH measured in rainwater and Table 43 shows the results from analysis of TPHdrinking water samples collected by the UNEP levels in rainwater samples from Ogoniland.Public Health Team. WHO (2008) describes The presence of hydrocarbons was noted in sixrainwater as “slightly acidic and very low in of the 46 samples. The Nigerian drinking waterdissolved minerals; as such, it is relatively standard for hydrocarbons is 3 μg/l. These TPHaggressive [and] can dissolve metals and other concentrations detected may have come fromimpurities from materials of the catchment and chemicals scoured from the atmosphere bystorage tank” [59]. Of the 35 rainwater samples rainfall or from rainwater catchment systems andcollected from harvesting vessels, 22 had pH harvesting vessels. However, as the community usemeasurements in the range 6.5-8.5 required by the water from harvesting vessels, the observedNigerian drinking water quality standards [36]. concentrations represent the actual risk to theOf the 13 samples with pH measurements outside community. Only three rainwater samples werethis range, 12 had pH levels ranging from 2.4 to collected directly from the atmosphere by the6.3 and one had a pH of approximately 9. The UNEP team; none had detectable concentrationsrainwater sample with a pH of 2.4 was described of TPH. Because rainwater samples were collectedas ‘colloidal’ but was reportedly used for washing from the area where concern had been expressedand other domestic purposes. The sample with a about its quality, these findings are encouraging,pH of about 9 was reportedly greenish in colour particularly given that questionnaire respondentswith a slight odour and had been collected over reported use of rainwater for drinking, as well asa relatively long period. Rainwater samples for bathing and washing.collected directly from the atmosphere had pHmeasurements ranging from 5.6 to 6, below the Two further observations regarding hydrocarbons6.5-8.5 range. These pH levels might reflect in rainwater are worth noting:relatively clean rainwater, but they could also The observed hydrocarbons may have comereflect some effect from nearby industrial activity from a non-SPDC source in Ogoniland (suchand vehicular emissions. As with the rainwater as the refinery) or a non-Ogoniland sourcesamples collected directly from the atmosphere, (such as flares from neighbouring LGAs)drinking water samples had pH measurementsbelow 6.5, ranging from 5.1 to 5.7. The presence of TPH in rainwater is highest during local incidents of fire. While suchWHO has noted the difficulty in determining links incidents are not uncommon in Ogoniland,between human health and the pH of drinking no fires occurred during UNEP’s assessmentwater because pH is so closely associated withother aspects of water quality. Furthermore, foods While contamination of rainwater by hydrocarbonswith low pH, such as lemon juice (pH about 2.4) appears not to be serious across Ogoniland,and orange juice (pH about 3.5), are commonly given the prevalence of the use of rainwater forconsumed. However, pH measurements outside drinking and the possibility of increased pollutionthe 6.5-8.5 range might influence public health during localized fires, the community should beindirectly if they resulted from the leaching assisted in creating a safer approach to rainwaterof metals into the water from the rainwater harvesting in order to prevent hydrocarbon andconveyance and harvesting system. non-hydrocarbon contamination. 187
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDDrinking water from wells national standard, which requires drinking water odour to be “unobjectionable” [37]. The respectiveTwo types of well are constructed in Ogoniland: communities were aware of both the pollutiondug-out wells (i.e. wells dug by hand) and bore- and the inherent dangers but explained that theywells (i.e. boreholes). Anecdotal information continue to use the water for bathing, washing andsuggested that dug-out wells are shallow and cooking because they have no alternative.typically less than 10 metres in depth, while bore-wells may reach a depth of 50 metres. However, One important point must be noted here. Theall such wells essentially exploit the same aquifer. drinking water survey was neither a comprehensiveDrinking water wells were sampled by both the survey analysing every drinking water wellPublic Health (PH) Team and the Contaminated in Ogoniland, nor a sample survey in whichLand (CL) Team. the locations of the wells were selected in a systematic manner to reflect overall drinkingA summary of hydrocarbon contamination in the water contamination in Ogoniland. Rather, thewells is presented in Table 44. In every case, TPH values given above are an indication that in manyvalues exceed the Nigerian standard for drinking locations petroleum hydrocarbon has migratedwater of 3 μg/l. to the groundwater. In practice, it is likely that every well within the vicinity of a contaminatedIn addition, some of these samples exhibited well is either already contaminated or at risk ofstrong petroleum odours, again in violation of the becoming contaminated. Samples by Sample ID number LGA Well type TPH (ug/l) CL 001-005-MED-101 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 19,900 CL 001-005-BH-02 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 4,280 CL 001-005-BH-04 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 317 CL 001-005-GW-104 Eleme water: hand-dug well (community) 20,300 CL 001-009-HW-01 Eleme water: hand-dug well (community) 12 CL 019-014-GW-100 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 63 CL 019-014-GW-102 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 11,500 CL 019-035-HW-104 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 12 CL 019-035-HW-12 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 21 CL 019-020-HW-15 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 4,240 CL 019-007-HW-101 Gokana water: hand-dug well (community) 15 CL 008-002-HW-01 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 14 CL 008-002-HW-03 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 12 CL 008-002-HW-04 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 12 CL 008-002-HW-11 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 11 CL 008-002-HW-12 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 11 CL 008-002-HW-13 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 13 CL 005-009-HW-04 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 53 PH 001-005-HW-100 Eleme water: hand-dug well (community) 39.3 PH 001-005-BH-103 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 1320 PH 001-005-BH-104 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 233 PH 001-005-BW-100 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 42,200 PH 001-005-BH-102 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 20,200 PH 004-006-BH-105 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 299 PH 001-002-BH-102 Eleme water: bore-well (community) 642 PH 009-003-HW-101 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 54.7 PH 009-003-HW-102 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 154 PH 008-002-HW-100 Tai water: hand-dug well (community) 59.4188
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUESCase study 9 Groundwater pollution at Nsisioken Ogale, Eleme LGASampled well Benzene (μg/l)001-005-BH-102 9,280001-005-BH-103 161001-005-BW-100 7,090001-005-MED-101 8,370001-005-GW-104 7,140 189
    • UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 400 Concentration of VoCs, ug/m3 350 300 250 Community 200 Contaminates Site 150 100 50 0 Nkeleoken-Alode, Eleme-Oil Site Orboo-Ooodukor, Kpalaade, Gokana Keburuzo, Gokana - Community Keburuzo, Gokana -Community Debon-Bodo, Gokana - Oil Site Agbonchia, Okpee, Eleme - Oil Site Korokoro-Aabue, Tai- Oil Site Norkpo1, Tai- Oil Site Akpajo, Eleme - Oil Site K-Dere, Gokana - Oil Site K-Dere, Gokana - Oil Site Sugi, Gokana - Oil Site RSUST, Port Harcourt Uewaagu, Khana-Community Aleto, Eleme-Oil Site Gio, Tai - Oil Site Bodo West, Gokana - Oil Site Intels Camp Oyaa-Ejamah-Ebubu, Eleme-Oil Site Okwale, Khana Botem, Tai - Oil Site Kpite, Tai-Oil Site Ejamah-Ebubu, Eleme - Oil Site Ejamah-Ebubu, Eleme - Oil Site Sime, Tai-Oil Site Kwawa, Khana - Oil Site Wiiborsi-Kpean, Khana-Oil Site Location InvestigatedOutdoor air represent a different location. Community samples were also likely to reflect more non-oil spill sourcesVolatile organic compounds. Figure 21 shows of petroleum (e.g. vehicle exhaust; fuel sold on thethe sum of VOC concentrations at locations where side of the road; presence of petroleum transportair sampling was carried out. Where communities vehicles, as at Nkeleoken-Alode, Eleme, wherewere adjacent to known contaminated sites, the community sample was far higher than thesampling results are presented together. spill site sample). Moreover, concentrations detected below approximately 2 μg/m3 are closeConcentrations of VOCs in air were generally to laboratory detection limits and must thereforehigher near oil spill locations with larger quantities be viewed with greater uncertainty than higherof relatively unweathered product on the ground detected concentrations. These factors made itthan at spill locations with weathered or combusted difficult to accurately apportion the VOCs detectedoil. This was to be expected given that these VOCs in the atmosphere to specific oil spills and otherare among the petroleum hydrocarbons that petroleum sources. However, the air concentrationsvolatilize and weather most rapidly. did indicate some influence of oil spills on air quality.There was no clear pattern as to whether themeasured VOCs were higher at the spill site or Figure 21 also shows air concentrations inin the nearby community; the concentration of the Okwale reference community and in twoVOCs in many community samples was similar urban reference samples in Port Harcourt.to or even higher than the corresponding oil spill Concentrations of VOCs were generally low insamples. However, this generally occurred at spill these samples and similar to oil spill locations withsites with either weathered product or only a small limited and/or weathered oil contamination onamount of product on the ground surface. the ground surface.At many sampling sites the community samples Significance of benzene concentrations. Whilewere very close, sometimes immediately adjacent the survey measured concentrations of individualto spill sites and, arguably, did not necessarily VOCs at sampling locations across Ogoniland,190
    • 5 VEGETATION, AQUATIC & PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES only benzene values are reported here (Figure 22). This is because benzene is a known carcinogen and was detected in both soil and groundwater investigations in Ogoniland. WHO has developed indoor air quality guidelines for benzene [37]. It notes that toxicity from inhaled benzene and other indoor air contaminants “would be the same whether the exposure were indoors or outdoors. Thus there is no reason that the guidelines for indoor air should differ from ambient air guidelines”. Benzene was detected in all samples at concentrations ranging from 0.155 to 48.2 μg/m 3. WHO concluded that no safe concentration of benzene in air can be recommended because it is a genotoxic carcinogen. Instead, WHO – and USEPA – have