Adam Baron

Five Questions on Oil Tanker FSO Safer


August 2022

The FSO Safer, moored off Yemen’s coast, is an aging supertanker at an advanced stage of decay, and it could soon break apart or explode. The resulting environmental and humanitarian catastrophe would further devastate Yemen. Potential consequences include ecological devastation and millions exposed to highly polluted air and cut off from food, fuel, and other life-saving supplies, as well as the loss of hundreds of thousands of fishing industry jobs. We spoke with Greenpeace’s Ahmed El Droubi about the situation.

1) How would you describe the potential threat of an oil spill from the FSO Safer tanker at this moment?

The threat is both extremely serious and urgent. Everyone who has any knowledge of the issues agrees that the situation is critical, that urgent action is needed to resolve it, and the impacts of not securely removing the oil from the Safer to a separate tanker would be devastating. Greenpeace’s briefing released earlier this year identifies the range of humanitarian and environmental impacts that a catastrophic spill or explosion would have not just on Yemen but also on other countries.

2) What other environmental disasters would you compare the current Safer situation to?

Comparisons with the Exxon Valdez 1989 spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska, have been made, highlighting that the estimated 1.14 million barrels (140,000 tonnes) of oil on the Safer is over four times larger. But the situation with the Safer is unique. The Exxon Valdez, like many oil spills before and since, were accidents; each with serious and long term damage to communities and the environment. If the Safer is left and either explodes (due to the lack of inert gases in the tanks) or breaks up, leaking its cargo, this would not be an accident, but the result of the inability of all parties to make humanitarian and environmental considerations a priority. The technology and expertise is available and ready to be deployed – political will from the international and regional communities is missing. But there is no doubt that the experience of other oil spills and well blow-outs around the world tells us that the impacts would be devastating both for communities living in the region and the environment in one of the world’s fragile biodiversity hotspots.

3) Why has the situation reached this point?

I note some of the reasons why we have reached this point above. More concretely, the United Nations and the de facto authorities in the region have agreed on a sensible and clear plan. This requires funding – US$80 million to enable the oil to be transferred and held in a second tanker. Thus far, a number of governments have pledged some finance to support the plan but at the time of writing they still need a further US$20 million. And, bear in mind that many of these ‘pledges’ are just that, and there is a need to actually get the money in the bank. 

US$80 million is but a drop in the ocean compared with the money made by oil companies that have recently announced record profits averaging around US$7.2 billion in the first three months of this year. And not one single oil company has come forward to provide funding. The US$80 million needed also pales into insignificance when compared to the US$ 405 billion subsidies given to fossil fuels each year – mostly oil and gas companies – by the G20 governments.

4) What can local and international actors do to avoid a worst case scenario?

As I indicated above, political will and the finance needed to operationalize the plan are needed. But we need to ensure preparation in case of a major spill or explosion. It is of huge concern that there is limited oil response equipment in the region needed to prevent and mitigate the worst impacts. Oil containment booms need to be placed around the Safer, other oil response equipment should be in the country NOW. The most urgent time in which the best mitigation can be undertaken is within the first 48 hours of a spill happening. If we wait until it happens and then try to get equipment to the region, it will already be too late. In addition, potentially impacted communities should be alerted and warned of the potential health impacts and what action should be taken. We have produced such information leaflets and posters. To this end there need to be stocks of personal protective equipment both for those involved in dealing with the spill and those impacted.

5) What is the cost of inaction?

The United Nations has put the cost of oil response at US$22 billion. This just covers the cost of equipment, mitigation efforts, recovering, etc. It does not count the human and environmental cost in livelihoods, health, and welfare and the incalculable costs on the Red Sea ecosystems.

Ahmed El Droubi is the regional campaigns manager for Greenpeace Middle East and North Africa, and a member of Greenpeace’s international working group to address the threat of the FSO Safer.

Adam Baron is a writer and political analyst. He was based in Yemen from 20112014. He is also a YPC Board Member.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Yemen Policy Center or its donors.

Editors:
Jatinder Padda
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Yemen Policy Newsletter
×