The survey and interview findings were analyzed and discussed. It provides a brief overview of the respondents’ perception of oil exploration’s influence on their environment.
Perception of residents on influence of oil exploration on the environment
In any phase of oil and gas exploration, there is a peculiar primary impact on the environment and these impacts are driven by the release of emissions, discharges, collisions and physical destruction of the seabed and land. One ecological impact from the offshore oil and gas industry arises from the loss of habitat and biodiversity due to the construction and installation of subsea infrastructure. Such installations do not only directly destroy the habitats but also give rise to suspended particles which can either smother certain species (Amoasah, 2010). Apart from the influence oil exploration has on the flora and fauna, there is also an influence on man.
Table 1 shows the distributive results of variables used in the adverse environmental change analysis. Thirty nine percent (39%) of the respondents confirmed an adverse change in the environment whilst 61% disagreed. Adverse environmental change may not be noticed for a long period of time, thus this result is not so alarming. Factors of adverse environmental change as a result of oil exploration considered in the study include air, noise and visual pollution. Table 1 gives more details of the results.
Further, the multinomial logistic regression model was used to estimate relationship between independent variables (air and noise pollution) and the dependent variable (adverse environmental change as a result of oil exploration).
Mathematically, the regression equation is given as:
Where, j = 1, 1.2; Pr(peri) is the probability that a household perceives an adverse environmental change; X is the vector of the explanatory variable, and β is a vector of parameters to be estimated (air pollution and noise pollution)
Perception of residents on adverse environmental change due to air pollution
Air pollution is the contamination of the indoor or outdoor environment by any chemical, physical or biological agent that modifies the natural characteristics of the atmosphere. Atmospheric emissions are increasingly becoming the subject of concern to both industry and national governments due to its negative effect on the climate (Osei, 2011). Household combustion devices, motor vehicles, industrial facilities (example, being oil exploration) and forest fires are common sources of air pollution. Air pollution may cause respiratory and other diseases, which can be fatal (World Health Organisation, 2013).
Table 1 shows the perception of respondents concerning air pollution as a result of oil exploration. Forty two percent (42%) confirmed air pollution is increasing in their community whilst 58% did not agree. This is a surprise as the oil field is about 50 kilometers away from the two communities where the survey took place. This may be due to the fact that almost half of the residents (especially, in the Efaso community) are fishermen and fish mongers, hence they are always onshore which is closer to the oil field. Thus much impact of air pollution on them. Adverse environmental change due to air pollution has a ‘cultural services’ impact on the people as well. ‘Cultural services’concern the benefits people derive from ecosystems through recreation, cognitive development, relaxation and reflection (Amoasah, 2010). Most of the respondents in Efaso expressed worry about the obnoxious smell at the beach after oil exploration began operation. Others also complained of terrible headaches when they stay at the beach for long hours. As a result, this has deterred them from relaxing and enjoying the cool breeze as they used to. With these comments from the inhabitants of Efaso, it can be affirmed that onshore air pollution impacts are being blamed on the oilfield. This supports a research done by the National Press Release (NPR) in the United States which speculates that as a result of toxic ingestion, many people suffer from skin rashes which require daily injections to prevent swelling, and chronic headaches. Also, fainting spells, vomiting and chronic diarrhea are common symptoms for those impacted by oil extraction.
Long term health effects include: Lung disease, liver and kidney damage, damage to the nervous system, malformation, brain damage, miscarriages and many other devastating chronic conditions (Rain forest foundation, 2015). The multinomial logistic estimation model (Table 2) revealed that the likelihood of the perception of air pollution’s influence on the environment was positively and significantly related to oil exploration. This implies that air pollution has an adverse effect on the environment based on the perception of residents in study area.
Perception of residents on adverse environmental change due to noise pollution
The traditional definition of noise is “unwanted or disturbing sound”. Sound becomes unwanted when it either interferes with normal activities such as sleeping, conversation, or disrupts or diminishes one’s quality of life (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). Studies have shown that there are direct links between noise and health of man. Problems related to noise include stress related illnesses, high blood pressure, speech interference, hearing loss, sleep disruption, and lost productivity. Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) is the most common and often discussed health effect, but research has shown that exposure to constant or high levels of noise can cause countless adverse health effects (Environmental Protection Agency, 2009). There has also been reported death, reduced growth, impaired hearing and stress, as some of the possible impact of noise from oil and gas operation (Fernández et al., 2005).
Apart from the influence on man, during oil and gas development noise disturbances associated with aircraft, bulk vessels and drilling operational activities are likely to impact negatively on the ecosystem. This may arise from prospecting and survey activities. At certain levels, noise affects the functions of marine organisms. Fish and marine mammals, including whales and dolphins, are particularly affected mostly by sound elevation because of their dependence on sound for reproduction, feeding, and avoiding hazards such as predators and navigation (Sakyi et al., 2012). It was not surprising that Ghana’s marine environment is under threat as whales (and other marine mammals and turtles) continue to be washed ashore in the Western and Greater Accra regions since the oil and gas exploration activities began (Aklorbortu, 2013).
Critics are of the view that noise pollution among other factors as a result of the drilling activities might have caused this. Not less than 21 whales had been washed ashore. The EPA has not investigated the cause of the historic beaching of whales but consistently without any scientific grounds, dissociated the drilling of oil at the Jubilee Field from the raging discussion (Dadzie, 2015). This unfortunate situation may not promote a healthy relationship between the people in these regions and the oil companies.
Results from Table 1, shows that 1% of the respondents perceived that there is noise pollution as a result of oil exploration, but 99% disagreed. Oil exploration is being done offshore; hence there is not much noise onshore, in these communities. This is not unexpected due to the oilfield being 50 km away. Noise perceived as pollution was basically from helicopters that transport oil from the rig to Takoradi, the regional capital (Figure 2). However, there may be an influence of noise on the mammals in the sea as discussed. A further analysis using the multinomial logistic estimation model (Table 2) revealed that the likelihood of the perception of noise pollution’s influence on the environment was not significantly related to oil exploration.
Perception of residents on adverse environmental change due to visual pollution (sea weed-sargassum)
Waste disposal has become one of the main challenges of globalization. Developing countries are still in the transition towards better waste management but currently have insufficient collection and improper disposal of wastes. Clear government policies and competent bureaucracies for management of solid wastes are needed urgently especially in countries where there is rapid population growth through urbanization into peri-urban areas (Srinivas, 2012).
The main visual pollution observed in the study was sea weeds (Sargassum) along beaches of communities onshore in unusual quantities (Dadzie, 2015). Fishermen from these communities linked the ‘blackened’ colour of rotting sargassum to the recent commencement of oil production, calling on the government to discipline Tullow, the main company operating in the Jubilee Oil Field, and to compensate them accordingly (Ackah-Baidoo, 2013). They believe the sea weeds were uprooted as a result of the distraction of the sea bed in the course of oil exploration. But as discussed earlier no scientific research has been conducted yet by the EPA to confirm this.
On the other hand, representatives from the government and Tullow have countered by stating that the growing presence of sargassum, which is an important source of food for numerous aquatic species, has more to do with local fishing habits: that, it is a result of overfishing, not oil production (Ackah-Baidoo, 2013). Thus the real cause of the surging sea weeds on the beach is not known. Disposing them is one of the greatest challenges in these fishing communities because they form a greater part of the fish catch volumes rendering the fishermen to lose out on income resulting in a gradual and disturbing decline in their livelihoods. Fishermen had no choice but to damp them all over the coast after the removal of fish for consumption and sale (Figure 3).
A complaint of weeds trapping nets and destroying them was also common. The fisher men spend most of their time to remove the weeds and debris from the nets. When it comes to the community, the weeds are making most coastal communities uninhabitable and depriving them of humane relaxation and fresh breath. Residents cannot longer enjoy the serenity of the beaches endowed them. They also cannot enjoy their swimming as they are likely to have rashes. Some are now even complaining of eye problems. The weeds when left to decompose produces strong stench which they say makes life and pleasure unbearable. With tourism, no tourist will be attracted to unappealing piles of rotting seaweed along the beach. Resorts will have to spend more efforts and money maintaining their beaches or risk losing clients who come there as result of the serenity of the beaches (Kwofie, 2014).
This paper focused on the interim environmental influence of oil and gas exploration activities on human lives in the Half Assini and Efaso communities in Jomoro District of the Western region of Ghana. Two stage sampling technique was used. It employed purposive sampling of residents living in the Jubilee Oil field environs. After, simple random sampling was used to select 300 respondents from the study area out of a population of about 8,000. The factors of adverse environmental change as a result of oil exploration considered in the study include air, noise and visual pollution. The multinomial logistic estimation model revealed that the likelihood of perception of air pollution’s influence on the environment was positively and significantly related to oil exploration. That of noise pollution was not significant. Visual pollution (disposal of sea weeds) was likewise an eyesore at the beach.
