Introduction - UNEP

EnvironmentalAssessmentof OgonilandUnited 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 PotocnikCover image: Victor Temofe MogboluPrinted on Recycled PaperUNEP promotesenvironmentally sound practicesglobally and in its own activities. Thispublication is printed on recycled paperusing vegetable-based inks and other ecofriendlypractices. Our distribution policyaims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint.

EnvironmentalAssessmentof OgonilandUnited Nations Environment Programme

Table of contentsForeword 6Executive summary 8Chapter 1: Introduction 181.1 Nigeria and the Niger Delta .................................................................................................................................20Rivers State ..........................................................................................................................................................22Ogoniland ............................................................................................................................................................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 ....................................................................................30Geology ...............................................................................................................................................................30Groundwater ........................................................................................................................................................30Surface water ........................................................................................................................................................31Vegetation ............................................................................................................................................................32Local communities ...............................................................................................................................................32Ogoni interaction with neighbouring regions .......................................................................................................35Institutional framework........................................................................................................................................362.2 Petroleum hydrocarbons: origin and environmental consequences .......................................................................36Origin and use .....................................................................................................................................................36Environmental consequences of hydrocarbons .....................................................................................................37Non-hydrocarbon environmental issues related to the oil industry .......................................................................412.3 Oil industry-related infrastructure in Ogoniland ..................................................................................................43SPDC facilities in Ogoniland ...............................................................................................................................43Non-SPDC oil industry facilities in Ogoniland ....................................................................................................46Chapter 3: Objectives, Scope and Methodologies 503.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................523.2 Scope of the investigation .....................................................................................................................................52Geographical scope ..............................................................................................................................................52Technical scope of the assessment .........................................................................................................................533.3 Structure of the study team ..................................................................................................................................53Project management .............................................................................................................................................54Technical teams ....................................................................................................................................................54Cross-cutting teams ..............................................................................................................................................55Support teams ......................................................................................................................................................55Use of local resources ...........................................................................................................................................58Laboratories .........................................................................................................................................................593.4 Assessment methodologies ...................................................................................................................................59Community engagement ......................................................................................................................................613.5 Phase 1: Scouting exercises, desktop reviews and reconnaissance ..........................................................................623.6 Phase 2: Intensive fieldwork .................................................................................................................................642

Assessment of soil contamination .........................................................................................................................64Assessment of groundwater contamination ...........................................................................................................66Assessment of naturally occurring radioactive materials ........................................................................................68Assessment of surface water and sediment contamination ....................................................................................68Assessment of fish contamination .........................................................................................................................70Assessment of impact of oil contaminants on vegetation ......................................................................................71Assessment of damage to mangroves .....................................................................................................................72Assessment of impacts on air pollution and public health .....................................................................................72Remote sensing ....................................................................................................................................................79Sample management ............................................................................................................................................81Field measurements ..............................................................................................................................................83Analytical measurements ......................................................................................................................................83Field data collection for remote sensing ................................................................................................................84Review of institutional issues ................................................................................................................................853.7 Contamination assessment criteria .......................................................................................................................85Standards for soil ..................................................................................................................................................86Standards for groundwater ...................................................................................................................................87Standards for drinking water ................................................................................................................................87Air quality standards ............................................................................................................................................883.8 Limitations, challenges and constraints ................................................................................................................88Scientific constraints ............................................................................................................................................88Security constraints ..............................................................................................................................................90Access restrictions .................................................................................................................................................91Information constraints ........................................................................................................................................92Sample management constraints ..........................................................................................................................93Ill-defined boundaries ..........................................................................................................................................93Vertical delineation of contamination ...................................................................................................................93Time frame ..........................................................................................................................................................93Chapter 4: Assessment of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater 944.1 Field observations of the current situation on land ...............................................................................................96Habitation on or close to oilfield facilities ............................................................................................................96Unmanaged vegetation .........................................................................................................................................98Facilities not in operation .....................................................................................................................................98Decommissioned and abandoned facilities ...........................................................................................................99Well blowouts ....................................................................................................................................................1004.2 Field observations concerning illegal oil-related activities ...................................................................................101Illegal tapping of oil wells and pipelines .............................................................................................................101Artisanal refining ................................................................................................................................................1024.3 Geological observations ......................................................................................................................................105Groundwater ......................................................................................................................................................1054.4 Contamination assessments ................................................................................................................................108Soil and groundwater contamination .................................................................................................................108Case study 1 SPDC pipeline right of way – 001-001 Ejama-Ebubu, Eleme LGA .............................................110Case study 2 SPDC suspended facilities – Bomu Manifold, K-Dere, Gokana LGA ..........................................115Case study 3 SPDC legacy site – 008-010 Korokoro flow station .....................................................................119Case 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 ...............................................127Case study 6 Fly tipping of oilfield waste - 001-022 – oil waste dump site .......................................................130Case study 7 SPDC remediation site 008-002 – Korokoro Well 3, Korokoro, Tai LGA ...................................132Background concentration of hydrocarbons .......................................................................................................136Barium pollution................................................................................................................................................136Naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) results ..................................................................................1364.5 Discussion of institutional issues ........................................................................................................................138Multiple institutions with unclear mandates .......................................................................................................138Resolving the issue .............................................................................................................................................142Review of SPDC’s practices and performance .....................................................................................................142SPDC 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 ...........................................................................154Case 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 ...........................................................................................169Presence of oil ....................................................................................................................................................169Water quality .....................................................................................................................................................169Petroleum hydrocarbons in water .......................................................................................................................173Impacts of oil on sediments ................................................................................................................................175Impacts of oil on fisheries ...................................................................................................................................1755.4 Impacts of oil on public health ...........................................................................................................................183Exposure and health questionnaires ....................................................................................................................183Case study 9 Groundwater pollution at Nsisioken Ogale, Eleme LGA .............................................................189Ogoniland is not an island .................................................................................................................................200Chapter 6: Recommendations 1026.1 Operational recommendations ...........................................................................................................................205Maintenance of oilfield facilities .........................................................................................................................205Decommissioning of oilfield facilities .................................................................................................................205Prevention of illegal activities .............................................................................................................................205Oil spill response ................................................................................................................................................206Ongoing remediation of contaminated sites .......................................................................................................2066.2 Technical recommendations for environmental restoration.................................................................................207Clean-up of contaminated soil and sediments ....................................................................................................207Decontamination of groundwater ......................................................................................................................210Rehabilitation of mangroves ...............................................................................................................................2116.3 Recommendations for public health ...................................................................................................................214Communities exposed to petroleum hydrocarbons in their drinking water .........................................................214Communities living on rights of way .................................................................................................................215People involved in bunkering and artisanal refining ............................................................................................2156.4 Recommendations on follow-up monitoring ......................................................................................................215Preventive surveillance........................................................................................................................................216Monitoring of groundwater ................................................................................................................................217Monitoring of water bodies, fish and aquatic sediments .....................................................................................217Monitoring of vegetation and fauna ...................................................................................................................2174

Air quality monitoring .......................................................................................................................................217Public health monitoring ...................................................................................................................................2176.5 Recommendations for changes to regulatory framework.....................................................................................217Legislative matters ..............................................................................................................................................217Institutional arrangements..................................................................................................................................2196.6 Recommendations for follow-up ........................................................................................................................219Chapter 7: Ogoniland’s Path to Sustainability 2227.1 Recommendations for Government ...................................................................................................................224Creation of an Ogoniland Environmental Restoration Authority .......................................................................224Creating an Environmental Restoration Fund for Ogoniland .............................................................................226Creating a Centre of Excellence for Environmental Restoration .........................................................................227Declare the intent to make the wetlands around Ogoniland a Ramsar site..........................................................228Mount 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 inOgoniland is a long, complex and often painfulone that to date has become seemingly intractablein terms of its resolution and future direction.It is also a history that has put people and politicsand the oil industry at loggerheads rendering alandscape characterized by a lack of trust, paralysisand blame, set against a worsening situation forthe communities concerned.The reality is that decades of negotiations,initiatives and protests have ultimately failed todeliver a solution that meets the expectations andresponsibilities of all sides.In an attempt to navigate from stalemate to action,the Government of Nigeria, in consultation withmany of the relevant actors, invited UNEPto consider undertaking an assessment of oilpollution in Ogoniland.UNEP has acquired an international reputationfor assembling expert teams, coordinatingdemanding assessments and bringing scientificand empirical evidence to policymakers.UNEP initially consulted with a wide rangestakeholders and the United Nations CountryTeam in Nigeria in order to consider the scopeand indeed the feasibility of the assessment.We were confronted with a unique challenge:lack of trust between actors; political tensionsbetween communities; regional and nationalgovernment; gaining access to Ogoniland; securityconsiderations and technical and logisticalchallenges.Despite imperfect conditions, UNEP in the endagreed to undertake the study as it representedthe only tangible option for possibly breakingthe decades of deadlock while providing thegovernment and stakeholders with a potentialfoundation upon which trust might be built andaction undertaken to remedy the multiple health,environmental and sustainable developmentissues facing millions of people in Ogonilandand beyond.In order to ensure the independence of the studyand provide the logistics necessary, a frameworkfor cooperation was negotiated in which all partieswere involved and a recognized team of nationaland international experts then recruited for thetwo year assessment.This report details how that team carried outtheir work, where samples were taken andthe findings that they have made. Over a14-month period, the UNEP team examinedmore than 200 locations, surveyed 122 kmsof pipeline rights of way, reviewed more than5,000 medical records and engaged over 23,000people at local community meetings. Detailedsoil contamination investigations were conductedat 69 sites. Altogether more than 4,000 sampleswere analyzed, including water taken from 142groundwater monitoring wells drilled specificallyfor the study and soil extracted from 780boreholes.The findings in the report underline that thereare, in a significant number of locations, seriousthreats to human health from contaminateddrinking water to concerns over the viabilityand productivity of ecosystems. In additionthat pollution has perhaps gone further andpenetrated deeper than many may have previouslysupposed.This report represents the best available understandingas to what has happened to the environment ofOgoniland – and the corresponding implicationsfor affected populations – over many years of oilindustry operations. It provides the government,stakeholders and the international communitywith invaluable, baseline information on the scaleof the challenge and priorities for action in termsof clean-up and remediation.It does not address all scenarios and answerall questions which have arisen over the years,particularly in respect to legal questions whichwere beyond the terms of reference of theundertaking.But UNEP believes it can provide a firm foundationupon which all the stakeholders concerned can, if6

they so wish, draw up a response to the findingspresented here.Before and during the assessment, the consensusthat has allowed this work to proceed in the firstplace was at times fluid and sometimes fractiousand fragile. Many questions were raised, not leastsurrounding how the study was financed and bywhom. The report and its long list of annexesneeds to speak for itself.But it is important to point out that from theoutset UNEP deemed it right and appropriatethat key actors in the petroleum sector shouldbear the financial costs for this assessment andthis was spelt out in the project document whichis publicly available.To date all parties have honoured thosecommitments and the rigor, independence andimpartiality of the study and its conclusions hasbeen maintained which we hereby acknowledge.This study would not have been possible withoutthe local knowledge and cooperation of the Ogonipeople and the support of many other stakeholdersin Nigeria. We wish to sincerely thank themembers of the Presidential ImplementationCommittee, under the Chairmanship of TheMost Reverend Matthew Kukah, Bishop for theDiocese of Sokoto; the former Federal Ministerfor the Environment, The Hononourable JohnOdey; the traditional rulers of Ogoniland, inparticular the Paramount Ruler, His Majesty KingGodwin N.K. Gininwa; the Executive Governorof Rivers State, the Right Honourable RotimiChibuike Amaechi, along with the faculty andstudents at the Rivers State University of Scienceand Technology led by Vice Chancellor ProfessorBarineme Beke Fakae.We also appreciate the assistance of our colleaguesat the UN Nigeria Country Team, in particularthe UN Resident Coordinator, Mr Daouda Touré,the Country Director of the United NationsDevelopment Programme, Ms Ade MamonyaneLekoetje, and the Resident Representative andResident Security Coordinator in Port Harcourt,Mr Larry Boms.I would also like to thank the national andinternational members of the assessment teamincluding UNEP staff members.For the first time, there is systematic and scientificevidence available in the public arena on thenature, extent and impacts of oil contaminationin Ogoniland. The report also provides clearoperational guidelines as to how that legacy canbe addressed.The oil industry has been a key sector of theNigerian economy for over 50 years. But manyNigerians have paid a high price, as this assessmentunderlines. It is UNEP’s hope that the findings cancatalyze not only significant environmental andsocial improvements in the region but a strategicpolicy on how the oil industry there will functionin a way that truly benefits the lives and livelihoodsof these communities now and in the future.Achim SteinerUnited Nations Under-Secretary-GeneralExecutive Directorof the United Nations Environment Programme 7

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDExecutive SummaryIntroductionCovering around 1,000 km 2 in Rivers State,southern Nigeria, Ogoniland has been the siteof oil industry operations since the late 1950s.Ogoniland has a tragic history of pollution fromoil spills and oil well fires, although no systematicscientific information has been available about theensuing contamination.With this independent study, conducted at therequest of the Federal Government of Nigeria, theUnited Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)reveals the nature and extent of oil contaminationin Ogoniland.The Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland coverscontaminated land, groundwater, surface water,sediment, vegetation, air pollution, public health,industry practices and institutional issues.This report represents the best available understandingof what has happened to the environmentof Ogoniland – and the corresponding implicationsfor affected populations – and provides clearoperational guidance as to how that legacy can beaddressed.Assessment processInvolving desk review, fieldwork and laboratoryanalysis, the two year study of the environmentaland public health impacts of oil contaminationin Ogoniland is one of the most complex on-thegroundassessments ever undertaken by UNEP.UNEP recruited a team of international expertsin disciplines such as contaminated land, water,forestry and public health, who worked underthe guidance of senior UNEP managers. Thisteam worked side-by-side with local experts,academics and support teams comprised oflogistics, community liaison and security staff.The UNEP project team surveyed 122 kms ofpipeline rights of way and visited all oil spill sites,oil wells and other oil-related facilities in Ogoniland,including decommissioned and abandoned facilities,that were known and accessible to UNEP during thefieldwork period, based on information providedby the Government regulators, Shell PetroleumDevelopment Company (Nigeria) Ltd (SPDC) andcommunity 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, UNEPexperts observed oil pollution which was not readilyvisible from the ground, including artisanal refiningsites. Information provided by Ogoniland residentsabout oil contamination in their communitiessupplemented official oil spill data supplied by theNigerian Government and SPDC.Following its initial investigations, UNEPidentified 69 sites for detailed soil and groundwaterinvestigations. In addition, samples of communitydrinking water, sediments from creeks, surfacewater, rainwater, fish and air were collectedthroughout Ogoniland and in several neighbouringareas. Altogether more than 4,000 samples wereanalyzed, including water drawn from 142groundwater monitoring wells drilled specificallyfor the study, and soil extracted from 780 boreholes.The UNEP project team also examined more than5,000 medical records and staged 264 formalcommunity meetings in Ogoniland attended byover 23,000 people.The samples were collected following internationallyacceptedsample management procedures anddispatched for analysis to accredited (ISO 17025)laboratories in Europe. The analytes examined in thestudy included certain groups of hydrocarbons thatare known to have adverse impacts and which aretherefore dealt with selectively in oil-spill assessmentand clean-up work. The most important of these areBTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes)and PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons).Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were the maintarget of UNEP’s air quality investigations.Extensive remote sensing analyses complementedthe fieldwork. Reviews of legislation, institutions,oil industry practices and available remediationtechnologies were also undertaken by internationalexperts to complete the study.A selection of the study’s key findings and recommendationsare summarized below. Given the vastamount of data generated during the assessment,the following content should not be considered inisolation.Summary of findingsUNEP’s field observations and scientificinvestigations found that oil contamination inOgoniland is widespread and severely impactingmany components of the environment. Eventhough the oil industry is no longer active inOgoniland, oil spills continue to occur withalarming regularity. The Ogoni people live withthis pollution every day.As Ogoniland has high rainfall, any delay incleaning up an oil spill leads to oil being washedaway, traversing farmland and almost always endingup in the creeks. When oil reaches the root zone,crops and other plants begin to experience stressand can die, and this is a routine observation inOgoniland. At one site, Ejama-Ebubu in Elemelocal government area (LGA), the study foundheavy contamination present 40 years after an oilspill occurred, despite repeated clean-up attempts.The assessment found that overlapping authoritiesand responsibilities between ministries and alack of resources within key agencies has seriousimplications for environmental management onthe-ground,including enforcement.Remote sensing revealed the rapid proliferation inthe past two years of artisanal refining, wherebycrude oil is distilled in makeshift facilities. The studyfound that this illegal activity is endangering livesand causing pockets of environmental devastationin Ogoniland and neighbouring areas.Contaminated soil and groundwater The report concludes that pollution of soilby petroleum hydrocarbons in Ogonilandis extensive in land areas, sediments andswampland. Most of the contamination is fromcrude oil although contamination by refinedproduct was found at three locations. The assessment found there is no continuousclay layer across Ogoniland, exposing thegroundwater in Ogoniland (and beyond) tohydrocarbons spilled on the surface. In 49 cases,UNEP observed hydrocarbons in soil at depths ofat least 5 m. This finding has major implicationsfor the type of remediation required. At two-thirds of the contaminated land sitesclose to oil industry facilities which wereassessed in detail, the soil contaminationexceeds Nigerian national standards, as setout in the Environmental Guidelines and 9

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDStandards for the Petroleum Industries inNigeria (EGASPIN). At 41 sites, the hydrocarbon pollution hasreached the groundwater at levels in excess ofthe Nigerian standards as per the EGASPINlegislation. The most serious case of groundwater contaminationis at Nisisioken Ogale, in Eleme LGA,close to a Nigerian National Petroleum Companyproduct pipeline where an 8 cm layer of refinedoil was observed floating on the groundwaterwhich serves the community wells.Vegetation Oil pollution in many intertidal creeks has leftmangroves denuded of leaves and stems, leavingroots coated in a bitumen-like substancesometimes 1 cm or more thick. Mangrovesare spawning areas for fish and nurseries forjuvenile fish and the extensive pollution of theseareas is impacting the fish life-cycle. Any crops in areas directly impacted by oilspills will be damaged, and root crops, such ascassava, will become unusable. When farmingrecommences, plants generally show signs ofstress and yields are reportedly lower than innon-impacted areas. When an oil spill occurs on land, fires oftenbreak out, killing vegetation and creating acrust over the land, making remediation orrevegetation difficult. Channels that have been widened and theresulting dredged material are clearly evidentin satellite images, decades after the dredgingoperation. Without proper rehabilitation, formermangrove areas which have been converted tobare ground are being colonized by invasivespecies such as nipa palm (which appears to bemore resistant to heavy hydrocarbon pollutionthan native vegetation). In Bodo West, in Bonny LGA, an increasein artisanal refining between 2007 and 2011has been accompanied by a 10% loss ofhealthy mangrove cover, or 307,381 m 2 . If leftunchecked, this may lead to irreversible loss ofmangrove habitat in this area.Aquatic The UNEP investigation found that thesurface water throughout the creeks containshydrocarbons. Floating layers of oil vary fromthick black oil to thin sheens. The highest readingof dissolved hydrocarbon in the water column,of 7,420 μg/l, was detected at Ataba-Otokroma,bordering the Gokana and Andoni LGAs. Fish tend to leave polluted areas in search ofcleaner water, and fishermen must thereforealso move to less contaminated areas in searchof fish. When encountered in known pollutedareas, fishermen reported that they weregoing to fishing grounds further upstream ordownstream. Despite community concerns about the qualityof fish, the results show that the accumulationof hydrocarbons in fish is not a serious healthissue in Ogoniland but that the fisheries sectoris suffering due to the destruction of fishhabitat in the mangroves and highly persistentcontamination of many of the creeks, makingthem unsuitable for fishing. Where a number of entrepreneurs had setup fish farms in or close to the creeks, theirbusinesses have been ruined by an ever-presentlayer of floating oil. The wetlands around Ogoniland are highlydegraded and facing disintegration. The studyconcludes that while it is technically feasible torestore effective ecosystem functioning of thewetlands, this will only be possible if technicaland political initiatives are undertaken.Public health The Ogoni community is exposed to petroleumhydrocarbons in outdoor air and drinkingwater, sometimes at elevated concentrations.They are also exposed through dermal contactsfrom contaminated soil, sediments and surfacewater. Since average life expectancy in Nigeria is lessthan 50 years, it is a fair assumption that mostmembers of the current Ogoniland communityhave lived with chronic oil pollution throughouttheir 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, communitymembers at Nisisioken Ogale are drinkingwater from wells that is contaminated withbenzene, a known carcinogen, at levels over 900times above the World Health Organization(WHO) guideline. The report states that thiscontamination warrants emergency actionahead of all other remediation efforts. Hydrocarbon contamination was found inwater taken from 28 wells at 10 communitiesadjacent to contaminated sites. At seven wellsthe samples are at least 1,000 times higher thanthe Nigerian drinking water standard of 3 μg/l.Local communities are aware of the pollutionand its dangers but state that they continue touse the water for drinking, bathing, washingand cooking as they have no alternative. Benzene was detected in all air samples atconcentrations ranging from 0.155 to 48.2μg/m 3 . Approximately 10 per cent of detectedbenzene concentrations in Ogoniland werehigher than the concentrations WHO andthe United States Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) report as corresponding to a1 in 10,000 cancer risk. Many of the benzeneconcentrations detected in Ogoniland weresimilar to those measured elsewhere in theworld, given the prevalence of fuel use and othersources of benzene. However, the findings showthat some benzene concentrations in Ogonilandwere higher than those being measured in moreeconomically developed regions where benzeneconcentrations are declining because of effortsto reduce benzene exposure.Institutional issues First issued in 1992, the EGASPIN form theoperational basis for environmental regulationof the oil industry in Nigeria. However, thiskey legislation is internally inconsistent withregard to one of the most important criteria foroil spill and contaminated site management –specifically the criteria which trigger remediationor indicate its closure (called the ‘intervention’and ‘target’ values respectively). 11

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND The study found that the Department ofPetroleum Resources (DPR) and the NationalOil Spill Detection and Response Agency(NOSDRA) have differing interpretations ofEGASPIN. This is enabling the oil industry toclose down the remediation process well beforecontamination has been eliminated and soilquality has been restored to achieve functionalityfor human, animal and plant life. The Nigerian Government agencies concernedlack qualified technical experts and resources.In the five years since NOSDRA wasestablished, so few resources have beenallocated that the agency has no proactivecapacity for oil-spill detection. In planningtheir inspection visits to some oil spill sites,the regulatory authority is wholly reliant onthe oil industry for logistical support. The oilfield in Ogoniland is interwovenwith the Ogoni community. The fact thatcommunities have set up houses and farmsalong rights of way is one indicator of the lossof control on the part of the pipeline operatorand the government regulator. The UNEP project team observed hundredsof industrial packing bags containing 1,000-1,500 m 3 of waste, believed to be cuttingsfrom oil drilling operations, dumped at aformer sand mine in Oken Oyaa in ElemeLGA. The open disposal of such waste inan unlined pit demonstrates that the chainof custody in the region between the wastegenerator, transporter and disposal facility isnot being followed.Oil industry practices The study concludes that the control,maintenance and decommissioning of oilfieldinfrastructure in Ogoniland are inadequate.Industry best practices and SPDC’s ownprocedures have not been applied, creatingpublic safety issues. Remediation by enhanced natural attenuation(RENA) – so far the only remediation methodobserved by UNEP in Ogoniland – has notproven to be effective. Currently, SPDC appliesthis technique on the land surface layer only, basedon the assumption that given the nature of theoil, temperature and an underlying layer of clay,hydrocarbons will not move deeper. However, thisbasic premise is not sustainable as observationsmade by UNEP show that contamination canoften penetrate deeper than 5 m and has reachedthe groundwater in many locations. Ten out of the 15 investigated sites whichSPDC records show as having completedremediation, still have pollution exceedingthe SPDC (and government) remediationclosure values. The study found that thecontamination at eight of these sites hasmigrated to the groundwater. In January 2010, a new RemediationManagement System was adopted by all ShellExploration and Production Companies inNigeria. The study found that while the newchanges are an improvement, they still donot meet the local regulatory requirements orinternational best practices.Summary of recommendationsThe study concludes that the environmentalrestoration of Ogoniland is possible but may take25 to 30 years. The report contains numerousrecommendations that, once implemented,will have an immediate and positive impact onOgoniland. Further recommendations have longertimelines that will bring lasting improvements forOgoniland and Nigeria as a whole.The hydraulic connection between contaminatedland and creeks has important implications for thesequence of remediation to be carried out. Until theland-based contamination has been dealt with, itwill be futile to begin a clean-up of the creeks.Due to the wide extent of contamination inOgoniland and nearby areas, and the varyingdegrees of degradation, there will not be one singleclean-up technique appropriate for the entire area.A combination of approaches will therefore needto be considered, ranging from active interventionfor cleaning the top soil and replanting mangroveto passive monitoring of natural regeneration.Practical action at the regulatory, operational andmonitoring levels is also proposed.12

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYIt is recommended that the restoration of mangrovesbe viewed as a large-scale pilot project in whichmultiple approaches to clean-up and restoration,once proven, can be replicated elsewhere as neededin the Niger Delta.Emergency measuresThe report identifies eight emergency measureswhich, from a duty of care point of view, warrantimmediate action.Emergency Measures To begin prioritizing specific locations tobe cleaned up, restored or rehabilitated, thereport suggests the following framework:– Priority 1. All instances where the Ogonicommunity is known to be at risk– Priority 2. Instances where contaminationcould potentially affect the community(e.g. where groundwater, fishing groundsor agricultural land are impacted)– Priority 3. Instances where a community’slivelihood support base is impacted, and– Priority 4. Instances where there is noimmediate risk to people but where thereis non-compliance with the law.Operational recommendations Immediate steps must be taken to preventexisting contaminated sites from beingsecondary sources of ongoing contaminationwhile further risk assessments and investigationsare undertaken for detailed planning of theclean-up of Ogoniland during a recommendedTransition Phase. All sources of ongoing contamination, includingthe artisanal refining which is currently ongoingin the creeks, must be brought to a swift endbefore the clean-up of the creeks, sedimentsand mangroves can begin. A campaign in Ogoniland to end illegal oilrelatedactivities should be jointly conductedby the government, oil companies and localauthorities. It should include an awarenesscomponent highlighting the disproportionateenvironmental footprint of artisanal refining(borne by all sections of the community) andspell out training, employment and livelihoodincentives that will encourage people awayfrom participating in this illegal activity.Technical recommendations forenvironmental restoration Surface water. Clean-up activities of themangroves and soil should not be initiatedbefore all possible measures are taken to stopongoing pollution from reaching the creeks. Restoration of swamplands. The mostextensive area in terms of treatment ofcontamination will be the topsoil from theswamplands. The two main options are manualcleaning of contaminated topsoil and lowpressurewater jetting. A portable facility whichcan be fixed on a barge, move through the biggercreeks and act as a base for decontaminationcrews, should be considered. A proposed Integrated Contaminated SoilManagement Centre will be a modernindustrial enterprise in Ogoniland employinghundreds of people. On-site ‘mini treatmentcentres’ for bioremediation and excavationwater will also act as staging areas feeding themain soil treatment centre. 13

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND Treatment of contaminated sediments.Decisions on intervention for sedimenttreatment are more complicated than simplybasing them on an intervention value. Issuesof erosion, vegetation damage and impact onlocal aquatic ecosystems as well as potentialfor natural recovery all need to be part ofthe decision-making process. In some cases,contaminated sediments will have to bedredged as part of the clean-up or they willact as reservoirs of pollution after the ongoingpollution has been eliminated. Decontamination of groundwater. Theissue of hydrocarbon contamination needs tobe addressed in a comprehensive manner, butclean-up actions must be site-specific. In makingdecisions about the clean-up of groundwater,additional factors such as proximity to thecommunity, absorption characteristics of the soiland all possible pathways must be considered, andthis will require additional data to be gathered aspart of the detailed clean-up planning process. Mangrove restoration. Local nurseries shouldbe established so that healthy, indigenousplants will be available to regenerate heavilyimpacted mangrove stands. Rehabilitation willfocus on red mangroves along the waterfrontand on white mangroves inland – which havebeen most severely impacted – and also oncontaining the spread of invasive species.Recommendations for public health Everyone who has consumed water fromcontaminated sources should be requestedto undertake a comprehensive medicalexamination by physicians knowledgeableabout the possible adverse health effects of thehydrocarbons detected. A focussed medical study should be initiatedto track the health of the Ogoni communityover their lifetimes to ensure any possiblehealth impacts are identified early enough andacted 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 SUMMARY Monitoring sector Monitoring approach FrequencyPreventive surveillance Aerial scouting WeeklySurveillance from boatsWeeklySurveillance of facilities and incident sitesWeeklyGroundwater Household visits in impacted communities One-offWells around impacted sites and facilitiesMonthlyWater bodies Surface water MonthlySedimentsQuarterlyFishQuarterlyBenthic organismsQuarterlyVegetation Transects in creeks and oilfield sites Once a yearMangrove faunaOnce a yearAnalysis of satellite imageryOnce a yearAir quality Particulate measurements, hydrocarbons MonthlyPublic health Cohort registry of highly exposed communities YearlyPublic health registry of entire Ogoniland community YearlyRecommendations on monitoring During and following clean-up operations inOgoniland, a monitoring programme shouldbe put in place in consultation with thenational institutions mandated to deal withspecific environmental issues. All monitoringactivities should be communicated to thecommunity and all results should be publiclyavailable. Comprehensive air quality monitoringacross Ogoniland should be initiated todetect ongoing pollution, to help establishguidelines for protecting public health andto track improvements at sites where clean-upactivities are under way. A public health registry should be establishedfor the entire Ogoniland population in orderto determine health trends and take proactiveaction individually or collectively whereimpacts related to long-term exposure tohydrocarbon pollution are evident.Recommendations for changes toregulatory framework Transfer oversight of the EGASPIN legislationfrom DPR to the Federal Ministry ofEnvironment, with the concurrent transfer ofstaff or by recruiting and training new staff. Comprehensively review existing Nigerianlegislation on contaminated site clean-upconsidering recent international developmentsin regulation and incorporating communityconsultation to determine remediation closurelevels so that decisions on new legislation areseen as both transparent and inclusive.Recommendations for Government The report recommends that the Governmentof Nigeria establishes an OgonilandEnvironmental Restoration Authorityto oversee implementation of this study’srecommendations. With a fixed initial lifespanof 10 years, the Authority will have a separatebudget which will accrue from an OgonilandEnvironmental Restoration Fund and its staffwill largely be seconded from relevant nationaland state institutions. The overall cost of the clean-up should not bean obstacle to its implementation. Therefore,an Environmental Restoration Fund forOgoniland should be set up with an initialcapital injection of USD 1 billion contributedby 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 regionTo be managed by the Authority, the Fundshould be used only for activities concerningthe environmental restoration of Ogoniland,including capacity building, skills transfer andconflict resolution. A Centre of Excellence for EnvironmentalRestoration should be established in Ogonilandto promote learning in other areas impacted byoil contamination, in the Niger Delta andelsewhere in the world. Offering a range ofactivities and services, the Centre could runtraining courses in environmental monitoringand restoration and ultimately become amodel for environmental restoration, attractinginternational attention. Build the capacity of government agencies toenable them to fulfil their mandates, throughsuch actions as increasing human resourcesand equipment, and improving the technicalskills of staff. A public awareness campaign should be mountedto improve the community’s understanding of theenvironmental and health impacts arising fromhydrocarbon contamination in Ogoniland. Thisshould include a formal education componentin the academic curricula in the Niger Delta.Recommendations for oil industryoperators SPDC procedures for oil spill clean-up andremediation need to be fully reviewed andoverhauled so as to achieve the desired levelof environmental restoration. In addition toprocedures and clean-up methods, contractingand supervision also need to be improved. SPDC should conduct a comprehensive reviewof its assets in Ogoniland and develop an ‘AssetIntegrity Management Plan for Ogoniland’ anda decommissioning plan. These plans should becommunicated to the Ogoni people.16

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It is recommended that SPDC works with theNigerian regulators to clarify the paradox ofremedial intervention and target values beingthe same. The parties should also agree on aconsultative approach to setting site-specificclean-up values. In the event that a decision is made to restartoil exploration and production activities inOgoniland, the region should be treated asa green-field site of high environmental andsocial sensitivity. This would mean applyingthe latest technologies and environmentalguidelines, such as re-evaluating pipelineroutes to minimise environmental damage andallocating a percentage of all project costs forenvironmental and sustainable developmentinitiatives in Ogoniland.Recommendations for the Ogonilandcommunity The Ogoni community should take full advantageof the employment, skills developmentand other opportunities that will be createdby the clean-up operation which is aimedat improving their living conditions andlivelihoods. Community members should avoid protractednegotiations over access by oil spill responseteams as this means that responses to spills aredelayed, resulting in a far greater environmentalimpact. The community should take a proactive standagainst individuals or groups who engagein illegal activities such as bunkering andartisanal refining.The way forwardRestoring the livelihoods and well being of futureOgoni generations is within reach but timing iscrucial. Given the dynamic nature of oil pollutionand the extent of contamination revealed inUNEP’s study, failure to begin addressing urgentpublic health concerns and commencing a cleanupwill only exacerbate and unnecessarily prolongthe Ogoni people’s suffering.A Transition Phase is recommended to maintainmomentum and begin detailed planning in theintervening period between the release of UNEP’senvironmental assessment and the commencementof a clean-up operation guided by an OgonilandEnvironmental 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

IntroductionOgoniland is a kingdomsituated in the Niger Delta –the largest river delta in Africaand the third largest in the world© Mazen Saggar

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDIntroductionThis report presents the results of an environmentalassessment undertaken by the United NationsEnvironment Programme (UNEP) in Ogoniland,Nigeria. The study covers thematic issues ofcontaminated land, groundwater, surface water andsediments, vegetation, air pollution and public health.Ogoniland has witnessed recurrent social unrestduring the past several decades over concerns relatedto oil industry operations, its revenue and petroleumrelatedcontamination. Although oil industryoperations were suspended in Ogoniland in 1993,widespread environmental contamination remains.Upon a request from the Federal Government ofNigeria, UNEP undertook an independent study todetermine the extent of the environmental impactsarising from oil industry operations in Ogoniland.This report sets out the background and context tothe present-day conditions in Ogoniland, providesa synthesis of UNEP’s findings, and gives a set ofoverarching recommendations to deal with themulti-faceted environmental challenges currentlyfacing the Ogoni people.Nigeria gained independence from the UnitedKingdom in 1960. With a population in excessof 158 million people, Nigeria is a multi-ethnicfederation divided into 36 states and the FederalCapital Territory, within which lies the capital cityof Abuja. More than 250 ethnolinguistic groupsare scattered across the country, but the threedominant groups are the Hausas living in thenorth, the Ibos in the south-east and the Yorubamainly in the south-west [1].Nigeria is rich in natural resources, includingnatural gas, petroleum, tin, iron ore, coal,limestone, niobium, lead, zinc, timber andextensive arable land. Prior to the discovery of oilin the 1950s, agriculture was the mainstay of theeconomy, with agricultural produce exported tothe more industrialized regions of the world. By1971 there had been a shift from agriculture topetroleum production, such that between 1973and 1981 the value of agricultural exports fellfrom more than USD 1.5 billion to about USD0.3 billion [2]. Currently, oil provides 80 per centof budget revenues and 95 per cent of foreignexchange 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 km 2 , 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. Theswamp, forest and woodland areas occupy about12 per cent of the delta’s land surface.A farmer tends her maize crop in Horo, Tai LGA.Prior to the discovery of oil in the 1950s, agriculturewas the mainstay of Nigeria’s economy20

1 INTRODUCTION Akure!(°ONDOEDOENUGUBenin City!(Asaba!(Awka!(Enugu!(ANAMBRADELTAN i g e rD e l t aBAYELSARIVERS!(Port HarcourtIMOOwerri!(Umuahia!(ABIAOgonilandUyo!(AKWAIBOMAtlantic OceanBeninLagos!(NigerNigeria!\ AbujaPortHarcourt!(CameroonKilometresLegend!(¬rState boundaryCitiesMain roadsRailroadAirportRiversWater bodiesKilometres0 50 100Geographic Coordinate SystemWGS 84Sources:VMap0, SALB.Atlantic Ocean0 200 400Niger DeltaUNEP 2011 21

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILAND 450400350300Average rainfall, mm250200150100500Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecMonth of the yearRivers StateRivers State – in which Ogoniland, the study areafor this report, is located – is situated in the coastalplain of the eastern Niger Delta. Its topography ismainly characterized by rivers, lakes, creeks, lagoonsand swamps of varying dimensions. The landsurface can be grouped into three main divisionsfrom north to south: the freshwater zone, mangroveswamps and the coastal sand ridge zone.The riverine area, with a land surface between 2and 5 metres above sea level, covers about 40 percent of the state, while drier uplands occupy theremainder. Most water channels in the freshwaterzone are bordered by natural levees that provide thebasis for settlements and agriculture. The uplandarea varies in height from 10 to 45 metres abovemean sea level (msl), but the majority is below 30metres asl. Its surface is interspersed by small ridgesand shallow swamp basins, as well as by gentlysloping terraces intersected by deep valleys thatcarry water intermittently. The southern part issubject to tidal influences and is highly susceptibleto recurrent inundation by riverine flooding. Theseflow patterns are responsible for the deposition offine-grained sediments in the delta.Rainfall, which is variable but heavy across muchof the country, occurs throughout the year,decreasing from around 4,700 mm/year in thesouth to around 1,700 mm/year in the north ofthe state. The rainy season, which in coastal andsouth-eastern parts of Nigeria begins in Februaryor March, lasts about 330 days, with 250 mm ormore of rain per day at times. The state’s capital,Port Harcourt, has about 180 rainy days per year(Figure 1). Temperatures range from 28°C to33°C. The hottest months are February to May,with high relative humidity throughout the year,decreasing slightly in the dry season.OgonilandOgoniland is a region covering some 1,000 km 2 inthe south-east of the Niger Delta basin (Map 2).It has a population of close to 832,000, accordingto the 2006 National Census, consisting mainlyof the Ogoni people. The region is dividedadministratively into four local government areas:22

1 INTRODUCTION IKWERREETCHE EBERI/ OMUMA°OBIGBOOBIO/AKPORAYAMAAKPAJOOYIGBOPORTHARCOURTABAMEBUBUELEMESIMETAIJOR-SOGHOTEKA-SOGHOOGUKOROKOROKPITEKHANAOKRIKAOGU/BOLOKPORGHOR DEKENGIOWAKAMABOLOBERAGOKANABORIZAAKPONOPUOKOLUEGBO-BEERIBEREKIBANIKAPNORBONNYKAAOLOMAIMO RIVERBONNY RIVERANDONIDEGEMAANDONI RIVEROPOBO/ NKORODELTAOwerri!(IMOLegendUmuahia!(Local Government Area limitsABIA!SettlementsKilometres0 10 20Projection: UTM 32NDatum: WGS84RIVERSPort Harcourt!(AKWAIBOMHydrographic networkRail networkSources:SPDC,River State Administrative map,UNEP.BAYELSAExpress WayUNEP 2011 23

UNEPENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF OGONILANDHis Majesty King Godwin N.K. Gininwa, Ogoniland’s Paramount RulerEleme, Gokana, Khana, and Tai. Traditionally thearea is formed by six kingdoms (Babbe, Eleme,Gokana, Ken-Khana, Nyo-Khana and Tai) withHis Majesty King Godwin N.K. Gininwa as thearea’s Paramount Ruler. While to the outsideworld the communities of Ogoniland may appearsimilar, they have distinctive differences, includingtraditional institutional structures, languages andcultural features.1.2 Impacts of oil explorationand productionOil exploration in Ogoniland commenced in the1950s and extensive production facilities wereestablished during the following three decades(Table 1). These operations were handled by ShellPetroleum Development Company (Nigeria) Ltd SPDC facilityNumberOilfields 12Wells drilled 116Wells completed 89Flow stations 5Flow station capacity (barrels per day) 185,000(SPDC), a joint venture between the NigerianNational Petroleum Company (NNPC), ShellInternational, Elf and Agip.Oil exploration and production projects may haveimpacts on the natural environment long beforeany oil is actually produced. These are complex,multi-faceted projects, with many different phases,including: land survey, land clearance for seismiclines, establishment of seismic and drilling camps,site preparation, infrastructure construction,drilling for oil (even when the effort is unsuccessful)and development of transportation infrastructure.Once a facility begins operating other issues haveto be dealt with, such as spills caused during oilproduction and the disposal of water (often saltyand known as ‘produced water’) and flaring ofgas (‘produced gas’) generated alongside the oil.All of these activities and their effects leave anenvironmental footprint.The oil industry’s environmental awareness andstandards in the 1960s were very different and lowercompared to those of the present day. This impactwas exacerbated by the Nigerian Civil War (knownwidely as the Biafran War) in the late 1960s, duringwhich oil industry infrastructure was targeted and anumber of facilities were damaged, with consequentspillage of oil and widespread pollution.24

1 INTRODUCTION1.3 The Ogoni struggle and thecessation of oil explorationand productionWhile oil exploration and the associated socialand environmental consequences in Ogonilandbegan prior to Nigeria’s independence, thesituation did not improve when the countrygained independence in 1960. Environmentalincidents, such as spills and uncontrolled flares,continued to occur in the area and responses wereslow and inadequate.Partly in response to the environmental consequencesof oil production, the Movement for the Survivalof the Ogoni People (MOSOP) was founded underthe leadership of the Nigerian author Ken Saro-Wiwa. A staunch defender of the rights of theOgoni people, Saro-Wiwa criticized oil companiesand the government’s oil policy and broughtinternational attention to the Ogoni cause.In 1990, MOSOP presented the Ogoni Bill ofRights to the Federal Government of Nigeria[3]. The Bill included a number of references toenvironmental issues. In 1993, Saro-Wiwa joined300,000 Ogoni on a march to demand a share inoil revenues and greater political autonomy [4].The conflict within the region, however, was notresolved in a peaceful manner. As a consequence ofthe ensuing violence, oil exploration and productionactivities in Ogoniland ceased in 1993.In November 1995, following a trial by a militarytribunal, Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogonileaders were hanged in Port Harcourt. Continuedsocial upheaval in the area further alienated theOgoni community from SPDC, and MOSOP hassince been campaigning for the total expulsion ofShell from Ogoniland.While no oil production has taken place inOgoniland since 1993, the facilities themselveshave never been decommissioned. Some oilpipelines carrying oil produced in other parts ofNigeria still pass through Ogoniland but these arenot being maintained adequately. Consequently,the infrastructure has gradually deteriorated,through exposure to natural processes, but alsoas a result of criminal damage, causing furtherpollution and exacerbating the environmentalfootprint.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 processIn 1999, democracy was re-established in Nigeriaand legislation to increase revenue sharing withinoil-producing regions soon followed. However, asthe Ogoniland oilfield lay dormant, the Ogonipeople were unable to benefit from these reforms.The country’s political leadership thereforedecided to establish a mechanism whereby theoil industry operator could enter a process ofreconciliation with the Ogoni community,enabling oil production to recommence and thecommunity to benefit from the new revenuesharinglegislation.In 2005, His Excellency Olusegun Obasanjo,President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,appointed Reverend Father Matthew HassanKukah as mediator between the Ogoni and Shell.As part of the reconciliation process, an impartial,international agency would be appointed toundertake an environmental assessment andsupervise the clean-up of the areas damaged bythe effects of oil operations in Ogoniland.Accordingly, in July 2006, UNEP received anofficial request from the Federal Government ofNigeria to conduct a comprehensive assessmentof the environmental and public health impactsof oil contamination in Ogoniland, RiversState, together with options for remediation.In response, the Executive Director of UNEPdeployed a high-level mission to Nigeria in orderto gain a fuller understanding of the backgroundto the request and the expectations of the NigerianGovernment. Extensive discussions took placewith various stakeholders, including the Presidentof Nigeria, local government officials and SPDCmanagement. The UNEP team also conductedfield visits to Ogoniland and met with the keyOgoni stakeholders. A series of pre-arranged,well-publicized and well-attended public meetingshelped the mission to understand local communityperspectives and expectations.Following these preparatory consultations, UNEPpresented a proposal (including workplans andbudgets) to the Nigerian Government in January2007 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 Assessmentof Ogoniland, and2. An environmental clean-up to follow, basedon the assessment and subsequent planningand decisions.The President agreed with UNEP’s proposals andmade two suggestions: A Presidential Implementation Committee, underthe chairmanship of Bishop Kukah shouldbe formed to oversee the work, and wouldconsist of HM King Gininwa, the ParamountKing of Ogoniland, and representatives of theFederal Environment Ministry, the Rivers StateMinistry of Environment, the National Oil SpillDetection and Response Agency (NOSDRA),SPDC and MOSOP, and All expenses relating to the environmentalassessment should be borne by SPDC underthe ‘polluter pays’ principle.These suggestions were agreed to by all parties.UNEP also made it clear that the assessmentwould be completely independent, and this toowas accepted by all parties.While the project was approved in 2007,administrative delays meant that fieldwork couldnot start until late 2009. Fieldwork and laboratoryanalysis were completed in January 2011. Thestudy resulted in tens of thousands of analyses andphotographs, all illustrative of the environmentalsituation in Ogoniland. The many separate reviewsand findings have been synthesized in this final report– the main output of the Environmental Assessmentof Ogoniland component of UNEP’s work – topresent the information in a relevant and usefulmanner. Before discussing the scientific findings, aseries of field observations are described. The data onwhich this report is based are being made availableonline (www.unep.org/nigeria) to enable those whowish to undertake more in-depth analyses to do so. 27