Brussels’ campaign of diplomatic pressure on Uganda and Tanzania aimed at stopping the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP) amounts to pure “hypocrisy,” and constitutes an attempt by wealthy countries to keep developing nations down, Elison Karuhanga, a member of Uganda’s Chamber of Mines and Petroleum, has said.
“Unlike wealthy nations which will remain wealthy even when their oil and gas revenue is removed, we cannot afford to gamble the future of Ugandan generations on hypotheticals,” Karuhanga said.
Karuhanga’s sentiments echoed comments made by Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni last month, with the president slamming EU politicians seeking to meddle in Uganda and Tanzania’s affairs as “insufferable,” “shallow,” and “egocentric.”
Museveni is the latest African leader to question the European Union’s attempts to smother the continent’s energy projects, with others pointing out that the entirety of Sub-Saharan Africa produces just 2.5 percent of the world’s carbon emissions, compared to up to 17 percent for Europe (including 9.8 percent from the EU-28).
According to International Renewable Energy Agency data, a whopping 92 percent of Uganda’s energy supply is currently met by renewables, with a similarly high rate of 84 percent in neighboring Tanzania. By comparison, just 21 percent of the European Union’s energy needs are met by renewable energy sources, with that figure expected to drop as members fire up coal power plants and other polluting energy sources after cutting themselves off from cheap and comparatively environmentally-friendly Russian natural gas earlier this year.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution last month condemning EACOP, calling on “Ugandan and Tanzanian authorities, as well as the project promoters and stakeholders, to protect the environment and put an end to the extractive activities in protected and sensitive ecosystems, including the shores of Lake Albert.” Brussels urged TotalEnergies – the largest stakeholder in the project, to hold off on construction for one year to study the feasibility of an alternative route.
European officials and local activists have expressed concerns that the pipeline could displace tens of thousands of local residents and farmers, endanger local wildlife and water supplies, and generate up to 34 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year once up and running (equivalent to Denmark’s annual CO2 output). The pressure campaign has prompted some companies affiliated with the project to pull out, with oil and gas insurance giant Allianz dropping out in April, citing “climate” concerns. Barclays Bank and Credit Suisse have refused to provide financing for the project.
Tony Tiyou, the chief of Renewables in Africa, a UK-based clean energy company, said that "green energy" concerns must be balanced by pragmatic sensibilities over the needs of developing countries.
“I know we’re still going to need some fossil fuel because at the moment people need power in Africa and if they don’t have power, it will be a little bit difficult to lift people out of poverty. Solar and wind could be intermittent. You don’t have solar at night, for example, and wind doesn’t always blow when you need it. But people talk about an energy mix – a combination of different sources,” Tiyou said.
Once completed in 2025, EACOP will pump up to 230,000 barrels of crude oil per day from the shores of Lake Albert in western Uganda to northeastern Tanzania’s Indian Ocean port. The project is expected to net Uganda between $1.5 and $3.5 billion a year (with the latter figure equivalent to up to three quarters of its current annual tax base), while Tanzania is expected to pocket up to $1 billion per year from the project.
Standard Bank, a massive African banking and financial services group headquartered in Johannesburg, expects EACOP to help Uganda’s GDP to grow by double digits over the next three years, and double from $30 billion in 2022 to $60 billion by 2028.
France’s TotalEnergies has a 62 percent stake in the $4 billion project, with the China National Offshore Oil Corporation also involved.
In addition to earning transit income, the pipeline could help improve the region’s access to energy. Today, just 42 percent of Ugandans and 40 percent of Tanzanians have access to electricity.
Along with EACOP, Ugandan and Tanzanian authorities are also working on the construction of a natural gas pipeline which would run parallel to the oil pipeline, and deliver liquefied natural gas to Uganda. The latter initiative is envisioned as a project that would improve the energy security of both nations, cut down on pollution caused by charcoal and firewood – which is used by 70 percent of Ugandans for their cooking needs, and slow deforestation.