Oil contamination in Thar Jath, South Sudan

Oil's contamination of health and habitat in South Sudan This briefing takes a look at one of the world's great environmental time bombs - Big Oil's heedless and unscrupulous spewing of toxic wastes into the country's groundwater.


Oil was discovered in what would become South Sudan in 1979. Production commenced in 1993. From the very outset there were concerns about the oil companies’ adherence to the environmental standards imposed on the disposal of the processed water ensuing from their pumping operations. Indigenous people consuming water taken from wells located in the catchment areas of the oil rigs began arriving at local clinics. The peoples’ health complaints ranged from nausea and skin problems to neurological disorders. The villagers also reported that the water in their wells had become salty, that it stank, and that their livestock and plants were ailing, even dying after having consumed it. In the early 2000s, local residents resisted their forced expulsion from their lands by oil companies and their governmental allies. South Sudan was recently ranked as the most dangerous country in the world for humanitarian workers - due to the world's highest rate of fatalities and other grave incidents. This comes with the assassination of a number of journalists who were striving to report on the links between Big Oil and the South Sudanese government.

See more...
Basic Data
NameOil contamination in Thar Jath, South Sudan
ProvinceSouth Sudan
SiteKoch County, Unity State
Accuracy of LocationMEDIUM regional level
Source of Conflict
Type of Conflict (1st level)Fossil Fuels and Climate Justice/Energy
Type of Conflict (2nd level)Oil and gas exploration and extraction
Specific CommoditiesCrude oil
Project Details and Actors
Project DetailsThe facts on oil's contamination of one oil field - Thar Jath - of ten in South Sudan are contained in the abstract summarized below. To obtain an overview of the country-wide situation, satellites-generated images are now being analyzed.

The abstract's title and authors

"High concentrations of lead and barium in hair of the rural population caused by water pollution in the Thar Jath oilfields in South Sudan."

Pragst F1, Stieglitz K2, Runge H3, Runow KD4, Quig D5, Osborne R6, Runge C7, Ariki J8.


In the oil fields of Thar Jath, South Sudan, increasing salinity of drinking water was observed together with human incompatibilities and rise in livestock mortalities. Hair analysis was used to characterize the toxic exposure of the population. Hair samples of volunteers from four communities with different distance from the center of the oil field (Koch 23km, n=24; Leer 50km, n=26; Nyal 110km, n=21; and Rumbek 220km, n=25) were analyzed for altogether 39 elements by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Very high concentrations and a toxic health endangerment were assessed for lead and barium. The concentration of lead increased steadily with decreasing distance from the oil field from Rumbek (mean 2.8μg/g) to Koch (mean 18.7μg/g) and was there in the same range as in highly contaminated mining regions in Kosovo, China or Bolivia. The weighting materials in drilling muds barite (BaSO4) and galena (PbS) were considered to be the sources of drinking water pollution and high hair values. The high concentrations of lead and barium in hair demonstrate clearly the health risk caused by harmful deposition of toxic industrial waste but cannot be used for diagnosis of a chronic intoxication of the individuals.
Type of PopulationRural
Potential Affected PopulationAt least 180,000 - possibly many more
Start Date01/01/1996
Company Names or State EnterprisesPETRONAS from Malaysia
China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC ) from China
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) Videsh
Relevant government actorsGovernment of South Sudan Ministry of the Environment

Government of South Sudan Ministry of Petroleum and Mining

Governments of China, Malaysia and India (owners of oil companies that have polluted groundwater in South Sudan)
Environmental justice organisations and other supportersHoffnungszeichen Sign of Hope e.V. www.hoffnungszeichen.de

Local Committees
The Conflict and the Mobilization
Intensity of Conflict (at highest level)HIGH (widespread, mass mobilization, violence, arrests, etc...)
When did the mobilization beginLATENT (no visible resistance)
Groups MobilizingFarmers
Indigenous groups or traditional communities
International ejos
Landless peasants
Local scientists/professionals
Religious groups
Fisher people
Forms of MobilizationArtistic and creative actions (eg guerilla theatre, murals)
Creation of alternative reports/knowledge
Development of a network/collective action
Involvement of national and international NGOs
Official complaint letters and petitions
Public campaigns
Shareholder/financial activism.
Arguments for the rights of mother nature
Appeals/recourse to economic valuation of the environment
Environmental ImpactsVisible: Biodiversity loss (wildlife, agro-diversity), Food insecurity (crop damage), Loss of landscape/aesthetic degradation, Soil contamination, Waste overflow, Oil spills, Surface water pollution / Decreasing water (physico-chemical, biological) quality, Groundwater pollution or depletion, Reduced ecological / hydrological connectivity
Health ImpactsVisible: Exposure to unknown or uncertain complex risks (radiation, etc…), Malnutrition, Other environmental related diseases, Deaths
Socio-economic ImpactsVisible: Increase in Corruption/Co-optation of different actors, Displacement, Increase in violence and crime, Loss of livelihood, Loss of traditional knowledge/practices/cultures, Militarization and increased police presence, Specific impacts on women, Violations of human rights, Land dispossession, Loss of landscape/sense of place
Project StatusIn operation
Pathways for conflict outcome / responseCorruption
Violent targeting of activists
Withdrawal of company/investment
Development of AlternativesSIgn of Hope has called upon the government of South Sudan to vigorously apply environmental regulations, and has lobbied oil companies for them to cease and desist their violations of human and environmental rights, to remediate the environment, to drill deep wells, and to treat local residents for the effects of the damaging of their health - to no avail.
Do you consider this as a success?No
Why? Explain briefly.No effective response by government, no change in environment-damaging practices by oil companies, no remediation of environment, no compensation to victims of oil contamination for loss of health and habitation
Sources and Materials

"Oil, Power and a Sign of Hope" - on South Sudan's struggle to curtail oil contamination and for clean water
[click to view]


forsouthsudan.com - platform for independent reporting on South Sudan by and on its people
[click to view]

Article on oil contamination in South Sudan and on Sign of Hope's struggle for human and environmental rights there
[click to view]

Hardhitting report in Al Jazeera on oil comtamination's damaging of life and livelihood in South Sudan
[click to view]

Media Links

Description of Sign of Hope's humanitarian work in South Sudan
[click to view]

forsouthsudan - the platform of and for the people of South Sudan
[click to view]

Other Documents

[click to view]

Children play at a water pump where the water is undrinkable because of contamination from a nearby oilfield [Al Jazeera] Source: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/03/soaked-oil-cost-war-south-sudan-150302102747401.html
[click to view]

Meta Information
ContributorTerry Swartzberg forsouthsudan.com E-mail: [email protected]
Last update06/02/2018