Never has the peril to the planet from fossil fuels been greater and never has the recognition been clearer that the primary contributors to this looming calamity must take radical measures to pull humanity back from the brink.
On October 29th, CARICOM ministers responsible for climate change issued a declaration to coincide with the start of the crucial COP26 conference which is underway in Scotland.
Among other things, to close the emissions gap, the CARICOM ministers called on the leaders of the Group of 20 to commit by COP26 to:
Urgently close the emissions gap in order to maintain global warming to well below 1.5°C;
Deliver, well before the global stocktake in 2023, new Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) with 2030 targets that are consistent with the 1.5°C temperature goal and credible net zero by 2050 long-term strategies;
Support efforts to encourage the aviation and shipping sectors to align with the Paris goals; and,
Provide fair and just compensation for ecosystem services provided by forests regarding climate and atmospheric regulation;
Support efforts to conserve and enhance reservoirs and sinks of greenhouse gases, including forests.
The ministers committed that CARICOM would continue to do its part to contribute ambitious climate plans and in this regard:
Commended fellow Member States who have already submitted ambitious targets and noted encouragingly the efforts of others to finalize their submissions; and
Committed to marshal all efforts to present low emission development strategies in line with a net zero by 2050 commitment and adaptation communications or adaptation plans, as appropriate.
As a new and aggressive producer of oil, Guyana, as part of this CARICOM declaration finds itself in a delicate position. It is currently generating roughly 124,000 barrels of light sweet crude per day and is aiming over the next decade to get close to 1 million barrels a day at which point it shall be a major producer and player in the oil market. While it won’t be combusting any significant percentage of this production it will bear a moral responsibility for the greenhouse gases emitted wherever in the world this production goes.
From all of the rosy projections that keep rolling in, Guyana will be flush with cash in a decade from its in-demand light crude and sans any measurable or noticeable liability for the climate burden that will be heightened by its oil production. As a country with peculiar economic challenges, a notorious inability to lift itself out of the production of primary commodities, a minuscule internal economy, a high number of unskilled workers and migration that has denuded it of the critical mass of skills to lift the economy into higher paying jobs and services, Guyana deserves an opportunity to sensibly extract and monetise its oil, a mere fraction of what G20 economies and others have drawn for decades and continue to do so.
Greed and a dismissive attitude to the climate danger must, however, not overwhelm or corrupt the thinking of Guyana’s decision makers as in the manner of the atrocity of uprooting mangroves on the West Demerara for the siting of an oil and gas shore base to be financed by a Florida-based Guyanese. After all, climate changes poses an existential threat to Guyana’s entire coastline and riverain communities and as other low-lying states it must be acutely aware of what is at stake and endeavour to make a real contribution to the fight against climate change rather than the issuing of mere platitudes.
Its real contribution can come in the form of restraining the rapaciousness of ExxonMobil and its partners in the Stabroek Block. Is it the intention of President Ali’s administration to manage the oil and gas sector in a manner that enables the sustainable development of the country while recognising its climate change obligations or is it its intention to allow wanton extraction to enable profligate and dubious expenditure as Exxon and its partners make a killing off of the country’s oil all the while stoking the Dutch disease and a rise in the cost of living to further immiserise the small man and woman?
That is the question that President Ali should answer. The question also arises in the context of the government’s intention to use associated gas from the Liza-1 and Liza-2 wells for piping to shore for conversion into electricity which it is promised will substantially lower the cost of power. Burning of natural gas, while cleaner than the heavy fuel oil currently used, will release greenhouse gases and instigate methane leaks and discharge other noxious substances. It will immediately pump up Guyana’s emissions of climate harming gases and classify this country as an emerging offender.
Aside, from the release of greenhouse gases, this gas-to-shore-to-energy project could turn out to be an unmitigated economic and environmental disaster. In the post-independence decades that it has been in office, the PPP/C has not shown the ability to successfully deliver mega projects that function. To the contrary there has been stunning failure as exemplified by the Skeldon Sugar Modernisation Project. Moreover, the price tag for this dirty gas behemoth has been put at US$900m and it is yet unclear how this will be financed. To make matters worse, the project is not founded on the basis of any purpose-built study that has been presented for critical review. It is conveniently based on a hodgepodge of work done under the former APNU+AFC administration. As if that wasn’t enough, the environmental and safety risks to the country’s offshore waters from the pipeline, flora and fauna and populated centres will be onerous especially in the backdrop of lax, ineffective and underfunded regulatory bodies here.
The gas to energy project, which could run for decades could also serve as a great disincentive to the green energy transformation this country has committed to under several administrations without any sign of success. If the project were to deliver cheaper power, even with all the attendant risks, the commitment to more expensive and expansive solar, hydro and wind power will be muted and transformation to renewables will be placed on the backburner.
Shockingly, Guyana will be attending COP26 without setting a Nationally Determined Contribution on the grounds that it will be doing a four-month consultation on its enhanced Low Carbon Development Strategy- a most unimpressive argument.
For all the reasons outlined above, the gas to shore project should not be proceeded with. As a new oil producer, Guyana can mitigate its contribution to global warming by announcing in Scotland that it will forego the use of gas and have ExxonMobil and its partners re-inject it into its wells. It would be the type of ambitious move envisaged by CARICOM climate change ministers. Guyana should also commit to an oil depletion policy that factors in how much the country will earn from the climate services provided by its intact forests. This is the direction in which President Ali’s government should be moving – sustainably managing its oil while eschewing gas that can further accelerate the catastrophe that humankind faces.
