–local environmentalist scotches rumour Guyana likely to become world’s highest polluter
THOUGH its vast oil-and-gas resources could contribute to the emission of millions of tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), veteran local environmentalist Dr. David Singh believes that Guyana should not be held wholly responsible for that.
Dr. Singh’s position comes in the wake of a recent report put out by Urgewald, a German Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), saying that if all the oil currently in Guyana’s offshore reserves were to be exploited, the resulting carbon emissions from oil alone could be close to 860 million tons, and another 1.7 billion tons from natural gas. Essentially, what Urgewald is saying is that such huge volumes of greenhouse gases would cause Guyana, a country that is a net carbon sink due to its vast rainforests, to become the country with the highest per capita emissions in the world.
Dr. Singh, who at one time headed Conservation International-Guyana (CIG), couldn’t agree more, in that while the emissions would be significant, and could have detrimental environmental impacts, whether the responsibility for this should be laid squarely on Guyana’s shoulders is a matter for discussion.
As he was at pains to explain, in the longstanding climate change conversation, there has been debate as to whether a country that produces oil should be the one that bears the full responsibility for the carbon emissions that result from the oil.
“If ExxonMobil produces a million barrels of oil,” he asked, “is that million barrels of burnt carbon to be attributed to Guyana, or should it be attributed to the people who actually finally use the million barrels of oil?”
He doesn’t believe that that should be the case. He explained that you would have to look at the final consumers of the oil.
“If you look at the overall value chain, it is not only the responsibility of the producer, but also the consumer. And Guyana’s oil, and oil in general, ends up in developed countries to fuel or support their lifestyles and their economies,” he said.
Whatever fossil fuels are consumed within the country, and those which are used for the production of Guyana’s oil should, however, be factored into Guyana’s carbon emissions, according to Dr. Singh.
And even while looking at the value chain and the producers and final consumers, he noted that not much attention is given to those corporations which profit from the production of oil and their responsibility.
As such, he said that the German NGO is correct in predicting that Guyana’s oil will contribute to global emissions, but added that the organization did not factor in the role and responsibility of the oil-producing companies as well. “I think what they have done is let Exxon go scotch-free at this time,” he said.
In light of Urgewald’s report, too, Dr. Singh stressed that Guyana must remain committed to its ‘green’ agenda, and upkeep its reputation as a responsible nation.
According to him, it is not unusual for countries to be oil producers while at the same time maintaining a ‘green’ image, as Norway has so aptly proven.
However, he contended that Guyana’s current political situation presents some challenges to the country’s “reputation” as a responsible nation.
“If any one of the ministers of government tries to speak about Guyana’s ‘green agenda’, they would be compromised, because of the political context in which we are operating,” Dr. Singh said, adding: “It becomes almost impossible for them to demonstrate this balance between, on the one hand producing oil and gas, and on the other hand, being a ‘green’ country.”
