The evidence is all around us, but just in case anyone missed it, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirmed, in what has been dubbed its strongest report to date released on August 9, that the overheating of the earth is caused by human activity and we are running out of time to fix it. Dubbed “a code red for humanity” by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, the report warns that unless immediate action is taken to reduce emissions, the 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) global warming threshold could be soon reached and surpassed, resulting in even more dire consequences for the earth and its inhabitants.
In compiling its 40-odd pages report, the IPCC took cognisance of over 14,000 scientific studies done on global warming. It should come as no surprise to anyone that among the major contributors to the rise in temperature, which is currently at 1.1 Celsius, are methane emissions from the oil and gas industry and large-scale agricultural endeavours. It stands to reason then that it will require huge changes in these areas to slow the rate of warming.
Already, the clamour from environmental organisations and concerned individuals for governments to act has increased tenfold. It is expected that these calls will intensify over the next few months in the lead up to the UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) scheduled to be held in Glasgow, Scotland from October 31 to November 12. Since the principal goal of COP26 is securing global net zero emissions by 2050 and staying away from reaching the 1.5C degrees threshold, all eyes will be on its outcomes.
As part of its agenda, COP26 will ask countries to commit to aggressive reductions in emissions over the next nine years. These will include, but are not limited to, expediting the phasing-out of coal mining and its use in homes and industry, curtailing deforestation, switching to electric vehicles and investing in renewable energy. The prevailing conditions being what they are, environmentalists quite rightly believe that fossil fuels really have no future in the world, if the world is to have a future.
In the face of all of this, Guyana has chosen to bet on oil and gas to bolster its economy now and in the future, while incongruously holding itself out as a green economy. This same month, even as the IPCC report was being released, ExxonMobil, currently the largest oil extraction company in Guyana, applied for an environmental authorisation for a 12-well exploration and appraisal drilling programme in the offshore Canje Block. Exxon says on its website that it is committed to working to mitigate climate change and has spent billions of dollars on technologies to reduce emissions. Its actions, particularly in its dealings with Guyana, say otherwise.
Meanwhile, Guyana also has other problems. One of them is sea-level rise. According to the IPCC report, this is inevitable. It has long been established that as the earth warmed up the ice in Greenland and the Antarctic has been melting and impacting oceans and seas. If all emissions stopped right now, the ice would still continue to melt as the earth is already hotter than it should be.
Guyana’s coast is below sea level at high tide and its current sea defences are no match for what are often deemed abnormally high tides. A spring tide measuring three metres can breach any seawall in the country. This has occurred time and again. Furthermore, flooding caused by heavy rainfall and swollen rivers has become almost ubiquitous in hinterland areas, which are not below sea level. Now occurring annually, the inundation wreaks havoc on farms and further enervates already impoverished communities.
The global hot list of countries that are already dramatically impacted by sea-level rise, include India, China, Bangladesh and Vietnam among others where the number of people affected range between five million and 29 million. Guyana is not on that list, possibly because of its population size. That does not mean the government can rest on its laurels. The aforementioned flooding has to be addressed more definitively than by government ministers wading through water for photo ops and handouts of hampers. Is there a plan? If yes, what is it and why has it not been formulated with the input of the population? If no, how soon can the people expect one?
The forecast is that extreme sea-level events, which previously occurred once or twice every hundred years are likely to become annual fixtures. With the Atlantic on the coast and swelling rivers in the hinterland and maybe elsewhere, this country could easily find itself in a position where it has neither a rock nor a hard place to be caught between.
Yet the attention the powers that be have paid to the IPCC report is almost as if it does not concern us. This boggles the mind. In attempting to wrap their heads around absurdities that occur here, citizens sometimes jokingly ask whether Guyana is a ‘real’ place. Perhaps this is a question we should seriously put to our policy makers and those who represent us in Parliament.
