Dr Clive Thomas

Introduction In today’s column I begin my consideration, in some detail, of the problematic that I had posed several weeks ago concerning the likely impacts on Guyana’s infant oil and gas sector of the unfolding 2020 global general crisis.

Introduction There is one outstanding feature of the 2020 general crisis and its impacts on the crude oil market that remains to be assessed in this series of Sunday columns, before I can fruitfully turn to evaluate its likely specific impacts on Guyana’s infant (five-month old) oil and gas sector.

Introduction Some readers query my continued use of modifiers when referring to a coming 2020 economic recession and unfolding 2020 economic depression.

Introduction Last week’s column drew attention to the fact that the United States remains comfortably the world’s pre-eminent economic powerhouse. 

Introduction This column appears at the start of only the fifth month of the infant life of Guyana’s petroleum sector.

Introduction As revealed in last week’s column, thankfully the “crazy” oil price war has lasted for about one month.

Introduction My last column addressed the impact of the incipient 2020 global inflation and its accompanying economic recession on the one hand, and, on the other, the COVID-19 pandemic, on the global demand and supply for crude oil.

Introduction  In today’s column I continue my deliberations about the impact of the 2020 global general crisis on Guyana’s infant oil and gas sector.

Introduction At the heart of the 2020 general crisis and its financial driver is a serious public health crisis.

Introduction Today’s column continues my evaluation of the impact of the 2020 global crisis on Guyana’s “infant petroleum sector”.

Introduction Last week’s column wrapped-up my evaluation of Guyana’s first Report on Petroleum Production and Revenues (RPPR). 

Introduction Last week’s column had addressed the seeming rationale behind the publication of Guyana’s first Report on Petroleum Production and Revenues (RPPR) by the Ministry of Finance on February 19, 2020.

Introduction On February 2 of this year, I concluded my year-long series of columns, which had commenced on January 27, 2019, on the topic: Guyana’s Petroleum Road Map.

Introduction As previously indicated, today’s column wraps-up my reflections on the national debates that have so far centered on the birth of Guyana’s infant petroleum industry.

Introduction In this week’s column, I continue to review the national debate on Guyana’s Government Take from its petroleum sector, focusing on issues of its measurement, based on an acceptable definition.

Introduction This week’s column treats with what still passes today as Guyana’s “national debate on its projected Government Take” or revenue share obtained from the export of barrels of crude oil equivalent (boe) based on its petroleum discoveries as detailed in last Sunday’s column.

Introduction This week I turn to consider the second and third of the three relations, identified last week, as informing the petroleum metrics/revenues of the Guyana Petroleum Road Map, and, relatedly, the Buxton Proposal.

Introduction Last week’s column concluded my presentation on the Buxton Proposal.

Introduction Today’s column wraps-up discussion on the “reasonings” or developmental rationale for the Buxton Proposal of “oil-for-cash” transfers to Guyanese households.

Introduction In today’s column I shall continue the effort to offer readers, as careful an assessment as I can of the “reasonings” (developmental rationale), underpinning the Buxton Proposal of “oil-for-cash” transfers to Guyanese households, as the final element of the Guyana’s Petroleum Road Map, as I have been describing it.