By Tilak K. Doshi for RealClearPolitics
On March 28, President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of the South American country of Guyana became an instant hero to many as he refused to be lectured on climate change by a BBC journalist during an interview. In a two-minute video clip that went viral on X (formerly Twitter) and other social media, President Ali turned the tables on the BBC’s Stephen Sackur when the journalist accused Guyana of worsening the “climate crisis” by allowing its new resources. found oil and gas reserves.
“Over the next ten to twenty years, $150 billion worth of oil and gas is expected to be extracted off your coast,” Sackur told the president. “This is an extraordinary fact. But let’s think about it in practical terms. This means that, according to many experts, two billion tons of carbon emissions will come from the seabed and be released into the atmosphere.” Guyana’s head of state quickly retorted: “Let me stop you right there. Did you know that Guyana has a forest the size of England and Scotland combined, a forest that stores 19.5 gigatons of carbon, a forest that we have kept alive?”
When the reporter asked President Ali whether the rainforest gave him the “right” to release carbon, the Guyanese leader retorted: “Does that give you the right to lecture us on climate change? I’ll give you a lecture on climate change. Being lectured by the BBC on climate change is not a new development; this is what state-backed media often does, and in authoritarian tones. But is the BBC right in its claims about what “climate science” says?
Climate alarmists and their detractors
The BBC appears institutionally committed to an alarmist position in its coverage of climate change issues. Many BBC programs seem driven to insert the “climate catastrophe” narrative into every energy-related news story. Stephen Sakur’s pointed remarks to the President of Guyana on the country’s rapid emergence as an oil and gas exporter were not exceptional in this regard.
The social media response to the viral clip is significant. Here is a short selection from X of March 29th and 30th:
Chris Rose (over 130,000 followers): “It’s gorgeous to watch. The President of Guyana really put the BBC in his place. When sanctity and pomposity meet [sic] common sense and modesty.”
Simon Ateba (over 670,000 followers): “EXPLOSIVE: President Mohamed Irfaan Ali (@presidentaligy) of Guyana trashes BBC journalist Stephen Sackur (@stephensackur) over climate change hypocrisy. “No, no, I’m not done yet!” CLOCK.”
Dilly Hussain (over 110,000 followers): “LET ME STOP RIGHT THERE!” An absolute shut down from President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of Guyana when questioned by Stephen Sackur of @BBCHARDtalk about new oil and gas fields discovered in his country and the West’s concerns about “carbon emissions”.
Visegrád 24 (over 970,000 followers): “I will give you a lesson on climate change,” Guyana’s president @presidentaligy tells BBC journalist Stephen Sackur, as he objects to the journalist attempting to lecture the Caribbean leader that oil is harmful to the environment. environment.”
Major newspaper headlines on March 30 reflected these social media messages:
The telegraph: “Watch: Guyana president scolds BBC presenter for ‘lecture’ on climate change.”
Times of India: “’Are you in their pocket?’: Guyana’s president accuses journalist of Western hypocrisy.”
Fox News: “Video of Guyanese president taking BBC reporter’s climate quiz goes viral: ‘Let me stop you.’”
Hypocrisy as the default option in climate change narratives
What is of interest here is the inherently hypocritical nature of interactions between representatives of developed and developing countries regarding energy and climate policies. Some of the most visible of such interactions occur during the annual climate summits of the UN COP (‘Conference of the Parties’).
United Nations Secretary General António Guterres, who never backs down from hyperbolic statements, warns of a “code red for humanity. The alarm bells are deafening and the evidence is irrefutable.” Indeed, on the basis of dubious “hockey stick” models of global warming formulated in the West, the Secretary General proclaims the approach of the “era of global boiling”.
At COP26, held in 2021 in Glasgow, Western leaders addressed those who make up 80% of humanity with speeches that reeked of carbon imperialism ( here , here and here ). Their message can be fairly summarized as follows:
We are committed to climate finance to help you. There are promising new energy technologies to meet our net-zero emissions goals by 2050. The prospects for new jobs and economic growth are limitless with solar and wind energy, electric vehicles, green hydrogen and solar capture and carbon sequestration. However, we must stop all new investments in fossil fuels immediately! You have to give up fossil fuels otherwise the planet is doomed.
Faced with the increasingly unsustainable hypocrisy of Western elites discouraging the use of fossil fuels in developing countries, the reaction of leaders like Guyana’s President Ali is unsurprising. In 2015, India’s then-chief economic advisor, Arvind Subramaniam, spoke bluntly of a new carbon imperialism: “The rich world’s move against fossil fuels is a disaster for India and other poorer countries ”.
Ahead of COP27 to be held in Sharm Al Sheikh, Egypt, in 2022, Africa’s top energy official, Amani Abou-Zeid, African Union commissioner for infrastructure and energy, said African countries will push for “a common energy position that views fossil fuels as necessary for the expansion of economies and access to electricity”.
At the COP28 climate summit held in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Dr Sultan Al Jaber, Chairman of the Summit and Chief Executive Officer of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, answered questions from Mary Robinson, former UN Special Envoy for climate change: “There’s no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says phasing out fossil fuels is what’s going to get us to 1.5 C [maximum global temperature increase].” In an interview, you said that “you’re calling for the phase-out of fossil fuels. . . Please help me, show me the roadmap for phasing out fossil fuels that will enable sustainable socio-economic development, unless you want to take the world back to caves.”
That’s enough already!
Germany, a world leader in green energy ambitions, provides the best lesson in unsustainable hypocrisy in the face of the real-world constraints of physics and economics. In 2022, the country will face the prospect of entering winter without adequate energy supplies. It had closed its nuclear power plants and lost access to Russian natural gas by imposing sanctions against Moscow (which was followed by sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline). Against this backdrop, Germany has rapidly transitioned to coal-fired power generation and now plans to double its gas power generation capacity.
Second Doomberg, an energy and financial consultancy firm, Germany has returned to coal “with the speed and efficiency of Britain’s Dunkirk evacuation.” The IEA, the institution most responsible for Western calls to halt investment in fossil fuels, noted that Germany’s “significant turnaround” increased European coal consumption by 9% in 2022. Security energy and the need to heat homes and keep the lights on and factories running have trumped virtue-signalling climate goals – and Germany’s abject hypocrisy is evident to many leaders of developing countries.
Guyanese President Irfaan Ali has little to explain, much less apologize, as his country is rapidly emerging as a major South American exporter of hydrocarbons. Let BBC journalists peddle their beliefs about luxury to those who think they can afford it.
Dr. Tilak K. Doshi is an energy economist, independent consultant and Forbes contributor based in London.
Distributed with permission from RealClearWire.
