Wrong, Media and COP-27, Africa Is Not De-Carbonizing, Oil Exploration Is Expanding

From ClimateREALISM

By Linnea Lueken

The media and representatives at 2022’s U.N. Climate Change Conference (COP27) claimed that various nations of Africa, often suffering from extreme weather, are desperate for climate change initiatives like de-carbonizing by banning fossil fuel use, and so-called sustainable investing. This is not entirely true. Recent news about upcoming African oil exploration and drilling projects makes it clear that, despite the bluster at COP27, Africa is actively developing fossil fuels.

A recent RigZone article, “African Upstream Revival And 26 Drilling Campaigns Set For 2023,” discusses oil and gas projects currently under development in in oil-rich Nigeria, Chad, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and South Africa.

“[2023] will see an upstream revival in Africa and the launch of several multi-well drilling campaigns across the southern and western parts of the continent,” writes RigZone.

RigZone reports that there are at least 26 new drilling campaigns starting up in Africa this year, including:

  • In Zimbabwe, locations around the Cabora Bassa basin are projected to have up to 1.2 billion barrels of oil, and at least five prospective projects are under development.
  • The Orange Basin in South Africa, bordering Namibia, is seeing new activity and interest, and may have at least one prospective field containing approximately 350 million barrels of oil.
  • Estimates from companies already exploring Namibia’s potential oil reserves are that the country sits atop 30 billion barrels crude oil reserves, several drilling projects are set to begin there in February.
  • A large operation in Chad is underway, with Savannah Energy planning to drill 12 new wells per year through 2030. Chad has about 1.5 billion barrels of proven reserves.
  • Nigeria, Africa’s second largest oil producer at present, is set to open new shallow- and deep-water drilling in its reserves in 2023.

The revenues from oil and gas development are a boon for developing African nations. These projects are going ahead despite recent pushes for Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) investing, as well as carbon credit schemes, which are aimed, in part, at stifling fossil fuel development in Africa by cutting off needed financing for projects there.

Fossil fuels are reliable, proving critical across the decades to the development and operation of modern medical facilities, safe drinking water, large scale agriculture, and more than 4000 products and amenities taken for granted daily in wealthy developed countries. As explored in Climate Realism,  herehere, and here, for example, oil and gas use and revenue from its sales can help African nations minimize the impact of natural disasters and to recover from them when they occur. And modern oil and gas based fertilizers have helped African nations’ food production increase dramatically, reducing hunger and malnutrition there, as discussed herehere, and here, for instance.

Despite pressure from international agencies, foreign governments, and NGO’s, African countries appear to be going forward with new oil and gas projects, including pipeline infrastructure, to take advantage of the bounty of natural resources the continent is blessed with. This is good.  RigZone is absolutely right to describe the reality of the continued desirability of oil and gas development on the ground in Africa.

Linnea Lueken

Linnea Lueken is a Research Fellow with the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy. While she was an intern with The Heartland Institute in 2018, she co-authored a Heartland Institute Policy Brief “Debunking Four Persistent Myths About Hydraulic Fracturing.”

5 14 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
January 17, 2023 6:15 pm

I’m not following such things closely but much of what I have read suggests to me that Europe and Asia, not Africa, particularly not the general population of Africa, are likely to be the main beneficiaries.

Tom Halla
Reply to  AndyHce
January 17, 2023 6:43 pm

The major reason the benefits are ill distributed is due to government ownership of all mining assets. As the people living on the surface have no rights to oil, gas, or coal, diverting the income to whatever the government
sees fit will occur.
If it is vacationing on the Riviera for the Ministry of Mines, socialist principles make it easier.

Reply to  Tom Halla
January 17, 2023 8:16 pm

Hang on a minute you guys.
African countries have to increase their living standards other wise their birth rate stays much higher at over 31 births per 1000 people against Asia at around 17 per 1000 and Europe just over 10 per 1000 people .
If the use of fossil fuel should be curtailed (and I am not advocating that ) then helping African countries will actually in the medium term actually save using so much coal and oil if Africa can raise their living standard and drop their birth rate .
As I have quoted here before ,Somalia had the same population as New Zealand in 1950 2.5 million .
Now despite never ending civil war and lack of food Somalia now has exceeded 17 million and I doubt that any one has emigrated to Somalia .
New Zealand has just got to 5 million with constant emigrants from all around the world.
At least they are allowing mining of coal and are encouraging the development of oil and gas fields and that alone will provide well paying jobs for many Africans .

Reply to  Graham
January 17, 2023 9:48 pm

Why is their birthrate of any business but to themselves?

Reply to  PCman999
January 17, 2023 10:37 pm

Their high birth rate becomes every ones problem around the world when they cannot feed their populations
I don’t want to start an argument with you BUT I can remember when I was at school in the 1950s that Africa had problems feeding their population.
Now 70 years later they are still in poverty and there is still a lot of hunger.
Did you not comprehend what I wrote taking Somalia as an example .
2.5 million to 17 million is a massive increase in population for a war torn country .
I am still involved with Rotary which has undertaken many projects in Africa over the years .The high birthrate is because people hope that some of their descendants might be able to look after them in their old age as most countries in Africa do not have adequate pensions .

Reply to  Graham
January 18, 2023 2:52 am

Despite being Malthusian neo-Luddites the Davos crowd can’t seem to grok that rising living standards always result in steadily lower birthrates historically. Kind of makes you wonder about their real motivation, doesn’t it? Is nitwit Nick assigned to trolling here or just an independent annoyance? I’m pretty new to the comments.

John Hultquist
Reply to  AndyHce
January 17, 2023 9:18 pm

” . . . suggests to me that Europe and Asia, not Africa

I’m not sure, but I think this is alluding to other countries financing
resource extraction in African countries, and providing the workers
and technology. Governments of the countries do receive benefits,
but what the money is used for might not be known to outsiders.

Reply to  AndyHce
January 17, 2023 9:59 pm

Sure, lets take away all the high paying resource jobs, and the high-tech and managerial jobs that go along with that, and the countless service jobs that are much easier than poking a hole in the ground so you can starve at a slower rate, let’s take that away and prevent any more crawling out of the stone age, just because some capitalists might make some profit from risking to invest there.

A socialist would set themselves on fire to avoid an undertaker making an honest buck from embalming them.

Socialists would starve themselves and put up with malnutrition to spite the beef and dairy farmers.

Socialist would pretend the world is going to end from a remote possibility of a few degrees of warming, just to staft capitalists, the ones with the guts and brains to invest in new job creating ventures.

Reply to  PCman999
January 18, 2023 10:36 am

To clarify my comment, it seems to me that most promotion and financing from outside Africa to Africa is really based on the premise that the financier will get the major share of the extracted resources, it will not remain in Africa to help Africa. This seems to mean most financing because relatively little money can be provided by African nations themselves.

This is especially facilitated by the widespread corruption of government in Africa, benefits being for the governing politicians, not for the general population. Thoses in power in Africa have, and seemingly still do, accept nice personal cash payments for making agreements that screw their own country. This includes monies that might have made “well paying jobs” so that what the people actually get is hard labor for little pay.

Maybe I’m wrong, maybe all the evidence of the past is irrelevant to the shining future, but it seems unlikely.

January 17, 2023 7:48 pm

Most of Africa has always been the model for government corruption. If they can direct some of the monetary benefits from fossil fuels to the people they would be far better off than today.

Nick Stokes
January 17, 2023 8:27 pm

“Wrong, Media and COP-27, Africa Is Not De-Carbonizing, Oil Exploration Is Expanding”

This gets very confusing. A frequent narrative at WUWT is that Green Meanies are somehow holding Africa in energy poverty by denying access to fossil fuels. For example, Carbon Imperialists’ Impoverishment of Africa But now we hear that exploration and extraction in Africa are going gangbusters.

Tom Halla
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 17, 2023 8:36 pm

Nick, you are arguing that because the Green Blob is not all powerful, and does not totally control everything absolutely, the Green Blob has had no malign effects?

John Hultquist
Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 17, 2023 9:26 pm

Why this is confusing to you, Nick, is a mystery to me.
Seems the western elites argue to deny access so as to save the planet.
These will be the Green Meanies. Others, not of western clothing, are the
Green Niceys — they say nice green things but look out for their own interests.
If that means mining and burnings coal, that’s what they do.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 17, 2023 10:01 pm

The Green Meanies have failed, so far. Thankfully.

Reply to  Nick Stokes
January 18, 2023 10:38 am

But now we hear that exploration and extraction in Africa are going gangbusters.

But for whose benefit?

January 18, 2023 12:15 am

Recent news about upcoming African oil exploration and drilling projects makes it clear that, despite the bluster at COP27, Africa is actively developing fossil fuels.

Black fatigue from white crazies I presume?
Don’t be deterred by the rise of their neo-colonialism and cultural appropriation as black crude matters.

January 18, 2023 4:46 am

Not entirely true? Sounds like their stooges at COP27 were talking complete bollocks.

January 18, 2023 12:06 pm

Africans, generally, are not in the pockets of the UN and other peddlers of unreliable renewables – let’s hope they tell the west where to shove their windmills and massively exploit their natural gas, coal & oil reserves to power their own development

Edward Katz
January 18, 2023 2:03 pm

Give credit to the leaders of those African countries since they’ve realized that renewables like wind and solar won’t come close to boosting their economies, alleviating poverty or supplying adequate reserves of affordable, dependable energy. It’s too bad that so many leaders of the advanced countries are too unrealistic to see the same. They’d prefer to go in the opposite direction.

January 18, 2023 3:29 pm

Posters need a lesson on Africa’s energy resources and geography. Some African countries north of the Sahara (Libya, Algeria, and Tunisia) have well developed oil and gas industries. Nigeria and Angola are among the largest oil producers in the world. White neocolonialists have minimal influence on these countries. The debate is over whether to develop new discoveries (gas in Egypt and Mozambique, oil in many countries).

Verified by MonsterInsights