Amanda, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Developing Nations Reject Western Carbon Colonialism

By Vijay Jayaraj

Guyana President Irfaan Ali is the latest leader of a developing nation to publicly note the hypocrisy of those pressuring countries like his to forego wealth in pursuit of a “green” agenda.

In a fiery response to a BBC interviewer’s questioning of Guyana’s “right” to emit carbon dioxide in developing $150 billion of oil and gas reserves, President Ali questioned the reporter’s “right to lecture us on climate change. I will lecture you on climate change.”

It is not new, but still dismaying, that many leaders of developed nations assume a posture of moral superiority in leveling criticisms at countries with expanding economies and increasing emissions of carbon dioxide. Ensconced in seats of power from Brussels to Washington, D.C., they point accusing fingers while overlooking centuries of using coal, oil and natural gas to enrich their own countries.

The double standard fails to acknowledge the urgent needs of less advanced countries endeavouring to improve the lot of an impoverished citizenry. Such a nation is Guyana, the third smallest South American country in area.

The Guyanese president told the British journalist that it was hypocritical for rich countries to ask poor ones to reduce emissions. President Ali questioned the moral authority of those that benefited from the hydrocarbon-driven Industrial Revolution, whose most notable technological impetus was the coal-fired steam engine.

“The world, in the last 50 years, has lost 65% of all its biodiversity,” said the president whose country is home to a large rainforest. “We have kept our biodiversity. Are you valuing it. Are you ready to pay for it? When is the developed world going to pay for it, or are you in their pockets?”

President Ali’s comments echo those of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and others who have rejected the climate alarmists’ hostility to fossil fuels in favor of exploiting hydrocarbons to support economic growth.

From the perspective of a developing country, the climate crusaders are particularly annoying when they travel in fuel-guzzling private jets to exclusive locations for United Nations’ climate conferences. The amount of CO2 such a flights release surpasses the yearly emissions of an ordinary individual in a developing country.

Per Capita Emissions and Energy Poverty

Except for nuclear power, fossil fuels are the densest form of energy and so are the most efficient in powering economic growth. Their use — and their CO2 emissions — have a direct relationship with a society’s wealth. Economies with low poverty rates either have high per capita emissions, or have been through a phase when emissions were elevated, because of the central role that fossil fuels played in their development.

Thus, barring a few countries that are blessed with abundant water resources for hydroelectric generation or with nuclear power plants, low per capita emissions equate to poverty. While large developing countries like India produce a significant amount of CO2 emissions in total, the per capita emissions of individual citizens are dwarfed by the carbon footprints of people in the developed West.

For example, global per capita CO2 emissions in 2022 were just over 4 tons while India’s were less than 2 tons. In the U.K. — the BBC’s home — per capita emissions were almost 5 tons.

The African continent has per capita emissions of less than 1 ton; the Central African Republic, 0.05 tons, with 70 percent of its citizens in extreme poverty, making it the fifth poorest country in the world.  Another African country among the five poorest is the Democratic Republic of Congo with just 0.04 tons per capita. According to the World Bank, 4.6% of the Congolese people live on less than $2.15 per day.

Doomsday-promoting politicians cling to their luxuries while millions have no access to clean water, modern appliances and automobiles. The Guyanese president and others are quite right to call out the hypocrisy and moral bankruptcy.

This commentary was first published at Real Clear Energy on April 24, 2024.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K.

5 22 votes
Article Rating
15 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Chris Hanley
April 29, 2024 6:42 pm

CO2 emissions — have a direct relationship with a society’s wealth

Energy use per cap has a more useful correlation with wealth, for instance Germany has a CO2 emission per cap of 8 metric tons (2022) compared with France with 4.6 metric tons (2022) whereas the difference in wealth as measured by GDP per cap (PPP) — France 45904.41 US dollars (2022) cp. Germany 53969.63 US dollars (2022) — is marginal, a significant difference being France’s widespread use of nuclear energy for electricity generation.
Using CO2 emissions per cap gives alarmists more opportunities to confound and obfuscate figures in argument as they invariably do.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
April 29, 2024 9:08 pm

Today over at JoNova, there is an article on Fortescue setting up their first “green hydrogen” plant in Arizona. The reason being that their power cost is only 25% of the cost of power in Australia. So the “green” is more “black” if you base it on fuel type.

Arizona produces its annual 350TWh of electricity from mostly fossil fuels with some nuclear and hydro as well. There are 7.3M people in Arizona but it is growing radidly due to Climate Ambition™ refugees.

UK has electricity production of 266TWh for 68M people. No surprise why Arizona is attracting investment.

Reply to  RickWill
April 30, 2024 8:00 am

Fortescue is an 80 MW electrolyzer, not scheduled to go commercial until 2026. It can’t even “go commercial” without big tax credits and subsidies…plus its size is “pilot project” scale, plus it’s hooked to the grid so it’s claim to green-ness is a result of green paper shuffling.
https://fortescue.com/what-we-do/our-projects/arizona-phoenix-hydrogen-hub

Richard Greene
Reply to  Chris Hanley
April 30, 2024 3:22 am

CO2 emissions correlate best with Real GDP
Wealth is much harder to measure and can also drop a lot during a recession.

John Hultquist
April 29, 2024 7:16 pm

Venezuela has made a claim on the oil-rich region of Guyana. If the USA has made a response, I’ve not seen it. Then again, I miss a lot because I don’t follow news from a certain place much.

pillageidiot
Reply to  John Hultquist
April 29, 2024 7:31 pm

All of the Luddite Democrat politicians probably want Venezuela to steal the oil fields.

After all, if the current Venezuelans develop the oil fields, their ineptitude and corruption will result in most of the oil staying in the ground or being spilled before it reaches the end users.

April 29, 2024 7:20 pm

When human CO2 dropped by around 5.4 percent due to COVID-19 closures and lockdowns the atmospheric CO2 kept rising at the same rate.
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/emission-reductions-from-pandemic-had-unexpected-effects-on-atmosphere
https://www.co2.earth/monthly-co2
story tip

Richard Greene
Reply to  scvblwxq
April 30, 2024 3:42 am

Man made CO2 emissions add about +2.5 ppm of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Nature is said to absorb about half of about +5 ppm of gross manmade CO2 emissions each year.

If 2020 had 5% fewer emissions than the usual +2.5 ppm, the CO2 increase would have been about +2.4 ppm, rather than +2.5 ppm

2019 CO2 was 411.65 ppm average
2020 CO2 was 414.21 ppm average

2020 up +2.56 ppm from 2019

A slightly larger increase than expected

So what?

Atmospheric CO2 ppm by year 1959-2023 | Statista

April 29, 2024 7:27 pm

Western governments climate policy has already caused horrible global inflation through their war on fossil fuels, creating shortages and galloping prices for fuels, electric power, nitrogen fertilizers, and in turn, everything we eat, wear or use. A couple of billion people, already at or below subsistence margins are most certainly in life threatening circumstances.

A quiet, untallyed casualty rate that, unrelieved, is already mounting, and could easily surpass, in no time at all, the carnage of the 20th century’s “Government-Policy-Caused” devastation. This crime against humanity can be laid at the feet of feckless Western governments, the UN and other NGOs, the West’s Universities, fraudulent money grubbing climate scientists, Billionaire foundations and WEF elitists profiteers.

pillageidiot
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 29, 2024 7:36 pm

Energy costs are one of the most regressive items on the people in an advanced economy.

Every time a Leftist government raises energy prices, the burden falls disproportionately on the lower income folks.

Yet these same politicians nearly wrench their arms out of their sockets patting themselves on the back as “Champions of the Poor!”

David Goeden
Reply to  Gary Pearse
April 29, 2024 8:25 pm

Climate alarmism is currently the runner up for this century’s crime against humanity. The winner so far is the reaction to the virus. Observe how the divide between those who got paid and those who did not, during the shutdowns, fits with your named groups.

April 30, 2024 1:19 am

Surprisingly, the WHO have been onto this for years.

Key facts

Around 2.3 billion people worldwide (around a third of the global population) cook using open fires or inefficient stoves fuelled by kerosene, biomass (wood, animal dung and crop waste) and coal, which generates harmful household air pollution.

Household air pollution was responsible for an estimated 3.2 million deaths per year in 2020, including over 237 000 deaths of children under the age of 5.

The combined effects of ambient air pollution and household air pollution are associated with 6.7 million premature deaths annually.

Household air pollution exposure leads to noncommunicable diseases including stroke, ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and lung cancer.

Women and children, typically responsible for household chores such as cooking collecting firewood, bear the greatest health burden from the use of polluting fuels and technologies in homes.

This article goes onto describe solar, biogas, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), natural gas, alcohol fuels, as well as biomass stoves as solutions but with the exception of natural gas they are all sticking plasters.

The rest of the article illustrates the lives we expect these people to live whilst we and our ‘Green’ brethren life in centrally heated/air conditioned houses cooking over our gas/electric stoves.

You do have to suffer the occasional bleat about climate change but overall the author seems cool on the subject.

https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-air-pollution-and-health

Richard Greene
April 30, 2024 3:19 am

Vijay Jayaraj, from India, writes the best articles on climate and energy issues in Asia and Africa

I would like to add that at least 175 of 195 nations are ignoring Nut Zero. Of the 20 fool nations, three have not done much but seem to be playing the game.

Nut Zero is a fake engineering project intended to give governments strong fascist style control of their private sectors. Climate change is really irrelevant. If the climate was important the biggest problem, by far, would be those 175 wise nations which include India and China. But we don’t hear about them.

I have renamed Nut Zero”

Global warming became climate change. Net Zero is now the Carbon Reduction Atmospheric Project, or CRAP.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Richard Greene
April 30, 2024 10:58 am

I have renamed Net Zero. Net Zero Energy.

Edward Katz
April 30, 2024 6:18 pm

This is precisely what these leaders should be doing since there’s no way that environmentalists’ asinine demands should stand in the way of economic development and poverty alleviation that are the main goal of the developing world.

Verified by MonsterInsights