More direct ways needed to hold investors accountable for environment – US Environmental Advocate

…“we are a rule-based country” – Jagdeo
…says Govt insists investors follow environmental guidelines

By Vahnu Manikchand

As countries around the world move towards more sustainable development as part of efforts to fight the climate crisis, governments will have to play a more stringent role in holding investors accountable for adhering to environment best practices.
This is according to Regina Strong, who serves as the Environmental Justice Public Advocate in the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) in the United States. She recently delivered a briefing to journalists around the world who participated in a three-week Virtual Report Tour (VRT) on “Combatting the Climate Crisis through US Innovation” hosted by the US Department of State’s Foreign Press Centers (FPC).

When it comes to advocating for environmental justice, Strong pointed out that this “justice” can be elusive. However, she noted that environmental justice has to be incorporated into future plans to address climate change.
“If you’re looking at impact versus opportunity, that’s where the justice comes. How does it impact people, and how do you hold folks accountable for the results? And that’s a hard thing… I am at heart an advocate and activist, and so I truly believe that there are and there should be more direct ways to [hold people accountable].  I’m new to Government, it’s been a little over two years, and what I’ve learned is there are a whole lot of reasons why it’s harder to get to what on the ground may seem like injustices and get them addressed,” the Environment Justice Public Advocate noted.
In response to a question from <<<Guyana Times>>> on how Governments can ensure adherence to environmental best practices especially by foreign investors, Strong acknowledged that this can be challenging. But in the same breath, she contended that governments need look at the bigger picture of the impact of certain projects on the environment.

“Governments come into the process that a company may be looking to do, whether they’re investing [or] whether they’re existing companies looking to do changes, we come in at a slice of that process… We have to regulate [if] they ask us to approve something… One of the things that I’ve always found challenging is because everything’s divided up so much, we only ask for that slice. I think it is incumbent upon us as Government to ask for a bigger-picture look. How does this [project or investment] fit in and where will the impact [on the environment] be? So, asking the right questions up front is – sometimes people feel like it’s – well, it’s not our role because we’re only regulating this slice, but how will you know the impact of the bigger picture if you don’t ask that question? So, I would argue that that has to be part of practice. It may not be now, but I think it should become part of the practice as you work with industries,” she explained.
Further, Strong went on to underscore the need to make communities more resilient in advocating for change in how development is being undertaken, and ensuring it is done more sustainably.
“Some of the things that have been pushed quite a bit are community benefit agreements where industry finds ways to work with community to mitigate whatever impacts exist there. And those aren’t always a full panacea or a full solving of issues, but it brings them into the mix. So, it’s not just Government trying to figure it out, because you’re right; if they’re going to impact the environment negatively or impact communities, community health in a negative way, they still may be within whatever the regulatory framework [there] is to do that. So how do we work around that is part of the challenge and how we infuse justice there… There may be long-term changes that need to be advocated for, and maybe Government-to-Government isn’t the way to do it, but community-to-Government could be,” the Environment Justice Public Advocate posited.

Environmental impact
This suggestion of community involvement in sustainable development comes on the heels of residents of the community of Malgre Tout/Versailles, West Bank Demerara, complaining about the removal of a large swathe of mangroves by developer, Tristar Incorporated, which is constructing a shore-based facility there.
It was reported that the developer cleared more mangroves than it was permitted to, and stakeholders, including surrounding residents, have since expressed concerns about the negative impacts this move could have as it relates to flooding.
Another environmental issue that has sparked controversy here is the flaring of gas offshore Guyana where US oil major, ExxonMobil Guyana, is producing oil.
Exxon has come under fire over its increased flaring activities in recent years, which continued earlier this year following an equipment failure. In fact, the recurring technical issue has resulted in the oil company still flaring in the Stabroek Block.
This has had environmentalists up in arms over the harmful effects flaring has on the environment.

EPA response
In response to mounting pressure, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this month modified the Environmental Permit for the Liza-1 Development Project to include, among other things, a fee of US$30 per tonne of excess carbon emissions that is flared – something that was missing from the permit approved by the previous APNU/AFC Administration.
As a result of this change, Exxon will now have to pay the Guyana Government some US1.3 million for the excess flaring. The oil major had applied to continue flaring for a 36-day period, which started on May 26.
Based on calculations, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo had disclosed that this 36-day flaring will rack up a fee of some US$1.3 million.
“They say they’re flaring about 15 million cubic feet per day now. That would be equivalent to about 1152 tonnes of CO2e (Carbon Dioxide equivalent) …It should take us to 1.3 million US dollars,” Jagdeo told reporters during a recent press conference.
Meanwhile, with regards to Tristar’s shore-based facility, Government has given the go ahead for the more than US$100 million project.

Follow the rules
But according to the Vice President, it would have to seek all the regulatory permits consistent with the law.
“So, if the EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) and the residents don’t want it there, then they’ll have to move,” he posited.
Nevertheless, Jagdeo, who was awarded the United Nations “Champion of the Earth” award in 2010 during his presidency for his signature Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS), agreed that investors will have to adhere to and follow environment rules.
“It’s a rules-based country… They all have to follow the rules. I don’t think this was just a rule-based thing [but] that’s one thing you have to agree with – people need to follow the rules,” the Vice President had said in response to a question from Guyana Times.
Notwithstanding, Jagdeo had defended the project by explaining that the area where the mangroves were cleared is pegged for massive development and would provide over 20,000 jobs that will not just benefit Region Three (Essequibo Islands-West Demerara) but neighbouring Region Four (Demerara-Mahaica). He further pointed out that while mangroves have been a critical sea defence for Guyana, the plants along the Demerara River would not prevent floods.
“The mangrove fringe don’t prevent flooding. Water can pass through the roots; you have to have structures there too… It will have structures to prevent flooding. The way I see it the whole area will be developed,”
According to Jagdeo, the removal of the mangroves along that fringe will be mitigated by replanting some 6000 acres of mined out areas.
“…We need to balance development with [the environment] and how we’re going to protect the area from flooding… We have to develop our rivers too. When you go to the developed countries, both sides of the rivers are developed etc,” the VP contended.