Should we be flaring, or gainfully exploiting our gas reserves?

Dear Editor,
The question asked is: Is Guyana a real place; or a place where real, rational people live, work, and associate with each other?
At first it might appear to be a silly question, but further examination would show that there is strong validity in the statement.
But before I delve into the negatives of the statement, I must first accentuate the positives. Yes, Guyana is a real place; that is, all 83,000 square miles of it, where real, educated people live.
Having established that fact, I must further state that Guyana is also well known for its notorious traits, such as election-rigging, violence in politics, and negative economic growth. Central to the scenario painted above is that this country has become famous for its retrograde thinkers, persons whose thinking power is wrapped in a retrogression of negatives, and people who see things in that narrow, myopic mode of politics and race. Their constant focus on the darker side of those things makes it difficult for them to create anything of developmental value.
I am talking about men and women who happen to be educated, yet lack the wherewithal to demonstrate an intelligent, positive outlook. So, for too long, this country languished in the doldrums, with no developmental trajectory to boost us up. However, in recent times, it seems that The Almighty has smiled upon us with large oil and gas deposits. We are also thankful that we have oil and a Government that can manage it; so, we are doubly blessed.
On this note, you must realise that we are extracting the crude oil while, at the same time, there is the flaring of the natural gas. In this regard, natural gas is wasted. Now, the Government has devised an economic plan to bring the gas to shore, and utilise its many uses for the development of Guyana.
Immediately, the Opposition and its lackeys are heightening the negatives about gas to shore. In the first place, they are up in arms against the Government bringing the gas pipelines to the closed Wales Estate location, saying it would destroy the mangrove ecosystem there. In another negative move, they contend that it is too expensive a venture to bring the gas to shore, the Opposition Leader himself dogmatically sticking to his limited and opinionated view that it would be more lucrative for the Government to raise the taxes on ExxonMobil while they continue to flare.
For lack of a better word, I readily rubbish Norton’s view as the most asinine ever, because what he promulgates is simply this: continue to flare and increase the incidence of global warming, and the whole suffers as a result, instead of profitably utilising the same if it comes to shore. This is among the glaring evidence of an Opposition steeped in backwardness.
Concerning the gas to shore, while it might be costly in the initial startup, the long-term benefits far outweigh the cost, and this is what the Government is focusing on. It makes perfect sense to utilise the gas to shore, because the economic advantages it will bring are unparalleled. The transformation in the economy would be phenomenal. The narrow, myopic view of flaring, on the other hand, brings forth untold damage to the atmosphere, exacerbating global warming. To this end, I would say go full speed ahead with the implementation of the gas-to-shore project, and propel our development to greater heights.
At this point of our development, we cannot entertain the pessimism and retrograde proposals of the Opposition on gas to shore. Let this country move forward.

Respectfully,
Neil Adams