Prime
Our oil, environment and devt journey
Elison Karuhanga
What you need to know:
- In the same vein, addressing the sensitive subject of carbon emissions, the UK oil and gas regulator, North Sea Transition Authority (NTSA), offers compelling insights. NTSA highlights that domestically produced gas has a significantly lower carbon footprint compared to imported liquefied natural gas.
Amid global dialogues about oil’s role in economies and sustainability, the recent UK government announcement of new oil and gas licences in the North Sea reignites discussions on the multifaceted nature of oil exploration. Fossil fuels continue to dominate the global energy system, accounting for 81 per cent of primary energy demand. In a recent tweet, Grant Sharps, UK Secretary for Net Zero, emphasises His Majesty’s government’s decision, stating, “We will power ahead with new oil and gas because it’s in the best interests of the British people, of our economy, and of our national security.”
In the same vein, addressing the sensitive subject of carbon emissions, the UK oil and gas regulator, North Sea Transition Authority (NTSA), offers compelling insights. NTSA highlights that domestically produced gas has a significantly lower carbon footprint compared to imported liquefied natural gas. They assert, “The research shows that domestically produced gas is on average almost four times cleaner than importing gas in LNG form. This is because of both the way the gas is transferred and, in some cases, the methods of extraction.” Impressively, UK gas demonstrates a carbon intensity of only 21 kgCO2/boe.
Interestingly, North Sea Oil’s environmental benefits also shed light on the controversial Ugandan oil project. This initiative is projected to emit 13kg of carbon dioxide per barrel of oil, almost half of the UK’s estimated emissions.
As expected, the decision to “power ahead” in the UK was met with resistance, as exemplified by Greenpeace’s protest at Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s residence. This protest underscores the intensity of emotional debates echoing in Africa, particularly in Uganda; the belief that one-third of oil reserves should remain in the ground in 2050 to limit warming to 2 °C. Here, the discourse reached such a crescendo that the EU Parliament intervened, questioning our sovereign right to develop oil and gas resources. Accusations of “cooking the planet” surfaced, cautioning Africa against replicating perceived Western missteps in development.
Within this context, Africa was urged to embrace a paradigm shift and transition directly to renewable energy sources. This suggestion was rooted in the belief in an unequivocal scientific consensus.
As global net-zero efforts accelerated and European leaders exhorted us on emission levels, it’s crucial to underscore that Uganda’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions remained negligible, below 0.001 percent. Put another way, Uganda is already at net zero.
We are at net zero primarily because we are a poor country. There are those who think that the best way to maintain the global environment is to ensure that we remain poor. They see poverty as a means of environmental conservation.
Aside from the immorality of that proposition, it is actually terribly false. Uganda’s demographics over the past 37 years provide a compelling illustration. While Uganda’s population burgeoned to nearly 45 million, the UK’s grew from 57 million to almost 67 million. Projections suggest Africa will house approximately 2.5 billion people by 2050.
The idea that the forests of Africa will continue to be the “lungs of the world” is misleading. If we conserve poverty the world’s forests will be cut and migration to richer places will be unbearable for the host communities. Conserving poverty is, therefore, not just bad morals it is also no longer a means of environmental conservation. It is evident that perpetuating poverty, beyond being ethically concerning, is a fundamentally flawed environmental strategy.
Central to the discourse is the question of how Africa can transition to cleaner energy alternatives than firewood. This query encapsulates the intricate interplay between development, environmental stewardship, and socioeconomic progress that Africa faces. Navigating these complexities requires innovative strategies that raise living standards while minimising environmental impact.
The ongoing UK debate mirrors Africa’s historical struggles and underscores the delicate equilibrium nations must strike between economic advancement and environmental responsibility.
Uganda must take pride in the fact that our responsible, low-carbon, oil project is, to paraphrase the UK Secretary for Net Zero, “... in the best interests of the Ugandan people, of our economy and of our national security.”
The writer is an advocate and partner at Kampala Associated Advocates
