Latest update March 30th, 2025 6:57 AM
Latest News
- The U.S. “Joining” the Commonwealth: an unreasonable expectation
- ‘Musings of a Poet’ encapsulates an artist’s expression through theatre
- Nation yet to see ExxonMobil’s US$7.3B final audit report four months after GRA instructed its release
- Govt suspends Mohamed’s security service licence
- ‘PPP hooliganism confirms they know their time is up’
High Court orders EPA to include carbon dioxide impacts in all Exxon’s EIAs
Kaieteur News- In a groundbreaking decision in a matter filed against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), High Court Judge Simone Morris has ruled that the indirect effects of ExxonMobil Guyana Limited’s Hammerhead project will produce carbon dioxide pollution or scope 3 emissions.
Attorney at law Melinda Janki
According a release on behalf of the applicants in the case, these scope 3 emissions are produced when people burn fossil fuels. Carbon dioxide pollution causes global overheating, leading to climate change. It also causes ocean acidification which harms marine life. The release explained that Justice Morris’ ruling means that all of the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) for ExxonMobil Guyana Ltd. must now identify, describe and evaluate the impacts of scope 3 pollution. That includes all carbon dioxide pollution from Guyana’s oil, even if that oil is burned overseas; in the USA or Europe, for example.
Two citizens, Wintress Morris and Joy Marcus, had filed a legal action against the EPA for failing to ensure the impacts of ExxonMobil’s seventh oil project- Hammerhead- is properly assessed. The citizens had explained that the EPA issued a Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Hammerhead Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), which does not take into account the impact of greenhouse gas pollution from burning the associated oil and gas from the proposed development.
Attorneys-at-Law Melinda Janki, Tim Prudhoe, Anna-Kay Brown and Suzanne Bullen are representing the two citizens. The release, issued on Wednesday, noted that the EIAs did not cover scope 3 carbon dioxide pollution. Research conducted by this newspaper in the aftermath of the court decision, found that the EIA for Hammerhead now includes the impact of greenhouse gases.
Wintress Morris said, “People are always saying you cannot do anything about oil but that is not so. Joy Marcus and I are ordinary grassroots women. We brought this case. We changed the law. We feel proud as citizens of Guyana to know that we have done something good for our country.”
Joy Marcus urged that other citizens should use this ruling to protect themselves. She said, “People need to go and check whether this Hammerhead EIA does what the judge says it should do. We know the EPA is weak. We cannot rely on the EPA to protect us. We cannot sit back and let ExxonMobil and the government destroy our future. What about our children and grandchildren?”
Justice Morris had refused to grant the remedies prayed for by the applicants, in part due to the EPA changing the terms and scope of the EIA after the case was filed. She, therefore, dismissed the application.
Janki said, “Obviously, we are disappointed that the judge did not go a step further and grant the remedies, but this is an excellent ruling on scope 3. It shows that Guyana’s judges can deliver decisions that are in keeping with international standards. Only last year, the UK Supreme Court reached the same decision as Justice Morris.”
Ms Janki added, “I have to commend Justice Morris for dealing with this judicial review matter so swiftly. From filing to decision took three months. She carried out her constitutional duty to uphold the rule of law and she has set a standard for judges.”
Anna-Kay Brown said, “I share the disappointment that the court did not grant the requested orders. However, the decision has positive implications for environmental protection. Justice Morris’ ruling offers important guidelines for EIAs related to petroleum development. Notably, the decision highlights that EIAs must evaluate Scope 3 emissions as an indirect effect. Additionally, it clarifies that assessments under the Environmental Protection Act are not limited to quantitative discussions.”
(High Court orders EPA to include carbon dioxide impacts in all Exxon’s EIAs)
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The PPP is afraid
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Bharrat Jagdeo, General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), stood before... more
The U.S. “Joining” the Commonwealth: an unreasonable expectation
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- Recent media stories have suggested that King Charles III could “invite” the United... more
Weekend Cartoon
