Venezuelan Oil: Statism to Liberation?

Venezuela’s oil industry has long exemplified statism: full state control via Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) after nationalization in the 1970s, intensified under Hugo Chávez’s 2007 expropriations of private assets. This model, combined with mismanagement, corruption, and U.S. sanctions since 2019, collapsed production from over 3 million barrels per day (bpd) in the early 2000s to around 1 million bpd by late 2025.

A political graphic contrasting the flags of the USA and Venezuela, with images of Nicolás Maduro and Donald Trump, highlighting themes of statism versus liberation and oil industry joint ventures.

Venezuela’s oil industry has long exemplified statism: full state control via Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) after nationalization in the 1970s, intensified under Hugo Chávez’s 2007 expropriations of private assets. This model, combined with mismanagement, corruption, and U.S. sanctions since 2019, collapsed production from over 3 million barrels per day (bpd) in the early 2000s to around 1 million bpd by late 2025.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

A composite image featuring prominent political figures, including Nicolás Maduro and Donald Trump, set against a backdrop of oil infrastructure and a cloudy sky.

From Master Resource

By Allen Brooks

“Venezuelan oil has been powering Cuba’s electricity grid, and the Trump administration may use the fuel issue to effect changes in the island-nation’s leadership.”

“More heavy oil from Venezuela will put pressure on Canada’s role as a supplier of heavy crude to the U.S. It may also pressure Saudi Arabia, which ships heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S.”

“Access to Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves is likely to put a cap on how high global oil prices might rise in the future….”

Little did we realize how interesting 2026’s energy market would become when we finished writing our January 3 Energy Musings, “Energy Finishes 2025 In 8th Place Out Of 11 Sectors.” Just a few hours after finishing and scheduling its publication, United States Special Forces and Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, supported by military forces, mounted a military-style campaign to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

Their arrest was to comply with a federal indictment in New York for narco-terrorism conspiracy and other charges. Those charges included cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.

Multi-Country Ramifications

This dramatic change will have implications for global oil markets. And it might be asked if the political change underway in Venezuela marks the first domino of totalitarian regimes to fall, especially given the growing anti-government protests in Iran.

There will be many geopolitical ramifications from the Venezuelan leadership change, including the termination of sanctions on Venezuela and its oil. President Trump indicated a willingness to sell oil to China, helping Venezuela to pay down its $60 billion debt to that country.

Regionally, removing Maduro ensures that the border dispute with Guyana, which could impact its oil development, will be a non-issue. The news for Cuba, however, is not as favorable. Venezuelan oil has been powering Cuba’s electricity grid, and the Trump administration may use the fuel issue to effect changes in the island-nation’s leadership. That would be consistent with the administration’s desire to enforce the Monroe Doctrine’s policy of preventing foreign intervention in the governments of the Americas. Russia and Iran have long been supporters of the Cuban regime, as well as the Venezuelan regime. Putting these U.S. adversaries on notice to stop meddling in South American politics is an essential message from the Trump administration’s police action dealing with Maduro and his wife.

The decision to allow Venezuela to sell oil to China ensures that the nation will retain its commercial relationships, which are essential for ongoing international business activity. At the same time, it is a signal to China that the U.S. will enforce the Monroe Doctrine policies, removing the Americas as a focal point for increased Chinese involvement, which has involved significant investment in mines, ports, and other South American industries. The move also puts China on notice that its Venezuelan oil flows could be shut off instantly over unfriendly actions towards the U.S., changing the energy landscape for China. This risk may explain why China has been building its oil inventories despite flagging oil demand.

Oil Reserve Markup

Venezuela is estimated to have 303 billion barrels of crude oil reserves as of 2023, 17% of proven world reserves. Significantly, the reserve estimate was increased during the Chávez regime from 80 billion barrels to 303 billion barrels. While the reserve write-up was audited by the petroleum engineering company, Ryder Scott, it was prepared for the Venezuelan dictatorship.

The primary challenge for Venezuelan crude oil is its heavy, sour nature. That makes the oil a lower-quality supply, selling at a discount from world prices. Much of the oil comes from the Orinoco belt, which requires it to be mixed with diluent to enable transportation and refining. That also lowers the oil’s value and creates logistical issues, because without the diluent, the oil cannot be converted into a commercial product. Securing diluent supplies has been a recurring logistical and financial challenge, and is unlikely to change materially in the near term.

Four Oil Charts

Based on data from the Energy Institute and from BP, we have created several charts that show the role of Venezuelan oil in the global oil mix and the nation’s significance within OPEC since 1965. Venezuela was a founding member of OPEC in 1960 because it feared becoming a victim of international oil companies, which were unwilling to pay a fair price for oil extracted from OPEC member countries. [Ed note: The U.S. Mandatory Oil Import Program in 1959 created an oil surplus that sent prices down.]

It took more than a decade for the oil supply pendulum to swing in favor of OPEC members. When it did in the early 1970s, the international oil industry changed dramatically, with pricing power shifting into the hands of the host producing countries. In contrast, countries with mature production risked supply shortages and costly alternatives.

The first two charts show that Venezuela was a more important source of global and OPEC oil supplies in the 1960s and 1970s than it is today. They also show how Venezuela’s market share has declined sharply in recent years. What the charts show is how Venezuela’s output and market share fell sharply during those early years as other OPEC members rapidly expanded their outputs. Moreover, with lower-quality oil, Venezuelan supplies were less desirable to refiners seeking more low-sulfur, light crude oil to convert into gasoline and diesel fuels for the transportation market.

During that period of declining market share, the industrialized world was shifting its electricity generation away from oil to coal and natural gas, reducing the market potential for Venezuelan crude. Remember that this market shift was driven by a change in global oil pricing, from international oil companies to the Middle East OPEC host countries.

Chart 1: Venezuela’s global market share fell by nearly two-thirds between 1965 and 1977.

Chart 2: Venezuela has struggled to sustain relevance within OPEC in recent years.

For readers who prefer more granular oil production data, the following two charts show Venezuela’s output relative to the world oil supply and OPEC’s output. The challenges of sustaining and growing its oil production reflected the dynamics of Venezuela’s political situation and the tactics of its national oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA).

Hugo Chávez assumed the Presidency of Venezuela on February 2, 1999. At that time, world oil markets were in turmoil, partly due to PDVSA policies to maximize output, disregarding OPEC quotas and price objectives. This was a major contributor to the 1998 oil price collapse. The prior Venezuelan government had nearly abandoned OPEC as it struggled to avoid a financial collapse.

Chávez and his new oil minister, Ali Rodriquez Araque, completely reversed the situation. Along with the governments of Mexico and Saudi Arabia, a new understanding on quotas and higher prices was negotiated between OPEC and other oil-exporting countries.

A bit of personal history. In late February of 1999, as President of the National Association of Petroleum Investment Analysts (NAPIA), we were part of a group invited by PDVSA to spend a week touring Venezuela’s oil industry. PDVSA officials were hoping to curry favor from the investment community, as it would need to tap financial markets to sustain and grow its operations.

To appreciate the charade the Venezuelan government was attempting to conduct, on our first day’s lunch, Oil Minister Ali Rodriquez spoke. A condition was that he would talk in Spanish. Fortunately, we had a member fluent in Spanish who volunteered to conduct a contemporaneous translation. Sitting at the head table with other leaders of NAPIA and me was the U.S. Ambassador. When Rodriquez finished his talk and the Q&A, he sat down and conversed in perfect English with the Ambassador.

The new agreement between OPEC and other oil exporters led to a dramatically different oil market starting in 2000. That year’s Venezuelan oil export revenues were a record of $27.3 billion, a significant increase above the previous peak of $19.1 billion in 1981. However, there was a substantial difference in the impact on the Venezuelan government’s take. In 1981, PDVSA’s $19.1 billion in revenues generated $13.9 billion in royalties and income taxes. In 2000, the $27.3 billion in oil export proceeds generated only $11.3 billion in government income. Royalties and income taxes amounted to 73% of export revenues in 1981, but only 41% in 2000. This shift was mainly due to changes in how PDVSA structured its agreements after 1989, when it opened up its marginal oil fields to international oil companies. Those contracts were structured as service contracts rather than production agreements.

Furthermore, in 1989, when Venezuela came close to insolvency and was forced to subscribe to International Monetary Fund and World Bank adjustment programs and reforms, PDVSA adopted the worldwide accounting rules for reporting profits and losses. This brought down the ring fence around PDVSA’s Venezuelan operations. It was forced to transfer to Venezuela the costs it incurred in its foreign ventures, thus increasing the profits deemed to have accrued outside the country. The difference in tax rates between Venezuela and the United States was 67.7% versus 34%. Moreover, PDVSA also charged its Venezuelan accounts with the financial costs of its nine billion dollars in foreign debt, further reducing domestic profits and the taxes it owed to the Venezuelan government.

Chart 3: Despite its best efforts to increase production, oil output has been in a free-fall.

Chart 4: Venezuela (in gold) remains a minor player in OPEC.

Given the unsettled leadership situation in the government, we should not expect any near-term change in the oil market from Maduro’s removal. At the moment, his vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, has assumed leadership of the country. Unless the military leaders shift their allegiance away from her to the popularly elected politicians in 2024, the current turmoil is likely to continue. Will this lead to a further exodus of Venezuelans, or will people be willing to become active in demanding the leadership they desire?

An Oil Revival?

In the longer term, if the leadership changes to that of popularly elected officials, we can expect Western oil companies to re-enter Venezuela. There is also the possibility that PDVSA will be able to rehire prior professional employees who emigrated rather than live under the Chávez and Maduro regimes. A return of Western oil companies, with their technical talent and financial resources, plus long working histories and knowledge of the country’s oil resources for some companies, will put Venezuela on a path to increased oil output. Estimates are that the sector needs investments of $10 billion a year for many years to restore the industry’s productive capacity.

Few people know the condition of the country’s oil fields, its transportation network, and refining capacity. There may need to be a significant investment before production growth can be achieved. How long will this take, and what price will the international oil companies demand to return to Venezuela? Those are impossible questions to answer now.

While we may be surprised by how quickly the domestic oil industry changes and improves, without a significant number of former PDVSA workers returning, it is safer to expect a long, slow improvement in Venezuela’s production growth. There may be a jump of 250,000 barrels a day in output, assuming PDVSA can acquire sufficient diluent. However, sellers may be reluctant to commit to PDVSA until political stabilization is achieved.

More heavy oil from Venezuela will put pressure on Canada’s role as a supplier of heavy crude to the U.S. It may also pressure Saudi Arabia, which ships heavy oil to feed its refineries in the U.S. China might become a buyer of Canadian and Saudi heavy oil output in the future, as a supply diversification move, further altering global supply chains.

Access to Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves is likely to put a cap on how high global oil prices might rise in the future, given the lack of industry reinvestment in recent years. That could be a good thing for the industry in the long term, as demand might grow more than the International Energy Agency predicts by 2050, with lower near-term oil prices.

The issue of energy dominance is a key outcome of the weekend’s events in Venezuela. Europe struggles to understand it, while China and the U.S. fully comprehend its significance. Russia and Iran are in the process of learning the new energy landscape. Everyone will need to rethink their views of the geopolitical and energy landscapes after last Saturday night’s events.

————–

G. Allen Brooks has been actively engaged in the oil patch in various roles for the last half-century. He has been an energy securities analyst, an oilfield service company manager, a consultant to energy company managements and a director of various oilfield service companies.

Since early 2005, Mr. Brooks has been engaged in consulting as an advisor to PPHB LP, a boutique oilfield service investment banking firm, where he provides proprietary research for the firm’s partners and analysts. PPHB also distributes Musings From the Oil Patch, the highly regarded energy newsletter authored by Mr. Brooks since 1999.

An Economics graduate of the University of Connecticut, Brooks also has an M.S. degree in Economics from Cornell University. He started his investment career in 1969. Mr. Brooks lives in Houston, Texas.

Energy Musings contains articles and analyses dealing with important issues and developments within the energy industry, including historical perspective, with potentially significant implications for executives planning their companies’ future.

Oil and Gas Turning Poor Countries into Economic Miracles

Nations once relegated to the margins of economic discourse are now sprinting toward prosperity, their trajectories propelled by a single, unifying force: energy.

From Watts Up With That?

By Vijay Jayaraj

Nations once relegated to the margins of economic discourse are now sprinting toward prosperity, their trajectories propelled by a single, unifying force: energy.

Energy is indispensable. From the huge AI data centers in the U.S. to the mega-scale manufacturing factories in China, affordable and dependable energy supplies make all the difference between living and thriving.

Access to domestic energy resources – or the ability to secure imports – unlocks a cascade of opportunity: Jobs multiply, infrastructure rises, and governments gain the fiscal muscle to invest in their people.

Oil and gas, derided by climate elites as relics of a bygone era, are proving instead to be the engines of a new dawn. A cohort of nations is charting a radically different course fueled by the unyielding pragmatism of hydrocarbon exploitation.

Guyana: From Obscurity to Oil Juggernaut

Nestled along South America’s northern coast, Guyana was once an afterthought in global economic discourse. Today, it is the world’s fastest-growing economy, with gross domestic product (GDP) skyrocketing by a staggering 63% in 2022 and 38% in 2023. It is projected to grow another 27% this year.

Guyana’s growth leaves even the vaunted “Asian Tigers” – Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan – in the dust. By 2025, analysts project a still-robust expansion of more than 14%, driven by the relentless output of the Stabroek Block, 6.6 million acres of oil reserves off the country’s Atlantic shoreline. The 2015 Liza discovery, a 10-billion-barrel bonanza, has transformed this nation of 810,000 into an energy powerhouse.

The fiscal windfall – $2.57 billion in 2024 alone – has funded infrastructure upgrades, healthcare expansions and education reforms. As Upstream Online reports, Guyana’s per capita income has quadrupled since 2019, a feat unimaginable without oil.

Niger: Africa’s Pipeline to Prosperity

Half a world away, in the arid expanses of West Africa, Niger is scripting a similar tale. Long known for uranium and subsistence farming, this landlocked nation is poised to ride an oil boom that could redefine its future.

The key? The Niger-Benin pipeline, a 1,212-mile conduit that promises to ferry crude from Niger’s Agadem Rift Basin to the Atlantic coast. After diplomatic hiccups with Benin were resolved in August 2024, production was expected to surge past 110,000 barrels per day (bpd) in the coming years. GDP is forecast to soar as a result.

Senegal: Gas Lights the Way Forward

Further west, Senegal is joining the energy-driven renaissance. The Sangomar oil field, which began production in June 2024, and the Greater Tortue Ahmeyim (GTA) natural gas project, straddling the Senegal-Mauritania border, are rewriting the nation’s economic playbook.

In 2024, the Sangomar field exceeded its initial target, producing 16.9 million barrels of crude oil compared to the planned 11.7 million. With oil output exceeding 100,000 bpd and GTA is poised to deliver liquefied natural gas (LNG) to global markets, Senegal’s GDP growth is projected to hit double digits in 2025, among the highest in Africa.

Senegal’s GDP growth was around 10% in 2024, and energy exports were projected to account for 30% of government revenue in 2025. Crucially, gas-fired power plants are slashing electricity costs, enabling industries to thrive.

Côte D’Ivoire: Diversification Through Hydrocarbons

Côte D’Ivoire, long reliant on cocoa and coffee, is emerging as West Africa’s quiet energy giant. The country has exceeded initial estimates for production from its Baleine oil and gas field.

Oil production has doubled since 2020 to 60,000 bpd, while natural gas – supplying 72% of the nation’s electricity – has lured industries from across the region. The country plans to reach 200,000 barrels of oil per day and 450 million cubic feet of gas daily by 2028.

Thanks to rapid oil and gas development, Cote d’Ivoire has managed to reduce its poverty rate from 55% in 2011 to 37% in 2021 (the latest data available). With oil output projected to more than triple in the next four years, the poverty rate could drop to single digits.

Energy poverty, not climate change, remains the immediate threat to these regions and continues to plague the future of millions of Africans and South Americans. Solar panels and windmills cannot power steel mills, factories or cities.

The governments of Guyana, Niger, Senegal and Côte D’Ivoire understand this. They are prioritizing their citizens’ livelihoods over “carbon-reduction” targets drafted by so-called elites in Brussels or New York.

Their success exposes the vacuity of net-zero dogma and reaffirms a timeless truth: Energy abundance is the foundation of human progress.

This commentary was first published at RealClearEnergy on April 1, 2025.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.

Developing Nations Reject Western Carbon Colonialism

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.

From Watts Up With That?

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.

“I Am Going To Lecture You On Climate Change:” BBC Reporter Gets Schooled for Hypocrisy

On March 28, President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of the South American country of Guyana became an instant hero to many as he refused to take lectures on climate change from a BBC reporter during an interview.

xr:d:DAGB8bl8jJE:2,j:1343622937941451979,t:24040917

From Watts Up With That?

By Tilak K. Doshi

April 08, 2024

On March 28, President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of the South American country of Guyana became an instant hero to many as he refused to take lectures on climate change from a BBC reporter during an interview. In a two-minute video clip that went viral on X (formerly Twitter) and other social media, President Ali turned the tables on the BBC’s Stephen Sackur when the reporter accused Guyana of worsening the “climate crisis” by allowing the exploitation of its newly found oil and gas reserves.

“Over the next decade or two, it’s expected that there will be $150 billion worth of oil and gas extracted off your coast,” Sackur told the president. “It’s an extraordinary figure. But think of it in practical terms. That means – according to many experts – two billion tons of carbon emissions will come from your seabed from those reserves and released into the atmosphere.” Guyana’s head of state quickly rebutted: “Let me stop you right there. Did you know that Guyana has a forest that is the size of England and Scotland combined, a forest that stores 19.5 gigatons of carbon, a forest that we have kept alive?”

When the reporter asked President Ali whether the rainforest gave him the “right” to release the carbon, the Guyanese leader retorted: “Does that give you the right to lecture us on climate change? I’m going to lecture you on climate change.” Being lectured by the BBC on climate change is not a new development; it’s what the state-supported media service often does, and in hectoring tones. But is the BBC correct in its proclamations about what the “climate science” says?

Climate Alarmists and Their Detractors

The BBC seems institutionally committed to an alarmist position in its coverage of climate change issues. Many BBC programs seem driven to inject the “climate catastrophe” narrative into every energy-related news item. Stephen Sakur’s pointed remarks to Guyana’s president on the country’s rapid emergence as an oil and gas exporter were unexceptional in this regard.

The response on social media to the viral clip is telling. Here is a short selection from X on March 29 and 30:

Chris Rose (over 130,000 followers): “This is magnificent to watch. The President of Guyana truly put the BBC in its place. When sanctimony and pomposity meets [sic] sense and modesty.”

Simon Ateba (over 670,000 followers): “EXPLOSIVE: President Mohamed  Irfaan Ali (@presidentaligy) of Guyana obliterates @BBC journalist Stephen Sackur (@stephensackur) over climate change hypocrisy. ‘No, no, I’m not done yet!’ WATCH.”

Dilly Hussain  (over 110,000 followers): “LET ME STOP YOU RIGHT THERE!” An absolute masterclass shutdown by President Mohamed Irfaan Ali of Guyana when probed by @BBCHARDtalk’s Stephen Sackur on his country’s new found oil and gas fields and the West’s concerns about “carbon emissions”.

Visegrád 24 (over 970,000 followers): “I am going to lecture you on climate change,” says Guyana President @presidentaligy to BBC journalist Stephen Sackur, as he pushes back against the journalist attempting to lecture the Caribbean leader about oil being bad for the environment.”

The headlines of leading newspapers on March 30 reflected these social media messages:

The Telegraph: “Watch: Guyana’s president scolds BBC presenter for climate change ‘lecture.’”

Times of India: “‘Are you in their pockets?’: Guyanese President calls out reporter for Western hypocrisy.”

Fox News: “Video of Guyana’s president snapping back at BBC reporter’s climate quiz goes viral: ‘Let me stop you.’”

Hypocrisy As the Default Option in Climate Change Narratives

What is of interest here is the inherently hypocritical nature of the interactions between representatives of developed countries and those of developing ones concerning energy and climate policies. Some of the most apparent of such interactions occur during the UN’s annual COP (“Conference of Parties”) climate summits.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres, never one to shy from hyperbolic pronouncements, warns of a “code red for humanity. The alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable.” Indeed, based on dubious “hockey-stick” global-warming models formulated in the West, the secretary-general proclaims the approach of the “era of global boiling.”

At COP26, held in 2021 in Glasgow, Western leaders addressed those making up 80% of humanity in speeches that reeked of carbon imperialism (here, here, and here). Their message can be fairly summarized as follows:

We pledge climate finance to help you. There are promising new energy technologies to achieve our goals of net zero by 2050. The outlook for new jobs and economic growth are limitless with solar and wind power, electric vehicles, green hydrogen and carbon capture and sequestration. However, we must stop all new fossil fuel investments now! You must give up fossil fuels or else the planet is doomed.

Faced with the increasingly untenable hypocrisy of the Western elites discouraging fossil fuel use in the developing world, the pushback by leaders such as Guyana’s President Ali is no surprise. In 2015, the Indian government’s then-chief economic adviser Arvind Subramaniam spoke in no uncertain terms of a new carbon imperialism: “The rich world’s move against fossil fuels is a disaster for India, and other poorer countries.”

In the lead-up to COP27 held in Sharm Al Sheikh, Egypt in 2022, Africa’s top energy official, Amani Abou-Zeid, the African Union Commissioner for Infrastructure and Energy, said that African countries will push for “a common energy position that sees fossil fuels as necessary to expanding economies and electricity access.”

At the COP28 climate summit held in Dubai, UAE, Dr. Sultan Al Jaber, president of the summit and CEO of Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, rebutted questions from Mary Robinson, a former UN special envoy for climate change: “There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5 C [maximum global temperature increase].” In an interview, he said that “You’re asking for a phase-out of fossil fuels . . . Please, help me, show me the roadmap for a phase-out of fossil fuel that will allow for sustainable socio-economic development, unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

URL: Cartoons by Josh

That’s Enough Already!

Germany, the world leader in green energy ambitions, provides the best lesson of untenable hypocrisy when faced with the real-world constraints of physics and economics. In 2022, the country faced the prospect of entering winter without adequate energy supplies. It had shut down its nuclear power plants and lost access to piped Russian natural gas by imposing sanctions against Moscow (which was then followed by the sabotage of the Nordstream pipeline). In this context, Germany quickly retreated to coal power generation, and it now plans to double its gas-fired power-generating capacity.

According to Doomberg, an energy and finance consultancy, Germany moved back to coal “with the speed and efficiency of the British evacuation of Dunkirk.” The IEA, the institution most responsible for the West’s clarion calls to stop fossil fuel investments, noted that Germany’s “significant reversal” drove European coal consumption up 9% in 2022. Energy security and the need to heat homes and keep lights on and factories humming trumped virtue-signaling climate goals – and Germany’s abject hypocrisy is obvious to many leaders in the developing world.

Guyana’s President Irfaan Ali has little to explain, much less apologize for, as his country rapidly emerges as an important South American exporter of hydrocarbons. Let the BBC’s reporters peddle their luxury beliefs to those who think they can afford them.

Dr. Tilak K. Doshi is an energy economist, independent consultant, and a Forbes contributor based in London.

This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.