admin

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary...

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary...

NASSAU, BAHAMAS — Deputy Prime Minister Chester Cooper says that the development of the Grand Bahama International Airport is “imminent,” highlighting its potential to...

Govt. takes out US$300M more from oil fund Jul 25, 2024 News Senior Minister in the Office of the President with responsibility for Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh Kaieteur News – The Ministry of Finance on Wednesday evening announced yet another withdrawal from the Natural Resources Fund (NRF). In a statement, the Ministry of Finance said in keeping with the approval, the Government of Guyana has made its third transfer for 2024, totaling US $300 million (equivalent to G$62.394 billion) from the NRF on July 22, 2024 to the Consolidated Fund. The Ministry explained in the release that the move is in keeping with the Natural Resources Fund (NRF) Act 2021, as amended by the Fiscal Enactments (Amendment) Act 2024, when parliamentary approval was granted for US $1,586,150,331 (equivalent to G$329,885,563,088) to be withdrawn from the NRF in 2024. According to the Ministry, the transfer brings the accumulated withdrawals to date in 2024 to US $850 million equivalent to (G$ 176.72 billion within the total of the US $1,586,150,331 (equivalent to G$329,885,563,088) approved in 2024. Earlier this year, reports indicated that the final withdrawal from the Natural Resource Fund for the year 2023, amounted to US$152.1 million (G$31.6 billion). This took the total transfers for the year 2023 to US$1.002 billion (G$208.9 billion) as approved in the National Assembly. The fund was operationalised in 2022. The NRF Act sets specific guidelines for the use of the funds; however, there has been no indication from government as to a single project financed from this revenue stream to date. Section 16.2 of the NRF Act explains that, “All withdrawals from the Fund shall be deposited into the Consolidated Fund and shall be used only to finance: (a) national development priorities including any initiative aimed at realizing an inclusive green economy, and (b) essential projects that are directly related to ameliorating the effect of a major natural disaster.” Government has not identified what are the “national development priorities” being funded by the oil revenue. This is particularly concerning as the legislation features no penalties for misuse of the funds. The purpose of Guyana’s Natural Resource Fund is to ensure there is prudent management of the nation’s oil earnings for the present and future benefit of the people by ensuring that volatility in natural resource revenues does not lead to volatile public spending. With little transparency regarding the use of Guyana’s oil wealth, International Financial Analysts worry that the revenue may not be used to develop the country and improve the lives of its poor citizens. For instance, Director of Financial Analysis at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA), Tom Sanzillo had pointed out that the government has not been prioritising saving the funds generated from the industry like Norway but has instead embarked on a massive infrastructural and energy development scheme which may very well benefit its partner, ExxonMobil more than the citizens in the country. Meanwhile, the GoG previously said that money from the oil account is transferred directly to the consolidated fund which blends the various revenue streams. This means that the government is therefore unable to say what specific projects were funded by those earnings. Related Similar Articles

Cops seize 28 high-powered weapons during raid in Kitty Jul 25, 2024 News The guns seized during the Sandy Babb Street, Kitty raid. Kaieteur News – Police on Wednesday seized a total of 28 high-powered firearms during an intelligence-led operation on Sandy Babb Street Kitty, Georgetown. The raid was reportedly conducted around 05:30 hrs. at the home of Eon Fagundes a 47-year-old clothes vendor and relative of murdered gold dealer, Ricardo Fagundes.  Police in a statement said that “…A total of 28 handguns and high-powered rifles, along with a cache of ammunition, were found”.  A total of six persons (All relatives of the murdered gold dealer) including Eon Fagundes were all arrested for questioning, police said. One of the suspects being investigated, Eon Fagundes As ranks reportedly entered the yard they saw Eon Fagundes exiting the door of a flat wooden house in the yard with bag in his right hand. Police said that the ranks were in possession of a search warrant, so they stopped him and searched the bag. Inside they reportedly found a Sig Sauer Rifle with a magazine containing fourteen 9mm rounds of ammunition, one Polimore-80 9mm pistol without serial number with a magazine containing eight 9mm rounds of ammunition, one Spring Field Armory 45 pistol along with four magazines- one  of them containing five live .45 rounds of ammunition and a Bravo gun holster. “Fagundes was asked if he is the holder of a firearm license to carry the  said firearms and he said ‘no’”, Police stated. He was cautioned and arrested immediately. The ranks then reportedly proceeded to search the house but found nothing else illegal inside. However, when they reportedly decided to search a black Nissan Juke vehicle, PVV 6472 parked opposite the house, they found more guns and ammunition in a suitcase, a golf bag and haversack. Police said they found; One AM 15 rifle along with two magazines containing 61 .223 ammunition, two Ruger-57 9mm pistols and one magazine containing 40 9mm rounds of ammunition, one FN-45 pistol and two magazines containing 38 .45 rounds of ammunition, one Smith and Wesson 9mm pistol with a magazine, one Berretta 9mm pistol with a magazine, one Spring Field Hellcat 9mm pistol with a magazine, one Canik 9mm pistol with a magazine, one Glock 43 pistol with a magazine, Five Glock 19 pistols along with nine Magazines and 21  9mm rounds of ammunition, Seven Glock 40 pistols and ten magazines  with 18 .40 rounds of ammunition, two Glock 17 9mm pistols and two magazines, one Glock 9mm pistol and a magazine and one Glock 45 pistol and one magazine. The ranks also found a cache of ammunition and these include 75 12-guage cartridges, 456 .223 ammunition, 484 9mm ammunition, 83 5.7- 28 ammunition, 13 10 MM ammunition, 315 7.62-39 ammunition along and 15 magazines. Following the discovery of the weapons and bullets, Eon Fagundes was asked who the owner of the car was and he allegedly told them that he was using the car but it belonged to “his daughter and child-mother”. Investigations continue. Related Similar Articles

Opposition divided on how Exxon should handle produced water from 7th project – PNCR says reinject, AFC says treat Jul 25, 2024 News Kaieteur News – While ExxonMobil is yet to decide how it will be handling the produced water from its seventh project- Hammerhead, the two major opposition political parties- People’s National Congress Reform (PNC/R) and the Alliance for Change are on different wave lengths on the issue. AFC Chairman, David Patterson Produced water is a liquid that is extracted during oil production activities. It contains dissolved mineral salts, or may be mixed with organic compounds such as acids, waxes, and mineral oils. It may also be mixed with inorganic metals and byproducts or with trace amounts of heavy metals and naturally-occurring radioactive materials, the US Department of Energy said in a research paper. It is also usually very high in temperature, and can be deadly to marine organisms. Due to its toxicity, this substance is best re-injected into the wells, though this may be a costly exercise. Exxon has sounded the warning before, in six EIAs for its previously sanctioned projects, of the dangers associated with the dumping of produced water into the ocean. Produced water discharges from each of the projects vary. For instance, the sixth project – Whiptail – which will produce 250,000 barrels of oil per day (bpd) will also produce 200,000 barrels of produced water daily which will be dumped into the ocean. On the other hand, the fifth project Uaru which is being designed to produce 250,000 bpd will see the discharge or 300,000 bpd of produced water.  Prior to the dumping of produced water offshore, it is treated on the FPSOs to ensure it aligns with the industry standards, as required by the EPA.  The Permits granted to Exxon by the regulator requires the operator to treat the substance to ensure “oil content specification of produced water to be discharged does not exceed 42 mg/l on a daily basis or 29 mg/l on a monthly average”. Opposition divided On Tuesday this publication reached out to the Chairman of the AFC and the party’s spokesperson on the oil and gas industry David Patterson and economist and advisor to the PNCR on the sector Elson Lowe to get their party’s position on the way the oil giant not committing to specific ways in which they will be handling the produced water. Economist, Elson Low While the PNC is all for reinjection of the produced water back into the reservoir the AFC is calling for the oil company to adheres to international best practices and treat the produced water until there is 0.01 parts of 100 of any contaminants in it. Low told this publication that, “we believe that all water should be reinjected into wells. It is important to minimise the environmental effect of offshore operations for each project but we must also be aware of the cumulative effect of a policy of allowing contaminated water to be dumped offshore as not only are several FPSO’s in operation, there might be as many as a dozen in time.” He further explained that, “This means that any policy which allows for dumping could in the long term result in several times as much water being dumped. This cumulative effect needs to be studied but the best thing is for water to simply be reinjected into wells.” Patterson said that, “The international standard is t0 treat it and retreat it until there is 0.01 parts of 100 of any contaminants in it. So obviously that is something that we would want to do. We want Exxon and they do this everywhere else and it’s nothing unique to Guyana. Anywhere else that they have to abide by the international standards this is what they do.” He explained that he had brought a motion bef0re the Parliament to address the issue of the disposal of waste water. He highlighted that it is very hot and had around 200 contaminants in it which over a period of time can bring detrimental effects to the environment and the marine ecosystem. “The motion that I brought to Parliament of course it was defeated by the PPP requires them to do what the international standards say. So obviously we will want them to do it here in Guyana because it has a long term detrimental effect on your ecosystem. So obviously we would want that to be done which we’ve brought a motion and unfortunately the PPP with their majority defeated the motion but we still stick at that,” he added. Global Projects Cost Engineering Manager for Exxon Guyana Rebecca Cvikota during the opening of the public consultations for Exxon’s seventh project Hammerhead said that they would not be committing to any specific ways in which they will be handling the produced water. The official was asked by this publication if the company had plans to reinject the produced water from the project and if not can she say the effect it can have on rising sea levels if not reinjected.  She said that, “Produced water has been a topic we have been heavily involved in working very closely with the EPA and MNR to do studies on and assess and look at. So for Hammerhead we are still in the early phases I wouldn’t commit to any specific ways in which we are going to handle the produced water. What I will say now is the studies we are doing are informing those types of decisions and it is international practice to discharge produced water offshore.” Cvikota explained that the water is treated and they will not be discharging any water unless it meets the requirement of the environmental permit and is treated sufficiently. “That is part of our practices that’s one of the things that we are monitoring very closely to ensure that we have safe operations,” she added. Scientist Dr. Ulric Trotz during an interview with Kaieteur News earlier this year stressed the need for stringent monitoring of these discharges by the EPA.  He said, “Any sort of contamination in a pristine marine environment that provides so much to our livelihoods, our fisher folk, so much to our own nutritional diet with our dependence on marine sources for protein, for an environment that supports marine life, you think about turtle nesting facilities on Shell Beach- anything that disturbs that environment is not in our interest.” Exxon’s admission ExxonMobil has acknowledged that discharges from the seventh project can potentially affect the quality of water and harm marine species and wildlife. This information is contained in the Project Summary submitted by Exxon to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to the Project Summary seen by this newspaper, “The Project could have localised impacts to marine water quality in the project development area from discharge of drill cuttings and from routine operational and hydro-testing discharges. The Project could potentially impact marine water quality in the Project area of interest (AOI) as a result of non-routine, unplanned events (e.g., spill or release).” Drill cuttings and drill fluid discharges during the drilling of development wells; effluent discharges from cooling water and produced water; hydro-testing discharges and non-routine, unplanned events such as a spill can result in the release of dangerous substances that can affect marine life. Exxon said, “Increased total suspended solids concentrations, chemical concentrations, or temperature in water column has a potential to affect marine water quality and marine habitat quality and affect wildlife.” Related Similar Articles

Man charged with attempting to kill stepson Jul 25, 2024 Court Stories, Features / Columnists, News – fight breaks out in Court among relatives Kaieteur News – A fright broke out at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday after a 24-year-old man was remanded to prison for attempting to commit murder on a one-year-old boy. Remanded: Shawn Davidson The accused, Shawn Davidson a construction worker of North East Squatting Area, Georgetown appeared before Principal Magistrate Faith McGusty who read the charge to him. The charge read that on July 17, 2024 at his mentioned residence, unlawfully and maliciously wounded Seddon DeFreitas with intent to murder him. Davidson was not required to plea to the offence. According police reports, at around 16:00hrs on the mentioned date, Davidson, DeFreitas and the child’s mother were at home. During that time Davidson told the baby’s mother to call the child father and tell him to collect the child or else he will kill him (the baby). The mother called the father and did as she was told, but the father replied that he cannot come for the child and ended the call. Davidson became annoyed, took a lighter and set fire to the pants  DeFreitas was wearing at the time. As a result the baby received burns to his right inner and outer thighs. The woman tried to extinguish the fire and pleaded with Davidson to stop. However, the stepfather continued by placing a mop stick on the baby’s neck and applied pressure until the baby started to spit blood. He later made the mother cut the hair off of the baby’s head. Family and public-spirited person showed up at Court Davidson recorded the abuse, stating that he will send the video to the baby’s father and said that he will continue to assault the child until the father comes for his son. The mother fearful for her life did not report the matter to the police. However, public-spirited persons heard what happened and brought the mother and baby to the police station on July 19 where an official report was made. The baby was admitted to the Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation (GPHC) where he is listed as critical. Davidson was arrested on July 20 by public-spirited persons and was handed over to the police. He was told of the offence levelled against him and was later charged with the present offence. Injured baby; one-year-old Seddon DeFreitas During court proceedings an unrepresented Davidson denied the allegations against him. He told the court “It was not like that, me and the child mother had it out and she had she son in she hand. I fire a punch at she and she was frying bake at the time. I tek the pot spoon and beat she. The spoon hit the child and he get bun and the pan fall off the stove and hit the child.” Prosecutor Quincy Lacon objected to bail. He reminded the court that the offence was committed on a one-year-old child. Lacon also told the court that there is video footages of Davidson assaulting the child and due to the severity of the injuries sustained ,the baby was admitted to the hospital and listed as critical. Bail was refused and the accused is scheduled to return to court on August 14,2024. Additionally, Davidson faced another charge stating that on July 19,2024 in Georgetown while being in the company of another and armed with a gun robbed Ayesha Glenn of several pieces of gold jewellery an iphone and cash amounting to $577,000.Police reported that during the robbery, Davidson took the woman’s four-year-old daughter and placed a gun to the child’s head. He claimed that he would shoot the child if the woman refuses to hand over her valuables. The woman being fearful for her life handed over her valuables and retrieved her child. Davidson pleaded not guilty to the charge, but was remanded. Meanwhile, as Davidson exited the prisoners chute a fight ensued between relatives in the court compound.  Family members of both the child’s mother and Davidson along with public- spirited people protested outside the court urging that Davidson face the full brunt of the law. Related Similar Articles