Minister Melford Nicholas Rebuts Walker’s Claims on Government’s Environmental Commitments
Minister of Public Utilities Melford Nicholas has dismissed claims made by Barbuda MP Trevor Walker regarding the government’s environmental policies, asserting that all actions taken by the administration align with its international commitments, including the Paris Agreement.
Speaking in Parliament, Nicholas criticized Walker for allegedly misleading the public and creating a false perception that the government is acting inconsistently. He emphasized that the government’s transition from heavy fuel oil to liquefied natural gas (LNG) is part of a broader strategy to reduce the country’s carbon footprint while maintaining energy security.
“The Member for Barbuda has a unique ability to draw people into a conversation when there is no contentious issue,” Nicholas stated. “He often tries to confuse the public with innuendo, suggesting that the government’s actions contradict its international commitments. Nothing could be further from the truth.”
Nicholas clarified that the government had initially considered solar energy but determined that, at the time, the necessary technology and battery storage were not feasible for the country’s energy needs. As a result, LNG was selected as an interim solution, reducing carbon emissions by 60% compared to traditional heavy fuel oil.
He further explained that the establishment of an LNG terminal at Crabbs required dredging in certain areas of the harbor to accommodate the ships supplying fuel. The required depth of the channel must be at least eight meters, with some sections reaching depths of up to 40 meters.
Addressing Walker’s concerns about environmental impact, Nicholas categorically denied any harm to marine ecosystems. “To suggest that the dredging is destroying seabeds is a fabrication. Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said.
Nicholas also pointed to the Environmental Awareness Group (EAG), which supervises the North East Marine Management Area (NEMMA), stating that their oversight ensures the area’s ecological integrity. He invited members of the public to visit the dredging site themselves and consult with experts to verify the government’s claims.
Turning his critique back on Walker, Nicholas questioned the Barbuda MP’s environmental track record, citing poor waste management on the island. “He talks about flying over the area when he comes to Antigua but forgets the environmental disaster that exists in Barbuda under his stewardship,” Nicholas remarked.
The Public Utilities Minister reiterated that the government remains committed to sustainable energy development while ensuring transparency in its environmental management practices. “I want to assure the public that everything the government is doing is consistent and logical with the positions we have taken internationally,” he concluded.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
Environmental concerns should still be taken seriously, no matter who is right.
Is there independent research to back up these claims, or just government statements?
Instead of back-and-forth debates, why not provide clear data to the public?
Good to see the government addressing misinformation, but let’s also hear both sides.🤔
Dredging is important for development, but is the marine life being protected? 🐠
Hope this isn’t just political back-and-forth—we need facts, not arguments.🎭
Walker may be wrong, but open discussions on environmental impact are always needed.
This not a argument provide the data, you can’t just say no it doesn’t to x arguments. You can’t logically tell people digging the sea floor by 40 meters in some area wouldn’t damage the seabed you’re digging the sea floor, which would 100% have rougher waters because we all know shallow waters breaks the waves . Prove the area you’re digging is not habitats of marine animals, as well why is the way you choose instead of moving the distribution hub this is serious things. I do agree with the transition it is cleaner than diesel especially since I doubt we will be in full green Energy by 2030. But I don’t play around environmental issues especially since my generation will have to live though the effects of actions like this.
Comments are closed.