Civil organizations and youth groups demanded that Petrleos Mexicanos (Pemex) assume responsibility for the environmental damage associated with its activities. During a press conference held on October 15 in Plaza Palestina, in Mexico City, members of Debt for Climate Mexico and Trans-Habitat raised their questions about oil spills, fires, resources allocated to remediation and compliance with the company's climate commitments.
Dianx Cantarey, member of Debt for Climate Mexico, said that the effects of oil activity represent an environmental and social debt to the territories. “It is important to denounce the role of the company and the environmental debt it has with these territories, the social debt, which is not accounted for and is the only debt that should be collected,” he said.
Referring to the spills and fires that occurred during the year, the representative questioned the lack of resources to address their consequences. “There are all the damages that Pemex has had this year, the oil spills and also the fires that have occurred, and for which no budget has been allocated for remediation,” he said.
Cantarey also criticized the proportion of public resources allocated to the oil company compared to the needs of other sectors. “The budgetary burden assigned to Pemex over and above human rights is quite worrying,” he said. Among the areas he mentioned are health, education, energy transition and the environment.
The organization relates Pemex's indebtedness to its environmental and social consequences, as well as to what will remain for posterity. “We are going to inherit a very polluted country, we are going to inherit an over-indebted Pemex and we are not being given the same possibilities as previous generations,” he said.
Debt for Climate Mexico proposed reviewing the origin and destination of Pemex's debt, the interest paid, the projects financed and the environmental, territorial and health costs associated with its operations. During the conference, the organization asked a question about the use of public resources: “How long are we going to continue to allocate our public resources to support Pemex without knowing clearly enough how much it costs us, what benefits it produces and who ends up paying the consequences?”
The latest: Defending the territory against the law: How do amparo reforms hinder environmental justice in Mexico?
Information on climate commitments
Andrea Gómez Chiu, general coordinator and member of the board of directors of the Laboratory of Transpolitics of Habitat A.C., (Trans-Habitat) questioned the lack of verifiable information to evaluate compliance with Pemex's climate commitments. Among them, he mentioned the reduction of methane emissions and the goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050. “There is also no verifiable data that we can observe from civil society,” Gómez said. The lack of information, he explained, makes it difficult for organizations to evaluate the company's progress and follow up on their environmental obligations.
The representative also noted the need for responsible authorities to monitor compliance with these obligations. “The Security, Energy and Environment Agency (ASEA), the Ministry of Energy (Sener) and the Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources (Semarnat) have not followed up and have not required what they are supposed to do by regulations in order for Pemex to reduce its emissions,” he said.
For Trans-Habitat, access to environmental information and the protection of defenders are part of the necessary conditions to monitor oil activity. Gómez also referred to the Escazú Agreement, which recognizes rights of access to information, public participation and justice in environmental matters.
The discussion about oil activity is also part of the continental day against hydraulic fracturing, in which the Mexican Alliance against Fracking participates. The organization demands a legal prohibition of this extraction technique and measures to protect water, territories and communities.
Nathalie Seguin Tovar, regional coordinator of Water Networks and co-founder of the Alliance, questioned whether energy sovereignty is used as an argument to resume the discussion on hydraulic fracturing. “The first thing I would like to disassemble is that this sovereignty is like for whom and at whose expense?” , he posed.
Among the Alliance's requirements are prohibiting fracking in the Tampico-Misantla basin; preventing the use of fresh water and treated wastewater for this activity; establishing a minimum distance of 10 kilometers from villages, health centers, water sources and protected natural areas; and banning 13 substances that it considers highly toxic.
It also asks to prevent easements on communal, ejido and indigenous peoples' lands, as well as routine venting and burning in oil wells. Nathaly warned of the risks associated with the use of large volumes of water and chemicals, the fracture of rocks and the management of return water. The Alliance argues that these concerns must be translated into legal measures that prevent the expansion of the technique.
Don't miss out: The CFE's energy transition will depend on private investment to achieve its 2030 goals
March for Life and Against Pemex
The organizations called for the March for Life and Against Pemex for Saturday, October 17, at 11:00 a.m. The tour will depart from the offices of the Ministry of Energy, in the Insurgentes roundabout, and will arrive at the Executive Tower of Pemex, on Avenida Marina Nacional.
The mobilization seeks to demand accountability for the environmental damage caused by oil activity, to review the use of public resources allocated to the company and to move towards an energy transition that considers human rights, the protection of territories and the living conditions of future generations. “This march is against Pemex, but it's also for life,” said Andrea Gómez, from Trans-Habitat, calling for the protection of water, land, air and environmental defenders to be put at the center.
You may also like: The struggle of women fisherwomen from Veracruz who managed to get the Supreme Court to order the regulation of the Fisheries Law
Comentarios (0)