This is 100% the real explanation.

No. Not at all. If I remember correctly, Guyana has a ~2500 person military. But it’s still weird because even though Venezuela has a more capable military and shares a border with Guyana, it’s not clear how Venezuela would actually invade. There is no road from directly Venezuela to Guyana, the area their border is on is dense, sparsely populated forest. The only road between the two countries goes through Brazil, who has a real army, and has moved troops to the border, I think. The other option is an amphibious assault, but that’s sketchy too because amphibious assaults are notoriously hard and there’s a US (and I think UK) naval presences just off the coast. So, like, Guyana’s military can’t really defend itself, but it’s also unclear how Venezuela would actually prosecute an attack.

This reminds me of that time. England and Iceland went to “war” over fishing rights in the 70s and just, like, cut fishing nets and rammed each other’s boats

Careful. You’re saying the quiet part outloud.

It stands out to me how they make a specific goal on increasing renewable capacity but make no such goals to reduce fossil fuel production. My concern is that if we don’t consciously do the latter, the extra renewable capacity will, in effect, be used to increase power output without reducing the absolute quantity of fossil fuels significantly. There’s a lot of capital wrapped up in fossil fuel extraction, and we would be asking a lot of very power entities to take a haircut on their RoI by not continuing to use it. I think it’s a non-trivial problem that is really not being taken seriously enough in these kinds of talks.