Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

[OldBlackDog]

Have you read nothing?
Who owns the tar sands?
Who just got the deal of a lifetime from the canadian government.
China is going to do what ever they want.
India is the same.
You really think that you have the right to tell them they do not?

 

[agentaqua]

Have you read nothing?
Who owns the tar sands?
Who just got the deal of a lifetime from the canadian government.
China is going to do what ever they want.
India is the same.
You really think that you have the right to tell them they do not?

OBD - not only do you confuse science and media; scientific theory and opinion -BUT - you appear to be confusing power and right here.

Just because people have the right to govern themselves - that doesn't mean they exercise their right to demand accountability and involvement as and when they should.

Just because people have "power" that doesn't mean they have the right, and vice-versa.

Governing w/o the "right" generally catches-up with you, although sometimes it takes longer than it should.

Nobody has the right to take away our human quest for knowledge and truth - although they may temporarily have the power to do so.

Just because China is corrupting our system of governance - doesn't mean they have the right to, nor does it mean we cannot exercise our right to demand accountability and transparency from our government..

It's really not so confusing, OBD.

 

[GLG]

Have you read nothing?
Who owns the tar sands?
Who just got the deal of a lifetime from the canadian government.
China is going to do what ever they want.
India is the same.
You really think that you have the right to tell them they do not?

1) Well I have read everything you have posted and you seem to be hold many theories of climate change or the lack of it, but at this point I can only guess that you think it's natural and the reason is " it's the sun". Correct me if I'm wrong. At any point nothing you posted has convinced me that AGW is false or should be taken lightly.

2) the tar sands are owned by the citizens of Alberta. They will decide what happens to them. Will there be pressure from the rest of Canada to halt expansion and have a slow orderly shutdown and clean up? I hope so. Will the Industry continue to fight tooth and nail? I sure they will and with your support it will be a fight to the finish.

3) China and the US have sweet deals to grab our resources. Give away at fire sale prices and your point?

4) China will do what it wants in China but there are plenty of signs that there citizens and not going to take it much longer. You just have to watch what is happing right now in Hong Kong. These things have a way of spreading. Will they have there way with Canada? Not going to happen as there is more push back then even harper can handle. He wont be here much longer if you care to read the polls. FN have blocked Northern Gateway and if the mole pops up somewhere else I'm betting it will get wacked in the next location.

5) India will do what they will do in India.... they too will feel the pressure from their citizens and the rest of the world if they don't clean up there act.

6) China or India have no right to come here and tell me what to think or do. I don't care if harper want's to be some coal, oil and gas super power. He can say what he likes but mark my word he will be gone in one year or less. He is dividing the country with his fantasy and I suspect he will have a rude awaking come election day.

Here is the thing.... clean energy is on a path to beat dirty energy on price and social acceptance. Things are changing and I know it's hard to accept. That doesn't mean that it wont change. The future is not for us, as we have had our run, the future belongs to the next generation. They will decide and I for one will do what every I can to help them on that path to clean energy. Even if it means coming on this site and debating with the "other side" to point out the flaws in their arguments against AGW.

So I'll ask again... what's wrong with clean energy? Do you like what coal, oil and gas are doing to this world? Would you not prefer a healthy environment and a lot less conflict in this world? Is that not what both of us would like to see? Something we should both be working for to pass to the next generation.......

 

[Bent-Tip]

LNG in BC and job creation....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...eeded-for-b-c-s-future-says-premier-1.2786289

 

[OldBlackDog]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/07/china-coal-idUSL3N0K90H720140107

 

[GLG]

Christy Clark's LNG dreams tested in rare fall legislative session

Governing Liberals to introduce legislation outlining tax, regulatory framework for LNG export industry

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...ed-in-rare-fall-legislative-session-1.2788343

The B.C. Legislature convenes on Monday for what has become something of a rare event — a fall legislative session — where Premier Christy Clark's liquefied natural gas dreams will be put to the test of public scrutiny.
Although B.C.'s legislative calendar always marks off dates for a fall sitting, it has become increasingly uncommon. There has only been one other fall session since Clark became premier in 2011.

• Petronas LNG project still on the table, says B.C. Energy
• Chevron won't be rushed on Kitimat LNG decision

Instead of appearing in the people's house to be held accountable in question period or answer to reporters in the hallways of the legislature, Clark has generally chosen instead to appear at select public events where her staff can mostly control the message.
The fact that Clark's government is having a fall session this year suggests the importance of the subject matter — and given her government's almost singular focus of late, it's not surprising that subject is liquefied natural gas.​The premier has talked for years about the potential of LNG to drive B.C.'s economic future.

A liquefied natural gas project planned for Kitimat, B.C., faces an uncertain future after one of its U.S. partners, Apache Corp., announced plans in August to get out of the LNG business.

That talk was the cornerstone of the last election campaign, with its promises of a debt-free B.C. as a result of hundreds of billions of dollars in potential revenue from the emerging industry.
The problem so far, of course, is that the industry is just that — all potential. At least 17 energy companies have invested large amounts of money to secure a piece of that potential, but there has yet to be a single final investment decision made.
So this fall, the B.C. government will introduce legislation outlining its tax and regulatory framework for the LNG export industry.
There may be a few other issues at play, but LNG will occupy the bulk of the sitting days between now and when the house rises in late November.
While that may not sound very sexy, its significance as a key piece of the LNG puzzle can't be understated. This legislation will provide industry with the details on how much tax and regulation they're looking at.
Balancing act

As revealed in last February’s provincial budget, the government is planning a two-tiered approach, with a smaller amount of tax being paid at the outset and then increasing as the companies pay off their original infrastructure investment.
The legislation will also include restrictions on how much property tax individual municipalities can charge LNG companies, as well as environmental rules.
It is all being portrayed as part of a delicate balancing act between charging enough to ensure taxpayers get their fair share, but not so much that industry gets scared off.

Malaysian national oil company Petronas has threatened to walk away from its proposed $10-billion LNG plant near Prince Rupert. (Issei Kato/Reuters)

The Liberals had promised to have this tax and regulatory framework in place by the end of last year.
The fact that it's coming now indicates that we are approaching crunch time for the province's LNG hopes and dreams. With the tax and regulatory pieces in place, there will be very little else preventing companies from making that final decision.
Unfortunately for Clark and the Liberals, the climate for LNG investment is not nearly as rosy as it was a year ago.
Petronas, the Malaysian energy giant, is even threatening to walk away from its proposed $10-billion LNG plant near Prince Rupert, citing concerns that the province's tax and regulatory scheme might not be competitive enough.
And the U.S. energy company, Apache, has also abandoned its partnership with Chevron for an LNG plant in Kitimat.
That's not to say the situation is bleak, but the harsher realities of LNG investment are becoming more evident.
So what happens if these LNG hopes and dreams go south? On the political side, it would be a crushing embarrassment for Clark's government — one from which she would have a very difficult time recovering.
On the economic side, it wouldn't be welcome news for many B.C. communities and industries counting on a coming boom.
I recall touring the Spectra Energy gas plant in Fort Nelson during the 2013 election campaign and chatting with a grizzled old guy who had worked in the plant and the natural gas industry his entire life.
I asked him what "Plan B" was if the LNG export idea didn't work out. He looked at me with a sense of amusement and said that with the way the natural gas industry is headed in North America, "This is Plan B."
This fall's legislative session will be a key step towards either seeing that "Plan B" start to come to fruition, or for things to go very much the other way.

 

[GLG]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/07/china-coal-idUSL3N0K90H720140107

[h=1]SaskPower set to unveil 'clean coal' technology[/h][h=3]Technology aimed at reducing harmful emissions from burning coal[/h]
Saskatchewan has attracted international interest in a $1.4-billion large scale application of technology aimed at reducing harmful emissions from coal-fired power plants. The province's Crown corporation SaskPower is hosting a major tour of its facilities today.For several years, SaskPower has been outfitting its Boundary Dam power plant, near Estevan, Sask., in the province's southeast, with sophisticated equipment for what is known as carbon capture and storage

The project is aimed at demonstrating that such a system is feasible for conventional power plants that use coal as a fuel in the generation of electricity.
Scientists and policy-makers from around the world — around 100 people from some 20 countries — have converged on Saskatchewan for Thursday's tour.
"Coal-fired power is very significant for Europe," Graeme Sweeney, an adviser to the European Commission, told CBC News. "In fact, over the last couple of years the amount of coal-fired power usage has risen rather than fallen. I think we should see a lot of people from Europe want to come and see this."

Saskatchewan's project, in general, collects carbon dioxide gas that is emitted as coal is burned in a power plant. That gas is compressed to liquid form. SaskPower has plans to sell the liquefied CO2 to the oil industry. Studies are also underway to see if the CO2 can be injected into natural underground storage caverns

More here.... http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/saskpower-set-to-unveil-clean-coal-technology-1.2784876



Carbon capture: Coal power enabler, or the way to a green energy future?

The province of Saskatchewan has just turned a coal-fired power plant into "the world's first and largest commercial scale CCS Project of its kind."
SaskPower says the Boundary Dam Carbon Capture and Storage Project will make the province's continued use of coal environmentally and economically viable.
But critics say instead of being the way of the future, this application of CCS technology is just enabling Saskatchewan to hold on to its fossil-fuel guzzling past.

How it works
Carbon Capture and Storage systems can work in a number of ways. In this case, carbon dioxide will be collected from the gases created when coal is burned to fuel the power plant. The CO2 will be trapped before it can enter the atmosphere, and then liquefied and stored.
Robert Watson, President and CEO of SaskPower, told Jim Brown that the new CCS project will divert as much as one million tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere each year.
In some cases, CCS projects store the liquefied gas permanently in spent oil reservoirs, in unused mines, or saline formations more than five kilometres underground. The captured CO2 from the Boundary Dam power plant, however, will go to another use.
"In Saskatchewan we have enhanced oil recovery," Watson says. "When liquid CO2 is pumped into the ground and hits heavy oil it actually chemically attaches to it, expands it, and forces it out of the ground."
Captured carbon will be used again
As much as 90 per cent of the liquefied carbon dioxide captured in this program will be sold to energy companies, to aid in the extraction of more oil. It's part of SaskPower's plan for making the CCS program financially sustainable -- an important element given the project's $1.4 billion price tag.
More....... http://www.cbc.ca/the180/excerpts/2...wer-enabler-or-path-to-a-clean-energy-future/

Video tour of the plant
http://www.saskpowerccs.com/tour/

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141006094511.htm
Ocean warming in Southern Hemisphere underestimated, scientists suggest


Date:

October 6, 2014


Source:

DOE/Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory


Summary:


Using satellite observations and a large suite of climate models, scientists have found that long-term ocean warming in the upper 700 meters of Southern Hemisphere oceans has likely been underestimated. Ocean heat storage is important because it accounts for more than 90 percent of Earth's excess heat that is associated with global warming.



Share This

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Email to a friend
 Facebook
 Twitter
 LinkedIn
 Google+
 Print this page


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------







Akin to having a fleet of miniature research vessels, the global flotilla of more than 3,600 robotic profiling floats provides crucial information on upper layers of the world's ocean currents.

Credit: Alicia Navidad/CSIRO


[Click to enlarge image]






Using satellite observations and a large suite of climate models, Lawrence Livermore scientists have found that long-term ocean warming in the upper 700 meters of Southern Hemisphere oceans has likely been underestimated.


"This underestimation is a result of poor sampling prior to the last decade and limitations of the analysis methods that conservatively estimated temperature changes in data-€sparse regions," said LLNL oceanographer Paul Durack, lead author of a paper appearing in the October 5 issue of the journal Nature Climate Change.

Ocean heat storage is important because it accounts for more than 90 percent of Earth's excess heat that is associated with global warming. The observed ocean and atmosphere warming is a result of continuing greenhouse gas emissions. The Southern Hemisphere oceans make up 60 percent of the world's oceans.

The team found that climate models simulate the relative increase in sea surface height -- a leading indicator of climate change -- between Northern and Southern hemispheres is consistent with highly accurate altimeter observations. However, separating the simulated upper-€ocean warming in the Northern and Southern hemispheres is inconsistent with observed estimates of ocean heat content change. These sea level and ocean heat content changes should be consistent, and suggest that until recent improvements occurred in the observational system in the early 21st century, Southern Hemisphere ocean heat content changes were likely underestimated.

Since 2004, automated profiling floats (named Argo) have been used to measure global ocean temperatures from the surface down to 2,000 meters. The 3,600 Argo floats currently observing the global ocean provide systematic coverage of the Southern Hemisphere for the first time. Argo float measurements over the last decade, as well as data from earlier measurements, show that the ocean has been gradually warming, according to Durack.

"Prior to 2004, research has been very limited by the poor measurement coverage," he said. "By using satellite data, along with a large suite of climate model simulations, our results suggest that global ocean warming has been underestimated by 24 to 58 percent. The conclusion that warming has been underestimated agrees with previous studies, however it's the first time that scientists have tried to estimate how much heat we've missed."

Given that most of the excess heat associated with global warming is in the oceans, this study has important implications for how scientists view Earth's overall energy budget, Durack said.

The new results are consistent with another new paper that appears in the same issue of Nature Climate Change. Co-author Felix Landerer of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who contributed to both studies, says, "Our other new study on deep-ocean warming found that from 2005 to the present, Argo measurements recorded a continuing warming of the upper-ocean. Using the latest available observations, we're able to show that this upper-ocean warming and satellite measurements are consistent."

Other Livermore authors include Peter Gleckler and Karl Taylor. The study was conducted as part of the Climate Research Program at Lawrence Livermore, which is funded by the Department of Energy's Regional and Global Climate Modeling Program. Work at NASA is a part of the newly formed NASA Sea Level Change Team (N-SCLT) and is supported by a NASA ROSES Physical Oceanography grant.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by DOE/Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Journal References:
1.Paul J. Durack, Peter J. Gleckler, Felix W. Landerer, Karl E. Taylor. Quantifying underestimates of long-term upper-ocean warming. Nature Climate Change, 2014; DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2389
2.W. Llovel, J. K. Willis, F. W. Landerer, I. Fukumori. Deep-ocean contribution to sea level and energy budget not detectable over the past decade. Nature Climate Change, 2014; DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2387

 

[agentaqua]

“Water is a living thing” Environmental and Human Health Implications of the Athabasca Oil Sands for the Mikisew Cree First Nation and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation in Northern Alberta. Phase Two Report: July 7, 2014

Funding provided by: National First Nations Environmental Contaminants Program, Health Canada, SSHRC, Mikisew Cree First Nation, and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation

Prepared by: Stéphane M. McLachlan, PhD Environmental Conservation Laboratory, Clayton H Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth and Resources, University of Manitoba Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T2N2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Oil sands development in northern Alberta has generated much economic prosperity for Canada. The Athabasca Oil Sands represent the largest reservoir of crude oil (bitumen) and the only oil sands deposit in the world that is suitable for large-scale surface mining. Yet many argue that this intensive and fast-growing industrial activity has adverse and poorly understood implications for environmental and human health. Indigenous People, including members of both the Mikisew Cree First Nation (MCFN) and Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN), live downstream from these industrial activities on the Athabasca River, activities that continue to escalate in scale and impact. These and other downstream Indigenous communities are especially vulnerable to these impacts, in part because their traditional livelihoods, cultures, and wellbeing are so closely linked to the environment. Although these impacts continue to grow in scale, any existing monitoring has been widely criticized as inadequate by scientists, community members, and the broader public alike. The overall goal of the Phase Two component of this long-term project has been to characterize the impacts of upstream industrial activity associated with the Athabasca Oil Sands for wildlife, environmental and especially human health as it affects the MCFN and ACFN.

This project emerges from a collaboration initiated by the MCFN and ACFN in northern Alberta and with scientists from University of Manitoba and University of Saskatchewan. Outcomes of this community-based participatory research have been shaped and controlled throughout by ACFN and MCFN. Phase Two of this project built on the strengths and expanded on the results of the previous phase, which had documented Traditional Knowledge of the complex environmental change in the region and the factors responsible for these changes, as well as contaminant levels in wildlife.

In Phase Two, wildlife was again evaluated by veterinarians and tested for environmental contaminants including heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Interviews were also conducted with community members regarding ongoing impacts of upstream development. We documented consumption patterns of wild-caught (traditional or country) foods and assessed to what degree any changes in concern and consumption patterns were attributable to industry associated declines in the environment. Changes in community health and wellbeing as well as likely causes of and responses to these changes were identified by group interviews with community

...continued below...

 

[agentaqua]

Our specific objectives were:
(i) to evaluate contaminants levels by testing the environment and culturally important wildlife;
(ii) to identify potential exposure of community members to contaminants by documenting the consumption of wild-caught foods;
(iii) to explore any implications of these changes for community health and wellbeing;
(iv) to promote capacity in community-based monitoring to address any environmental concerns; and
(v) to facilitate effective cross-cultural risk communication that incorporates both western science and TEK in sharing the outcomes of this project members. The role of community-based monitoring and cross-stakeholder engagement in building capacity among local youth and in addressing shortcomings in existing governmental monitoring plans was documented in the form of a Youth-Elder Camp. Finally, the impacts of the Oil Sands and other upstream development were communicated to community members and a broader audience in the form of a feature-length documentary film.

Outcomes regarding contaminant levels in wildlife largely reflected those of Phase One, with some important differences. Harvesting was more strategic and broadened to include beavers, which are recognized as a more effective indicator species than muskrats, which have been effectively extirpated from the Athabasca Delta by upstream development. Arsenic levels were high enough in in muskrat and moose muscle; duck, moose, and muskrat livers; and moose and duck kidneys to be of concern for young children. Cadmium levels were again elevated in moose kidney and liver samples but also those of beaver and ducks, although muskrat samples were again low. Mercury levels were also high for duck muscle, kidneys, and livers as well as moose and muskrat kidneys, especially for children. In contrast to the last phase of the study, selenium levels were high enough in the muscle, kidney, and livers of all wildlife species to be of concern for adults and children alike. Yet human exposure rates to these contaminants were generally not of health concern. This reflects the relatively low amounts of traditional foods that are now consumed as community members transition towards store-bought foods. These high levels of heavy metals are also consistent with impacts from the upstream Oil Sands, which have become Alberta’s greatest emitters of mercury and cadmium.

Total levels of PAHs and levels of carcinogenic and alkylated PAHs were very high relative to other food studies conducted around the world. The mean concentrations of benzo[a]pyrene, a relatively well understood carcinogenic PAH, were about mid-way compared to studies conducted elsewhere in the world. The daily intake of total PAHs in our study was also high, almost 3X that of the next highest study. However, the daily dietary intake of carcinogenic PAHs was lower than the other two comparable studies. Indeed, dietary intake of benzo[a]pyrene and its equivalents was effectively zero. This again reflects the relatively low consumption levels of traditional foods compared to the past.

Our diet study shows that ACFN and MCFN members still consume a wide diversity of traditional foods, albeit at lower levels than in the past. The mostly frequently consumed kind of food was moose in the previous two months, about equal to all the other traditional foods combined. Moose was followed, in descending order, by ratroot, duck, wild mint, spruce gum, pickerel, caribou, and Labrador tea. Participants were concerned about declines in the quality of these foods, in the greatest part because of environmental pollutants originating from the Oil Sands. It was notable how many participants no longer consumed locally caught fish, because of government-issued consumption advisories and associated human health concerns. Muskrat consumption had also declined precipitously, along with muskrat populations, a decline that was attributed to changes in hydrology and contaminant levels associated with the WAC Bennett Dam and the Oil Sands. The only effective alternatives to traditional foods are store-bought foods. The latter consist of either healthy options that are cost-prohibitive and low in quality or convenience options that, while cheaper, are relatively high in fats, sweeteners, and salts. Consumption of convenience foods was most prevalent among younger community members, and is already having adverse health implications. Most participants anticipated that these trends would continue into the future as the Oil Sands expanded and as wildlife species decline in availability and safety.

All participants were worried about ongoing declines in the health and wellbeing of their community. They generally viewed themselves as less healthy than their parents, who rarely got sick. Neurological illnesses (e.g. sleeping disorders, migraines, and stress) were most common followed, in descending order of frequency, by respiratory illnesses (e.g. allergies, asthma) as well as circulatory (e.g. hypertension, coronary) and gastrointestinal (e.g. gallbladder, ulcers) illnesses. Yet, everyone was most concerned about the current and escalating cancer crisis. Indeed, of the 94 participants, 20 (21.3%) had experienced 23 cases of cancer. Cancer types included four cases of breast cancer, two each of lung, cervical, colon, gallbladder, kidney, prostate, and stomach cancer, as well as one case of cholangiocarcinoma or bile duct cancer. Cancer occurrence increased with age and was most frequent in women. For the first time, we showed that upstream development and environmental decline are affecting cancer occurrence. Thus, cancer occurrence increased significantly with participant employment in the Oil Sands and with the increased consumption of traditional foods and locally caught fish.

When human health was examined as a whole, participants identified the Oil Sands as the cause of health decline, followed in descending order of importance by upstream agriculture, substance abuse, and the WAC Bennett dam. Widespread increases in type 2 diabetes and obesity were attributed to the increased consumption of processed foods from the South, declines in physical activity, and depression. These declines in health and wellbeing were aggravated by poor risk communication, inadequate health care in Fort Chipewyan but also an overdependence upon often-inferior health care in urban centres to the south. Many felt that the continued expansion of the Oil Sands would continue to undermined health and wellbeing into the future, especially as related to cancer.

The inadequacy of existing and mostly culturally inappropriate and exclusively science-based monitoring was also emphasized by many participants, and seen by some as putting these communities further at risk. A highly successful Youth-Elder camp was held in spring 2012. Local youth engaged with and learned from Elders and outside scientists regarding environmental monitoring on the land as did younger children at the local community school. The development of these skills, at once grounded in both Traditional Knowledge and western science, will play a key role in enabling young community members to further engage in an already effective community based-monitoring program, which is documenting changes in water and wildlife health and which is informed by both knowledge systems.

These cross-cultural monitoring programs will also help address community concerns regarding existing risk communication. Typically, most outside scientists fail to adequately communicate their research outcomes with community members, much less adequately involve community members in the research projects. This communication gap combined with inaccessible governmental consumption advisories help foster fear and worry regarding traditional foods, which are still much more desirable than most high-cost, store-bought alternatives. A 60-minute documentary film was developed that will facilitate such communication within Fort Chipewyan and with other impacted communities, but also with outside stakeholders including government, industry, civil society, and the public as a whole. The film documents the above changes and decline in environmental and human health as experienced and communicated by community members. Yet, it further argues that this development also represents many opportunities for community members and, regardless of outcome, asserts that that these communities need to be centrally involved in any future decision making. Finally, a news aggregator web site has been launched that increases the visibility of these northern views.

In conclusion, represented here is a perfect storm of decline and opportunity, a storm that places these and other downstream communities at progressively increased risk. Substantial employment opportunities are generated by the Oil Sands. However, this development, as well as upstream hydro projects, compromises the integrity of the environment and wildlife, which in turn adversely affects human health and wellbeing. Associated changes in land use as well as decline in access to and concerns regarding the quality of traditional foods act to separate community members from these food sources and from their livelihoods and traditions. These changes and inadequate outsider-controlled monitoring programs and risk communication just aggravate these concerns and further displace their traditions. The failure of the healthcare system to address and mitigate ongoing adverse impacts and plans for rapid expansion of the Oil Sands in the future only act to ensure that an already grave situation will worsen. Recommendations included in this report focus on the increased role of these communities in decision-making and management of Oil Sands development as well as the need to conduct additional health research that build on this study, recommendations that will work towards the benefit of these communities and all Canadians alike.

 

[GLG]

[t24WRmj_HhY] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t24WRmj_HhY

 

[GLG]

[rm5DxojGAEI] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm5DxojGAEI

 

[agentaqua]

2014 Fall Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

Chapter 1 - Mitigating Climate Change

Full Report http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201410_01_e_39848.html
Audit at a Glance http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att__e_39876.html
Video http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_vid_e_39869.html


Chapter 2 - Environmental Monitoring of Oil Sands

Full Report http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201410_02_e_39849.htmll
Audit at a Glance http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/att__e_39877.htmll
Video http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_vid_e_39870.html

 

[OldBlackDog]

Keystone be darned: Canada finds a surprise route around Obama
http://www.theprovince.com/business...ry.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/pet_222_e_30317.html
Subsidies to the oil and gas industry and federal initiatives for greenhouse gas emission reductions
Petition: No. 222

Issue(s): Air quality, climate change, governance, human health/environmental health, and natural resources

Petitioner(s): KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Initiatives

Date Received: 12 November 2007

Status: Completed

Summary: This petition is about the apparent conflict of objectives in federal government policies related to energy efficiency and greenhouse gas. The petitioner requests information about how the federal government reconciles the apparent contradiction of encouraging the production of fossil fuels, through subsidies to the oil and gas industries, with encouraging the reduction of fossil fuels, through energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction initiatives (such as ecoENERGY Renewable and ecoENERGY for Bio-fuels).

Federal Departments Responsible for Reply: Canadian International Development Agency, Environment Canada, Department of Finance Canada, Foreign Affairs and International Trade—Department of [2006-present], Natural Resources Canada

 

[GLG]

Keystone be darned: Canada finds a surprise route around Obama
http://www.theprovince.com/business...story.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twit

With oil trading at $85 USD a barrel and falling expect these pipe dreams to go from on to off then on again.
Great plan to try and base the Canadian economy on the ups and downs of the oil patch. Not....
Ask any one who has worked in the patch about the boom and bust cycle of this industry.
Putting all your eggs in one basket is never a good call there harper.
I'll be happy when the price of oil is a minor player like pork bellies.

Food for thought
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/The-Role-Of-Oil-Prices-In-Global-Financial-Markets.html

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tes...l-wheel-drive-electric-car-unveiled-1.2794608

Tesla P85D: Dual motor, all-wheel-drive electric car unveiled
The P85D will go on sale in December, with a $120K base price
The Associated Press Posted: Oct 10, 2014 1:27 AM ET Last Updated: Oct 10, 2014 1:37 PM ET

Tesla unveils new car 2:51

Luxury electric car maker Tesla Motors is making its Model S sedan faster and safer in an effort to compete better with other high-end sedans.

At an open-to-the-public unveiling Thursday night that included bumping music, free alcohol and test rides on an airport tarmac, CEO Elon Musk revealed an all-wheel-drive version of the car that includes self-driving features he called "auto pilot."

Tesla's $5B 'gigafactory' is Nevada bound
Tesla stock soars as Elon Musk pledges 100,000 cars per year
Tesla to sell smaller $35K model in 2017
The announcement ended a week of speculation following a cryptic Musk tweet that said, "About time to unveil the D and something else."

Taking the stage with more than 1,000 Tesla fans in the audience, he explained that the "D" stands for "dual motor." The current Model S is a rear-wheel-drive car with one motor. The "D" will have two motors — one powering the front wheels and one powering the rear wheels.

TESLA-MOTORS-LAUNCH/
Tesla Motors Inc CEO Elon Musk unveils a new all-wheel-drive version of the Model S car in Hawthorne, Calif., on Thursday. (Lucy Nicholson/Reuters)

Musk said unlike all-wheel-drive systems on gas-powered cars, which tend to be heavy and make the cars less efficient, Tesla's system improves the speed, acceleration and mileage by optimizing which motor is used.

The dual motor version of the P85 performance sedan will have a top speed of 250 km/h, compared with the current model's top speed of about 210 km/h. It will accelerate from 0-60 mph in 3.2 seconds, akin to exotic sports cars.

"This car is nuts. It's like taking off from a carrier deck," Musk said at a municipal airport near Los Angeles where another of Musk's companies — the commercial rocket firm SpaceX — is based. The crowd obliged with cheers and applause.

After Musk left the stage came the rides, which demonstrated both the car's acceleration and safety features. Attendees, many dressed up and some well-lubricated with drink, were not allowed behind the wheel.

Upgraded safety features

The all-wheel-drive system helps grip slippery roads, and analysts have said Tesla needed it to boost sales in the Northeast and Midwest, as well as Europe. The company sold 13,850 cars in the U.S. this year through September, down three per cent from a year ago, according to Autodata Corp.

Tesla is also significantly upgrading its safety features.

The Model S will steer itself back if it wanders from its lane and brake automatically if it is about to hit something. Those features are offered on luxury competitors, as well as mainstream brands such as Ford, Hyundai and Toyota.

But Tesla is going a step further. Its new cruise control system that senses traffic can move the car over a lane when the driver uses the turn signal. It will also use cameras to read speed limit signs and decelerate accordingly. Volvo has a system that reads signs and alert drivers if they are over the limit, but does not change the speed.

Musk said "auto pilot" does not mean that the car could drive itself — as he put it, a driver cannot "safely fall asleep." Although, he said, on private property — not public roads — a driver could summon the car remotely.

While the addition of all-wheel drive catches Tesla up with other in the luxury car market, pulling together all the driver-assist features impressed Brian A. Johnson, an analyst with Barclay's. "It's a year ahead of the timeframe I was expecting," he said.

Raj Rajkumar, a pioneer of self-driving cars with Carnegie Mellon University, was similarly impressed but wondered about the limitations of "auto-pilot" — how would it perform in different weather and road conditions.

The dual motor will be a $4,000 option on the base and mid-range Model S, which start at $71,000. The base price for the P85 with all-wheel drive — which will be known as P85D — is $120,000. The cars went on sale immediately on Tesla's website; the P85D will be delivered beginning in December, while the other versions begin delivery in February.

© The Associated Press, 2014

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/global-warming-to-drive-fish-toward-poles-study-says-1.2795077

Global warming to drive fish toward poles, study says
Tropics 'overall losers' as marine life shifts to new habitats
CBC News Posted: Oct 10, 2014 12:07 PM ET Last Updated: Oct 10, 2014 12:07 PM ET

ICES Journal of Marine Science
UBC "fish thermometre" study
(Note: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external links.)
EL SALVADOR
UBC scientists say climate change has been affecting global fisheries for the past four decades by driving species toward cooler, deeper waters, and the trend is likely to continue. (Luis Galdamez/Reuters)

Large numbers of fish will disappear from the tropics by 2050, according to a University of British Columbia study that examines the potential effects of climate change on marine life.

Researchers used the same climate change scenarios as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to project a large-scale movement of marine fish and invertebrates. They concluded that changing temperatures will drive more fish toward Arctic and Antarctic waters.

The UBC team came up with a worst-case scenario, in which the Earth’s oceans warm by three degrees Celsius by 2100. In that case, fish could move away from their current habitats at a rate of 26 kilometres per decade. Under the best-case scenario, where the Earth warms by one degree Celsius, fish would move 15 kilometres every decade.

William Cheung, co-author of the study released Friday, said the tropics would be the “overall losers” because countries in these regions rely heavily on fish for food.

Cheung and his colleague used modelling to predict how 802 commercially important species of fish and invertebrates react to warming water temperatures, other changing ocean properties, and new habitats opening up at the poles.

“As fish move to cooler waters, this generates new opportunities for fisheries in the Arctic,” co-author Miranda Jones said in a release. “On the other hand, it means it could disrupt the species that live there now and increase competition for resources.”

The study was published in the ICES Journal of Marine Science (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) and follows previous research out of UBC that looked at how warming ocean temperatures are driving species toward cooler, deeper waters.

That study, appearing May 2013 in the journal Nature, said climate change has been affecting global fisheries for the past four decades, with "serious implications for food security" in the tropics.

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/oil-price-at-85-costing-provinces-and-economy-billions-1.2795062
Oil price at $85 costing provinces and economy billions
Bad news for oil companies should leave more money in consumers' pockets
By Pete Evans, CBC News Posted: Oct 10, 2014 12:33 PM ET Last Updated: Oct 10, 2014 12:56 PM ET

A worker pours oil into a barrel at a European oil refinery earlier this month. Lower crude prices are costing the oil industry and some provinces billions, but should lower costs elsewhere in the economy. (Akos Stiller/Bloomberg)

Oil prices touched new lows Friday, down almost $1 to $84.90 a barrel. That's the lowest price seen since April 2013. The price for the main North American oil benchmark, known as West Texas Intermediate, is now down more than 20 per cent from recent highs — which means oil has met the technical definition of a price correction.

'It's not time to worry' about oil prices, N.L. premier says
'Dirty' oil victory would cost Canada more than Europe
In a report titled 'Life with $85 Oil' BMO economist Robert Kavcic noted those lower prices are costing billions to Canada's three most oil-dependent provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland and Labrador.

In recent budgets, all three provinces made revenue projections based on assumptions that oil prices would be a lot higher than they are.

Alberta's estimates are based on oil being about $97 a barrel. Saskatchewan assumed just under $100 a barrel. And while Newfoundland and Labrador bases its oil projections on Europe's benchmark, known as Brent Crude, that province was assuming the price would average about $105 a barrel. Brent was going for about $115 per barrel as recently as June. Today, it's at $89.

'Quiet windfall' for consumers

Drivers may be breathing a sigh of relief at the pumps because of lower crude prices, but that cheaper oil is costing oil companies — and possibly more important, governments — billions.

Kavcic estimates that at current prices, based on its royalty regime Alberta is missing out on $1.2 billion in revenue. That's about three per cent of the province's entire funds.

"After a strong start to the year for prices, there’s now downside risk here if prices stay at or below recent levels for the remainder of the fiscal year," Kavcic said. "Longer-term plans (mostly in the $95 range) would also be at risk if these prices stick."

If it keeps up, the damage could be significant. Capital Economics economist David Madani estimates the Canadian economy as a whole could lose as much as $11 billion worth of exports this year — as much 0.6 per cent of GDP — because of lower oil prices.

His outlook is not as bleak as Kavcic's, however, in that he thinks oil would have to drop a lot further still before expansion plans in the Athabasca oilsands would halt.

"Canadian price per barrel remains at levels above ... cost, which we figure is between $60 and $80 per barrel," he said. "We suspect that world oil prices would have to fall below $70 per barrel before seriously endangering future production prospects."

Loonie cushions price drop

Much of the drop in prices, however, is being cushioned by a corresponding drop in the value of the loonie. Oil is priced on the U.S. dollar, which has been on a tear of late compared to the loonie. So cratering crude values aren't hurting Canada as much as they could be, because oil companies are taking in more loonies for every U.S. dollar they get for selling oil.

There's also another economic upside to lower oil prices, in that cheaper energy generally means lower transportation costs for all other industries, and more money in Canadians' pockets to spend on other goods, which grows the economy elsewhere.

"While lower oil prices is bad for Canada, the benefit to other net importing nations may boost economic growth, promoting non-oil exports to Canada," Madani said. "This would help cushion the blow to Canada's economy."

As Kavcic's colleague Doug Porter put it: "While this is bad news indeed for the hottest regions of North America it’s a quiet windfall for global consumers."

"The drop in energy prices acts as a tax cut for consumers by giving a small bump to real disposable income."

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/doe...rbon-emissions-in-a-growing-economy-1.2794955

BALONEY METER
Does Canada have falling carbon emissions in a growing economy?
Emissions falling thanks to 2008 recession and steps by governments - but set to miss 2020 target
By Bruce Cheadle, The Canadian Press Posted: Oct 10, 2014 11:06 AM ET Last Updated: Oct 10, 2014 11:06 AM ET

An oil sands extraction facility near Fort McMurray, Alberta. (Jason Franson/Canadian Press)

Environment Canada: GHG emissions https://www.ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators/default.asp?lang=en&n=FBF8455E-1
Environment Commissioner's 2014 fall report http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201410_e_39845.html
International Trade: Economic indicators http://w03.international.gc.ca/Commerce_International/Canada_Indicator-Indicateur.aspx?lang=eng
(Note: CBC does not endorse and is not responsible for the content of external links.)
"Under our government, we have lowered greenhouse gas emissions and, at the same time, been able to grow the economy." — Prime Minister Stephen Harper in the House of Commons, Oct. 7.

A report this week from the federal commissioner of the environment and sustainable development prompted some tough questions from the Opposition in the House of Commons.

Read the environment commissioner's fall 2014 report
Ottawa falling further behind on emissions reductions, audit finds​
More highlights from the commissioner's report
Chart: Canada's greenhouse gas emissions
Commissioner Julie Gelfand found that Canada is not on track to meet its international commitment on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

"We found that federal measures currently in place will have little effect on emissions by 2020," Gelfand said.

Yet when Prime Minister Stephen Harper was asked about the report's implications, he told parliamentarians Canada's greenhouse gas emissions went down even as the economy grew.

How can one square the findings of the environment commissioner, an independent officer of Parliament, with the prime minister's words to the same institution?

Spoiler alert: The Canadian Press Baloney Meter is a dispassionate examination of political statements culminating in a ranking of accuracy on a scale of "no baloney" to "full of baloney" (complete methodology below).

This one earns a rating of "a little baloney" — the statement is mostly accurate but more information is required. Here's why.

The facts

CANADA'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
(Mobile users, view a chart of Canada's emissions projections here.)

Under the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, the Conservative government committed Canada to cut GHG emissions 17 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020.

The Canadian economy as a whole emitted 736 megatonnes of greenhouse gases in 2005, according to Environment Canada, a number that fell to 728 megatonnes in 2006 before rebounding to 749 and 731 megatonnes in the following two years.

In 2009, amid a global recession that depressed demand for fossil fuels, Canada's GHG emissions plunged to 689 megatonnes and have been slowly rising since, reaching 699 megatonnes in 2012.

Canada's gross domestic product, meanwhile, was $1.4 trillion in 2005 and came in at $1.95 trillion in the second quarter of 2014.

"In 2012, Canada's greenhouse-gas emissions were 5.1 per cent lower than in 2005, while the economy grew by 10.6 per cent during the same period," Environment Canada reported in April.

Canadian emissions for 2013 have not yet been released by the government.

The federal environment commissioner, meanwhile, has found that following up on a 2012 study, "the evidence is stronger that the growth in emissions will not be reversed in time and that the (Copenhagen) target will be missed."

Gelfand also said provincial measures have done much of the heavy lifting on curbing GHG emissions. In fact, without provincial actions, Canada's emissions would likely now be higher than when the Conservatives came to office.

What they say

David McLaughlin, the former head of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, has been studying the linkages between economic and environmental performance for years.

He says Harper's statements to the House of Commons are factually accurate in that Canada's overall emissions are currently lower than they were when the Conservatives came to office in 2006 and the economy has grown since then.

A multitude of factors are involved in those lower emissions, notably the global financial crisis that began to bite in 2008 and created a major recession in 2009.

"The economy went off a cliff," said McLaughlin, a former chief of staff to Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney. "The emissions upward path dropped in conjunction with the drop in economic growth. Same thing happened in the U.S."

Harper's response in the Commons, said McLaughlin, "is a classic example of accuracy versus veracity."

"It's accurate without being true — in the sense that it's accurate the numbers show that, but it's not true in showing we're on a path to reducing overall emissions and to meet targets."

Harper is on shakier ground, however, when he claims emissions decreased "thanks to our plan."

Industries are more energy efficient, they've moved away from energy-intensive manufacturing to service industry work, and provincial measures — notably Ontario's move away from coal-fired electricity generation — have also played a major role.

"It's not true that it's on the basis of a series of distinct government actions, at the federal level anyway," McLaughlin said.

The verdict

A little baloney
The prime minister was perfectly correct in stating that Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, at least as of the last public accounting in 2012, are lower than they were in 2005.

He is also correct in stating that absolute emissions are lower despite a Canadian economy that has grown during the same time period.

However, the trend line for overall Canadian emissions remains on an upward trajectory and the global economic downturn of 2009 correlates directly to the sudden reduction of emissions below 2005 levels.

Gelfand also chastised the government for failing to bring in emissions regulations on the oil and gas sector — the fastest-growing emitter — and said Ottawa lacks an overall plan to achieve its international climate change commitments.

For these reasons, Harper's statement on Canada's greenhouse gas emissions contains "a little baloney."

Methodology

The Baloney Meter is a project of The Canadian Press that examines the level of accuracy in statements made by politicians. Each claim is researched and assigned a rating based on the following scale:

No baloney — the statement is completely accurate.
A little baloney — the statement is mostly accurate but more information is required.
Some baloney — the statement is partly accurate but important details are missing.
A lot of baloney — the statement is mostly inaccurate but contains elements of truth.
Full of baloney — the statement is completely inaccurate.
Sources

2014 report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development
Environment Canada
Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development Canada, National Economic Indicators
© The Canadian Press, 2014