Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

Status
Not open for further replies.
El Niños Generated By Geological Heat Flow Not Global Warming

ventJust one of many observations that indicate El Niños are generated by geologically induced heat flow and not by atmospheric conditions, aka global warming, is that they originate from deep-ocean high-temperature anomalies from a common fixed “point source” in the western Pacific, then migrate east, become progressively shallower, and fan out.

Observations supporting this contention are diverse, compelling, and numerous. Taken in total, they strongly support the basic tenant of the Plate Climatology Theory, that powerful geological forces drive many natural variations in climate patterns including El Niños.

How can this be true, after all those prominent climate scientists have told us for years that it’s all about the atmosphere? They have postulated that El Niños are generated from atmospheric solar radiation that is somehow narrowly focused into very deep-ocean regions, and then further concentrated by complex ocean currents into a localized powerful heat source. There are many problems with this theory.

So why have climate scientists evoked atmospheric-based theories and models to explain El Niños? The answer is three-fold.

First, reliable deep-ocean temperature and fluid-flow data have not been available until recently, in the last one to three years. Limited data existed, but in the eyes of “atmospherically” trained climatologists and “Shallow Ocean” trained oceanographers, the deep-ocean data set was deemed insufficient. Additionally, oceanographers were especially concerned that a sufficiently powerful deep-ocean heat source had not yet been proven to exist.

Secondly, in the absence of sufficient deep-ocean data, climate scientists turned to abundant atmospheric data to develop El Niño’s Theories. These theories are vague and ill formed for an obvious reason: they are constructed from the “effect” of El Niños, not the “cause.”

It works like this: release of geologically induced deep-ocean geothermal heat and associated chemically charged fluids dramatically alter the overlying deep ocean water.

Ocean currents act to laterally and vertically deliver this altered sea water to the surface where it changes atmospheric conditions such as: air temperature, wind directions, humidity, etc. These changed atmospheric conditions are the “effects” of an El Niño, not the “cause.” Climate scientists use these effects to build theories and models.

Lastly, it’s just human nature. Recognizing the obvious can sometimes be difficult. Surprisingly this trait is true for both nominal human tasks and high science theory generation. Take for example a nominal task, say locating your misplaced glasses. It’s common to “thoroughly” search the entire house three or four times. No luck. Then take a break. Upon restarting your search the glasses mystically appear in a previously searched location.

A good science-based example of this human trait concerns the explanation for selective melting of West Antarctic Glaciers. Overwhelming amounts of data and research now prove that this melting is caused by geologically induced geothermal heat from the West Antarctic Rift System. It’s obvious, but many climate scientists can’t see it because the atmosphere is what they know, it’s comfortable. They still believe the melting is caused by global warming.

So what key observations and new data indicates that El Niños are generated by deep-ocean geologically induced heat flow? The summary points are listed below:

All El Niños originate at the same fixed “point source”, east of Papua New Guinea. Recent deep-ocean temperature data from publications by Kessler et al proves that such a hotspot exists in this area. Additionally, very new data from a National Science Foundation funded ESA Satellite study shows that thousands of heretofore unrecognized seamounts (deep-ocean volcanoes) have been identified in the Papua New Guinea area.
The Papua New Guinea Point Source Area is known to be a complex and active deep-ocean geological region. In fact one of the most complex and unique deep-ocean areas on earth.
The shape of El Niño sea surface temperature anomalies are unique / one of a kind.
The El Niño sea surface temperature anomalies have “linear” and “intense” boundaries inferring that the energy source is not moving and very powerful.
Deep-ocean geological hydrothermal vents are a very good mini-analogy of the larger El Niños.
Large Continental volcanic eruptions are fair analogies of El Niños.
The amount of energy needed to generate an El Niño can be mathematically modeled using a 50 by 50 mile volcanically / tectonically active deep-ocean area (“point source” area). The measured energy released from the Yellowstone Plateau, a 50 by 50 mile area, is a good mathematical analogy.
El Niños often occur in “bundles”, mimicking the “bundle” pattern of many major volcanic eruptions. The main point here is that El Niños do not occur in an atmospherically predictable fashion.
El Niño-like events do not occur elsewhere in Pacific. Why? If they are atmospheric in origin, there should at least be other mini-El Niños. There are none.
La Niñas originate from same point source as El Niños.
Atmospherically based El Niño prediction models consistently fail, likely because they are modeling the “effects” of geologically warmed oceans and therefore not the “cause” of the El Niños.
Historical records indicate that the first “recorded” El Niño occurred in 1525 observed by Spanish explorers. Other studies suggest strong ancient El Niños ended Peruvian civilizations. The main point here is that strong El Niños are natural, and not increasing in relationship to global warming as contended by many climate scientists.
A very anomalous ozone hole recorded in 2009 may be the result of magnetospheric disturbances caused by tectonism and volcanism at the “point source”. The position and shape of this anomaly very closely matches the El Niño point source location. This is a very speculative notion, however it is worth considering.
Satellite recorded phytoplankton bloom maps can be interpreted to show a point source east of Papua New Guinea.
Finally, if major geological plate boundaries have the power to move continents two to three centimeters per year, frequently create large tsunamis that mix thousands of feet of ocean column, support vast chemo-synthetic communities, and contain 70 percent of the planets known active volcanoes, they can certainly and easily influence our climate in a dramatic fashion.

Generate El Niños? It’s obvious to see if we open our eyes and our minds.

James Edward Kamis is a Geologist and AAPG member of 40 years and has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. Years of research / observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is also an important driver of the Earth’s climate.
 
[zcavPAFiG14]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcavPAFiG14
 
[OjD0e1d6GgQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjD0e1d6GgQ&index=28&list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP
 
Same old same old from the fossils from the ruling tar party

[6HHkTQo02ck]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HHkTQo02ck
 
Al Gore, wrong again – Polar ice continues to thrive

Guest essay by Rolf E. Westgard

global.daily.ice.area.withtrend[1]

In his 2007 Noble Prize acceptance speech, former Vice President Al Gore warned that the “Arctic ice could be gone in as little as seven years.” Last week, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution reported:

“The North and South Poles are not melting.” In that report, oceanographer Ted Maksym noted that polar ice “is much more stable than climate scientists once predicted and could even be much thicker than previously thought.”

That Woods Hole study was confirmed by today’s NOAA Arctic radar map which shows the Arctic Ice Cap at more than 4,000,000 square miles, larger than on any December 28 in the past five years. Reaching the North Pole requires either a dog sled or a nuclear sub; Al Gore’s cruise ship will stay in the tropics. At the South Pole, Antarctic ice coverage is at the highest extent since radar measurement began 35 years ago.

NOAA’s Arctic Report Card; Update for 2014 provides similar data for the Earth’s other big ice sheet, Greenland. Data from the GRACE satellite and other sources has shown an annual average Greenland ice loss of more than 300 billion tons until 2013. That loss has now dropped sharply by 98% to 6 billion annual tons since mid 2013. A loss of 300 billion tons adds about one millimeter to sea level rise.

All this frigid data parallels the 17 year pause in global land and sea surface temperatures as reported by NASA, NOAA, the UK Climate Research Unit, and the University of Alabama Huntsville Remote Sensing Systems program. That pause is occurring despite our annual release of more than 30 billion tons of carbon dioxide(CO2) from burning fossil fuels, especially coal. Half of that CO2 release stays in the atmosphere. But CO2 remains a trace gas, as the atmosphere weighs several quadrillion tons, and a quadrillion is a million times a billion.

There are good reasons to limit coal burning, even if its CO2 emissions may be primarily plant food. Burning coal releases toxic products like mercury, sulfur, arsenic, soot, and unburned coal ash. But unfulfilled dire warnings coming from UN agencies about the effect of CO2 emissions are contributing to public skepticism about global warming. Global warming ranked 19th in a recent Pew Poll list of 20 issues which concerned the public.

In the most recent UN IPCC report, lead author Dr. Mark Howden said,

“There’s increasing evidence that climate change is also impacting on agriculture, particularly on some of the cereal crops such as wheat and maize. The negative impacts are greater and quicker than we previously thought.”

Farmers continue to ignore the IPCC. The US Department of Agriculture notes that world agricultural production set all-time records for all three major cereal crops in 2014, with rice output up 1.1 percent, wheat up 11.2 percent, and corn up a whopping 14.0 percent over 2013.

So hang on to that winter coat, our future as a tropical paradise may take awhile.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    55.4 KB · Views: 17
<iframe width="854" height="510" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/IaKm89eVhoE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
The Koch Brothers & Their Amazing Climate Change Denial Machine
 
Bill Maher lays waste to Global Warming deniers
<iframe width="854" height="510" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/0OwFSLm4pII" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Al Gore, wrong again – Polar ice continues to thrive

Guest essay by Rolf E. Westgard
That Woods Hole study was confirmed by today’s NOAA Arctic radar map which shows the Arctic Ice Cap at more than 4,000,000 square miles, larger than on any December 28 in the past five years.



So hang on to that winter coat, our future as a tropical paradise may take awhile.

Why is it that your team can't even give an honest view of what is happening up in the Arctic?
Are they just so morally bankrupt that they are unable to tell right from wrong?
Does the Arctic look like things are back to normal?
N_stddev_timeseries.png


Tell us OBD what's so hard to figure out?
Here is a graph from R. Muller and the "BEST" team.
decadal-with-forcing-small.png


This is serious. A highly regarded and widely recognized planetery physicist put together the most dangerous scientific ingredients that exist: skepticism of the established science, a comprehensive list of hypotheses that stood in opposition to that established science, a huge amount of data, a healthy amount of funding including a good chunk from energy companies that mainly sell fossil carbon based fuels, and a hand selected research team of others who were also skeptics.
In the end, he came up with an explanation for what people call Global Warming. Personally, I believe him. I think he has it right. Whatever you were thinking as the cause of global warming, you have to look at this work and if you have not come to the same conclusion, you should reconsider.
http://www.berkeleyearth.org/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Says a lot about predictions by scientists.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 25
At least use the right graphs.



Why is it that your team can't even give an honest view of what is happening up in the Arctic?
Are they just so morally bankrupt that they are unable to tell right from wrong?
Does the Arctic look like things are back to normal?
N_stddev_timeseries.png


Tell us OBD what's so hard to figure out?
Here is a graph from R. Muller and the "BEST" team.
decadal-with-forcing-small.png


This is serious. A highly regarded and widely recognized planetery physicist put together the most dangerous scientific ingredients that exist: skepticism of the established science, a comprehensive list of hypotheses that stood in opposition to that established science, a huge amount of data, a healthy amount of funding including a good chunk from energy companies that mainly sell fossil carbon based fuels, and a hand selected research team of others who were also skeptics.
In the end, he came up with an explanation for what people call Global Warming. Personally, I believe him. I think he has it right. Whatever you were thinking as the cause of global warming, you have to look at this work and if you have not come to the same conclusion, you should reconsider.
http://www.berkeleyearth.org/
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    70.2 KB · Views: 25
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/comm...against_canadas_22nd_prime_minister_goar.html

Events conspire against Canada’s 22nd prime minister: Goar
Stephen Harper’s plan to make Canada an energy superpower has run aground, thanks to a global surfeit of oil and his own misjudgments.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a victim of circumstances, writes Carol Goar, but his harsh leadership style prevents Canadians from giving him the benefit of the doubt.
DARRYL DYCK / THE CANADIAN PRESS

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is a victim of circumstances, writes Carol Goar, but his harsh leadership style prevents Canadians from giving him the benefit of the doubt.

By: Carol Goar Star Columnist, Published on Thu Jan 08 2015

If Prime Minister Stephen Harper had shown an ounce of contrition over his ill-fated plan to make Canada a global energy superpower, voters might be inclined to give him a break.

He couldn’t have known the price of oil would drop by 57 per cent since last June. No one did.

He couldn’t have foreseen that hydraulic fracking would become commercially viable in the U.S., undercutting demand for Canadian oil and gas.

He couldn’t have anticipated that nine years after he took power Alberta’s liquid gold would be landlocked. Pipeline building had never been a problem in the past (with the sole exception of the Mackenzie Valley inquiry in the 1970s).

Why, then, is there so little sympathy for Harper outside Alberta? What prevents fair-minded Canadians from seeing him as a victim of circumstances?

The first impediment is his absolute refusal to admit he misjudged Canada’s prospects. Even now, with the bottom dropping out of his budgetary calculations, Harper insists he is a masterful economic manager, the only safe choice for prudent voters. His skewed self-image and his unwillingness to adjust to events stifle any fellow feeling.

The second problem is that the prime minister is partly responsible for his own predicament. Although events conspired against him, he made matters worse. Discarding diplomacy, he publicly lectured the U.S. government that approving the Keystone XL pipeline designed to move bitumen from Hardisty, Alta., to the Gulf of Mexico should be a “complete no-brainer.” President Barack Obama didn’t take kindly to Harper’s needling. He still hasn’t given the project a green light. Similarly, Harper and his ministers lashed out at “radical groups” for hijacking the pipeline approval process and undermining the economy. Environmentalists dug in their heels.

The third is Harper’s overt favouritism toward Alberta. His government subsidized the oilsands while dismissing Ontario’s efforts to develop green energy. He treated central Canada’s manufacturing woes as an unfortunate, but unpreventable, byproduct of globalization. His ministers hunted down employment insurance recipients in the job-scarce Maritimes to ensure they were actively looking for work. He changed Canada’s equalization formula when Ontario became a have-not province.

The fourth is his obduracy on climate change. While other nations cleaned up their act, Harper broke Ottawa’s global commitments, ignored its emission-reduction targets and made no effort to put a price on pollution. The payback for sacrificing Canada’s reputation as a responsible member of the global community? A commodity the industry can’t sell in an oil-saturated world.

The fifth is his attempt to smear and silence charities. No prime minister has ever resorted to auditing charities that don’t share the government’s ideology or objectives. Since 2012, the Canada Revenue Agency has targeted more than 50 environmental organizations, anti-poverty groups, foreign aid providers and left-leaning think-tanks. Even people who don’t belong to — or donate to — these charities are disturbed by the lengths to which Harper will go to get his way.

The sixth is the prime minister’s contempt for Canada’s democratic institutions. He has shut down the House of Commons repeatedly, jammed dozens of pieces of legislation into a few massive take-it-or-leave-it omnibus bills, fired public watchdogs, refused to allow parliamentarians to scrutinize government spending, withheld public information, gagged federal scientists and replaced Canada’s detailed census with an unreliable household survey. Under Harper, Ottawa has become increasingly opaque, inaccessible and unaccountable.

Finally, there is his chilly, inscrutable persona. If Canadians liked Harper better — even knew him better — they might be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt when things go wrong. But after three mandates, he remains a closed book.

It is unfortunate the nation can’t separate the prime minister’s policy miscalculations from the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune. But he chose his style of leadership. He picked his tactics. He assumed the goodwill of the people was expendable.

Carol Goar’s column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
 
Do Greenhouse Gases Affect Antarctica? NASA Empirical Evidence Proves They Don't

chartCAGW proponents have a long-held belief that CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases are rapidly warming the Antarctica continent along with the surrounding oceans...further, this out-of-control warming is quickly melting sea ice and the South Pole's massive ice sheets...turns out, it's a case of unrepentant denial of climate reality.....

Way back in 1988, a NASA climate expert gave testimony that the 'high latitudes' (i.e. polar) would experience greater warming due to growth of human greenhouse gases (GHGs), including CO2 emissions.

This prediction was seized upon by global warming advocates as "proof" that the South Pole's unprecedented warming would melt sea ice and cause melting ice sheets to collapse, raising ocean levels and thus submerging worldwide coastal areas.

Indeed, there is strong evidence that GHGs have risen considerably - even to a greater extent then the feared 'business-as-usual' scenario NASA/GISS experts promulgated.

Yet the newest empirical research completely counters the fears and beliefs of the CAGW crowd: over the satellite era, some 30+ years, Antarctica's ice sheets have slightly grown and the South Pole's sea ice extent is at record levels.

Then there is the proverbial elephant in the CAGW room: the Antarctica region is not warming, per the advanced satellite technology of NASA. Those stubborn facts are indisputable and unequivocal.

Yet, denial of this empirical scientific evidence remains widespread, preventing a rationale debate about the real implications of the ongoing natural climate change.
 
http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/01/14/B...ce=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=140115

A Closer, Deflating Look at BC's Natural Gas Jobs Claim
Green MLA Weaver calls LNG promises 'a message of hope wrapped in hyperbole.'
By Andrew MacLeod, Today, TheTyee.ca

The B.C. government's claim the industry will generate 100,000 jobs appears to be overly optimistic for various reasons. Worker photo via Shutterstock.

The British Columbia government is sticking to its prediction that a new liquefied natural gas industry will generate 100,000 jobs in the province, but the public shouldn't get the impression all those positions will exist at any one time -- or come anywhere close to that once the anticipated gas plants are built.

"I wouldn't hang my hat on any of this," said Andrew Weaver, Green party MLA, noting that falling gas prices, decision delays and international competition are working against establishing the industry in B.C. "No longer is it a certainty."

Premier Christy Clark and her BC Liberal party ran in the 2013 election on a platform that emphasized LNG's potential to create huge numbers of jobs and eliminate the province's debt. The government halved its projected LNG revenue last fall, but has so far maintained its job creation projections.

Here's how Rich Coleman, the natural gas development minister, described the outlook in a Jan. 7 opinion piece circulated to B.C. media about the LNG industry: "Over time, we project as many as 100,000 new jobs could be created through diversification with the natural-gas sector."

There are 18 proposals for facilities that would export LNG, the Coleman piece said. They are at various stages, but the goal remains to have three facilities operating by 2020, it said.

The 100,000 number appears to be overly optimistic for various reasons. For one thing, it is based on five plants being built by 2023, which if Coleman's projection of three by 2020 is met, will require two more plants to be built in the following three years.

For another, it ignores that many of the jobs are temporary during construction and are projected to disappear once the plants are running. Nor does it allow for the current downturn in the oil and gas industry caused by falling prices, which has some companies delaying or cancelling development decisions.

So far, none of the LNG proponents have made a final investment decision that commits them to building a plant in B.C.

Premises, premises

It's worth examining a little more closely where the 100,000 jobs figure comes from.

Asked for the source for the figure, a Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training spokesperson cited an estimate created by the accounting and consulting firm KPMG and included in the provincial government's British Columbia 2022 Labour Market Outlook released in October.

"The 100,000 jobs would be made up of 58,700 direct and indirect construction jobs, 23,800 permanent direct and indirect jobs for operations and thousands of induced jobs as a result of households having more income," she wrote in an email.

Induced jobs are those created through the increased economic activity from a project, such as when demand for restaurant meals or entertainment grows as a result of people having money to spend.

The accounting and consulting firm Grant Thornton prepared an earlier estimate for how many LNG jobs B.C. might expect, which Focus magazine publisher David Broadland wrote appeared to be "fudged" to give the Liberals a talking point ahead of the 2013 election. KPMG's estimate is the most recent available to the public and arrives at similar figures to the Grant Thornton report.

The labour market outlook report that uses KPMG's figures says the 100,000 job projection was arrived at from information supplied by the companies proposing plants, 13 of which it lists. The projection is premised on a scenario where five LNG plants with a total production capacity of 82 million tonnes a year are built by 2023.

Temporary jobs

The labour market outlook report makes clear that many of the construction jobs are temporary and will disappear as plants go into operation. There is no year where the total jobs, expressed as full-time equivalents, add up to more than 100,000.

In the peak construction year 2018, for example, KPMG estimates there will be 58,700 direct and indirect construction jobs, but there will only be 500 direct and indirect operations jobs that year. There will also eventually be 13,000 "induced jobs as a result of households having more income," it said.

Adding the three figures for 2018 together, which charitably assumes all the "induced" jobs will exist by then, gives a total of 72,200 jobs.

Looking ahead to 2023, KPMG anticipates more operations jobs, but fewer in construction. By that year there would be 28,200 construction jobs, 23,800 in operations, plus the 13,000 "induced" jobs. That adds up to 65,000 jobs.

ChristyClarkLNGSign_600px.jpg
Clark's LNG industry, once billed as 'clean,' is no longer a certainty, according to Green MLA Andrew Weaver. Photo by David P. Ball.

Both the 2018 and 2013 figures represent a significant number of jobs, but they are also about 30 per cent short of the 100,000 number trumpeted by Coleman and Clark.

Assuming all five plants included for the estimate are built, the demand for labour will drop once they are up and running, according to KPMG. "Once all five plants are in full production by 2027, the steady state direct workforce demand for operations is expected to be 8,000 to 9,000 jobs."

That's in line with recent information from proponents. Exxon Mobil Corp. and its Canadian subsidiary Imperial Oil Ltd. filed a project description for West Coast Canada LNG on Jan. 8 with the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office. The 141-page document predicts the 15 million tonnes-per-year plant will require up to 6,000 construction workers at its peak, but says that will drop to about 300 jobs once it is operational.

'Hope wrapped in hyperbole': Weaver

What then counts as 100,000 jobs? Is it fair to add jobs projected for one year to others that aren't expected to exist until five years later? Or to include ones that are temporary? The Jobs Ministry spokesperson didn't respond to emailed followup questions.

"When people think 100,000 jobs, they think 100,000 permanent jobs," said the Green party's Weaver.

Weaver has called the LNG plan a "pipe dream," and continues to question whether it can live up to the hype.

"It was a message of hope wrapped in hyperbole," Weaver said, adding the Liberal government is giving away the public resource too cheaply in an attempt to make good on promises they made during the 2013 election campaign.

Prices for natural gas have decreased globally in recent months, along with the price of oil. And there is stiff competition from Russia, Australia, the United States and Qatar, each of which has advantages over B.C., he said.

"There simply is not a demand globally for five LNG plants in B.C.," he said. "We have a glut of a product in global supply where we are really small players."

Last fall, Weaver was the only MLA to vote against the legislation that set up a tax regime for the industry. "I shouldn't have been the only person voting to delay this," he said.
 
Graph that i missed.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 22
http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/01/14/B...ce=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=140115

A Closer, Deflating Look at BC's Natural Gas Jobs Claim
Green MLA Weaver calls LNG promises 'a message of hope wrapped in hyperbole.'
By Andrew MacLeod, Today, TheTyee.ca
Share article via email Print this article
ConstructionWorker_600px.jpg
The B.C. government's claim the industry will generate 100,000 jobs appears to be overly optimistic for various reasons. Worker photo via Shutterstock.

Related
BC's LNG Strategy Is Not Climate Friendly
Despite environment minister's claims, it won't displace coal in Asia.
BC Halves Projected LNG Revenue
Finance minister says lower tax rate necessary because 'the market's changed.'
Premier's LNG Dreams Given Reality Check By Japanese Expert
Visiting from Tokyo, Dr. Ken Koyama says BC faces 'severe' competition in selling gas to Asia.
Read more: Energy, BC Politics
The British Columbia government is sticking to its prediction that a new liquefied natural gas industry will generate 100,000 jobs in the province, but the public shouldn't get the impression all those positions will exist at any one time -- or come anywhere close to that once the anticipated gas plants are built.

"I wouldn't hang my hat on any of this," said Andrew Weaver, Green party MLA, noting that falling gas prices, decision delays and international competition are working against establishing the industry in B.C. "No longer is it a certainty."

Premier Christy Clark and her BC Liberal party ran in the 2013 election on a platform that emphasized LNG's potential to create huge numbers of jobs and eliminate the province's debt. The government halved its projected LNG revenue last fall, but has so far maintained its job creation projections.

Here's how Rich Coleman, the natural gas development minister, described the outlook in a Jan. 7 opinion piece circulated to B.C. media about the LNG industry: "Over time, we project as many as 100,000 new jobs could be created through diversification with the natural-gas sector."

There are 18 proposals for facilities that would export LNG, the Coleman piece said. They are at various stages, but the goal remains to have three facilities operating by 2020, it said.

The 100,000 number appears to be overly optimistic for various reasons. For one thing, it is based on five plants being built by 2023, which if Coleman's projection of three by 2020 is met, will require two more plants to be built in the following three years.



For another, it ignores that many of the jobs are temporary during construction and are projected to disappear once the plants are running. Nor does it allow for the current downturn in the oil and gas industry caused by falling prices, which has some companies delaying or cancelling development decisions.

So far, none of the LNG proponents have made a final investment decision that commits them to building a plant in B.C.

Premises, premises

It's worth examining a little more closely where the 100,000 jobs figure comes from.

Asked for the source for the figure, a Jobs, Tourism and Skills Training spokesperson cited an estimate created by the accounting and consulting firm KPMG and included in the provincial government's British Columbia 2022 Labour Market Outlook released in October.

"The 100,000 jobs would be made up of 58,700 direct and indirect construction jobs, 23,800 permanent direct and indirect jobs for operations and thousands of induced jobs as a result of households having more income," she wrote in an email.

Induced jobs are those created through the increased economic activity from a project, such as when demand for restaurant meals or entertainment grows as a result of people having money to spend.

The accounting and consulting firm Grant Thornton prepared an earlier estimate for how many LNG jobs B.C. might expect, which Focus magazine publisher David Broadland wrote appeared to be "fudged" to give the Liberals a talking point ahead of the 2013 election. KPMG's estimate is the most recent available to the public and arrives at similar figures to the Grant Thornton report.

The labour market outlook report that uses KPMG's figures says the 100,000 job projection was arrived at from information supplied by the companies proposing plants, 13 of which it lists. The projection is premised on a scenario where five LNG plants with a total production capacity of 82 million tonnes a year are built by 2023.

Temporary jobs

The labour market outlook report makes clear that many of the construction jobs are temporary and will disappear as plants go into operation. There is no year where the total jobs, expressed as full-time equivalents, add up to more than 100,000.

In the peak construction year 2018, for example, KPMG estimates there will be 58,700 direct and indirect construction jobs, but there will only be 500 direct and indirect operations jobs that year. There will also eventually be 13,000 "induced jobs as a result of households having more income," it said.

Adding the three figures for 2018 together, which charitably assumes all the "induced" jobs will exist by then, gives a total of 72,200 jobs.

Looking ahead to 2023, KPMG anticipates more operations jobs, but fewer in construction. By that year there would be 28,200 construction jobs, 23,800 in operations, plus the 13,000 "induced" jobs. That adds up to 65,000 jobs.

ChristyClarkLNGSign_600px.jpg
Clark's LNG industry, once billed as 'clean,' is no longer a certainty, according to Green MLA Andrew Weaver. Photo by David P. Ball.

Both the 2018 and 2013 figures represent a significant number of jobs, but they are also about 30 per cent short of the 100,000 number trumpeted by Coleman and Clark.

Assuming all five plants included for the estimate are built, the demand for labour will drop once they are up and running, according to KPMG. "Once all five plants are in full production by 2027, the steady state direct workforce demand for operations is expected to be 8,000 to 9,000 jobs."

That's in line with recent information from proponents. Exxon Mobil Corp. and its Canadian subsidiary Imperial Oil Ltd. filed a project description for West Coast Canada LNG on Jan. 8 with the B.C. Environmental Assessment Office. The 141-page document predicts the 15 million tonnes-per-year plant will require up to 6,000 construction workers at its peak, but says that will drop to about 300 jobs once it is operational.

'Hope wrapped in hyperbole': Weaver

What then counts as 100,000 jobs? Is it fair to add jobs projected for one year to others that aren't expected to exist until five years later? Or to include ones that are temporary? The Jobs Ministry spokesperson didn't respond to emailed followup questions.

"When people think 100,000 jobs, they think 100,000 permanent jobs," said the Green party's Weaver.

Weaver has called the LNG plan a "pipe dream," and continues to question whether it can live up to the hype.

"It was a message of hope wrapped in hyperbole," Weaver said, adding the Liberal government is giving away the public resource too cheaply in an attempt to make good on promises they made during the 2013 election campaign.

Prices for natural gas have decreased globally in recent months, along with the price of oil. And there is stiff competition from Russia, Australia, the United States and Qatar, each of which has advantages over B.C., he said.

"There simply is not a demand globally for five LNG plants in B.C.," he said. "We have a glut of a product in global supply where we are really small players."

Last fall, Weaver was the only MLA to vote against the legislation that set up a tax regime for the industry. "I shouldn't have been the only person voting to delay this," he said.
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north...arctic-for-longer-lasting-ice-study-1.2900256

Polar bears migrate to Canadian Arctic for longer lasting ice: study
Study used DNA from nearly 2,800 bears in the U.S., Russia, Canada, Greenland and Norway
Thomson Reuters Posted: Jan 14, 2015 8:34 AM CT Last Updated: Jan 14, 2015 8:34 AM CT

Bear clusters from Canada's eastern Arctic area and a marine area off eastern Greenland and Siberia are journeying to the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, where ice is more abundant, a new study found.

Bear clusters from Canada's eastern Arctic area and a marine area off eastern Greenland and Siberia are journeying to the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, where ice is more abundant, a new study found. (The Associated Press)

The study published earlier this month in the journal PLOS ONE was based on DNA taken from nearly 2,800 polar bears in countries where the animals live — the United States, Russia, Canada, Greenland and Norway.

Researchers tracked the shift through genetic similarity in bears among four regions.

Bear clusters from Canada's eastern Arctic area and a marine area off eastern Greenland and Siberia are journeying to the Canadian Archipelago, also known as the Arctic Archipelago, where ice is more abundant, the study found.

The channels through the islands, known as the Northwest Passages, have come to be seen as a potentially valuable shipping route as Arctic ice melts.

The region that has attracted a larger number of polar bears sits north of the Canadian mainland, close to Nunavut and the Northwest Territories. It is comprised of more than 36,000 islands and covers more than 1.4 million square km.

The migration has occurred during the last one to three generations of the predators, or between 15 and 45 years, U.S. Geological Survey researcher Elizabeth Peacock, the study's lead author, said in a statement.

The bears choose this area because that is "where the sea is more resilient to summer melt due to circulation patterns, complex geography and cooler northern latitudes," Peacock said.

The Canadian Archipelago could serve as a future refuge for polar bears, who rely on Arctic ice to cross between land masses, to forage and to mate, according to the researchers.

Since 1979, the spatial extent of Arctic sea-ice in autumn has declined by over 9 percent per decade through 2010, the researchers said, adding that recent modelling predicts that nearly ice-free summers will characterize the Arctic before mid-century.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top