Friends of the Lubicon
PO Box 444 Stn D,
Etobicoke ON M9A 4X4
Tel: (416) 763-7500
Email: fol (at) tao (dot) ca
www.lubicon.ca
March 11, 2008
The attached article was the lead article on the front page of the March 10th edition of the Toronto Globe and Mail newspaper. Banner headlines. The Globe and Mail is considered Canada's primo newspaper. It is considered the Canadian version of the New York Times. It is considered Canada's main establishment newspaper. It is Canada's only so-called "national newspaper". If the Toronto Globe and Mail characterizes Canada's new green plan as "tough", well, the Toronto Globe and Mail is after all only a Canadian newspaper...
Only in Canada would an 18 percent a year per barrel "intensity target" by 2010 -- plus an ephemeral 2 per cent per barrel more a year to 2020 reviewable in 2012 just to ensure that there are no so-called "unintended consequences" of imposing such an "intensity target" -- be considered "tough".
Hell the oil companies are proposing "tough new intensity targets". That's where the governments of Canada and Alberta get the idea of "intensity targets". So-called "intensity targets" means that the oil companies can keep producing more and more tar sands oil, and generating more and more green house gas emissions, just as long as they can somehow conjure up some way of showing that they are generating less green house gas emissions on a percentage basis per barrel of production. (The Canadian Environment Minister acknowledges that the Canadian government consulted "significantly" with the Alberta government in drafting the "tough new green plan intensity targets". The Alberta government in turn acknowledges that it consulted "significantly" with the oil industry.)
Imperial Oil recently "promised" tough new per barrel "intensity targets" in a proposed new tar sands plant, for example -- approved by the Canadian Minister of Fisheries and Oceans upon the recommendation of a joint federal/provincial regulatory panel. The panel found that Imperial's promised "intensity targets" would reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per barrel "to a level of insignificance" despite the fact that the plant would in fact put an additional 3.7 million tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere a year -- the equivalent of 800,000 passenger cars. That's for only one of the myriad of proposed new tar sands plants. At that rate the sky is clearly the limit for overall Canadian green house gas emissions under Canada's "tough new green plan targets". (Overall green house gas emissions are of course what is causing the problem of global warming, not how much green house gas is being generated on a per barrel percentage basis.)
The Canadian Environment Minister says that Canada "will not be able to make our targets (of a 60 to 70 per cent reduction in overall green house gas emissions) by 2050" if it does not now impose these "tough new green plan intensity targets". The question is whether imposing an "intensity target" of a 18 per cent reduction per barrel of tar sands oil by 2010 will make it possible to ever achieve the goal of reducing overall green house gas emissions. Letting the oil industry keep producing more and more overall green house gas emissions doesn't seem like a very good way to get the oil industry to reduce overall green house gas emissions. (Putting the federal Minister's comments in perspective, Alberta recently announced what it called a "realistic and achievable" "climate change" plan based on "intensity targets". The new Provincial "climate change" plan "is supposed to reduce overall green house gas emissions by 14 per cent below 2005 levels by 2050" and openly contemplates significant increases in overall green house gas emissions in the interim.)
In 2002 the Kyoto agreement committed Canada to a 6 per cent reduction of overall green house gas emissions below 1990 levels by 2012. Not one of the more impressive national commitments made under the Kyoto agreement but a far sight better than the provincially targeted 14 per cent reduction below 2005 levels by 2050 with significant increases contemplated in the interim.
With no effort at regulation whatsoever, overall Canadian green house gas emissions ballooned 27 per cent above 1990 levels by 2004. These escalating increases in Canadian green house gas emissions are clearly related to production of tar sands oil. The Federal Environment Minister says "no sector in the economy, save for the oil sands, would grow more than 18 per cent over the next two years." Green house gas emissions from production of tar sands oil, however, is expected to increase to 25 per cent of total Canadian green house gas emissions by 2020 up from the current level of 18 per cent.
By way of comparison, overall green house gas emissions in the the villainous US had increased only 15 per cent by 2004 -- about half the magnitude of Canadian increases.
Between 2004 and 2005 the 15 original members of the European Union together reduced overall green house gas emissions by 8 per cent with Germany, Finland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, France, Luxembourg, Sweden and the UK all showing actual reductions in overall green house gas emissions.
Luxembourg's target is a 28 per cent reduction by 2012. The Germans and the Danes both target a 21 per cent overall reduction by 2012 and the Germans had already achieved a 17.2 per cent reduction by 2004. Austria's target is 13 per cent by 2012. The British target is an overall reduction of 12.5 per cent by 2012. The Czech and Slovak Republics, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and Slovenia all target an overall reduction of 8 per cent by 2012. Belgium's target is a 7.5 per cent reduction by 2012. The Italian target is a 6.5 per cent reduction by 2012. The Netherlands target is a 6 per cent reduction by 2012 and the Dutch reached nearly half of their goal by 2005. Finland's target is 0 per green house emissions by 2012 and the the Finns achieved a 14.6 per cent reduction by 2005. (The French also target 0 per cent overall green house gas emissions but are achieving their goal of 0 per cent overall green house gas emissions through development of worrisome nuclear energy.)
Then along comes Canada with an original commitment to reduce overall green house gas emissions by 6 per cent by 2012 about which absolutely nothing was done; a 27 per cent increase in overall green house emissions by 2004 and now "tough" new "intensity targets" that clearly allow for significant additional increases in the amount of green house gases being put into the atmosphere by production of tar sands oil -- combined of course with threats of "unintended consequences" if others attempt to limit green house gas emissions by prohibiting the use of tar sands oil because it generates significantly more green house gases than production of conventional oil.
Brian Laghi
Globe and Mail
March 10, 2008
OTTAWA – Ottawa will unveil new climate-change regulations this week that would force new oil sands projects and coal-fired electricity plants to capture and store the bulk of their greenhouse gases rather than spew them into the air.
The new rules are part of Environment Minister John Baird's plan to regulate 17 key industrial sectors, which include manufacturers of pulp and paper, cement and chemicals, as well as producers of mineral products like steel, aluminum and iron ore, among others.
"There's no doubt we're asking a lot of industry and a lot of Canadians but we believe Canadians are up to the challenge," Mr. Baird said Sunday.
Mr. Baird said Canada cannot meet its targets of reducing greenhouse gases if it does not compel capture and storage of the substances in the two key industries of coal-fired electricity and oil sands. Oil sands production alone is expected to create 25 per cent of Canada's carbon-dioxide emissions by 2020, up from the current level of about 18 per cent.
There's just no future for dirty coal," said Mr. Baird. "... The second big issue is the oil sands and we will not be able to make our targets for 2050, let alone 2020, unless we mandate carbon capture and storage of all the oil sands projects."
Canada has set a target of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions by 20 per cent below 2006 levels by the year 2020. It aims to cut emissions by 60-70 per cent by mid-century.
Mr. Baird will also elaborate this week on a previously announced industry-wide requirement that forces companies to reduce carbon emissions by 18 per cent by 2010 for every unit of production. They would then have to reduce emissions by 2 per cent for every year thereafter until 2020, although the regime would be reviewed in 2012.
Some critics have panned the 18-per-cent reduction idea because it does not require firms to cut overall output.
For example, an oil sands plant will be forced to cut greenhouse-gas production per barrel of oil, but it will still be allowed to increase the number of barrels of oil it puts out.
But Mr. Baird said that no sector in the economy, save for the oil sands, would grow by more than 18 per cent over the next two years.
He estimated that the cost to industries to implement new measures to reach their targets will be $25 per tonne of carbon dioxide by 2010, rising to $50 by 2016 and to $65 by 2020.
Companies that fail to meet their targets would face prosecution under the Criminal Code.
In the case of oil sands and coal plants, this week's announcement would force plants that have yet to hit the drawing board to store their emissions rather than allowing them to escape and increase the amount of gases tagged as the cause of global warming.
By contrast, oil sands firms that have been in operation since before 2004 would be subject to the 18-per-cent reduction regime, while more stringent targets would be applied on firms that have been established since 2004 and on plants that are in the construction process.
The new regulations are potentially controversial, particularly in Alberta, home of the oil sands. Mr. Baird said the federal government has consulted significantly with Alberta.
The Environment Minister also said the techniques to capture carbon gases and store them underground are proven and go beyond research and development.
"It's not a pie-in-the-sky dream. It's being done here," he said. "… It's proven technology that's being used today."
There are a number of ways in which carbon dioxide can be stored, a key one being to pump it underground.
Experts, however, say capture techniques are expensive and could drive up the cost of oil and gas.
This week's announcement will also include some form of a new carbon trading system, a plan to allow corporations to purchase so-called carbon offsets and a requirement that industries use cleaner-burning fuel to build their plants.
A warning from Ottawa
Ottawa has warned the U.S. government that a recently enacted energy bill could thwart the development of the oil sands by imposing strict greenhouse-gas emissions standards.
In a letter to U.S. Defence Secretary Robert Gates, Canadian Ambassador Michael Wilson said that an overly broad interpretation of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 could prevent the U.S. from purchasing fuel from Canada's oil sands.
Mr. Wilson noted that Canada has surpassed Saudi Arabia as the United States' largest source of imported oil, and that the oil sands are the primary source of those growing volumes.
"Both President [George W.] Bush and Energy Secretary [Samuel] Bodman have publicly welcomed expanded oil sands production, given the increased contribution to U.S. energy security," the ambassador said.
Environmentalists and even some industry analysts have long warned that Canada's oil sands producers face a growing threat from the United States, where Democrats in Congress and all leading contenders for the presidential nomination have promised to impose tough new rules to combat climate change.
What the provinces are doing
British Columbia
In 2008, Gordon Campbell's government introduced the country's first revenue-neutral carbon tax, pledging that the revenues created by the tax will be returned in the form of income and business tax cuts. The tax takes effect as of July 1, starting at a base rate of $10 a tonne for carbon emissions, rising to $30 a tonne by 2012. The province's goal is to reduce carbon emissions by 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020, and 80 per cent below 2007 levels by 2050.
Manitoba
In 2008 the province, along with B.C., Ontario and Quebec announced an initiative to establish a market-based trading system to cut greenhouse-gas emissions. The cap-and-trade system would penalize companies that exceed their limits, and would pay a fee to those whose emissions are under their limit. The province, along with B.C., has already committed to the cap-and-trade system through the Western Climate Initiative pact signed by the two provinces and five U.S. states, which aims to cut emissions by 15 per cent below 2005 levels by 2020.
Ontario
In 2007 the McGuinty government announced that the province will cut its greenhouse-gas emissions to 6 per cent below 1990 levels by 2014, 15 per cent by 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050. The government also announced it will close its four remaining coal-fired power plants. In 2008 the Premier appointed a climate czar to make sure the government's environmental plans are carried out.
Quebec
In 2007 the Quebec government announced the first carbon tax in Canada. Oil companies in Quebec will be required to pay a new energy tax of 0.8 cents a litre for gasoline distributed in the province and 0.938 cents for diesel fuel. The province's Green Plan announced in June of 2006 calls for the province to meet the Kyoto target of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions to 6 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012.
Compiled by Rick Cash
The industries
The 17 industries that are included in the federal government's greenhouse-gas regulations, to be announced this week, include:
Electricity generation
Oil sands
Upstream oil and gas
Pipelines
Refineries
Pulp and paper production
Iron
Iron ore pelletizing
Smelting
Aluminum
Steel
Titanium
Cement
Lime
Potash
Chemicals
Fertilizers
fol-request at masses.tao.ca