THE GALLON
ENVIRONMENT LETTER
Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment
Fisherville, Ontario, Canada
Tel. 416 410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231
Vol. 14, No. 6, August 18, 2009
Honoured Reader Edition
****************************************************
This is the honoured reader edition of the Gallon Environment Letter and is
distributed at no charge: send a note with Add GL or Delete GL in the subject
line to subscriptions@gallonletter.ca. Subscribers receive a more complete
edition without subscription reminders and with extensive links to further
information following almost every article. Organizational subscriptions are
$184 plus GST nd provide additional benefits detailed on the web site. Individual
subscriptions are only $30 (personal emails/funds only please) including GST.
If you would like to subscribe please visit http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
If you feel you should be receiving the paid subscriber edition or have other
subscriber questions please contact us also at subscriptions@gallonletter.ca.
This current free edition is posted on the web site about a week or so after
its issue at http://www.cialgroup.com/whatsnew.htm. See also events of external
organizations at http://www.cialgroup.com/events.htm
Back free editions from January 2007 are also available.
***************************************************
ABOUT THIS ISSUE
In this issue we have sought to provide an in-depth but high level overview
of the current state of knowledge regarding non-renewable and renewable fuels.
This fall, the Copenhagen conference on climate change, the 15th
Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change scheduled for December 7 to 18, is likely to mean that energy issues
dominate the environmental policy agenda. Gallon Environment Letter is not
expecting much in the way of agreement on a post-Kyoto strategy in Copenhagen
but we are somewhat more optimistic that Copenhagen will set the stage for an
accelerated schedule of negotiations which could lead to an agreement by fall of
2010.
Our high-level overview of energy looks at projections from the National
Energy Board, The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, and
many other sources. Trends are obvious and Canada's problem is illustrated by
our willingness to join China, Russia, Mexico and Saudia Arabia as countries not
participating in the new International Renewable Energy Agency. We also provide
a brief overview of the new Ontario Green Energy Act, legislation which removes
citizen freedom of information and right to environmental assessment. It is
amazing how ready some governments and some energy and environmental activists
are to remove hard won environmental assessment and public participation
programs. Our review of some of the issues associated with wind power
illustrates why we think the Ontario government initiative to remove
requirements for environmental assessment from such installations is a bad
idea.
Energy is such a comprehensive topic that it can lead to
entire books, and in this issue we briefly review one good one, Sustainable
Energy - without the hot air, by Professor David MacKay. The extent of the topic
also means that it has taken up the entire space of this issue of Gallon
Environment Letter. Next issue we will look again at some of the environmental
aspects of cities and catch up on some of the news that has been happening over
the summer.
****************************************************
NO TRUE GREEN SHOOTS, AT LEAST NOT
YET
Last year, as the recession deepened and environment remained a more high
profile public policy issue than in any previous economic downturn, there was
some hope that economic recovery might come with a real move to a greener
economy. Now, as economists increasingly talk about the 'green shoots' of an
economic recovery, it is clear that, growth, at least in Canada, is likely to be
comprised mostly of the same old environmentally destructive industries as have
existed in the past. This is despite the fact that both the environmental and
economic signals are pointing towards the need for change.
Regular readers of Gallon Environment Letter are well aware that signals of
a climate 'tipping point' are becoming more clear, that water supplies are
depleting to critical levels in many parts of the world, that surface waters are
experiencing contamination with potentially endocrine disrupting substances,
that the battle against air pollution is failing in many major cities and in
downwind rural areas, and that, globally, generation of waste is increasing.
Technology exists to address many of these problems yet reinvestment is going at
least as much to older polluting technologies as it is to the technologies that
can improve environmental quality and quality of life. There is not enough being
done in North America to educate investors on the opportunities in the field of
greener technology.
The economic signals are even more interesting. In the last month many
publicly-traded companies have been reporting their second quarter financial
results. Quite a number have reported increased profits arising from lower
sales. It is too early to declare a trend but if the phenomenon continues, it
may suggest that a number of otherwise environmentally disinterested CEOs have
stumbled into one of the basic concepts of ecoefficiency or Sustainable
Development. Sustainable Development does not mean constraint on absolute
economic growth but it does mean constraining use of non-renewable resources and
getting maximum value out of the smallest amount of material. If CEOs see
increased profits after eliminating material inefficiencies then perhaps they
will be encouraged in future to do more to reduce, reuse, and recycle in ways
that will, over the long term, reduce costs and increase profits.
It is truly disappointing to see how little green leadership is being
provided by Canada's political leaders. Spending of so-called 'infrastructure
funding' provides an ideal opportunity for senior governments to require
municipal governments and the private and non-profit sectors to improve the
environmental performance of projects. Regrettably, this ball has been dropped
and many of the projects being funded are likely to meet bare minimum
environmental standards. Not only will this further impair Canada's
environmental quality but it will increase operating costs in the future,
contributing to tax increases and higher user fees.
At this stage it is difficult to compare Canada's performance in greening
the economic recovery with that of other countries but anecdotal evidence from
western Europe and from the US indicates that we are lagging. The food industry
is a major component of economic recovery in Europe and is moving strongly
towards innovative lower-environmental-impact packaging and storage systems.
Major efforts are being put into reducing waste and using all edible components
of farm production. As a result, food self-sufficiency is substantially
increasing in Europe. Both Europe and the US are increasing renewable energy use
in a much more aggressive way than Canada. Our failure to launch a crash program
for renewable energy may yet prove to be one of our largest mistakes in
re-empowering our economy.
Colin Isaacs
Editor
****************************************************
ALTERNATIVE
ENERGY
****************************************************
Our extensive use of non-renewable energy is one of our most
environmentally damaging activities, contributing to such results as climate
change, air pollution, loss of biodiversity, social injustice and social and
economic inequality for many people in developing countries. Renewable energy
can help solve these issues and can also contribute to a greener economy. Energy
efficiency and energy conservation are also often considered to be alternate
sources of energy, sometimes expressed as 'negawatts', or provision of new
energy supply through elimination of wastage of energy. Sooner or later,
depletion of conventional energy resources will force global conversion to new
forms of energy. The only non-renewable energy sources that are not facing major
depletion within this century are coal and fissionable materials, primarily
uranium, for nuclear power plants.
The list of terms for alternative energy is wide-ranging and often applies
a different mix of sources, differing also in geographic regions. Terms might
include renewable, ecoenergy, clean, green, sustainable, low-emitting,
low-carbon, zero emissions and unconventional. Fossil fuels, waste to energy and
nuclear energy are often included in the definitions, for example
as-yet-distant-carbon capture and sequestration CCS such as CCS coal ("clean
coal") or other fossil fuel power generation. For developing countries, just
improving the energy efficiency of fossil fuel power sources rather than
renewables might be in the cards for decades as our story on India
illustrates. In this GL, we will touch on some of the differing definitions for
energy of the future. GL also explores some of the issues which suggest while it
is important and critical that the world moves towards alternative energy, there
is still a lot of learning and R&D required along the way in order to
implement sustainable energy and to avoid creating even more problems.
****************************************************
WHY FOSSIL FUELS HAVE TO BE LIMITED: 2
DEG C OR SO GLOBAL TEMPERATURE
The G8 meeting held last month declared that "We recognise the
broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above
preindustrial levels ought not to exceed 2°C. Because this global challenge can
only be met by a global response, we reiterate our willingness to share with all
countries the goal of achieving at least a 50% reduction of global emissions by
2050, recognising that this implies that global emissions need to peak as soon
as possible and decline thereafter. As part of this, we also support a goal of
developed countries reducing emissions of greenhouse gases in aggregate by 80%
or more by 2050 compared to 1990 or more recent years." They also said they
would meet mid-term reductions not specified. Other parts of the declaration
related to energy such as energy efficiency, renewable energy and moving away
from fossil fuels.
Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the Nobel-Prize-winning Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said at a press conference that the G8 pledges
are fine as far as they go but there are "glaring gaps." The aspirational goal
is for 2050 but the IPCC's formula shows that to keep the temperature increase
to 2 deg C, emissions must peak no later than 2015. The G8 has no roadmap to
match the aspirational goal to action. Clean technologies that can contribute to
the aspirational goal are already available or on the verge of
commercialization.
In the face of considerable uncertainty, even 2 deg C cannot be regarded as
"safe" as small islands threatened with inundation are telling the world. A
letter to Nature in April with lead author Malte Meinshausen of the Potsdam
Institute for Climate Research in Germany gives a mathematical picture of
reducing emissions to heading off dangerous climate change. The calculations
based on published climate sensitivity studies show that the probability of
exceeding 2 deg C can be limited to below 25%* if the cumulative CO2 emissions
in the years 2000-2049 from fossil fuels and land changes (e.g. deforestation)
are below 1,000 Gt CO2. The researchers explored what would happen if all the
proven fossil fuel reserves (defined as those which are economically recoverable
with current technologies and prices) were burned. Again using the published
literature, they used a mid-estimate of 2,800 Gt CO2 estimate which would
"vastly exceed" the allowable CO2 emission budget.
About 234 Gigatonnes of CO2 were emitted between 2000-2006. Assuming
constant rates of 36.3 Gt CO2 yr and a probability of 25% for exceeding the 2
deg C, the CO2 budget would be exhausted by 2027. Carbon dioxide is the main
greenhouse gas but other gases covered by Kyoto protocol such as methane are
also presented. The researchers estimate that the probability of exceeding 2 deg
C is 75%** if 2020 emissions are not lower than 50 Gt CO2 equivalent (25% above
2000). They conclude, "Given the substantial recent increase in fossil CO2
emission (20% between 2000 and 2006), policies to reduce global emissions are
needed urgently if below 2 deg C target is to remain achievable."
*the literature range of probability of exceeding 2 deg C was between
10-42%; 25% was chosen as an illustrative default case.
**the literature range of probability of exceeding 2 deg C was between
53-87%; 75% was chosen as an illustrative default case.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
EXXON MOBIL: MOSTLY FOSSILS
BUT...
The world's largest publically-traded oil and gas company, Exxon Mobil, is
seeking technologies to locate and extract those oil and gas reserves which are
described as "unconventional" because of they are ""located in challenging
environments such as deepwater, heavy oil/oil sands, tight gas and Arctic
regions" or which need special recovery methods such as tight gas*, heavy oil
and oil sands. The company, which is known for its powerful lobbying against
action on climate change, sees these energy sources as key to the energy future
of the world. Exxon's Outlook for Energy which projects to 2030, says there must
be an expansion of all economically viable energy sources - oil, gas, coal,
nuclear and alternative and renewable sources such as wind and solar and
biofuels.
The company announced in July that it would invest in long term research
(GL notes the emphasis on long time into the future) with the biotech company,
Synthetic Genomics Inc. (SGI), to research and develop next generation biofuels
from photosynthetic algae. The capability of Exxon Mobil in fuel production,
transportation, distribution and at the pumps could bring biofuel in the form of
bio-oil into large scale use. Exxon also has other alternative energy interests
such as solar.
Exxon Mobil is also active in energy efficiency for its operations, which
in 2008 consumed approximately 1.5 billion gigajoules of energy. The company is
on track, it says, to improve energy efficiency of worldwide refining and
chemical operations by 10% between 2002 and 2012. Since 2004, it spent about
$1.5 billion to improve energy efficiency including for consumers and plans to
spend another $500 million over some unspecified time.
*Tight gas doesn't have a consistent definition but is natural gas in
reservoirs have low permeability requiring special technology such as horizontal
gas wells for extraction.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
WORLD BANK FUNDS MODERNIZATION OF
THREE COAL PLANTS IN INDIA
The Government of India has received a $180 million loan from the World
Bank and a $45 million grant from the Global Environment Facility. The funds are
for modernizing old and inefficient coal-fired plants. While India may move to
more alternate energy in the long term, its energy shortage is currently
hindering development. Forty percent of homes do not have electricity and 60% of
industrial power consumers use captive (e.g. textile factory generating its own
power) or backup generation (e.g. diesel generators). Roberto Zagha, World Bank
Country Director for India said, "More than 400 million people do not have
electricity in India. This is the same as switching off power for the combined
populations of the US, UK and France."
India set ambitious targets for universal power access by 2012. The policy
is showing results including less system losses and power exchanges between
regions and states. The aim is to add 80000 MW of additional capacity by 2012,
renovate 27,000 MW of old coal-fired generation plants and increase efficiency
of transmission and distribution. Demand side measures such as energy efficient
gadgets for consumers are also targeted.
India's installed electricity capacity is 145,000 MW. Electricity
contributes 50% of India's carbon emissions due to indigenous coal generation
and small inefficient and polluting back-up generators. About 80% of electricity
comes from coal-fired plants of which about a third are inefficient. This
funding for the renovations of three coal-fired plants with 200-220 MW capacity
each is expected to increase their efficiency by 10-15% and reduce direct
greenhouse gas emissions by almost half a million tons of CO2 equivalent
annually. The work funded by the World Bank and the GEF will also improve
particulate emissions, water treatment and ash disposal.
Coal is likely to continue to be a major source of electricity and is
expected to account for nearly 42% of total energy consumption; in other
scenarios as much as 65% of total energy is coal. Currently other fossil fuels
gas and diesel supply about 16,000 MW, nuclear 4000 MW, large hydro 36,000 and
other renewables about 12,000 MW.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
CANADA'S NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD: TRENDS
IN GOVERNMENT POLICY
Canada's National Energy Board has issued a report which identifies the
following as a trend in government policy, "Energy and the environment are
becoming increasingly interconnected. Indications suggest that North America is
on the cusp of significant environmental policy changes. These changes could
have a profound influence on how Canadians produce and consume energy."
Among these policies and announcements have been:
- The US federal cap-and-trade legislation.
- The Canadian federal government details for industrial GHG emissions in
the Regulatory Framework for Industrial Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
- The participation of four Canadian provinces and seven US states in the
Western Climate Initiative* developing a regional cap and trade system.
- vehicle fuel economy standards for North America
- Low Carbon Fuel standard. Both the Ontario and British Columbia
governments have indicated that they will adopt California's Low Carbon Fuel
Standard.**
- provincial policy directives: BC Energy Plan, Alberta's Climate Change and
Emissions Management Amendment Act and Manitoba's Beyond Kyoto.
- most provinces have an energy efficiency Act.
Many of these policies do not include operational programs but are seen as
indicative of future direction. Several key federal policies especially are not
final and in their stage of development lack the detail needed by the NEB to
create scenarios. The report also discusses stricter building codes, efficiency
standards for energy-using equipment, regulations promoting more use of
renewables, and the carbon tax in BC and Quebec.
*British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Arizona, California, Montana,
New Mexico, Oregon, Utah and Washington
** non-conventional oil like oil sands are presumed not to be comply but
the carbon intensity value must be documented and officially accepted or more
likely, not accepted..
NATIONAL ENERGY BOARD: ENERGY
MIX
The NEB, a federal government agency, projects energy use for the period
2007-2020. It points out that what actually happens depends on many trends such
as government programs and policies (see above), global energy supply, demand
and pricing, and technology development. The economic growth rates in China and
India of 7% annually between 2000-2007 increased global demand but the biggest
economic recession in 50 years has affected them as well.
While between 1990-2007 energy use increased by 1.6 % per year, the
2007-2020 estimate is lower at .7 % per year. Energy intensity or the energy
used per economic output is predicted to decrease by 1.3% per year. If the
slowing energy demand continues the greenhouse gas emission growth rate will be
lower than 1990-2007, but, according to the NEB, it will still be a growth rate.
Two thirds of total natural gas production compared to one third now will be
from shale and tight gas. Natural gas exports will stabilize rather than decline
sharply as was originally expected.
Conventional oil and gas production is expected to continue to decline.
While oils sands contribute less than 50% to Canada's production of oil now,
they are expected to contribute three quarters in the forecast period.
The retirement of Ontario's coal-fired power plants is expected to result
in lower GHG emission intensity from the electricity sector. Reduced demand for
electricity due to energy efficiency is also expected.
Fossil fuels will be the dominant form but increases in hydroelectric,
nuclear and natural gas capacity are expected. The share of unconventional
emerging technologies is expected to remain at less than 15% by 2020 but the
magnitude of these is projected to increase:
- wind capacity to form 10% of installed capacity by 2020.
- biomass, landfill gas, waste heat, solar and tidal also to increase
- carbon capture and storage CCS expected to be more broadly used for fossil
fuel generation.
- plug-in vehicles are not expected to change much of the vehicle fuel mix
by 2020.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
NRTEE: CARBON PRICING TO FOSTER LOW-EMITTING
TECHNOLOGIES
Canada's and the world's economy needs to be decoupled from its reliance on
fossil fuels, Canada's National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy
wrote in its report on carbon pricing, "The scale of the transformation and the
underlying technology deployment to achieve this decoupling should not be
underestimated. The necessary investment throughout the economy may need to
increase by $2.2 billion per year in the medium-term and $2 billion per year
thereafter." This could mean that capital expenditures on low-emitting
technology would be 5% higher annually than they otherwise would have been
between now and 2030, and 7% higher annually in the longer-term. Much of these
expenditures must occur in the electricity generation and biofuels manufacturing
sectors with significant outlays in industrial sectors for CCS (carbon capture
and sequestration). While most sectors can expect an increase in investments,
decreased investment in the transportation sector is also likely due to a shift
toward smaller, less expensive vehicles as well as movement toward greater use
of public transportation.
Some of the technology trends identified include:
- increased electrification in industry, transport and buildings using more
non-fossil fuel generated electricity including CCS, hydroelectric power,
nuclear and renewables which means electricity will cost more.
- more investment in biofuels and electricity generation as demand increases
and less demand for industrial mineral and petroleum refining.
- more energy use to capture and transport carbon for storage.
- no single technology will provide all the required emission reductions but
almost all available technologies must be available on the market.
- accelerate low emission trends in key sectors such as buildings, pulp and
paper, transportation, aluminum manufacturing, and goods and services. Current
hybrid electric vehicles are seen as a transition to plug-in hybrids and zero
emission electric vehicles and current biofuels will be phased out as
next-generation biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol is accelerated. due to
carbon pricing.
A lot of uncertainty is inherent in these scenarios: government shouldn't
pick winners but allow a broad range of technologies to emerge but on the other
hand, government needs to ensure the specific barriers and potentials are
addressed with support. Carbon pricing alone will be insufficient to drive the
transformation needed. A full permit auctioning system could generate $18
billion or 16% of total government receipts and can be used wisely to meet the
sustainability goals.
National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy. Achieving 2050: a
Carbon Pricing Policy for Canada. Ottawa, Ontario: April 2009.
****************************************************
CANADA DECLINES TO JOIN NEW
INTERNATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY AGENCY
The founding conference of the International Renewable Energy Agency
(IRENA) was held in Bonn, Germany in January 2009. As of June 30, 136 countries
joined, including EU countries, the US, Japan, Australia, India, Chile, Jordan
and Kenya. Among those not joining were Canada, China, Russia, Mexico and Saudi
Arabia. The goal is to foster the widespread and sustainable use of renewable
energy worldwide in both industrialized and developing countries.
Ms. Hélène Pelosse is the interim Director-General, she was in the office
of the French Minister for Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development and Town and
Country Planning and designed the Renewable Energy Plan for France. The new home
of the agency is in Abu Dhabi, the capital of the United Arab Emirates while
Bonn, Germany will host IRENA's centre of technology and innovation and Vienna,
Austria will host the liaison office linking to other international
agencies.
MOVING AWAY FROM OIL, GAS AND
COAL
According to the brochure produced for the founding
conference, the world's energy needs could increase by 50% or more by 2030.
Greenhouse gas emissions will increase up to 60% by 2030 if current demand
continues. Over 1.6 billion people have no access to electricity and 2 billion
rely on wood and dung for energy. Traditional uses of biomass are often
inefficient and non-sustainable with pollution harming the environment and human
health. Conventional energy is priced without accounting for the environmental
and health costs. Renewable energy becomes competitive if these costs are
included in the price.
Renewable energy has to potential to supply many times the
current global demand. Renewables include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal,
ocean and wave energy, biofuels and hydro energy. Global renewable energy
capacity from 2002-2006 grew 15-30% annually for many technologies such as wind
power, solar hot water, geothermal heating and off-grid solar PV. Renewables
contributed 18% of global final energy consumption in 2006. Almost
three-quarters of the renewable energy contribution was due to traditional
biomass. Fossil fuels were 79% and nuclear 3%. In the last few years, the share
of renewables as a percentage of total global energy consumption has not
increased.
BARRIERS TO RENEWABLE
ENERGY
One of the roles of IRENA is to remove barriers to the global development
of renewable energy.
Structural political and market barriers: Fossil fuels have strong market
structures, powerful companies and financial subsidies and incentives. Costs for
these don't usually include the environmental and health costs and the companies
have control of the service and distribution infrastructure.
Lack of information: Needed are best practices for policies such as
legislation, market incentives and institutional frameworks, research,
requirements for the industry to prosper.
Technical know-how: New approaches to design and management of energy
systems and grids. Developing countries lack the resources to buy, install and
maintain the technology - they need not only market access but capacity to
produce the technology themselves and to use it.
An international organization such as IRENA is seen as being needed to
close the gap between what countries say they want to do and what needs to be
done.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
IRENA: CANADA'S GOVERNMENT DOESN'T
WANT TO JOIN
Membership in the new International Renewable Energy Agency was the subject
of a private member motion No. 295 moved by the "Hon. member for
Saint-Laurent-Cartierville" which read, "That, in the opinion of the House, the
government should increase its support of Canada's renewable energy sector,
allow our country to participate in the worldwide effort to develop renewable
energy sources and enlist Canada as a full member of the International Renewable
Energy Agency." Still green shifting, former Liberal leader Stéphane Dion who
moved the motion spoke on June 11 of the government's opposition to the motion,
"The government has two points against the motion. The government does not want
to be part of IRENA, the new international renewable energy agency, because it
claims it duplicates organizations that already exist. The government claims
that it is doing enough about renewable energy and feels it does not need to add
to that. All colleagues who have spoken about these points have made it very
clear how wrong the government is in its assertions. I do not want to repeat
many of them, but it is clear that IRENA is welcomed by the very organizations
that the government claims will be duplicated and overlapped. They are welcoming
IRENA as an umbrella institution that will coordinate the booming file of the
renewable energy sector. This argument does not hold. More countries are coming
to IRENA one after the other. Why would Canada be the last? Why is the
government always a laggard instead of a leader?"
He said that the programs the Conservatives had brought forward such as the
$3.6 billion ecoEnergy initiatives had been introduced by the Liberals and the
Conservatives rebranded them. Most of the clean technology investments
introduced by the government in 2009, he said, having nothing to do with
renewable energy. Of the $2.5 billion announced for clean energy over five
years, $800 million is for development and demonstration of large scale carbon
capture storage CSS projects, not renewable energy. To raise the current 73% of
electricity from non-emitting sources to the government target of 90% by 2020,
the government's plan is to use nuclear and CCS for coal, neither renewable
energy. Both nuclear and CCS have long timelines; it is impossible to build a
nuclear plant by then and CCS is even further away if ever. In contrast, wind
can be built now. ecoEnergy funding is likely to run out by the fall and the
government has taken no action to renew this program.
The Motion passed June 17, 2009 carried by the vote of 146-141.
Conservatives, including the Prime Minister, Environment Minister Jim Prentice
and Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt, voted nay. The speaker declared the
motion carried.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
ONTARIO'S GREEN ENERGY ACT: LOSS OF
DEMOCRACY OR JUSTIFIED URGENCY
The Ontario's Green Energy and Green Economy Act is lauded by the Canadian
Renewable Energy Alliance (CanREA) for its feed-in-tariff FIT program and fixed
premium rates for 20 year contracts, The program sets standards, standard contracts
and standard pricing by energy source or fuel type, generator capacity, and
which generation facility is used, deployed, installed or located. Transmitters
and distributors will be allowed to connect generation facilities to transmission
systems or distributions systems if specified criteria are satisfied. CanREA
said this would allow , "any renewable power system, from the smallest household
solar system to large off shore wind farms in the Great Lakes, to connect to
the grid and make a reasonable return on investment. The Ontario Power Authority
set new draft rules and prices July 10 and a streamlined FIT for small renewable
energy projects August 14. The Act also includes measures to accelerate the
adoption of energy conservation measures, including the labelling of homes and
buildings with their energy consumption."
Other say there may be a high cost to pay in terms of loss of public
involvement, increased government secrecy and lack of accountability, usually
not a good sign for protecting the environment. For example, a Renewable Energy
Facilitator Office will be set up to facilitate green energy projects and will
generally be exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.
The Act itself changes the following bills: Electricity Act, 1998, Ministry
of Energy Act, Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, Clean Water Act, 2006,
Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, Environmental Protection Act, Ontario Water
Resources Acts,Co-operative Corporations Act,,Building Code Act, 1992 and the
Planning Act.
Some of the regulations of the Green Energy Act posted until July 24 in the
Environmental Bill of Rights removes most renewable energy projects from the
environmental assessment process. While applicants for a renewable energy
facility have to meet the various requirements including public notice, posting
on the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry and public consultations and how
the public concerns are addressed, the right of appeal under the
Environmental Bill of Rights has been removed - instead third parties have
just 15 days to appeal from the date of notice of the Ministry of Environment
approval. Municipalities are already complaining that current deadlines
such as 30 days are insufficient for appeals. Facilities under the act include
landbased or off-shore turbines, biogas anaerobic digesters, biomass thermal
treatment, landfill gas facilities, hydro electric facilities and photovoltaics
and may include other operations. The exemption from the EA covers a number of
situations. Exempted are renewable facilities and testing facilities carried out
by the Crown, municipalities or public bodies. Also exempt are associated
elements such as access road, dock, disposition of crown land, and water
crossings. Waste disposal sites e.g. thermal treatment of biomass are also
exempt. New hydro electric facilities of 200
MW or larger and expansions to existing facilities that would result in a 25%
increase in capacity to 200 MW or larger will still require EAs.
Various elements of the Planning Act do not apply to renewable energy
projects, for example Section 24 which requires public works and by-laws to
conform with official plants, demolition control by-laws, zoning by-laws. Also
anybody handling goods or technologies under this legislation is exempt from
bylaws (except those required under provincial law), encumbrances on real
property or rules made by condominiums. The Association of Municipalities of
Ontario corresponded with City Councils about the regulation posted on the
Environmental Bill of Rights. Specifically AMO wanted:
- bylaws on tree-cutting, health and safety to continue in force
- projects proposed on heritage easements continue to be subject to Heritage
Trust approval [GL wonders whether conservation easements which landowners set
aside for ecological preservation might be not preserved when it comes to
green energy projects - no doubt we'll find out soon]
- exemptions should not be extended to biomass, biofuels, ground mount solar
or wind projects.
Mark Mattson, Waterkeeper and President of the environmental group Lake
Ontario Waterkeeper expressed a number of concerns regarding the fast tracking
of the bill which he suggested seemed to be run through the Green Energy Act
Alliance rather than the government. He objected to the characterization of
people as either for or against, say wind energy. He gave the example of the
Premier saying "NIMBYism will no longer prevail" and Minister Smitherman saying
that residents opposing industrial wind on the Scarborough Bluffs should know
that only safety and environmental concerns are legitimate objections, "by
inference this statement suggests that concerns about such wind plants are not
rooted in safety or environmental concerns." In regard to the revision of the
Planning Act, he wrote, "The removal of local power to control and plan the
environment via Official Plans and by-laws is an affront to the principles of
democracy. It removes the people with the most direct knowledge of an area and
those who will experience any consequences of a project from the decision-making
process. It goes against a fundamental principle of all green movements: think
globally but act locally."
GL is not sure what problems the Ontario government is trying to solve by
setting up yet another system, no doubt costly in administration, for project
approvals which purports to speed up the approval process so much that it
basically minimizes public oversight and puts an inordinate amount of power in
the hands of the minister. If the Environmental Assessment process is too slow,
there are many environmentally and socially important projects which are held up
not just green energy so fixing the EA process would be a better approach. The
green energy area is still relatively new and there is still much that we don't
know about what its impact are. Environmental assessments is a good mechanism
for analyzing and learning both what the impacts are and how to monitor and
mitigate them.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************~
TIDAL POWER
Nova Scotia Power operates one of three tidal power plants in
the world, according to the company. The Annapolis Tidal Power Plant began
operating in 1984 and has a capacity of 20 megawatts. While it used to be that
tidal power required a dam or land into which water could be funnelled into the
generating plant, new technologies use floating tidal turbine or turbines
anchored to the sea bottom.
In 2008, Minas Basin Pulp and Power was given the right to
construct a tidal power demonstration and research facility in the Bay of Fundy.
The Fundy Tidal Energy Demonstration Facility will have three underwater berths
for tidal in-stream energy conversion (tisec) devices is subject to
environmental assessment. The EA will evaluate impacts on the marine
environment, community acceptance and socio-economic benefits in the surrounding
areas. Factors in selection of the site will include ocean current, tidal flows,
sediment, seabed habitats, fisheries, ships, underground cables, ocean bottom
and water depth.
Three candidates, representing technologies from Canada, UK.
and Ireland, are in negotiations for first occupancy in the proposed
facility:
• Clean Current (Clean Current Turbine)
• Minas Basin Pulp and Power Co. Ltd. (Marine Current Turbines)
• Nova Scotia Power Inc. (OpenHydro Turbine)
The preliminaries of a public open house and environmental assessment are
in progress.
Seeing the tide come into the Bay of Fundy ought to be on one's 50 Things I
Must Do list. According to the Nova Scotia Department of Energy, "100 billion
tonnes of seawater flows in and out of the Bay of Fundy each tide cycle - more
than the combined flow of the world's fresh rivers. The vertical tidal range can
be over 50 feet - giving the Bay of Fundy the highest tides in the world. The
horizontal range can be as much as 5 kilometers, exposing vast areas of ocean
floor." The current is fast as much as 10 knots.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
THE ENERGY-WATER
NEXUS
Energy and water are linked and dependent as large quantities of water are
needed for the development of energy and energy is needed to pump, treat and
distribute water. Demand for both water and energy has created serious supply
constraints for both. The US Energy Information Administration is projecting the
need for 259 gigawatts of new electricity generating power between 2007 and 2030
or the equivalent of 259 large coal-fired power plants. The US Government
Accountability Office, a unique independent government service agency which
provides research advice to federal legislators on their request, has produced
some preliminary observations on links between water and biofuels and
electricity production. GAO reported on the energy-water nexus between three
issues:
1. biofuel and water
2. thermoelectric power plants and water and plans to report on
3. oil shale and water later.
Most of the ethanol produced in the US is 98% from corn produced in the
Midwest; the rest is soybeans. While data for corn ethanol and water use is
somewhat known, little is known about the next generation of feedstocks such as
cellulose or algae produced on the large scale. Water use for corn ethanol has a
wide range from 7 to 321 gallons of water needed at the corn production stage
per gallon of ethanol produced. The higher levels of water use are for areas
where irrigation is applied. About 3 gallons of water per gallon of ethanol
produced are needed at the conversion process. Breeding corn to use less
fertilizer and to be more drought tolerant could reduce the impact of
corn-ethanol on water and other resources. Improvement in corn ethanol
production has reduced the consumption of water but corn ethanol production uses
freshwater from local aquifers some of which are not replenished.
Cellulosic feedstocks include annual or perennial crops such as
switchgrass, forage sorghum, and miscanthus; agricultural residues such as corn
stover (the cobs, stalks, leaves, and husks of corn plants); and forest residues
such as forest thinnings or chips from lumber mills. While there are some pilot
cellulosic ethanol projects, there are no commercial-scale facilities in the US.
Federal renewable fuel standards for 2010 require cellulosic ethanol. The
Department of Energy is funding four small biorefineries for $272 million to use
cellulosic feedstocks.
While many assume that perennial feedstocks such as grasses will rely on
rain, others suggest that additional yield gains will require irrigation putting
increased pressure on water supply depending on geographic areas such as the
depleting Ogallala Aquifer serving eight states such as Nebraska. Using corn
stover and other agricultural waste will reduce organic material returned to the
soil reducing soil quality, increasing need for fertilizer and increasing
sediment runoff into streams, rivers and lakes. Researchers are working on
developing data to indicate how much residue needs to be left and what else
needs to be known to produce cellulosic feedstocks in a sustainable way.
Algae can produce oil for refining into biodiesel with a potential to yield
10 to 20 times per acre of other feedstocks. Cultivation can be in open ponds or
enclosed systems. Algae selected for high oil content may need to be produced in
closed systems to prevent the regular algae from taking over the pond. Even less
is known about algae than cellulosic feedstocks. Algae can be grown in low
quality water which is an advantage. Some of the issues still to be
addressed:
- how to extract the oil while retaining as much of the water as possible
for reuse in the cultivation process.
- how to manage the contaminant in algal cultivation water and how to handle
the wastewater.
WATER USE IN
BIOREFINERIES
For cellulosic conversion, current estimates are for 1.9 to 5.9 gallons of
water per gallon of ethanol depending on the technology. Siting facilities
should consider the impact on the local aquifers.
More research is needed on storage and distribution of biofuels. Ethanol is
highly corrosive so is a serious risk for damage to pipelines, underground and
above-ground storage tanks which may lead to releases polluting underground and
other water sources. Regulations mandating higher fuel blends may lead to
incompatibility of biofuels with existing infrastructure such as tank
systems.
THERMOELECTRIC AND
WATER
Thermoelectric uses fuels including coal, natural gas, nuclear materials
e.g. uranium, or the sun to heat water into steam which turns a turbine
connected to a generator which produces electricity. Water is used to cool the
steam so it turns back into water for reuse. Water may also be used for purposes
such as in pollution control equipment. Such electricity plants accounted for
39% of freshwater withdrawals in the US in 2000 although the actual water
consumed is less.
One advanced cooling technology using air instead of water was found in use
which reduced the freshwater use at thermoelectric power plants. This technology
however, may increase the cost of building the plant, use more land, and consume
more electricity to operate. The technology may provide benefits of reducing
costs and challenges associated with use of water and allow the siting of the
facility where water is in short supply. Currently, the forms collected by
regulators from power plants doesn't include the listing of this technology so
nobody knows how commonly it is installed in the US.
Other water sources could also reduce freshwater use. Examples are effluent
from sewage treatment plants or industrial water such as from extracting oil and
gas. They have the disadvantage of requiring treatment to ensure the power plant
equipment isn't damaged and create problems about what to do with wastewater no
longer needed. The siting of the facility would have to be near the alternate
water source. About 38% of power plants were reported in a 2007 report to be
using municipal wastewater. And ditto for regulators not collecting this
information from power plants.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
EEA: WIND ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
& ECONOMIC CONSTRAINTS
The European Union has a mandatory target of 20% share of total energy
consumption supplied by renewables in the Community by 2020 and a mandatory 10%
of renewable energy in transport consumption by all Member States by 2020.
The EU-27* had 65 GW of wind power capacity installed by the end of 2008
supplying 4.2% of the EU electricity demand. The potential for raw wind energy
in the EU is large but in practical terms other factors constrain the
development. A new report by the European Environment Agency evaluates the
environmental and social constraints of wind sector development both on land and
offshore including noise, visual impact, death of birds and bats flying into the
blades as well as future costs and competitiveness. It highlights the importance
of environmental assessment impact due to wind energy on a large scale being
relatively new leading to considerable gaps in knowledge.
The calculations excluded areas protected for biodiversity from potential
siting for wind farms. Environmental constraints reduced the wind energy
potential by less than 14% although social constraints such as public objection
to the visual impact could reduce the potential further onshore. Limits on
offshore sites include shipping lanes, military areas, offshore oil and gas,
protected areas and tourist areas. The offshore constraints reduced the
potential for offshore by more than 90%. Despite these constraints, economically
competitive wind power in 2020 is expected to be more than three times the
projected demand in 2020. The costing does not include the support systems, for
example, major expansion of wind power requires extensions and upgrades of
transmission and distribution grids and power flow to balance electricity
generation and consumption. While the report examines the issues on the European
scale (the EU27, Norway, Turkey and Switzerland), it suggests more assessment is
needed of impacts at the regional, national and local scale in order to make
decisions about wind farms. There are many uncertainties in physical,
technological and economic variables but the most uncertain are human choices in
the social and political area.
BIODIVERSITY
One of areas of environmental constraint discussed is biodiversity,
Among the potential negative issues associated with wind power
development on biodiversity are:
- collision risk. Birds and bats may collide with rotors, towers, nacelle**
and structures such as cables and meteorological masts. The wake created as
the rotor blades sweep by has also been implicated in death of bats and birds.
- barrier effects. Birds are thought to change flight direction during
migration and on a regular basis expending more energy for feeding and
roosting.
- displacement. Birds and marine mammals may leave the immediate as well as
surrounding areas due to both operation of wind turbines and maintenance as
well as during construction of both the wind mills and the infrastructure for
access. Noise, visual impacts and vibration as well as human activity are
causes.
- habitat loss and degradation. Although the scale of habitat loss connected
with a wind farm is often small, the effects may be larger due to changes to
water flow or to the physical features of the larger area. It is expected that
usually these impacts would be mostly on rare habitat or on sites of national
or international significance for biodiversity. Because wind farms tend to
have associated infrastructure. there may be an increase in other economic
activity in the area.
Among the positive benefits of wind energy developments are:
- Wind power replacing fossil fuels reduces greenhouse gas and air pollution
both of which are hazards for biodiversity.
- If no hunting or fishing is allowed on the wind farm, the habitat can
provide a refuge for wildlife.
- A wind farm limits other development such as housing development, military
activities and recreation activities.
- offshore wind structures can act as artificial reefs and provide
structures for birds to use adding new feeding sites.
- land under or near the turbines may be removed from monoculture farming
improving the habitat for species such as birds.
The report explores some of the policies relating to biodiversity and wind
farms:
- the effects of wind energy on biodiversity are still relatively new and
unknown." Environmental impact assessment of projects and monitoring programs
of existing wind farms are considered essential tools both to minimize impacts
and to learn about the effects.
- this study did not have sufficient data on protected areas offshore so
future assessments of biodiversity concerns for offshore areas are very
important.
- The significance of impacts and cumulative effects need to be considered.
Wind power development can effect bird species differently as some may be more
vulnerable but may also affect other species. Some landscapes even in
unprotected areas may be more sensitive e.g. bottleneck areas for bird
migration and some marine areas may be more sensitive than others. Shallow
waters are viewed positively by the wind developers but are also moulting and
wintering grounds for most European seaducks. Some damage may not kill animals
directly but reduce their fitness for survival later on or reduce their
ability to reproduce. Population simulations have shown that for bats, a quite
small increase in annual mortality rates (.1%) can decrease the bat population
by significant numbers. Sensitive bird species can be identified by tools such
as an Environmental Vulnerability Index which uses abundance and an indicator.
Cumulative effects can occur when a number of wind farms are in an area or
along a migration route or combined impacts with other development. The report
recommends Strategic Environmental Assessment.
- National action plans and roadmaps for spatial planning such as the EU's
maritime policy and plan can assist assessment of the pressure and ways to
reduce impacts on the marine and other environments.
Comprehensive and long-lasting studies on birds are so rare only one was
identified. About 1,500 to 2,300 golden eagles in the Altamont Pass Wind
Resource Area in California have been killed by collision over 20 years or so.
Operating since the 1970s, the number of turbines peaked at 7,300 in 1993
operating in the Coast Range Mountains in California in an area of 150 square
km. The death rate in a population of 35,000 to 100,000 birds led to a decline
attributed in part due to the wind farm. Other studies have found high numbers
of collisions at large wind farms located in mountain regions where birds
funnelled through a mountain pass or used wind to rise above mountain ridges
during migration. Lower mortality rates have been found elsewhere but it is
thought that the methodology of counting carcasses underestimates mortality as
scavengers would eat small birds quickly. In German, bird fatality was found to
be less than one bird per turbine per year while a few wind farms had more than
50 birds per turbine per year.
Eagles, vultures and some other birds aren't bothered by wind turbines and
seem to get killed more by them while geese and waders are disturbed by them and
are not commonly killed. However, waders and geese are more likely to be
displaced. Even if each turbine has a small displacement impact, cumulatively it
is not know what the consequences of such displacement are for breeding and
survival.
Bats may not use echolocation which would help them avoid wind turbines
when travelling long distances as in migration. One estimate is that there are
16.4 bat fatalities per turbine per year at 16 study sites in Germany.
The most important measure to reduce wildlife impacts are to avoid siting
where negative impacts on biodiversity occurs. If prevention cannot avoid
negative impacts, measures include alignment so turbines are not perpendicular
to the main flight of birds. In some locations, the turbines should be as close
together as possible to reduce the overall footprint or be arranged so there is
a flight corridor of the right width between clusters of turbines.
NOISE
Neighbours tend to complain about noise often at night in
rural areas where there are low background noise levels. Some studies have
indicated that the wind turbine developers have in some cases underestimated the
wind speed at the hub which was 2.6 times higher than predicted creating noise
levels of 15 decibels higher than expected. High wind speeds at the hub level
can mean noise levels above the expected threshold at distances of 500 - 1000
metres quite a bit further than the setback often required for wind
turbines.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
****************************************************
ADDING UP SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
PLANS
Taking Britain as an example, Professor David MacKay does a
whole bunch of number-crunching to illustrate the extent of impact and
possibilities for alternative energy. His book Sustainable Energy - without the
hot air is dedicated to "those who not have the benefit of two billion years'
accumulated energy reserves." MacKay is Professor at the Department of Physics
at the University of Cambridge and is a member of the World Economic Forum
Global Agenda Council on Climate Change. He discusses current energy consumption
(shown as a pink box) and conceivable energy production (shown as a green box)
and works out everything from nuclear power plants, cars, planes, wave power and
toasters in "kilowatt- hour per day". Usually he expresses this as per person so
readers from elsewhere can do the same arithmetic. The book is rich in data and
the associated references e.g. how much energy does a transport truck use per
tonne-kilometre or what's the embedded energy of PET, how much power can be
produced per unit of land by a particular solar unit.
If you think this is some boring (albeit useful) text, think
again, MacKay is a very personable writer who writes with verve and vigour yet
conveys details about how the energy works, the real-life performance of hybrid
cars or electric cars, how to cope with lulls and slews of renewable
energy, storage options and so on. Although numbers are key, he provides a lot
of detail about current and potential energy sources, including "Stuff". Water
is part of "stuff" such as toilets for "taking a pee" and water supply through
desalination. Compared to 40 kWh/d per person for the car, he figures making
Stuff costs 48+ kWh/d per person and transporting stuff costs 12 kWh/d per
person. He is fearless and fascinating especially if one agrees that meaningful
numbers and facts are needed to inform.
He develops five plans for Britain. His rough numbers cover wind,
hydroelectricity, wave, tide, solar voltaics and thermal panels on roofs. He
concludes that neither Britain or Europe can live on its own renewables if what
is needed is to supply the average European level of 125 kWh per day per person.
"So if the aim is get off fossil fuels, Europe needs nuclear power, or solar
power in other people's deserts." Redoing the calculation for North America, he
cuts the average North American 250 kWh/day per person to "the misery of living
on the mere 125 kWh/d of an average European or Japanese citizen.". In the mix
are included wind, offshore wind, geothermal, and hydro and he concludes, "North
America's non-solar renewables aren't enough for North America to live on. But
when we include a massive expansion of solar power, there's enough. So North
America needs solar in its own deserts, or nuclear power, or both." A
calculation for the world concludes that one or more solar powers must be in the
mix or nuclear or both.
[Although GL paid for the hardcover and GL readers can pay by ordering on
the website, this is a free book]
****************************************************
GREEN ENERGY LABELS FOR
PRODUCTS
Increasingly one sees labels on products related to the energy
used to produce them. One example is for Cascades Tissue Group bathroom tissue,
paper towels , paper napkins and wipers headed by Powered by change, "The first
towel & tissue brand made with 100% green-e certified wind-generated
electricity. Clean. Renewable. Emission-free."
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and references here.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copyright © Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment
119 Concession 6 Rd Fisherville ON N0A 1GO Canada. Fisherville &
Toronto
All rights reserved. The Gallon Environment Letter (GL for short) presents
information for general interest and does not endorse products, companies or
practices. Information including articles, letters and guest columns may be from
sources expressing opinions not shared by the Canadian Institute for Business
and the Environment. Readers must verify all information for themselves before
acting on it. Advertising or sponsorship of one or more issues consistent with
sustainable development goals is welcome and identified as separate from
editorial content. Subscriptions for organizations $184 + GST = $193.20. For
individuals (non-organizational emails and paid with non-org funds please) $30
includes GST. Issues about twelve times a year with supplements.
http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx