THE GALLON ENVIRONMENT LETTER
Canadian
Institute for Business and the Environment
Fisherville,
Ontario, Canada
Tel. 416
410-0432, Fax: 416 362-5231
Vol. 16, No. 7, November 7, 2011
****************************************************
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 HST
nd provide additional benefits detailed on the web site. Individual
subscriptions are only $30 (personal emails/funds only please) including HST. 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. Back free editions from January 2009 are also
available.
****************************************************
ABOUT THIS
ISSUE
The next UN climate change summit, officially
the Seventeenth Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Seventh Session of the Meeting of
the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol will be held from 28 November to 9 December
2011 in Durban, South Africa. Though expectations for this international meeting
remain quite low, pressure is increasing on the intransigent parties such as
Canada and the United States.
In this issue of GallonLetter we look at some
of the more recent developments including an account of a recent interview given
by Canada's Environment Minister Peter Kent to CBC Radio. We look at the recent,
and in many ways laudable, effort of global financiers to tell governments what
to do instead of doing it themselves. We look at a book on the role of insects
in innovation. Taxpayers are putting huge amounts of money into Carbon Capture
and Storage while other worthwhile government initiatives go unfunded: we wonder
why CCS should be funded by taxpayers rather than by users of the GHG emitting
fuels. This issue contains several more articles on recent developments in
climate science and technologies, including the approach taken by one utility to
comply with provincial regulation in Alberta.
If you have heard that there may not be enough
lithium available for batteries to meet the world demand for electric vehicles,
some business researchers at the University of Michigan Erb Institute for Global
Sustainable Enterprise and at Ford have studied this challenge and have come to
the conclusion that this is not an insurmountable problem. We report on the
article.
Our editorial looks at another incident from a
company that seems to have an unfortunate tendency to call its lawyers before
engaging its brains. GallonLetter views it as a useful model in how to get the
worst possible publicity for your environmental problems.
GallonLetter's Editor travels quite widely
across the country for conferences and speaking engagements. We have recently
implemented a policy of telling you where you might find him. This week it is at
the Canadian Waste and Recycling Expo in Montreal and next week it is at an
event in Waterloo. Details are below. Please drop by to say Hi! And contact us
by phone or email if you need to pinpoint his location.
Barring dramatic developments in Durban or
elsewhere, the next issue of Gallon Environment Letter will be on the subject of
the sustainability of the world's forests. Meanwhile, we hope you find value and
interesting topics in this issue. We invite you to send your comments on our
articles or on anything else to do with sustainability to editor@gallonletter.ca. We will choose a selection of the most interesting for
publication.
****************************************************
Editorial:
MCDONALD'S CALLS LAWYERS INSTEAD OF CLEANERS & DAMAGES ITS
REPUTATION
Erin Carr-Jordan is a professor of adolescent
behaviour at Arizona State University. She might be called an activist: some of
her research is focused on the presence of potentially harmful microorganisms on
the surfaces of children's playground equipment. In GallonLetter's telephone
interview, however, she seemed about as level headed and sensible as any
university researcher might be expected to be.
As part of her research, she has visited and
taken samples from numerous fast food restaurant play areas across the United
States, including one playroom at a McDonald's restaurant in Phoenix, Arizona.
For her efforts she has been advised by lawyers for the McDonald's franchisee
that she is banned from eight McDonald's in the Phoenix area that are operated
by the same franchisee and that have playrooms. Fortunately, because she is
happy to take her own children to McDonald's, she is not banned from the three
Phoenix area restaurants that do not have playrooms nor is she banned from any
other McDonald's in the nation.
McDonald's corporate media relations has told
Gallon Environment Letter that:
"We take feedback about our restaurants
extremely seriously. Over the past several months we have engaged in open and
honest dialogue with Dr. Carr-Jordan in an effort to address her concerns and
review her findings. We are still committed to doing this.
That said, it appears recent actions by Dr.
Carr-Jordan have become disruptive to the employees and customers within our
franchisee's restaurants, which prompted the letter from his attorney.
We remain committed to working with an
internal team on ensuring that our PlayPlaces are clean and safe for all
customers."
McDonald's has not responded to GallonLetter's
inquiry on ways in which "recent actions by Dr. Carr-Jordan have become
disruptive to the employees and customers within our franchisee's restaurants".
Dr. Carr-Jordan claims that she was in no way disruptive and limited her
comments to other customers to suggestions to parents in the playroom that they
should ensure that their children wash their hands before eating. To
GallonLetter, that sounds more constructive than disruptive.
We are writing about this because we think it
is a good example of corporate stupidity. The stupidity, as we see it, is not in
sending a lawyer's letter banning entry to a few restaurants to a university
professor who will almost certainly give it to the press and benefit her cause
enormously, but in having franchisees who think they can stick lawyers on to
customers and researchers without any consideration of the broader consequences.
Sustainable business is not just about recycling programs and carbon emissions
but also about governance and management strategies. This incident illustrates a
big hole in McDonald's strategy for sustainable business. Many other companies
likely have similar weaknesses presenting major risks to their reputation and
profitability.
A brief note on the underlying issue: spread
of disease through playground equipment, especially in areas where diapered
infants are encouraged to play, is almost certainly a problem in our society.
Playground equipment should be cleaned regularly but, however regular the
cleaning, it will not be enough as soon as an infected infant or toddler uses
the equipment. If these infections were highly aggressive, children would be
getting sick at much higher rates than we see in developed countries.
GallonLetter agrees that these issues are worthy of study, commends McDonald's
for agreeing to study them, and, based on the available and admittedly limited
evidence, condemns the Phoenix franchisee for turning a reasonable research
exercise into an international horror story with his own company positioned as
the bad guy. To Dr. Carr-Jordan, if you want to find even higher levels of "bad
bugs", try the cubicle door locks and flush handles in restrooms in
establishments frequented by the public. We will not solve the problem of
transmission of drug resistant organisms by focusing only on play rooms, nor are
we likely to solve the problem only with better cleaning. The growing problem of
drug resistant disease organisms is huge and it needs an integrated
international response, one element of which is the banning of the unnecessary
use of antibacterial cleaning products that foster the evolution and growth of
antibiotic resistant organisms.
Colin Isaacs
Editor
For more on Dr. Erin Carr-Jordan's take on
this issue, visit http://kidsplaysafe.net
****************************************************
LARGE
INVESTORS CALL FOR WELL-DESIGNED CLIMATE POLICIES
The 2011 Global Roundtable organized by the
United Nations Environment Programme Financial Initiative held in October
focussed on sustainable financing to ensure the long term stability of the world
economy. As part of the event, a group of 285 investors said to represent assets
of US$20 trillion signed a statement on climate change.
UNEP FI is a global partnership between UNEP
and the financial sector. Over 200 institutions, including banks, insurers and
fund managers, work with UNEP to understand the impacts of environmental and
social considerations on financial performance.
Recommendations covered domestic and
international issues. Among the recommendations for domestic policies
are:
1. Ensure effective policies are in
place.
- clear targets (short, medium and long) and
legal mechanisms and timelines to deliver on the objectives and
targets.
- Policies should be integrated with both
energy and climate and accelerate the deployment of a range of initiatives
e.g. cleaner energy, green buildings, low carbon transportation
infrastructure.
- Sectors should not be only energy but include
sources such as waste, industrial emissions.
- policies supporting renewable energy
generation including energy generated from renewable sources to electricity
transmissions and distribution infrastructure.
- incentives for low carbon, well-designed
carbon markets and other incentives for private investment in clean energy.
Key is removal of fossil fuel subsidies.
- adaptation measures to reduce climate change
impacts.
2. Ensure policies are well
designed:
- Incentives to invest should include
recognition of the risk and appropriate returns to investors in relation to
the risks.
- need to have larger scale to reduce unit
costs and allow application of new technology.
- Be clear about the design and
implementation.
- Policies need to be for long enough time
period for the large scale investments. Uncertainty caused by shorter term or
the likelihood that the next government will overturn the policy drive
investors away.
- Avoid policies which apply
retroactively.
- Use market forces to develop least
cost
- Align with wider policy such as economics,
energy, resources, and transport policies.
3. Ensure the effectiveness of the
institutions involved with the policies. Provide sufficient resources and
effective implementation.
Kudos from
Some
The statement was lauded by some. For example,
the Globe Foundation lauded the position as part of a mailout for its conference
and trade show Globe 2012 to be held in Vancouver March 14-16, 2012 . The group
Al Gore chairs, The Climate Reality Project, posted an article suggesting that
taking these capitalists seriously as allies could be a fine thing to do, "In
the past, we've seen some good examples of businesses being proactive in the
fight against climate change and the push for clean energy solutions. Sure,
capitalism is not motivated by altruism, but by the opposite — self-interest. In
fact, that's exactly why they get it. Businesses understand risks, and they do the cost-benefit calculus better than
most of us. Guess what that tells them? That the time for action on climate
change is now."
Gallonletter: Statement Falls
Short
GallonLetter thinks that this statement is
mainly about financiers telling someone else, governments, what to do. We
certainly would not disagree with much of what is proposed except perhaps that
we think small scale can be just as important as large scale. Also we find it
quite novel that this powerful group is happy to suggest so publicly that
governments (ie taxpayers) should guarantee investors a good return. We suggest
that investors who are not taking climate risks into account should in fact be
guaranteed a bad return on their investments. But who would disagree with the
idea of a well-designed policies, institutions with adequate resources to
implement, etc. However, we are sure that whatever apparent high-level consensus
this statement appears to show, when it is crunch time, the policies that are
developed will never quite meet the high standard that this group
suggests.
We would have liked to see a commitment from
these investors that they themselves would make efforts to hold the increase in
global average temperature below 2 degrees Celsius. Just as they are asking
governments to make such a commitment, investors also have the ability to refuse
to invest in projects that threaten this target. They have the ability to
collect greenhouse gas emissions data from the companies/projects in which they
invest and they could commit to a significant and specified reduction in
emissions from their investments. While it is good to see investors support
action on climate change, it would be even better if they were to put their own
mouth where their money is.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
EMPIRE OF THE
BEETLE
Insect epidemics have historically helped to
foster innovation. The town of Enterprise, renamed Weevil, in Alabama has a
statue of the Cotton Boll Weevil in recognition of its role in getting the town
to diversify to other economic pursuits when the weevil threatened to destroy
the economy of the town by decimating cotton crops. The book Empire of the
Beetle by journalist Andrew Nikiforuk verges on beetlemania and gives a tip of
the hat to the many people who have studied the intricacies of relationships in
the ecosystem of trees, birds, bears, squirrels, plants and of course, the bugs
and their even tinier companions such as fungus and mites. It is also a lively
story of human folly, of science ignored, or perhaps of hubris on the part of
the decision makers who ignored scientific advice and scientific experts whose
knowledge proved inadequate for the changing circumstances. Policies and
politics favoured economic exploitation over realities of nature.
The spruce beetle and the mountain pine beetle
have eaten their way through forests in western North America and are now
expected to expand their range northward, eastward and to higher altitudes is.
Their impact is on a monumental scale. Although native to western North
America and always a presence, the bark beetles have never killed so many
million trees before. The beetles have destroyed twice as much forest in ten
years as in the previous century. Crawford Holling, a Nanaimo, British Columbia
ecologist who won the 2008 Volvo Environment Award isn't one of those who wants
to wipe out the beetles but "reckons that the extreme, the small and the
improbable will decide our future."
Nikiforuk presents the views of many
scientists and ecologists whose views are that the beetles are more of a symptom
of things gone wrong not only in forest policy but in dealing with climate
change and with recognition of the interconnectedness of nature. A major problem
was forest fire suppression to maximize the number of harvestable mature trees
creating a same species same age monoculture compared to a multi-age and diverse
forest which results from fires.
Climate change is a factor as hotter and dryer
summers stressed the trees (tree rings are smaller in the last two decades as
available water dropped.) The beetles strike in early spring just when the trees
are opening needle pores to photosynthesize releasing water vapour which they
can't replace because their roots are still frozen; without water the trees
can't make resin which helps protects them from invasion. Warmer temperatures
allow the beetles to mature into adults in one year instead of two.
David Mattson, a grizzly bear biologist in
Yellowstone, studied the relationship between the pine seeds caches made by
squirrels which were raided by bears providing essential nutrients for raising
cubs. When climate change in the 1990s affected the trees, Mattson recommended
that the bears have a bigger range but this would have impacted hunters, gas
companies and ranchers. His advice was not wanted: "Partly because of his direct
and repeated warning, Mattson now studies cougars in Arizona."
For some in the affected areas, the measures
taken and the millions of dollars spent by government to clearcut caused more
damage than the beetles. Examples of issues discussed in the book include one
beetle event around Prince George British Columbia:
- Clearcutting was usually done in the winter.
The stumps left were full of overwintering beetles looking for more food. One
scientist said, ""An outbreak that might have lasted a couple of years instead
burned away for nearly a decade."
- Trying to outlog the beetles let to poorly
functioning streams as the watershed lost all its protective cover some of
which would have been retained in the natural even if dying forest.
- The industry successfully pressed for more
roads, more clearcuts because the beetles carried fungus, mites and other
microorganisms which meant the infected trees would retain their wood value
only for a number of years. Logging trucks loaded out 175 million cubic feet
of wood, which could have formed a convoy a thousand miles long.
- A number of the clearcut areas became
settled, a type of suburbia in an area prone to wildfires.
- There was so much wood that much of it was
chipped for transport to Asia; the boom lasted until 2004 when the chipping
plant closed.
- So many jurisdictions had a point of view it
was very difficult to get any kind of consensus. People couldn't believe that
such a tiny bug could do that kind of damage or that a river would prevent
them crossing even though the beetles can fly at least 7 miles and are
transported many more miles when the wind blows and of course, by
vehicles.
GallonLetter observes that Nikiforuk has done an
excellent job of showing how much of a challenge it can be to take practical
action to deal with or adapt to catastrophic events when scientists lack even
basic data about the changes taking place in the landscape. In 1995 Canada
closed down its Forest Insect and Disease Survey so large areas of forest were
infected with mountain pine beetle before anybody paid much attention. The
responsibility was passed to the provinces who took some time to get into gear
so Allan Carroll, a Canadian insect ecologist, comments that it was as though
the federal government ""had poked out its eyes and blinded itself. We faced
global change in the forest yet lacked the capacity to measure
it.""
The book was one of the 68 finalists for the
2011 Governor General's Literary Awards. GallonLetter thinks that so often
non-fiction award winners are historical or social works so if we had a vote we
would plumb for this one which is so well-written and has such a strong truth to
tell about science and the environment.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
CANADA'S
ENVIRONMENT MINISTER ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Canada's Environment Minister, Peter Kent,
made himself available to CBC Radio's The Current with host Anna Maria Tremonti
on the topic of climate change on October 27, 2011. The government has been
taking hits lately from a proposed European rule disfavouring oil from the
oilsands, a very critical report by Canada's Commissioner of the Environment and
Sustainable Development, who says Canada's climate change planning is so
disorganized there is little likelihood of achieving any of the several targets,
and the National Round Table on the Environment and Economy about the high costs
of climate inaction.
CBC Radio used to document how often to they
tried unsuccessfully to get government officials to participate in interviews
talk but they gave up because it became too common that ministers were not
available. So Minister Kent must be given kudos for showing his face (or at
least his voice). Even better would be to hear the voices of the scientific
experts in the federal government.
The following is a summary of some of the
highlights (!)* of the interview:
Tremonti: the National Round Table on the
Environment and Economy report projected that climate change would cost $5
billion a year by the end of this decade and $40 billion a year and up by
mid-century and the years following.
Kent: the Copenhagen and Cancun climate
conferences set out a global challenge which requires a global solutions. He
suggested that the NRTEE echoes what the government has been saying in terms of
mitigation and that Canada's small contribution of barely 2% to global emissions
mean that Canada isn't going to have much effect.
Tremonti: Canada's per capita emissions are
among the highest in the world.
Kent: the reality is that Canada has been
working for years now on a climate change agreement, ideally a binding treaty,
to engage all major emitters in order to address effectively a meaningful
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. In the pre-Durban meeting, Canada has
continued to urge the large emitters to engage and take up their
responsibilities.
Tremonti: emissions are on the
rise.
Kent: Canada is not buying into "hot air" from
depressed Eastern European economies but is regulating transport such as cars,
trucks, railroads and renewable fuel additives which play a small part.
Regulations on the coal-fired electricity sector will be enacted and then
regulations will focus on petroleum, steel, commercial and residential buildings
sectors. The regulations will align with the US.
Tremonti: the rising contribution of the oil
sector to emissions and the intensity of the oil sands oil.
Kent: the economy is recovering. The goal is
to separate increased prosperity from increased greenhouse gases. In the last 20
years the petroleum industry has achieved great improvements through
technologies. "Those faint hearts who see only gloom and doom" should recognize
the willingness of the sector to help government achieve targets. The increase
of GHG emissions is on a small base number as the oil sands are a minor
contributor to total Canada's emissions.
Clip from the Commissioner of the Environment
and Sustainable Development: Comment by Scott Vaughan that the plan has 35
different initiatives. There is a need to get all these elements working
together and provide more than a total budget for them. Much of the plan is
disjointed, confused and lacks coordination making it next to impossible for the
federal-wide coordination needed to get their act together. The CESD expressed
doubts whether they will be able to meet any target.
Kent: Commented that he disagreed and that the
CESD misunderstands the reporting requirements under the Kyoto Protocol
Implementation; there are no reporting requirements. He said that it would be
redundant to report under the KPI because the government already reports on its
climate change investment. He said that the Commissioner's data is more than a
year out of date and doesn't take into account the comprehensive water, air and
biodiversity program brought in to the oil sands and he deplored the selective
media reporting because the Commissioner acknowledged that the good news in the
new plan as a postscript.
Tremonti: the federal government's role in
supporting a pipeline to the BC coast and to the Gulf of Mexico.
Kent: there is no question that the government
is moving forward to a day when fossil fuels will not be the dominant fuel but
that is many decades away. Heavy oil is a responsibly regulated product and the
Canadian way is a more environmentally sustainable way. The industry will
continue to produce and supply to customers. Environment Canada and the Canadian
Association of Petroleum Producers have worked together to significantly reduce
the impact on air and water over the past 20 years through new
technologies.
Tremonti: while Kent suggests that the oil
sector has reduced its emissions, the oil sands is expected to more than double
production in the next 20 years.
Kent: the transport sector is the most
significant. The regulations for tailpipe emissions of both light and heavy duty
vehicles as well as renewable additives to gasoline and diesel would be key to
reducing Canada's GHG emissions. Then aviation and maritime would follow and
then sector by sector.
Tremonti: aligning with the US; are you
considering meeting California standards for vehicles.
Kent: only the continental rules are the most
practical and most reasonable without putting the auto industry at risk. The
automakers are not being forced but are working on regulations together with the
government which has begun negotiations for the next regulations.
Tremonti: some people are going to suffer e.g.
low lying islands, while most of the GHG emissions are produced by the
industrialized world. Once in the atmosphere, the carbon survives for many
years.
Kent: Canada does have an obligation but, if
developing countries don't stop emitting, the temperature will continue to rise
and all the things Canada can do will certainly not prevent the cataclysmic day
ahead. He sees no binding agreement at the Durban meeting and sees those
developing countries like the Chinas and the Indias as "clinging to Kyoto" to
avoid their responsibilities.
GallonLetter felt a lot more gloomy after
listening to this broadcast but will let our readers decide for themselves;
check out the podcast available on the CBC.
The Conference Board of Canada updates its
scorecard on Canada's performance in a range of activities. In its July 2011
update on per capita GHG emissions, it gave Canada a D grade on the scoring
because it ranks 15th out of 17 countries, not much change since 1990. While
some other countries like the UK have reduced their per capita emissions,
Canada's per capita GHG emissions increased 3.2% from 1990 to 2008 while total
GHG emissions rose 24%.
*these aren't direct quotes but GallonLetter's
summary of the gist of the selected comments
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
IEA:
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM FUEL COMBUSTION
The International Energy Agency has produced
highlights for a report on global greenhouse gas emission trends. The data is
somewhat different from what countries have reported under the climate change
convention.
Global CO2 emissions decreased by 0.5 GtCO2
between 2008 and 2009 or a decline of 1.5%. The economic crisis has led to an
overall decrease in developed countries but it is expected that the trend will
be for more releases as economic conditions change. Emissions in the developing
world have increased.
Based on only emissions from fuel combustions,
Canada was 8th out of 10 top emitting countries in 2009. The top ten emit two
thirds of the world's CO2 emissions. In annual emission, China leads the world
followed by the US which together account for 41% of the world's emissions. In
cumulative and per capita emissions, the US is the largest.
In 2009, emissions in the Kyoto (Annex 1)
industrial countries emissions decreased by 6.5%. Emissions of the developing
world (non-Annex 1) increased by 3.3% in 2009. Since 1990 to 2009, of the Kyoto
signatories, Canada has increased emissions from fuel combustion by 20.4%,
Australia by 51.8%, and Japan 2.7%. Those decreasing their emissions from 1990
to 2009 were Eastern Europe Emerging Economies which includes Russia decreased
by 36.2%, and Europe has decreased by 4.9%. From 1990 to 2009, the group of
countries participating in the Kyoto Protocol have decreased their emissions by
just about 15% below 1990 levels. The Kyoto Protocol targets cover about a third
of global CO2 emissions in 2008.
While Russian's emissions dropped in
2008-2009, in absolute terms of emissions it along with China, the US and India
are the top four countries in the world for greenhouse gas
emissions.
For the non-Kyoto Parties, the US has
increased emissions by 6.7% between 1990 and 2009. Other regions have increased
by 133.9%: Africa increased by 70.1%, Middle East by $171.0%, Latin America
63.0%, Asia without China 144.2%, and China alone 206.5%.
Globally the world increased emissions from
20,966.megatonnes in 1990 to 28,999.4 MT in 2009 or a 38.3% increase for fuel
combustion.
The range of emissions per capita is wide: 1
tonnes of CO2 per capita for India, 5 t for China, 7 t for the EU, 17 t
for the United States, almost 18 t for Australia and much higher for some other
countries such as in the middle east.. Canada had emissions in 2009 of 15 t per
person. The global per capita emissions from 1990 to 2009 increased by 8% with
most being due to China and India increasing their per capita emissions. Some
countries such as Russia and the US decreased their per capita emissions in the
same period.
The IEA report states, "Trends in CO2
emissions from fuel combustion illustrate the need for all countries to shape a
more sustainable energy future. Special emphasis should first be on the
industrialised nations that have the highest per capita incomes and that are
responsible for the bulk of cumulative emissions. However, with the rapidly
growing energy demand of developing countries, it is important that they also
strive to use energy in a sustainable way."
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
CARBON CAPTURE
AND STORAGE FOR OIL SANDS
In June, the Governments of Canada and Alberta
announced funding for the Shell Quest Carbon and Storage Technology 40 km north
east of Edmonton Alberta. Canada is providing $120 million from the Clean Energy
Fund while Alberta is providing $745 million from a $2 billion Carbon Capture
and Storage CCS Fund. The CO2 is to be compressed into supercritical fluid,
transported by 16" diameter pipeline and injected into storage wells located 2
km below the surface. The press release from the federal government quotes John
Abbott, Shell's Executive Vice President of Heavy Oil, "CCS is recognized as one
of the most promising technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from
fossil fuels. To realize that potential, government support in this important
demonstration phase is essential. We would like to thank both levels of
government for their commitment to progress CCS technology by investing in
Quest."
According to the Canadian Environmental
Assessment Agency and the Major Projects Management Office's Tracker, designed
to track and monitor the progress of major resource projects through the federal
regulatory system, the only information publically available on the project so
far is the original documents of commencement of 2010 which include an agreement
to commence environmental assessment, a timeframe and notes on stages completed
so far.
While the governments call it investing, some
might call it handing out more subsidies to the oil industry. Many proponents of
action on climate change propose greater priority be given to energy efficiency
and conservation over speculative technology such as CCS. CCS is also the
foundation of the proposed federal regulation of coal-fired electricity
generation. The federal funding for this one oilsands industry project is a lot
less than is available for homeowners to upgrade homes for energy efficiency.
The governments enthusiasm for the project to protect the reputation of the oil
sands internationally also casts doubt on the ability of the federal agencies to
ensure a good and proper environmental assessment. The federal government has
just gutted the Canadian Environmental Network which in a non-political way used
to organize and support environmental groups in Canada to participate in public
consultations (see separate article) The Shell project's public consultations
are still in the future. GallonLetter can't help but think that the cuts of such
a relatively small amount represented by the funding of CEN at less than
$600,000 a year may indicate a governmental bias that could end up hurting the
fossil fuel industry even more in the long run if the grassroots can convince
the public that the government is acting in cahoots with big business against
the public interest on the environment.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
CONTRARIAN
STUDY CONFIRMS GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RISE
A contrarian scientist, University of
California physicist Richard Muller, who climate supporters say has smeared
reputable climate scientists with accusations of fraud and data manipulation,
has led the completion of a study which he says confirms the climate data.
Muller founded Berkeley Earth, a private organization, to conduct Berkeley Earth
Surface Temperature (or BEST).
The study, which is not yet peer-reviewed,
found that based on temperature records land temperature globally has increased
by 1 deg C since the mid-1950s. The press release also said that:
- In using temperature records as far back
as 1800, the study "directly addressed scientific concerns raised by skeptics,
including the urban heat effect, poor station quality and the risk of data
selection bias."
- About 2/3 of temperature measuring sites
reported global warming while 1/3 of sites had cooling. Just because some
sites have local cooling does not negate the overall warming effect.
- Some stations may be more reliable than
others but the stations ranked as poor by Anthony Watts in the US showed the
same global warming patterns as the stations marked as acceptable. The
absolute temperature may be less accurate at these "poor" stations but the
global warming trend is the same. There is no undue bias caused by the poor
stations.
Four scientific papers are due for scientific
peer review. Muller said that science teams in the US and the UK had accurately
estimated the extent of land surface warming.
The press release says the Muller acknowledges
that the study did not conclude whether the warming was due to human actions but
as climate scientists have said the physics indicates that the cause is due to
humans and the risks serious enough to warrant taking action to avoid possible
catastrophic impacts.
Funding sources included Fund for Innovative
Climate and Energy Research (created by Bill Gates) ($100,000) and Charles G.
Koch Charitable Foundation ($150,000) and other sources such as Lawrence
Berkeley National Laboratory.
The Daily Show
Makes Fun of TV Reporting on Climate Sceptics
Jon Stewart asked on his October 26th Daily
Show why so many of the television news shows which reported on Climategate, a
set of emails which were said by the sceptics/denialists as proof that climate
scientists had manipulated the temperature data, failed to report on Berkeley
Earth findings.
Stewart's satire has set off another storm
among the bloggers about what Stewart said about the Berkeley study and what the
study proves or doesn't prove. On one hand, most scientists don't need
confirmation that the globe is warming although there are many other questions
that create uncertainty about the risks of climate change e.g. a recent report
on ocean acidification raises questions about the future of food security. On
the other hand, the core of sceptics, many of whom aren't climate scientists,
don't accept evidence. It seems that Muller's hope that his analysis of the data
will be a slam dunk is being met by more scepticism and his co-author is being
reported as criticizing him; apparently he didn't ask her before publishing the
results on the website.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
CALIFORNIA'S
CAP AND TRADE
California has introduced a cap and trade
program which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels of
greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. This would be a 15% reduction in GHG from the
business as usual scenario in 2020. The emission trading program is said to
cover sources for 85% of California's GHG emissions or about 350 businesses with
600 facilities.. Firms can seek out the lowest price possible for reducing
emissions.
The program begins in 2013 with electric
utilities and large industrial facilities and in 2015 for distributors of
transportation, natural gas and other fuels. The cap set in 2013 is 2% below the
emissions level forecast for 2012. And declines by 2% in 2014 and 3% annually
from 2015 to 2020.
Initial allowances will be free but later
allowances will be auctioned.. Various mechanisms will be used to improve
flexibility so as not to penalize firms for short-term variability e.g.
compliance periods will be three years to allow for annual
variations.
Offsets have limitations e.g. allowed for up
to 8 percent of compliance obligation, limited to projects in the US in four
areas - forestry, urban forestry, dairy digestion and destruction of
ozone-depleting substances).
Every year capped industries provide
allowances and offsets for 30% of previous years emissions and at three years,
the remainder. A penalty for four allowances for each ton of emissions not
covered in time is applied for missed deadlines.
The press release states that the design
allows for California to be line with programs in other states and provinces
within the Western Climate Initiative including British Columbia, Ontario and
Quebec.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
News of this initiative appeared in our daily publication
Gallondaily.com on 26 October 2011.
****************************************************
ENMAX GHG
EMISSION REDUCTION COMPLIANCE
ENMAX is an electricity company owned by the
City of Calgary Alberta. In its 2010 corporate responsibility report, the
company reported 12.4 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions from coal and
0.36 million tonnes from natural gas. As yet no federal regulations apply.
Provincial regulation, the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation, requires large
final emission with annual GHG emissions greater than 100 kilotonnes to reduce
GHG emissions intensity by 12% annually based on a baseline emissions
calculation. The reductions began July 2007. Options for compliance are 1)
reduce emissions directly 2) pay into the Alberta Climate Change and Emissions
Management Fund (Technology Fund) at $15 per tonne or 3) buy Alberta-based GHG
offsets from the non-regulated sector. Failities which reduce their emissions
below the threshold can bank or sell the credis.
Under the provincial regulation, ENMAX's total
exceedance of GHGs for 2010 was 1.7 million tonnes. ENMAX used offsets for 1.4
million tonnes. One offset was purchased from Viterra which aggregates GHG
emission savings from Alberta farmers practicing no-till or low-till. ENMAX also
used its own wind farm for offsets. By using offsets in 2009,
the company saved $3.7 million dollars. Since 2007 ENMAX has contributed
$5.4 million into the Technology Fund of the CCEMC and saved $14.7 million by
using offsets to cover 2.6 million tonnes of GHG emissions. ENMAX's 2010
revenues were $2.4 billion in 2010 with net earnings of $178
million,
ENMAX's report notes that the federal
regulation will require reducing GHG intensities to natural gas-fired generation
standard (375 tonnes of CO2/GWh) by Carbon Capture and Storage or retirement of
the generating plant at the end of economic life or 45 years whichever is
longer. There are no allowances for offsets. The proposed federal regulations in
the Canada Gazette ended public comment at the end of October 2011. If
regulations are passed, they would become effective July 1, 2015 with some
provisions effective 2013.
Generate
Choice
In November 2010, ENMAX introduced a program
called Generate Choice (TM) which offers the generation of electricity by solar
or wind at home. ENMAX applied for and received $14.5 million from the CCEMC
Technology Fund for this microgeneration program, receiving more money from the
fund than it has contributed.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
GLOBAL LITHIUM
SUPPLIES ADEQUATE FOR TRANSPORT ELECTRIFICATION
Electrification of vehicles is currently
dependent on lithium for batteries. Some have conjectured that lithium could be
a constraining factor but others indicate that is unlikely.
A recent article in the Journal of Industrial
Ecology tracked 103 deposits of lithium of which 32 each have lithium deposits
of greater than 100,000 tonnes. The global lithium resource was estimated to be
39 million tonnes. The top ten deposits contain 83% of the resource and are in
Bolivia, Chile, US, China, Congo, Argentina and Serbia. Canada has one deposit,
Beaverhill (Alberta) listed at 15th in size. Estimates for global demand was
estimated to be no more than 20 MT from 2010 to 2100. Lithium is used for other
products but even so the authors conclude that lithium shortage is unlikely to
be a limiting factor on electrification of vehicles.
GallonLetter notes that indigenous peoples in
Argentina have protested the issuing of permits including to Canadian mining
companies for extracting lithium.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
CLIMATE CHANGE
NEGOTIATIONS IN DURBAN
"A rift between developed and developing
nations has dominated negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change. Developed nations have committed to lead efforts, but
developing nations feel that the leadership has been lacking." wrote Tim
Williams of the Library of Parliament on Canada on a short piece on the upcoming
UNFCCC meeting in Durban November 28 to December 9. The UNFCCC was finalized at
the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, which GallonLetter's editor attended with less
cynicism than he has these days. The intent of the UNFCCC was to prevent
dangerous human interference with the climate system.
While parties to the agreement committed to
holding the global average temperature to 2 deg C in Copenhagen, the commitments
made under the Copenhagen Accord are insufficient to achieve that goal. Canada
has committed to reducing emissions by 17% of 2005 emissions by 2020 but insists
it will take action only in alignment with the US which hasn't enacted any
legislation.
Developed countries want all large emitters to
reduce emissions. COP17 meetings in Durban are unlikely to achieve a new
agreement especially a "binding" one as the Kyoto Protocol, the first and only
binding climate agreement so far. Japan, the US, Canada and Russia have said
they will not participate in a successor to Kyoto.
GallonLetter Comments:
Australia has a package going through the
Australian Parliament putting a carbon price on the top 500 greenhouse gas
emitters. Once passed, the rules become effective July 1, 2012. The carbon price
will be $23 a tonne until 2015 when an Emissions Trading Scheme will set the
price. But Australia says it doesn't want a legally binding agreement until
2015. The European Union is willing to have a second commitment period for Kyoto
with conditions that since it has 11% of global emissions that the other 89%
sign on too but the EU's chief climate negotiator says it is too late for Durban
- that is now not going to happen until the earliest at 2015. Despite the
economic problems, climate change action is still active in the EU.
Originally China said the developed countries
should bring equivalent plans, creating a kind of parallel to the Kyoto
protocol; this is intended to encourage (shame) the United States to do its part
as it never signed on to Kyoto. The BASIC countries (Brazil, South Africa, India
and China) met in Beijing at the end of October and concluded there must be a
second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. A China News press release
stated that this is "the essential priority for the success of the Durban
conference." Kyoto required binding targets for developed countries and
voluntary initiatives for developing countries. The Green Climate Fund to
capitalize financial support for climate initiatives in developing countries is
also considered a priority.
The Kyoto Protocol has provided the structure
for fostering emission trading schemes and at least in countries with serious
intent to meet the emission reduction targets, innovation and new technologies
The lack of a second commitment period doesn't mean that the Kyoto Protocol is
dead but it sure would create a administrative nightmare because some of the
provisions depend on emission targets and those would stop. For businesses
involved in markets created through the Kyoto Protocol, this could have serious
financial implications.
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
NRC INDUSTRIAL
RESEARCH ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: GREENER GARBAGE TRUCK
A group of young entrepreneurs/recent
engineering graduates set up a company Effenco in Montreal to use the brakes on
a garbage truck to operate the mechanical arm and to compact the waste. About
one third of the energy of a typical garbage truck operate this part of the
system. The goal of the inventors was to reduce fuel consumption by 20% by
recovering energy generated by braking.
A NRC IRAP grant provided both financial and
technical assistance as well as commercialization advice. The company now has 13
staff and expects to sell one hundred Head(TM) systems by 2012. The system is in
operation in Drummondville, Sherbrooke, Victoriaville and Halifax. Tests
indicate the results are in line with expectations for fuel savings, brake wear
and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The company also was able to obtain
financial support from other sources such as Export Development Canada, Quebec's
Ministère du Développement économique, de l'Innovation et de l'Exportation and
the provincial Agence de l'efficacité énergétique.
Effenco will exhibit at the Canadian Waste
& Recycling Expo , to be held November 9 to 10 , 2011 at the Palais des Congres de Montreal :"Come
check out our hybrid demo truck." GallonLetter's editor will be at the
conference and trade show and will have a look. If you are not going to CWRE,
the company has a web site with some photos.
Canadian Waste & Recycling Expo. Montreal,
Quebec: November 9-10, 2011. Palais des Congres de Montreal. Montreal, Quebec:
November 9-10, 2011. http://www.cwre.ca
****************************************************
MACLEANS: SOME
OF THE BEST EMPLOYERS IDENTIFY ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVES
After Macleans magazine surveyed employees of
Canadian firms to create its 50 Best Employers list, it asked the companies for
information on what they thought was the reason they won the recognition. A
number of firms identified environmental initiatives as one of the three to four
reasons they listed:
- BC Biomedical Laboratories Ltd.(Surrey,
British Columbia)-""Go Green" team
educates staff on green initiatives; the "Giving Back" committee holds
fundraisers for local charities"
- British Columbia Automobile Association
(Surrey, British Columbia) -"Employees
take pride in the organization's efforts to be socially and environmentally
responsible"
- La Capitale Financial Group (Quebec City,
Quebec)-"Prides itself on its social and
environmental responsibility"
- Canadian Western Bank (Edmonton,
Alberta)-"Commitment to corporate social
responsibility through initiatives including the "Green Team" and the
"Employee Volunteer Grant Program" "
- Loyaltyone (Toronto, Ontario)-"Environmental sustainability programs, including a
waste-reduction program, and a Smart car fleet"
- Scotiabank Group (Toronto,
Ontario)-"A commitment to corporate social
responsibility, including supporting the arts (Scotiabank Nuit Blanche), the
environment and charity"
Of course, other companies listed might also
have environment captured in such programs as an Open Door policy to air
concerns without having to talk to the manager, contributing to charities which
could be environmental as well but these are interesting because of the three to
four reasons given, environment is mentioned specifically by the firm as a
reason Maclean's survey of employees rated these companies highly as
employers
Paid subscribers see link to original documents and
references here.
****************************************************
NLEN CALLS ON
CANADIANS TO PROTEST GOVERNMENT CUTS TO ENVIRONMENT NETWORKS
The Newfoundland Industry Association has a
news link to the Newfoundland Environment Networks NLEN call on political
leaders to reconsider cuts to the NL and Canadian Environment Network, "On
October 13, 2011 the Newfoundland and Labrador Environment Network learned that
core funding for the entire Canadian Environment Network (RCEN) had been cut by
Environment Canada. Unless alternate sources of funding are identified, this
decision will force many of the environment network offices across the country,
including the NLEN, to cease operating. Please contact your MP to ask the
government to reconsider this decision."
"The return on investment to the well-being of
Canadians in supporting the Canadian Environmental Network and its provincial
affiliates including NLEN cannot be underestimated. These organizations provide
a tremendous contribution in creating good public policy in Canada. Through
their passion and the expertise of their volunteers, important environmental
issues and perspectives, that might otherwise not be addressed, are brought to
the forefront. This input adds value to decision-making in many sectors
including the business community. Business has a responsibility to lead by
example in supporting the goal of genuine wealth for Canadians. This requires a
balanced environmental, social and economic approach." said Linda Bartlett,
Executive Director, Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Industry
Association.
For 33 years the Canadian Environment Network
has had an agreement with Environment Canada. Core funding recently been
$547,000. This money also provides the main funds for the 10 provincial networks
and the Yukon Network. The Ontario Environment Network expected to receive
$25,000 but had to lay off their executive director of 12 years because there of
the cut and because there was no warning that the funds would not be provided.
The Nova Scotia allotment was $18,000.
GallonLetter notes that one of the problems in
raising public concern is that these networks are mostly administrative
providing capacity training, linkages and calls for delegates to the
governmental table of consultations. The public doesn't know that much about
them compared to the individual environmental groups. The Canadian Environment
Network coordinates responses from grassroots organizations. These inputs now
will go to federal bureaucrats to compile instead probably at much higher cost
to the taxpayer.
Newfoundland and Labrador Environment Network.
Action Alert – Call on political leaders to reconsider cuts to the Newfoundland
and Labrador Environment Network and the Canadian Environment Network. October
17th, 2011.
****************************************************
GALLONLETTER'S
EDITOR IN WATERLOO ON NOVEMBER 16
The environmental journal Alternatives is
celebrating its 40th Anniversary this year and part of the
celebration is a panel discussion entitled Deep Roots, New Shoots. Gallon
Environment Letter's Editor Colin Isaacs will be one of the panelists for the
event which starts at 6.00pm on Wednesday, November 16th with a
screening of the CBC documentary Surviving the Future. The panel discussion is
being moderated by Alternatives' editor-in-chief Nicola Ross and will also
feature the chair of Alternative's Editorial Board Professor Bob Gibson.
The event is being held at the Centre for
International Governance Innovation Auditorium at 67 Erb St. W. in Waterloo.
CIGI is a partner and will be nominating other panel participants. Admission is
free but tickets are required. More details and a link for tickets are at
http://www.alternativesjournal.ca/40thForum.
****************************************************
IJC BIENNIAL
MEETING CONSIDERS NEXT STEPS
The proposed priorities for the International
Joint Commission IJC 2011-2013 priority cycle will guide the IJC. Under the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, the IJC provides advice and recommendations
to the Canadian and US governments on the quality of the boundary waters of the
Great Lakes system. The public was able to submit comments at the biennual
meeting held in Detroit October 12-14 and until October 31, 2011.
In keeping with the theme of this
GallonLetter, climate change is included in the priorities One of the priorities
is adaptive management including the potential impacts of climate change on the
Great Lakes, possible ecosystem responses and capacity for response and
adaptation. Studying the ecological and ecosystem value of natural systems such
as wetlands is also part of the plan. A number of the draft reports address the
impact of rising temperature due to climate change on the aquatic and nearshore
habitat.
Climate change is linked to
- stress in native fish communities
- algal blooms with their associated health
risk due toxins produced by the cyanobacteria associated with the algae
- potential shifts of some fish species
northwards
- changes in timing of peak floods and flood
flow which may affect spawning and hatching
- more challenges in recovery efforts for
endangered species such as lake sturgeon
The Commission is planning to publish final
reports in 2012 after processing of the comments received. A key
recommendation of the meeting was that governments need to commit to monitoring,
measurement and reporting of problems. Indicators related to objectives of the
agreement are needed.
Former US Vice President Al Gore was a keynote
speaker at the event and media coverage about what he said tended to overwhelm
press coverage. Gore tends to be a flashpoint for climate contrarians who
criticize his linking of environmental catastrophes associated with drought,
floods, and extreme weather to climate change. The media tended to note the
controversy. However, the article in our local paper ended with a quote from IJC
Senior Science Advisor (and hydrologist) Ted Yuzyk who said, "He's quoting what
the researchers are saying." GallonLetter notes that the Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change is finalizing a draft report which links climate change and
extreme weather events.
****************************************************
READING
GALLONDAILY
If you enjoy Gallon Environment Letter or find
it useful for your work or interests, may we recommend the GallonDaily report.
Found at www.gallondaily.com, GallonDaily provides short articles and reports on
topics of particular interest to green businesses. One article appears almost
every day Monday to Friday - we recommend visiting at least once a week. Our
real enthusiasts can also sign up for email notification as new articles are
posted. Recent topics include:
- A Green Christmas Shopping List
- Arctic Food Network wins major sustainability
prize
- Court upholds US West Coast pesticide ban in
salmon habitat
- The Tea Party is not the US public
- Green economy growing strongly in London,
UK
****************************************************
UK GETS TOUGH
ON RECYCLING, NOT SO MUCH ON REDUCING, OF JUNK MAIL
UK governments have just signed an agreement
with the Direct Marketing Association designed to reduce the carbon footprint of
junk mail. In addition to apparently improved opt-out provisions for
householders, the agreement includes:
- a requirement that the industry develop and
apply a carbon footprint calculator for advertising mail
- a new industry standard on the procurement
and use of paper products, and on supplier management, to help ensure that
waste and carbon emissions are minimized
- controls which ensure the mailings are
produced using materials that are capable of being recycled
- annual measurement of recycling rates for
direct mail.
As GallonLetter sees it, the Sustainability
challenge facing industry in general is to do more with less while remaining
adequately profitable with lower material and input content. The agreement
between government and the DMA does not appear to address this objective,
especially when one considers that the latest DMA Door Drop facts and figures
report states that Door Drop volumes (Door Drop is UK jargon for unaddressed
advertising mail) increased by 1.8% to 7.905 billion items in 2010 compared to
the previous year. The DMA report describes this as "the encouraging return to
growth in 2010".
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 1G0
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 + HST = $207.92. For individuals (non-organizational emails and paid with
non-org funds please) $30 includes HST. Subscription includes 12 issues about a
year or more. http://www.cialgroup.com/subscription.htm
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx