Category Archives: Climate Change

EnviroAb – Oct. 4-10

Posted on by
Reply

With the daily publication of EnviroAb, I thought I would add a weekly commentary on some of the topics I found of most interest/value.

The relative roles and responsibilities of the federal and provincial committees reviewing oilsands monitoring was frequently discussed this week with questions of overlap, duplication etc.

The intent to establish aprovincial committee was announced Sep. 26:

http://alberta.ca/acn/201009/2920144932A4E-0BA6-6932-D9C0606CCBFE2BC1.html

And the names were made available this week:

http://environment.alberta.ca/03183.html

The committee is to report by Feb and is reviewing monitoring results and methods – to understand the apparently different results and to understand their significance historically.

The federal panel was announced Sep 30 and is to report within 60 days:

http://www.ec.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=714D9AAE-1&news=981D86D0-D3DB-4D71-8957-8EF52F85A05E

The mandate here seems broader – they are to review research and monitoring. The release actually mentions “of environmental effects” but I somehow doubt they will be limited to that.

It seems the federal panel is somewhat more oriented to the methods and systems in research and monitoring shill the provincial panel is more oriented to resolving some of the specific inconsistencies in observations. So, they are complementary but it would have been better if the provincial panel reported first.

James Hansen added significantly to the hearings about the Total oilsands proposal:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/oil-sands-should-be-left-in-the-ground-nasa-scientist/article1743844/

I found two things interesting about this intervention. First, I wondered about his appearance at such a hearing and being reported as from the Goddard Institute. I presume he wasn’t presenting a position of GISS but his own opinion. I wonder if that was made clear during the hearing.

More importantly, this whole hearing is a reflection of the reality that there is really no policy or law in place today to manage GHG emissions. One has to have the argument over each individual project or initiative.

The First Long Weekend of Summer (?)

Posted on by
Reply

Summer can be a fleeting thing in western and northern Canada.  Last week was a prime example …  +30 C to start the week but closer to +3 C to start the first “summer” long weekend.  We can only hope for a turn around!

The annual meeting of the International Arctic Buoy Meeting will be held in a couple weeks in Oslo — just prior to the IPY Final Conference.  The IABP coordinates the deployment of weather, ice and oceanographic buoys throughout the Arctic ocean.  Today’s map of Arctic sea ice shows that the ice extent in the Arctic right now is lower than it was at this time in 2007 — the year of the minimum sea ice recorded in the Arctic.  It is a very interesting development — particularly in light of the results that suggest that much of the remaining ice is thin — thinner than perhaps we know.  Read the comments of University of Manitoba professor Dave Barber.

Sea ice in Canada’s fragile Arctic is melting faster than anyone expected, the lead investigator in Canada’s largest climate-change study yet said Friday — raising the possibility that the Arctic could, in a worst-case scenario, be ice-free in about three years.

We will have a challenge at the IABP to find ice that is suitable for us to deploy our instruments.

Photo: Actually taken a couple weeks back, this was taken as the late snowfall  melted from some of the early spring flowers in the yard.  Vignetting intentionally applied in photoshop to draw attention to the focus of the image.

Understanding Carbon Emissions

Posted on by
Reply

(Photo:  Elbow River, Calgary, Alberta)

I am certainly no expert but I am interested in trying to understand the emissions of carbon from various energy sources.  A report from CERA calculates the ‘well to wheels’ emissions with Canada’s oil sands as the energy source.  (Well to wheels is defined as:  The oil extraction, processing, distribution, through to the combustion of the refined products, such as gasoline and the resulting emissions that exit through the tailpipe.)

The study conclusion states that emissions ”are approximately 5 to 15 percent higher than the average crude oil processed in the United States.” 

A comment on a National Post site suggests the emissions of heavy oil sources in California are higher than the average oilsands emissions.

It would be very interesting to determine more ‘wells to wheels’ calculations of emissions.  Personally, I would like to see these calculations be inclusive of all ‘associated’ emissions.  For example, the production of conventional oil can, depending on what is done, be accommpanied by the flaring or venting of natural gas. 

The wikipedia entry concerning oil production in Nigeria, indicates the oil from there is light and sweet (implying there would be lower overall emissions to refine this to a usable state) but then goes on to indicate that much natural gas is flared off.

I will be trying to learn more about the equivalencies of so called “well to wheels” emissions for various energy sources.

Alberta GHG Emissions

Posted on by
Reply

Alberta Prime Time had a debate on the efficacy of Alberta’s regulations on greenhouse gases.  Andy Ridge of the Alberta Climate Change Secretariat debated with Matthew Bramley of the Pembina Institute.

At issue was what exactly was the substance of the Government’s news release of May 5th — where it was reported that emissions were reduced relative to the business as usual scenario.

It felt like the debate was like so many climate change discussions this year — thinking of Climategate etc. — a discussion of apples and oranges.  We don’t even have a common understanding of the basic data/information and we are not really giving it to people in a way they can understand it.

I wonder if we need to bring some private sector accountability to the reporting of emissions.  Imagine investing in a company with an annual report that said something like “Losses were $17M less than expected under a business as usual scenario.”  Or, in light of the big spill in the Gulf, suppose BP were reporting “The spill is now 17 million fewer barrels than under a business as usual spill.”

We can report that emissions were lower than expected …  but we also should expect our governments to be both honest and truthful and report the full emissions — thereby making it clear that it wasn’t an actual decline in emissions but rather it was a slowing in the rate of increase.

I think, though, that is is more than just a #rebootab issue ….  it is an issue for all governments at all levels.  Believe it or not, the electorate are all big people.  We can handle the truth; we will reward those that tell it — the good, the bad and the ugly.

The image with this post is from my backyard — my grass slowly taking up some of the CO2 in the atmosphere.  But, my grass is growing every which direction — it is haphazard without any clarity and one can’t tell if there is an overall direction to it.  It summed up my sense of the information from the debate.