SUZUKI - SK and AB - Environmental "laggards"

SUZUKI - SK and AB - Environmental "laggards"

Postby Oscar » Sat Apr 07, 2012 9:55 am

Alberta, Saskatchewan called environmental ‘laggards’

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/
alberta-saskatchewan-called-environmental-laggards/article2398750/

GLORIA GALLOWAY OTTAWA— From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Apr. 11, 2012 3:03PM EDT
Last updated Thursday, Apr. 12, 2012 7:37AM EDT

Some provinces are closing their coal-fired generating plants and introducing economic incentives to reduce their citizens’ reliance on fossil fuels.

Others – specifically Alberta and Saskatchewan – are going backwards in the fight against climate change, says a new report by the David Suzuki Foundation that looks at what individual provinces and territories are doing to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.

The report, called All Over The Map, was released Wednesday and coincides with a federal announcement that greenhouse-gas emissions are levelling off nationally despite a growing economy.

The Suzuki Foundation says sharp declines in emissions will be needed to prevent devastating climate change. And “a lot of the progress that’s being made when it comes to global warming is coming from provinces and cities,” said Ian Bruce, leader of the climate-change program at the Suzuki Foundation, in a telephone interview.

- - - - SNIP - - - -

The “worst” provinces

Alberta and Saskatchewan were named environmental “laggards” by the Suzuki Foundation. Most of Canada’s increase in greenhouse-gas emissions since 1990 has come from these two provinces, and their per-capita emissions are five times what they are in the rest of Canada.

Alberta, because of its economic reliance on the oil sands, is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Canada, and emissions will continue to grow until 2020, the Suzuki report says. Meanwhile, the province continues to rely heavily on coal power for electricity, Mr. Bruce said.

A spokesman for the Alberta government said the province had the first mandated emissions-reduction program for all large industry, and has a policy to cut greenhouse gases while balancing the need for “a healthy economy and a competitive industry.”

Saskatchewan, meanwhile, has the highest greenhouse-gas emissions per capita in the country, has no plan to close its coal-fired power plants and has eliminated its Climate Change Secretariat and its Office of Energy Consumption. “It is difficult to imagine any jurisdiction taking the threats of climate change less seriously than Saskatchewan currently does,” the Suzuki report says. Saskatchewan officials did not respond to a request for comment.

What is needed? A comprehensive national plan

The Suzuki Foundation accuses the federal government of thwarting action to reduce climate change. Federal programs, where they exist, are weak and ineffective, it says.

What is required, says the foundation, is a full suite of policies at the national level to tackle all sources of greenhouse gas. That includes efforts to spur innovation and the production of clean energy, action to reduce growing road-transportation emissions, more efficient construction methods and an increased emphasis on renewable power.

“Technologies already exist to dramatically cut emissions,” the report says. “The only missing ingredient is political leadership.”


= = = = = = = = =

SUZUKI: REPORT: All Over the Map

Get the report: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/
2012/All%20Over%20the%20Map%202012.pdf

The Link here to the Suzuki Foundation latest report “All Over The Map” in which Saskatchewan is reported to be one of the worst province’s in Canada when it comes to addressing climate change, not something our government was very happy about.

Read the press release:

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/media/news/2012/04/
report-shows-provincial-climate-change-plans-all-over-the-map/


= = = = = =


IS SASKATCHEWAN READY FOR ITS ENERGY SHIFT?

by Elaine Hughes

Published in the Wadena News on April 4, 2012, P. 9
(with two photos & some changes by WN Editor . . . )

This was the question posed by Dr. Mark Bigland-Pritchard during his high-powered presentation at St. Peter's Abbey in Muenster on March 17, 2012.

Dr. Bigland-Pritchard, Director of Low Energy Design Ltd of Saskatoon, is well qualified to speak to this issue; he has taught energy studies in two British universities, has two engineering degrees, a Ph.D in architectural physics, has many years' experience in energy and green building consultant, and is currently the lead reseacher for the Green Energy Project Saskatchewan.

He began by referring to the Common Sense declaration of the Bruntland Commission in 1987 which reads: “Sustainability: meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”, reminding us of the urgency of shifting our energy demands from the quickly-disappearing fossil fuels to alternative sources – while we still have even the slightest chance of preventing irreversible climate collapse. We must find a way to face the threats to sustainability - climate change, peak oil, gas, coal, uranium; radioactive emissions; pollution – and act. Now!

He said, “Last November, the International Energy Agency concluded that we have five years in which to stabilise and begin to reduce GHG (Greenhouse Gas) emission if we are to avoid irreversible climate change. If we fail to meet that deadline, we are most likely condemning future generations to live in a world in which many coastal cities are underwater, much of the world's present agricultural areas have become too hot, too wet or too dry to grow crops, and international affairs are dominated by failed states and an ongoing climate refugee crisis.”

He examined some of the sources of Saskatchewan's GHG emissions: 20% from electricity generation (predominantly coal-fired), 19% from transport, 14% from industrial process heating (nearly all of it in the mining and oil/gas industries), 20% from leakage and venting of methane by the oil and gas industries, 16% from agriculture (methane gas in emissions from livestock, and nitrous oxide loss from soils - both more polluting than CO2), 5% from heating buildings, and the remainder from miscellaneous smaller sources.

In 1990, each Saskatchewan resident was responsible for approximately 43 tonnes of GHG (Green House Gas CO2 equivalent) emissions per year; in 2009, that number had risen to approximately 71 tonnes – the highest in Canada! If we were meeting our emission reduction goal, that number should have been approximately 40 tonnes! By comparison, Quebec's figures dropped over the same period from 12 to 10.4 tonnes per person per year, and Sweden's from 8.5 to 6.5.

Dr. Bigland-Pritchard asked the question: “So, where could Saskatchewan go in its shift to alternative energy generation?” In reply, he quoted Wayne Gretzky:: “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.”


He then presented the province's low carbon electrical options, rapidly eliminating two of them. Nuclear fission has well-known problems - high cost, health issues, the (small but devastating) risk of a major accident, the still-unsolved problem of safe and sustainable storage of the lethal waste, and the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation. Coal with carbon capture and storage is also extremely expensive, still results in emissions of toxic heavy metals, and uses a finite resource.

Dr Bigland-Pritchard therefore instead advocates Energy Efficiency & Conservation (government's tardiness to force all users of electricity - commercial, industrial and personal - to get with the program towards increasing the efficient use of electricity and to conserve rather than waste electricity. Both uranium and coal will eventually run out – then what?); and Renewable Energy (if so, which ones do we choose to shift our energy sources? Wind, Solar (the sun is sending us 108,000,000,000,000,000,000 kWh/yr . . . more than 10,000 times the energy we need) photovoltaics, Hydroelectricity, Biomass, Geothermal, Solar concentrating thermal).

Dr. Bigland-Pritchard pointed out advantages of Renewable Energy, “MORE SECURE LOCAL JOBS, DOESN'T RUN OUT, much less pollution, no direct toxic emissions, no radioactive waste.”

He sees it as a POWER DOWN and a POWER UP scenario. POWER DOWN would be accomplished through efficiency and conservation. POWER UP to meet our demands would be met by renewable, sustainable energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass, hydroelectricity, and grid integration), discussing the options and energy generation of each system.

To supply 25% of SaskPower's projected electricity needs in 2030 would require wind turbines spread over only about 250 to 300 km2, out of 10,000 km2 available with sufficient wind speeds. To supply 10% of projected 2030 demand from solar photovoltaics would require only 20 km2, of which 10 km2 could be on buildings or beside east-west highways. While considering a strict ethical criteria considering food security, ecological impact and land rights, the present Saskatchewan potential for electricity from biomass fuels is 15% to 20% of 2030 demand (mostly from forestry and agricultural residue); with successful development of sustainable biochar technology, that could possibly be doubled.

The contribution of hydroelectricity could steadily grow, while designing to avoid significant ecological effects, protect First Nation rights and livelihood, and minimize flooding (which results in methane production). These sources need to be carefully integrated into the grid, with quick response options (hydro and biogas, including the option of imported hydro from Manitoba) compensating for the variability of wind and solar. That variability can be substantially reduced through strategies such as wide geographical distribution, optimizing the mix of wind and solar, introduction of "smart grid" technology to enable users to shift consumption to optimum times, better weather data collection, and energy storage (especially pumped storage, new battery types and compressed air).

He pointed out the progress of other jurisdictions. A detailed study in Germany concludes: “Our scenario computations show that Germany could readily achieve a wholly renewable electricity supply that is both reliable and affordable.” Denmark's government is now targeting "... a total conversion of the Danish energy system ... away from oil, coal and gas .... and to green energy with wind turbines and bioenergy as the most important elements". [note – there is no nuclear power in Denmark either today or in future proposals]. Ontario's current move towards green energy owes much to the Pembina Institute's Renewable is Doable Action Plan; a similar report has prompted more serious action in Alberta's Greening the Grid – Powering Alberta's Future with Renewable Energy.

In closing, Dr. Bigland-Pritchard asked: “The science says WE MUST. The technology says WE CAN. We stand to benefit both socially and economically - what will it take to say WE WILL???”

How will Saskatchewan proceed?

For more information on the Green Energy Project Saskatchewan: www.greenenergysask.ca

- 0 -

Elaine Hughes, Chair
Quill Plains Chapter
Council of Canadians
Last edited by Oscar on Sat Apr 14, 2012 5:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Oscar
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8060
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm

SUZUKI - Saskatchewan an Environmental "laggard"

Postby Oscar » Sat Apr 14, 2012 5:21 pm

Power Shift: A Sustainable Future for Saskatchewan's Electricity

with Dr. Mark Bigland-Pritchard

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/author ... -pritchard

Saturday, April 14, 2012 7:00 p.m.

Mackenzie Art Gallery Theatre
3475 Albert Street, Regina

Free Admission, Everyone Welcome

- - - - - - -

Promoting a greener Sask

http://www.leaderpost.com/technology/Pr ... ener+Sask/
6458017/story.html

By Emma Graney, Leader-Post April 14, 2012

On the heels of Saskatchewan's environmental "laggard" label by the David Suzuki Foundation, an environmental expert will be in Regina on Saturday night to talk about a potential Green Energy Project for the province, and promoting renewable energy use.

Mark Bigland-Pritchard, an academic and director of Low Energy Design in Saskatoon, says Saskatchewan is years behind other parts of the world when it comes to renewable energy.

"I think in North America, part of the problem is the fossil fuel industry is much more powerful than in Europe and their lobbyists are very effective, and so a lot of people here don't get to see what's possible with renewable energy," he said.

"(Renewable energy) will never be a boom industry in the same way as oil or gas, because it's steady and sustainable, but establishing these renewable energy sources would secure long-term jobs in the community."

Bigland-Pritchard argues establishing local, renewable energy sources means people would not have to commute to remote oil or gas fields to make a living.

"For a long time in Scotland, for example, the boom town was Aberdeen, because of the oilfields in the North Sea that are now past maximum production," he said.

"In Scotland there's a massive push to develop wind power ... it means a lot of people have secure stable jobs at home through wind farms in their own community."

Denmark is aiming for 100 per cent renewable energy use by 2035. There farmers used a co-operative approach to establish wind farms. [ . . . ]


- - - -

QUOTE: ""We're not very pleased with some of the attention from the David Suzuki Foundation, because we take climate change seriously and we're making great strides," he said."- - - - -

Sask. climate stance called 'laggard'

Duncan disputes report

http://www.thestarphoenix.com/technology/
Sask+climate+stance+called+laggard/6451696/story.html

BY EMMA GRANEY, LEADER-POST APRIL 13, 2012

Environment Minister Dustin Duncan says he'd like to sit down with the David Suzuki Foundation and discuss climate change after the foundation labelled Saskatchewan a "laggard" in a scathing report.

With the highest rate of greenhouse gas emissions in the country - 71 tonnes per capita compared with 14.3 in B.C. and 10.4 in Quebec - Saskatchewan was slammed in the report as a province that doesn't care.

"The Saskatchewan Party government hasn't simply stalled action on climate change - it has reversed it," the report says. "It is difficult to imagine a province taking the threats of climate change less seriously."

But Duncan disputes the comments, saying there are plans in place when it comes to cutting emissions and promoting a greener province.

In particular, the foundation is critical of Saskatchewan's reliance on coal and the government's lack of commitment to turn that around.

Duncan counters that the industry employs hundreds of people directly and thousands indirectly, and points to Saskatchewan's research into carbon capture and storage (CCS) - a method of storing emissions so they don't enter the atmosphere.

The first example of CCS was in Weyburn, and Duncan says the province is a "world leader" when it comes to CCS practices, citing a new project at the coal-powered Boundary Dam Power Station.

But the report says CCS is not a proven technology and doesn't equate to cutting emissions. [ . . . ]

- - - - - -


Alberta, Saskatchewan called environmental ‘laggards’

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/
alberta-saskatchewan-called-environmental-laggards/article2398750/

GLORIA GALLOWAY OTTAWA— From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Apr. 11, 2012 3:03PM EDT
Last updated Thursday, Apr. 12, 2012 7:37AM EDT

Some provinces are closing their coal-fired generating plants and introducing economic incentives to reduce their citizens’ reliance on fossil fuels.

Others – specifically Alberta and Saskatchewan – are going backwards in the fight against climate change, says a new report by the David Suzuki Foundation that looks at what individual provinces and territories are doing to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.

The report, called All Over The Map, was released Wednesday and coincides with a federal announcement that greenhouse-gas emissions are levelling off nationally despite a growing economy.

The Suzuki Foundation says sharp declines in emissions will be needed to prevent devastating climate change. And “a lot of the progress that’s being made when it comes to global warming is coming from provinces and cities,” said Ian Bruce, leader of the climate-change program at the Suzuki Foundation, in a telephone interview.

- - - - SNIP - - - -

The “worst” provinces

Alberta and Saskatchewan were named environmental “laggards” by the Suzuki Foundation. Most of Canada’s increase in greenhouse-gas emissions since 1990 has come from these two provinces, and their per-capita emissions are five times what they are in the rest of Canada.

Alberta, because of its economic reliance on the oil sands, is the largest emitter of greenhouse gases in Canada, and emissions will continue to grow until 2020, the Suzuki report says. Meanwhile, the province continues to rely heavily on coal power for electricity, Mr. Bruce said.

A spokesman for the Alberta government said the province had the first mandated emissions-reduction program for all large industry, and has a policy to cut greenhouse gases while balancing the need for “a healthy economy and a competitive industry.”

Saskatchewan, meanwhile, has the highest greenhouse-gas emissions per capita in the country, has no plan to close its coal-fired power plants and has eliminated its Climate Change Secretariat and its Office of Energy Consumption. “It is difficult to imagine any jurisdiction taking the threats of climate change less seriously than Saskatchewan currently does,” the Suzuki report says. Saskatchewan officials did not respond to a request for comment.

What is needed? A comprehensive national plan

The Suzuki Foundation accuses the federal government of thwarting action to reduce climate change. Federal programs, where they exist, are weak and ineffective, it says.

What is required, says the foundation, is a full suite of policies at the national level to tackle all sources of greenhouse gas. That includes efforts to spur innovation and the production of clean energy, action to reduce growing road-transportation emissions, more efficient construction methods and an increased emphasis on renewable power.

“Technologies already exist to dramatically cut emissions,” the report says. “The only missing ingredient is political leadership.”


= = = = = = = = =

SUZUKI: REPORT: All Over the Map

Get the report: http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publications/downloads/
2012/All%20Over%20the%20Map%202012.pdf

The Link here to the Suzuki Foundation latest report “All Over The Map” in which Saskatchewan is reported to be one of the worst province’s in Canada when it comes to addressing climate change, not something our government was very happy about.

Read the press release:

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/media/news/2012/04/
report-shows-provincial-climate-change-plans-all-over-the-map/


Please share with your networks.

Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan
cleangreensask@yahoo.ca

http://www.cleangreensask.ca

http://www.facebook.com/pages/
Coalition-for-a-Clean-Green-Saskatchewan/83935014222

http://www.youtube.com/user/cleangreensask
Oscar
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8060
Joined: Wed May 03, 2006 3:23 pm


Return to Renewable General/Solar Energy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron