Canada to the Rescue (of the Coal Industry)

Mon, 2009-05-04 17:47Mitchell Anderson
Mitchell Anderson's picture

Canada to the Rescue (of the Coal Industry)

Canada’s science minister, Gary Goodyear, was in Washington recently talking up how Canadian research may usher in a era of “clean coal”. Ottawa is shoveling $1 billion for research related to the dubious concept of “carbon capture and storage”, targeted largely at the Alberta tar sands.

Goodyear implied that the Canadian brain trust could develop technologies to keep the carbon party going on both sides of the border without any of those nasty emissions.

Is this good news? Hardly.

It’s more like a drunk trying to talk a drinking buddy out of going to his first AA meeting.

America under the Obama Administration has been making the first bold steps to getting serious about climate change. A cap and trade bill is moving through Congress. The EPA listed carbon as a “pollutant” opening the door for regulation under the Clean Air Act. Obama has pledged billions in tax dollars and incentive to double renewable energy production in US in the next three years.

Obama has also dedicated 3% of American GDP to research – the highest level of government investment in science in American history. There is a constellation of green energy research programs being nurtured in the US designed to make America a green technology leader.

Obama’s motivations are clear: “The nation that leads the world in 21st-century clean energy will be the nation that leads in the 21st-century global economy,” the President said. “America can and must be that nation.”

Meanwhile Canada is still on the barstool wondering where her old pal went. Carbon emissions in Canada ballooned by 4% in 2007 alone and are now 26% above 1990 levels, with no end in site. Rather than deal with a root cause of extraction and consumption, Canada has instead committed to the technological pipe dream of carbon capture that has already been rejected by experts as a solution to tar sands emissions.

Of course if the US brings in meaningful cap and trade legislation, it would be a disaster for the already marginal economics of the oil sands. Canada either wants the US to continue ignoring the problem, or make sure that whatever climate bill is passed gives Canada’s tar sands a pass.

As for the $1 billion carbon capture research fund, maybe it makes more sense to ask what else that money could have been used for. Harper has slashed science spending by $148 million. Many researchers complain that what support does exist has largely been earmarked for bricks and mortar rather than pure research.

Renewable energy producers are exasperated by the lack of support by the Harper government. America now spends four times more per capita on renewable energy research than Canada.

What support does exist for so-called “green energy” has largely been sucked up by carbon capture for the oil sands. Even with an additional $1 billion of Alberta taxpayer’s money thrown at funding this boondoggle, the private sector is not interested.

Nine out of twenty oil companies picked by the Alberta government to access the massive $2 billion fund to develop this dubious technology have since pulled their bids.

Such tar sands heavy weights as Suncor, Syncrude, ConocoPhillips and StatoilHydro decided this “solution” wasn’t worth their investment dollars, even if the taxpayer was shelling out billions. Last month Shell reneged on a pledge to reduce carbon emissions at a $13 billion tar sands expansion to those of conventional oil - exposing themselves to litigation that might overturn the approval for the project.

Carbon capture at the tar sands has been a bust both economically and scientifically. It is therefore no surprise that the hapless Minister Goodyear is talking up the idea south of the border. Canada obviously hopes this red herring will lead to a sweetheart deal for the tar sands, or even dissuade the US from kicking the carbon habit. 

If America walks away from fossil fuels, Canada will finally have to go on the wagon as well. And no drunk wants to lose their buddy to a 12-step program.

This month we’re giving away FREE copies Anthony Barnosky’s Heatstroke: nature in an age of global warming.

Go here to find out more details about DeSmogBlog’s monthly book give-away.

 

Comments

I have come to see Carbon Cap and Trade as being a scam that allows companies to send monies across borders without the regular taxes.

If Carbon is below 2600 feet it goes “critical” that is turns to a liquid, It stays that way until it is brought up to a lesser depth.  The closer it gets to the surface, the greater it expands.

In Weyburn Saskatchewan they are using captured carbon dioxide injecting it into the shale to recover gas and oil.  The carbon dioxide acts like a solvent and as a solvent it becomes saturated into what ever it is being used on. 

In the case of oil most of it comes to the surface with the oil and escapes again into the atmosphere.  Companies can claim carbon sequestration and sell it on the stock exchange.  Oil companies using it can claim a lower carbon foot print for conventional oil. And, on it goes.

In Montana they are talking of a proper sequestering into a Geo dome far underground.  So far so good.  They are also considering a pipeline to move the carbon dioxide from the dome to the shale to use it as they do in Weyburn.

Carbon Cap and Trade is a numbers game.  It has little or nothing to do with the environment in my humble opinion.

Gary Goodyear was first elected to the House of Commons in 2004 and was re-elected in 2006 and 2008. On October 30, 2008, he was appointed Minister of State (Science and Technology) by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Prior to entering federal politics, he practised chiropractic medicine and worked as an advisor to investment firms in the biomedical industry.

cheers,

free music downloads

Working internationally to ensure the coal industry addresses its detractors and speaks with a common voice is also becoming more important.

regards,

Wieghtlloss Blog

Canada’s science minister, Gary Goodyear, was in Washington recently talking up how the Canadian research may usher in a era of “clean coal” Fta

Today there are 10 most perspective kinds of energy which not new and all of us them it is known, in the near future think hardly that that will change.
Solar energy
Coal
Wind
Oil
Biomass
Hydroelectricity
Transformation of thermal energy of ocean
Atomic energy
Fuel elements
Antimatter

——————————————-
my blog:http://tummy-tuck-info.blogspot.com

I think Obama makes a solid stance and point that whichever nation or nations are the leaders in clean energy, will be the emerges in the new economy structure that prevails after this world recession. More importantly, it is the responsibility of those nations to share the knowledge so the whole world can be better and benefit from it.

Cheers,

Broadway Music

Your parallel, “It’s more like a drunk trying to talk a drinking buddy out of going to his first AA meeting.” was really well said.

Choi,

Broadway Music

[x]

At 9:35 p.m. on Saturday, May 30, Greeley, Colorado was struck by a 3.4 magnitude earthquake. Earthquakes are highly unusual in eastern Colorado, raising speculation that it was a “frackquake” — a man-made earthquake stimulated by the disposal of contaminated drilling water in deep injection wells. This disposal technique forces wastewater generated from hydraulic fracturing (fracking) deep into underground rock formations, lubricating layers of rock that would not ordinarily be subject to movement.

Earthquakes are so rare in eastern Colorado that the U.S....

read more