Tweet
Province's 'carbon tax' blasted
Environmentalists agree with industry that new policy is unfair -- and it won't lead to a reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions
Paul Marck, The Edmonton Journal
Published: Saturday, March 10, 2007
EDMONTON - Chemical producers and environmentalists alike are blasting the Stelmach government's new greenhouse-gas emissions policy.
The Pembina Institute for environmental policy and research says the new legislation is ineffective, shortchanging both the public and industry.
The chemical companies call Bill 3 a carbon tax, while Alberta's power producers praise it.
Pending legislation calls for companies to reduce their emissions intensity by 12 per cent by July 1 -- or pay into a climate-change fund. Companies have until year's end to report on their progress.
The Canadian Chemical Producers' Association says Alberta essentially penalizes both responsible companies and laggards indiscriminately.
Association president Richard Paton says there is no time for companies to make technology improvements before the end of 2007.
"Instead, Alberta companies will have to start paying into a fund, which is essentially a carbon tax," Paton said. "Unless you shut down production, there is no way to reduce emissions in a dramatic way overnight."
Gordon Lloyd, the association's vice-president of technical affairs, says the chemical industry in Canada has reduced greenhouse-gas emissions by 56 per cent since 1992, when the first global conferences on climate change called for action.
"We were astonished Alberta ignored that," Lloyd said. "We were very surprised that they came up with that formula."
The association predicts that some of its members will not make the grade in reducing emissions intensity -- the amount of greenhouse gases per production unit -- by 12 per cent by year's end.
"What we did in reducing our emissions seemed to be the right thing to do, but now we're being penalized," said Lloyd.
The association's members include such Alberta companies as Shell, Nova, INEOS Canada Partners, ME Global, Imperial Oil and Dow Chemicals.
The Pembina Institute says Alberta's pending legislation does little to address the problem of growing greenhouse gas because it's about measuring emission intensity, rather than putting in real limits.
"Really, it's a joke. There is nothing here that is going to lead to a reduction in emissions," said spokesman Jaisel Vadgama. "It's very confusing to the public."
The institute estimates the climate-change fund will raise $174 million in its first six months and terms that amount as ineffectual. All the same, many companies will end up paying the penalty of $15 per tonne for failing to meet reduction targets because the government is not giving industry enough time to invest in technology change, Vadgama said.
"There's an expectation in the first period, it's likely that many companies will be doing that. We're in a situation where we're not going to get any real reductions, and we're pointing everything in the wrong direction, where we haven't set up this framework that creates a stable plan that lets companies start investing. It's just dragging out the period of uncertainty."
Meanwhile, Alberta's power companies say they're prepared for the new green standard. They will use a combination of offsets, paying into the climate-change fund and advancing their own technologies.
"These are real tough targets. There's going to be just as tough an effort meet them," said Don Wharton, director of sustainable development for TransAlta.
While targets will present a significant challenge to industry, power companies have worked on strategies for years prior to the government's actions, Wharton said.
"We're relieved that we have some regulatory certainty, which has been missing for the last decade," Wharton said.
The result likely means higher costs for both industry and consumers, but there are no estimates as to how much, Wharton said.
EPCOR president Don Lowry says the power company has recognized for a long time that greener technologies will be an integral part of its operations. Last year, EPCOR invested $11 million, which was matched by the provincial government, into its Genesee G3 plant to study clean-coal techniques.
That kind of continuing investment will eventually pay off in getting energy out of coal without burning it, he said.
In the meantime, carbon dioxide sequestration and the federal government's announcement of a $156-million joint task force with Alberta in a CO2 pipeline and storage network will help launch other new technologies, Lowry said.
All the same, commercialized clean-coal technology does not yet exist.
EPCOR will pay into the climate-change fund with expectations that it will accelerate development of greener processes.
EPCOR does not expect to meet this year's deadlines for reducing greenhouse-gas emission intensity. "I don't think we can meet it by year end. But it's very early days to speculate, until we've had a chance to look at how the program works and how it's measured. The devil's in the details."
But like all the other companies that are gas emitters, EPCOR will crunch the target numbers with hard dollar projections to see what it means.
"Clearly the vintage of equipment that not just we, but all others, have just physically has limits to its performance capabilities. It's like your car, in terms of the only way you get your car to the next level of fuel efficiency is by buying a new one. It's the same with us. With the power plants, the way we get them to the next level of efficiency to meet these is replacing them."
pmarck@thejournal.canwest.com
AT A GLANCE
Under Bill 3, the Climate Change and Emissions Management Amendment Act, companies that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year must reduce their emissions intensity by July 1, 2007.
It is expected this regulation will apply to about 100 facilities that make up about 70 per cent of Alberta's industrial emissions.
Source: Alberta government website
Environmentalists agree with industry that new policy is unfair -- and it won't lead to a reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions
Paul Marck, The Edmonton Journal
Published: Saturday, March 10, 2007
EDMONTON - Chemical producers and environmentalists alike are blasting the Stelmach government's new greenhouse-gas emissions policy.
The Pembina Institute for environmental policy and research says the new legislation is ineffective, shortchanging both the public and industry.
The chemical companies call Bill 3 a carbon tax, while Alberta's power producers praise it.
Pending legislation calls for companies to reduce their emissions intensity by 12 per cent by July 1 -- or pay into a climate-change fund. Companies have until year's end to report on their progress.
The Canadian Chemical Producers' Association says Alberta essentially penalizes both responsible companies and laggards indiscriminately.
Association president Richard Paton says there is no time for companies to make technology improvements before the end of 2007.
"Instead, Alberta companies will have to start paying into a fund, which is essentially a carbon tax," Paton said. "Unless you shut down production, there is no way to reduce emissions in a dramatic way overnight."
Gordon Lloyd, the association's vice-president of technical affairs, says the chemical industry in Canada has reduced greenhouse-gas emissions by 56 per cent since 1992, when the first global conferences on climate change called for action.
"We were astonished Alberta ignored that," Lloyd said. "We were very surprised that they came up with that formula."
The association predicts that some of its members will not make the grade in reducing emissions intensity -- the amount of greenhouse gases per production unit -- by 12 per cent by year's end.
"What we did in reducing our emissions seemed to be the right thing to do, but now we're being penalized," said Lloyd.
The association's members include such Alberta companies as Shell, Nova, INEOS Canada Partners, ME Global, Imperial Oil and Dow Chemicals.
The Pembina Institute says Alberta's pending legislation does little to address the problem of growing greenhouse gas because it's about measuring emission intensity, rather than putting in real limits.
"Really, it's a joke. There is nothing here that is going to lead to a reduction in emissions," said spokesman Jaisel Vadgama. "It's very confusing to the public."
The institute estimates the climate-change fund will raise $174 million in its first six months and terms that amount as ineffectual. All the same, many companies will end up paying the penalty of $15 per tonne for failing to meet reduction targets because the government is not giving industry enough time to invest in technology change, Vadgama said.
"There's an expectation in the first period, it's likely that many companies will be doing that. We're in a situation where we're not going to get any real reductions, and we're pointing everything in the wrong direction, where we haven't set up this framework that creates a stable plan that lets companies start investing. It's just dragging out the period of uncertainty."
Meanwhile, Alberta's power companies say they're prepared for the new green standard. They will use a combination of offsets, paying into the climate-change fund and advancing their own technologies.
"These are real tough targets. There's going to be just as tough an effort meet them," said Don Wharton, director of sustainable development for TransAlta.
While targets will present a significant challenge to industry, power companies have worked on strategies for years prior to the government's actions, Wharton said.
"We're relieved that we have some regulatory certainty, which has been missing for the last decade," Wharton said.
The result likely means higher costs for both industry and consumers, but there are no estimates as to how much, Wharton said.
EPCOR president Don Lowry says the power company has recognized for a long time that greener technologies will be an integral part of its operations. Last year, EPCOR invested $11 million, which was matched by the provincial government, into its Genesee G3 plant to study clean-coal techniques.
That kind of continuing investment will eventually pay off in getting energy out of coal without burning it, he said.
In the meantime, carbon dioxide sequestration and the federal government's announcement of a $156-million joint task force with Alberta in a CO2 pipeline and storage network will help launch other new technologies, Lowry said.
All the same, commercialized clean-coal technology does not yet exist.
EPCOR will pay into the climate-change fund with expectations that it will accelerate development of greener processes.
EPCOR does not expect to meet this year's deadlines for reducing greenhouse-gas emission intensity. "I don't think we can meet it by year end. But it's very early days to speculate, until we've had a chance to look at how the program works and how it's measured. The devil's in the details."
But like all the other companies that are gas emitters, EPCOR will crunch the target numbers with hard dollar projections to see what it means.
"Clearly the vintage of equipment that not just we, but all others, have just physically has limits to its performance capabilities. It's like your car, in terms of the only way you get your car to the next level of fuel efficiency is by buying a new one. It's the same with us. With the power plants, the way we get them to the next level of efficiency to meet these is replacing them."
pmarck@thejournal.canwest.com
AT A GLANCE
Under Bill 3, the Climate Change and Emissions Management Amendment Act, companies that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year must reduce their emissions intensity by July 1, 2007.
It is expected this regulation will apply to about 100 facilities that make up about 70 per cent of Alberta's industrial emissions.
Source: Alberta government website
The Pembina Institute says Alberta's pending legislation does little to address the problem of growing greenhouse gas because it's about measuring emission intensity, rather than putting in real limits.
"Really, it's a joke. There is nothing here that is going to lead to a reduction in emissions," said spokesman Jaisel Vadgama. "It's very confusing to the public."
These idiots think that a growing region, with vast untapped resources should just sit still and do nothing. Or better yet, shut down.
On top of having a rapidly growing population in a cold climate, Alberta is also a major global energy producer. What, leave it in the ground?
Emmissions intensity is the only way for reductions to move forward in growing economies. To expect a region, or country, that is growing in population and industry to remain below an absolute baseline is wingnut enough to discredit the cause.
Comment