Category: Energy

I recently received a response to an access to information request I’d filed with Transport Canada asking for a briefing note prepared for Minister Lawrence Cannon on Sept. 22, 2006 about British Columbia’s Hydrogen Highway. Here is the “Key Message” from that note:

For more than 20 years the Government of Canada has supported the development of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies with a total contribution of approximately $300 million. In 2003, the government announced a further investment of $215 million in Research & Development and commercialization initiatives. The Government of Canada, with the new funding allocations to this area, spends about $60 million per year on hydrogen and fuel cells. While industry acknowledges the support it has received to date, it is quick to point out that additional support is required, particularly in light of growing support international competitors are receiving domestically.

The Calgary Herald’s Lisa Schmidt today reports that 2007 was a big year for oilsands producers and that 2008 and beyond will be even busier.

Canadian oil production rose nearly eight per cent to 2.8 million barrels a day in 2007, preliminary estimates from the National Energy Board show.

Much of that growth was in Alberta’s northern oilsands, where production is expected to triple over the next decade with the first of several new projects or expansions firing up in 2008.

…two new oilsands projects will start up in 2008, accounting for about half of the expected production increase in 2008. Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.'s Horizon mine is slated to produce about 110,000 barrels a day, while the first phase of Long Lake, a joint venture Nexen Inc. and OPTI Canada Inc., will produce about 58,000 barrels a day.

Also coming on stream is significant expansion by Suncor Energy Inc., Canada's second largest oilsands producer, including the addition of its Millennium coker as well as initial phases of its Firebag in situ project.

Other oilsands developers such as EnCana Corp., Devon Canada and ConocoPhillips are also slated to start or add production this year.

 

As Canadian politicians, including Environment Minister John Baird and Liberal Stephane Dion, make their to key climate change meetings in Bali, Indonesia next week, a new report (PDF, 765 kb) from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) tracks renewable energy use:

Renewable energy is increasingly being used as a mainstream alternative to the fossil fuels which are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) says in a new report.

The REN21 Renewables Global Status Report 2007 says that out of a total global power capacity of 4,300 Gigawatts (GW), renewable energy (without large hydro) now provides about 240 GW of clean power, avoiding some 5 gigatonnes per year (Gt/year) of carbon emissions.

“What's needed now are binding targets in an international agreement to establish polices that can rapidly accelerate the large-scale deployment of renewable energy to replace fossil fuels”, said Mohamed El Ashry, head of the global policy network REN21 that produced the report with the Worldwatch Institute.

… More than 50 countries worldwide have adopted targets for future shares or amounts of renewable energy, including 13 developing countries, all EU countries, and many states or provinces in the United States and Canada.

I’m not sure which provinces have set such targets — B.C. I’m guessing? Anyone help? — but there are not national Canadian targets for renewable energy though there are some federal government programs to encourage ethanol use, wind power, and solar power. The United States Congress, just this week, passed a comprehensive energy package which, among other things, would require that electrical utilities generate 15 per cent of their power from renewables by 2020. That bill, though, has some things in it which President Bush doesn’t like — it would raise taxes on oil companies!! — and so he was threatened to veto it if it makes it out of the Senate.

 

Canada’s decision to join the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is controversial in some circles. The NDP and Greens reject the organization and the Liberals say this decision has not yet been subjected to proper Parliamentary scrutiny.

“It's beyond me how this government continues to believe it has any environmental credentials. It's failing us on climate change and it's solution: Bring in a more nuclear waste,” said NDP environment critic Nathan Cullen.

Meanwhile, CTV News has received a copy of the letter that Minister of Natural Resources Gary Lunn (left) sent to Sam Bodman, the U.S. Secretary of Energy, who formally invited Canada to join GNEP.

In that  letter (53 KB PDF), Lunn lays down the law under which Canada will participate:

Canada's participation in the GNEP is based on the understanding that: first, the Statement of Principles (PDF) is not legally binding; second, that we are joining the Partnership without prejudice to any future uranium processing options, including the acquisition of nuclear enrichment and reprocessing technology related to the fuel cycle; and third, our decision to join the GNEP does not in any way commit Canada to a policy of repatriation of nuclear waste. Indeed, Canada will not consider the repatriation of fuel waste.

GNEP was happy to have us:

We welcome Canada’s announcement that it will join the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership and help expand the benefits of safe, emissions-free nuclear energy worldwide to meeting growing energy demand,” Dennis Spurgeon, U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy, said. “Canada’s position as the world’s largest uranium producer coupled with its commitment to non-proliferation and safety will make its participation and perspective especially beneficial to this global framework and further demonstrates the diversity of this growing partnership.

Lunn was the busiest minister at today’s Question Period:

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP) :
Mr. Speaker, reluctant as I am to quote the Prime Minister, I have to do so today, because he promised “…to make Parliament responsible for exercising oversight over the conduct of Canadian foreign policy”. He has broken that promise.

He also promised to put international treaties to a vote in the House, but now we learn that Canada is signing on to this so-called global nuclear energy partnership.

There was no notice to the House. There was no debate that took place in the House and there has been no vote on this matter.

Why is the Prime Minister breaking his promise? Why has he not given parliamentarians oversight over this matter?

*   *   *

Hon. Gary Lunn (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, the global nuclear energy partnership that we are signing on to is a voluntary agreement to actually expand technology, to reduce nuclear spent fuel, to reduce or develop technology that is proliferation resistant.

This is very important. Canada is a serious player, the larger producer of uranium of any other country in the world.
We would welcome the opportunity to address the committee, if I were invited, to discuss these issues at any time.
It is great news for Canada to be part of this partnership.

*   *   *

Hon. Jack Layton (Toronto—Danforth, NDP) :
Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear the minister will come to speak to a committee about it. That is a start.
My question is whether the government will accept a vote on this matter, because the facts are very clear.
Nuclear energy is prohibitively expensive. It takes too long to bring online. It will not stop climate change. It is dangerous because of the waste product and furthermore, national security should be a key part of the discussion.

After all, India's nuclear weapons program got started with a research reactor from Canada, so there is a great deal that must be debated.

My question to the government: Will there be a vote on Canada's participation in this nuclear energy partnership, yes or no?

*   *   *

Hon. Gary Lunn (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, this is about leadership. There are 17 or 18 countries that have now signed on to this partnership to develop technologies, to minimize waste, to recycle spent nuclear fuel, to develop proliferation resistant technology.

This is exactly the type of thing where Canada should be at the table. We are a player. I find it completely unpropitious that the NDP would not want us to be there.

Canada can show leadership. We should share these experiences with other countries.

Mme Claude DeBellefeuille (Beauharnois—Salaberry, BQ) :
Monsieur le Président, nous savons déjà que le Québec a fait un choix propre en choisissant l'énergie hydroélectrique plutôt que l'énergie nucléaire. Le gouvernement devrait choisir des avenues plus porteuses plutôt que de miser sur le pétrole ou l'énergie nucléaire, surtout qu'en ce moment, aucune solution n'existe pour éliminer les déchets nucléaires.

En adhérant au partenariat mondial pour l'énergie nucléaire, le gouvernement fait le mauvais choix et, à la veille de Bali, envoie le mauvais signal.

Comprend-il qu'il doit faire demi-tour pour s'engager résolument à développer des énergies propres et environnementales, plutôt que de faire la promotion de l'énergie nucléaire?

*   *   *

Hon. Gary Lunn (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. First of all, certain parts of Canada like Quebec and British Columbia are blessed with a lot of hydro and it is up to the provinces to decide on their own energy mix. We do not take any say in that but where there are provinces that choose nuclear, as they do in Ontario, it is important for us that we provide the leadership, the safety and security of all Canadians.

With respect to the global nuclear energy partnership, we made it unequivocally clear that we will under no circumstances ever accept any nuclear spent fuel back from any other country. So this is a good initiative and Canada should be at the table to ensure that we have a voice.

Mr. Daryl Kramp (Prince Edward—Hastings, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Minister of Natural Resources announced that Canada has accepted an invitation to join the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. This partnership focuses on enhanced safeguards, cooperative research
and developing advanced technologies.

There were some allegations heard in the House here today that joining this partnership will require Canada to import nuclear fuel from other countries. Could the minister once again clarify this issue and further explain what this announcement will mean for Canada?

*   *   *

Hon. Gary Lunn (Minister of Natural Resources, CPC) :
Mr. Speaker, first of all, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership is an international partnership that promotes a safer, more secure, cleaner world.

With respect to the spent nuclear fuel, there is absolutely nothing in the stated principles that requires Canada or any other country to take back spent nuclear fuel, but we went even further. We have absolutely, explicitly stated that under no uncertain circumstances will Canada ever be taking back spent nuclear fuel at any time from any country.

NYMEX Considers Trading Greenhouse Emissions

NEW YORK – The New York Mercantile Exchange is considering trade in global warming emissions credits, a bourse senior executive said Wednesday.

“We have been looking at it, and will continue, and think it has promise,” Robert Levin, senior vice president of research at NYMEX, told reporters.
He said NYMEX had no set timetable to launch the emissions.
The global carbon market last year tripled to US$30 billion, with the lion's share taking place on the European Union's emissions market, according to the World Bank. The EU launched the market in 2005 to help countries meet their emissions obligations under the Kyoto Protocol on global warming.

Planet Ark : NYMEX Considers Trading Greenhouse Emissions.

The Ottawa Citizen’s Glen McGregor digs through the hydro and natural gas bills for 24 Sussex Drive — the official residence of the Prime Minister — and reports that it costs one heckuva lot to keep the place lit and warm:

In spite of an unusually warm winter, the costs of heat and electricity for 24 Sussex Drive hit a chilling $57,000 for the year ending in January, records obtained by the Citizen show.

…

For the December 2006 billing period, with the Harpers in residence, the National Capital Commission was billed for 4,799 cubic metres of natural gas, even though the average mean temperature that month was a relatively toasty -1.7 C.

In the same billing period the previous year, under Mr. Martin, with an average mean temperature of -6.6 C, only 4,472 cubic metres were used. The average Canadian home uses about 3,000 cubic metres annually.

The electric bills, however, were virtually identical under both prime ministers. Mr. Harper averaged 1,304 kilowatt hours per day compared to Mr. Martin's 1,297.

Neither the Harpers nor Martins used as much energy as their predecessor, Jean Chretien and his family, who burned off 20-per-cent more gas during his last year in the historic home. Temperatures were lower in 2003, accounting for the higher gas consumption  . ..

[Read the rest of the story]