Well, it looks like we’ve got a conundrum. On the one hand, everyone is increasingly concerned about climate change, while on the other hand cheap sources of coal, oil and natural gas keep popping up. However, while a hearty supply of coal, oil and natural gas provides cheap energy sources for now, eventually even these sources will become depleted. And then what? By the looks of it, certainly not renewable energy sources! What about seriously dealing with the ongoing impact of fossil fuel usage on the climate?
North Americans aren’t the only ones in this boat. Europeans, the Chinese, the Indians, and the rest of the developed world are rowing to the same tune. Much of the prognosis is being attributed to new technologies in drilling, in particular the recovery of shale oil and gas through a contentious process called “fracking”. In addition, new pipelines are expected to pop up all over the world, including those planned for between Russia and China and the U.S. and Canada. Liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities are also expected to expand in the U.S. and Canada in order to export natural gas to Asia and Europe. But at what environmental risks?
Oil and gas extraction and production is responsible for about a third of all carbon emissions, while the combustion engine releases about another third of pollutants. Alas, by 2030 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to cut power plant emissions by 30 percent from 2005 levels. The EPA is particularly going after power plants, notably those electrical generation operations powered by coal — coal still producing almost 40 percent of electricity generation in the U.S. The new EPA proposal, if approved, will most likely force power plants to switch to natural gas or to seek out renewable or nuclear energy resources. Remember, the U.S. is currently the second largest contributor to global warming on the planet.
As for Canada, Environment Canada predicts that the country will fail to meet its greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020, primarily because of the oilsands projects whose emissions are expected to triple. Regulations on Canada’s largest oil and gas emitters have yet to be released, seven years after they were first discussed. The federal government talks a good talk, but has failed to walk the walk.
The problem is that President Obama has to convince the states and the fossil fuel industry to reduce carbon emissions in line with national targets. Despite states such as Missouri and Illinois for example which continue to produce at least 80 percent of their electricity from coal. Prime Minister Stephen Harper believes that Canada doesn’t get enough credit given how hard it is to cut emissions from a system where much of the energy is already clean — namely hydroelectric power. The PM completely ignores the predicted increases in greenhouse gas emissions from the oilsands and the potential environmental issues surrounding the expansion of pipelines to carry oilsands crude oil across Canada and into the U.S. Between Obama and Harper, when it comes to urgently dealing with fossil fuels, one gets a feeling of witnessing — excuse the expression — the blind leading the blind.
FROLITICKS 
Leave a comment