Five major oil companies, Canadian Natural Resources, Cenovus Energy, Imperial, MEG Energy and Suncor Energy, which extract some of the world’s most carbon-intensive oil, announced they had formed the Oil Sands Pathways to Net Zero alliance on Wednesday.

The companies, which together operate about 90% of Canada’s tar sands, said they will work with the Canadian government and the provincial government of Alberta to roll out technologies that will enable them to cut emissions from their extraction and production process.

Prime minister Justin Trudeau has committed to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. In 2018, the oil and gas sector was the largest source of Canada’s emissions, accounting for 26% of its total, according to government data.

Tar sands companies said the alliance aims to “develop an actionable approach” to cut emissions while “preserving the more than $3 trillion in oil sands contribution” to Canada’s economy to 2050.

But they made no mention of phasing out production. The “net zero” strategy does not extend to emissions from consumers burning the oil, which are many times larger than those from the extraction process.

Tar sands executive named as Canadian ‘climate champion’ ahead of Cop26

In fact, planned oil production in Canada would lead to a 17% expansion between 2019 and 2030, according to recent analysis by Stockholm Environment Institute.

This goes against modelling by the International Energy Agency (IEA), which found that new investments in expanding oil and gas production must stop by the end of the year for the sector to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.

“This kind of greenwash is worse than meaningless – it’s dangerous,” Alex Doukas, senior consultant at the Denmark-based KR Foundation, said of the alliance. “It fails to cover emissions associated with the tar sands products themselves. Nobody should cheer this nonsense.”

Laurie van der Burg, campaigner at Oil Change International, told Climate Home News: “These plans lack the one and only action that is most vital to cutting emissions: cutting dirty oil and gas production.

“If the Canadian tar sands net-zero alliance cared about climate action it would have committed to cut production by 2030.”

Van der Burg added that tar sands producers risked facing litigation over the plans, citing a court ruling against oil giant Shell, which established that real emissions reductions were necessary for oil and gas companies to meet their obligations under the Paris Agreement.

According to the UN Environment Programme, global oil production must fall by 4% every year between now and 2030 to maintain a chance of staying below 1.5C of warming.

New Zealand climate plan criticised over ‘cow-shaped hole’

Because it is thick and viscous, oil from tar sands takes a lot of energy to extract and refine, making its production three to four times more greenhouse gas intensive than conventional crude oil.

To meet the goal, the alliance plans to create a corridor to link oil sands facilities from Fort McMurray to the Cold Lake regions and channel CO2 to a carbon sequestration hub.

Energy efficiency measures, electrification of operations, producing hydrogen and carbon capture and storage technology would be deployed requiring “significant investment” from both the industry and government, the companies said.

The alliance said “internationally recognised forecasts” indicate fossil fuel will continue to be part of the energy mix to 2050 to justify the initiative – contrary to the latest IEA net zero report.

“Every credible energy forecast indicates that oil will be a major contributor to the energy mix in the decades ahead and even beyond 2050,” said Sonya Savage, Alberta’s minister of energy, claiming this would lead to the production of “net zero barrels of oil”.

Net-zero latest

“Canadian oil sands producers said on Wednesday they would form an alliance to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from their operations by 2050”https://t.co/WjuVD53quZ pic.twitter.com/bTyUKwHk4m

— Simon Evans (@DrSimEvans) June 9, 2021

Under the IEA’s first comprehensive 1.5C scenario, the agency projects a drop in oil demand of 75% between 2020 and 2050, with fossil fuels supplying slightly over one-fifth of total energy by 2050.

Tzeporah Berman, chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, described the alliance as “absurd”. In a tweet, she said measures to reduce emission intensity and develop carbon capture and storage were “clearly not enough” to help the world meet its climate goal.

Want more climate news? Sign up to get updates straight to your inbox

One of the main checks on tar sands producers’ bullishness is organised opposition to infrastructure projects to connect Alberta to key export markets.

On Wednesday, TC Energy abandoned plans for the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have transported 830,000 barrels of oil a day to refineries along the US’ Gulf Coast. The decision comes after Joe Biden revoked permits for the pipeline expansion in January.

It was hailed a victory by climate campaigners and indigenous communities who fought the project for a decade.

“Keystone XL is now the most famous fossil fuel project killed by the climate movement, but it won’t be the last,” said Jamie Henn, co-founder of 350.org. “Now it’s time to go a step further and say no to all new fossil fuel projects everywhere.”

On Thursday, the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative published research warning that ending the expansion of the fossil fuel sector was not enough to keep the 1.5C within reach, and an exit strategy from existing production is required.

The study, from the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology in Sydney, found that carbon emissions from existing fossil fuel projects would lead to 66% more emissions in 2030 than is compatible with a 1.5C trajectory.

Professor Sven Teske, who led the research, said: “National governments must establish binding limits for the extraction volumes for coal, oil and gas,” adding that new investments risked becoming stranded because of the falling prices of renewable energy.

The post Tar sands companies aim for ‘net zero’ by 2050 – with no plan to extract less oil appeared first on Climate Home News.

A statement published on the UK government’s website said 26 “Canadian climate champions” had been identified “as exceptional individuals actively working to move Canada to net zero emissions”.

The “champions” were selected by Canada Climate Law Initiative (CCLI), a research initiative based out of the University of British Columbia, with input from the British High Commission in Ottawa. The list was revealed during a livestream event co-hosted by CCLI and the British High Commission last week six months ahead of the start of the climate talks in Glasgow.

Martha Hall Findlay, chief sustainability officer at Suncor, a company which produces crude oil from tar sands, made the list of people awarded with the title.

Suncor is one of Canada’s largest integrated energy companies and is expanding its oil production. The company has pledged to reduce the emission intensity of its oil production by 30% by 2030 but made no commitment to cut its emissions in absolute terms.

Suncor CEO Mark Little is a governor on the board of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), which has repeatedly opposed climate policy and lobbied to weaken Canada’s carbon tax on the oil sector.

California is the biggest producer in the world planning to go beyond oil

“Appointing oil company executives and bank executives heavily invested in oil and gas as climate champions is like appointing the tobacco industry to regulate cigarette advertising,” Tzeporah Berman, chair of the Fossil Fuel Non-proliferation Treaty campaign and the international programme director at Stand.Earth, told Climate Home News.

“Emissions from the production of oil and fracked gas are now the fastest and largest growing source of emissions in Canada. It’s too late to just talk about carbon storage and emissions intensity reductions,” she said.

“Canada wants to be a climate leader and is making some headway but until the Trudeau government acknowledges the need to wind down oil and gas production growing emissions will cancel out all our progress.”

The Canadian government was not involved in the initiative and there are no plans for the 26 “champions” to play a formal role at Cop26.

A spokesperson for the UK’s foreign commonwealth and development office told Climate Home the event was “part of the UK’s work to drive forward leadership on climate change, ahead of the Cop26 summit”. The UK’s Cop26 team did not respond to a request for comment.

Get climate news in your inbox: Subscribe to our weekly or daily newsletter

Jesse Bragg, spokesperson for campaign group Corporate Accountability, told Climate Home that any business that promises alignment with the Paris Agreement but still plans to extract fossil fuels into the future “is not a climate champion” but “an obstacle to progress”.

“In fact, the only way to truly ensure the UN talks are set up for success is to completely firewall the talks from the fossil fuel industry, not roll out the red carpet for them,” he said.

Valerie Chort, vice president for corporate citizenship and sustainability at the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), was another controversial choice of “champion”.

RBC has financed fossil fuels projects to the tune of $160billion between 2016 and 2020, including more than $2bn for coal projects – the fifth largest fossil fuel funder in the world and the largest in Canada, according to a report by a coalition of NGOs published in March.

The findings led climate activists in Canada to put pressure on RBC to move away from fossil fuels.

Earlier this year, the bank pledged to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and to mobilise $500bn in sustainable finance by 2025.

Asian Development Bank plans exit from coal finance

Other people named as champions include Canada’s infrastructure minister and former environment minister Catherine McKenna, who launched the Powering Past Coal Alliance with former UK minister Claire O’Neill.

Environmentalist broadcaster David Suzuki and indigenous climate justice advocate Melina Laboucan-Massimo also made the list.

Cat Abreu, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, told Climate Home that while there were some “true champions” on the list, “the criteria for what constitutes a ‘champion’ is quite unclear”.

“It appears that this list was named with the exclusive input of the CCLI, which is a nascent academic group focused on corporate responsibility that has so far not engaged Canada’s broad climate movement,” she said.

The post Tar sands executive named as Canadian ‘climate champion’ ahead of Cop26 appeared first on Climate Home News.

So desperate was he to secure the Trans Mountain expansion, the Canadian government offered to buy out Kinder Morgan for C$4.5 billion ($3.5bn).

But on Thursday, as Kinder Morgan’s shareholders approved the deal, the federal court of appeal blocked the project. Bombshell. The Vancouver Sun has a decent explainer.

Almost immediately Rachel Notley, premier of oil producer Alberta, announced the state was pulling out of Trudeau’s federal climate plan until the pipeline got back on track.

Campaigner and academic Tzeporah Berman reminded Trudeau on Twitter he could back out of the pipeline deal for $10 million. Instead, the prime minister doubled down, assuring Notley he stood by the Trans Mountain expansion.

So….in the purchase agreement any party can walk away with a $10million penalty. This might be the time to invoke that clause @JustinTrudeau. $10 million seems a small price to pay for $10 billion mistake #StopKM #cdnpoli #bcpoli

— Tzeporah Berman (@Tzeporah) August 30, 2018

Today I spoke with Premier @RachelNotley – and reassured her that the federal government stands by the TMX expansion project and will ensure it moves forward in the right way.

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) August 30, 2018

Other states and provinces are already pursuing climate policies, but Alberta’s tar sands are Canada’s most significant source of pollution. As Notley put it: “Without Alberta that [federal climate] plan isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.”

There is an international dimension too: China could potentially sue the government to protect its commercial interests in tar sands.

How much longer can Trudeau hold this fragile compromise together? And what comes next?

Kicking offsets

UN Climate Change came under fire for a jokey video promoting carbon offsets this week. The advert was swiftly taken down, after viewers complained it mocked greener lifestyle choices like giving up meat and flying.

Comments mainly focused on the video’s flippant tone, but there is a deeper issue: what future is there for the Clean Development Mechanism that generates these credits?

Carbon Market Watch is launching a campaign to scrap the Kyoto-era carbon market, citing weak environmental integrity. Others see some role for it in the Paris Agreement – and UN climate chief Patricia Espinosa touted its successes in a press release on Friday. Something to watch in “Article 6” negotiations at next week’s Bangkok talks.

See you there?

Speaking of Bangkok, I will be at the talks and sending a daily newsletter out to all of you. Send tips, rumours and questions to my email or Twitter @climatemegan.

Climate conversations

• We need all sectors of society to take climate action up a level – Patricia Espinosa and Anne Hidalgo
• Heavyweight help needed at the Green Climate Fund – Niranjali Manel Amerasinghe and Joe Thwaites

Call in the cavalry

Poland is a generous host when it comes to UN climate talks, taking on the responsibility for the third time in ten years. But its coal-loving politics make climate advocates nervous.

They may be reassured to see Michał Kurtyka, top official for the next summit in Katowice, drawing on the expertise of former Cop presidents.

Kurtyka convened a meeting with France’s Laurent Fabius and Morocco’s Salaheddine Mezouar in Paris on Monday, to pick their brains on “challenges, threats and the opportunities for the international community”.

Quick hits

• Green fund woes loom over upcoming climate talks
• Australia’s new PM risks climate trade-off with EU
• Poland’s ‘last coal power plant’ depends on subsidies, say analysts
• Pakistan to apply strict green rules on Chinese coal deals – Imran Khan advisor

About those challenges…

French president Emmanuel Macron is one of the most vocal champions of the Paris Agreement. His green credibility took a hit this week when environment minister Nicolas Hulot resigned on live radio.

“I don’t want to lie to myself any more. I don’t want to give the illusion that my presence in the French government shows that we are doing what it takes to face these challenges,” he said.

The post Climate Weekly: Trudeau’s climate pact breaks down appeared first on Climate Home News.

On Tuesday, he was accused of sending conflicted messages on climate change after authorising construction of two pipelines for tar sands oil.

In the past year, the Trudeau administration has been one of the more vocal in calling for tougher global greenhouse gas cuts and joined a ‘high ambition’ group of countries backing climate action.

But green groups say Trudeau’s decision to back the pair of projects – which are valued at C$11.8 billion – runs counter to his claims that the world needs to move away from fossil fuels.

In a series of tweets on his official account the prime minister said pipelines would “protect the environment and grow the economy”, citing nearly 200 “binding conditions” on developers.

Trudeau reveals playbook for tackling Trump climate denial: https://t.co/MiDVrAcWQf pic.twitter.com/wHEBrr8tAT

— Climate Home News (@ClimateHome) November 29, 2016

“A clear message has emerged through our government’s extensive consultations with Canadians: the economy and the environment go hand in hand,” read an accompanying statement.

One pipeline will run from the tar sands heartlands of Alberta to British Columbia; the second will see an existing 1,000km pipeline from Alberta to Manitoba replaced.

Oil extracted from tar sands is one of the most carbon-intensive fuel stocks on the planet, and causes widespread environmental damage during extraction and refining.

According to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the pipelines mean Alberta’s tar sands industry will be able to ship an extra 1.1 million barrels of oil per day.

A third proposed project was rejected on the grounds it was not in the public interest and would see an increase in oil tankers navigating sensitive ecosystems.

FULL STATEMENT from Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson on Kinder Morgan decision. pic.twitter.com/TLrdRz7xWo

— Kamil Karamali (@KamilKaramali) November 29, 2016

Limits to shipments of oil along British Columbia’s north coast were also announced, with legislation due in early 2017.

The announcement illustrates the delicate line Canada’s federal government is taking on climate change and oil exploration, reluctant to squeeze a multi-billion dollar industry that employs thousands.

Plans for a nationwide carbon price from 2018 and a promise to axe coal use by 2030 grabbed headlines, as did the province of Alberta’s landmark decision in 2015 to cap the emissions of its tar sands industry.

Still, the country is projected to miss its climate targets under the Paris Agreement: there the government pledged to cut emissions 30% on 2005 levels by 2030, but analysts at Climate Action Tracker say they are on track to rise 1-7%.

Under that agreement, signatory countries aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero in the second half of the century and limit warming to “well below” 2C above pre industrialised levels.

Interview: Meet the woman who took on Canada’s tar sand barons

The decision means Canada “in one fell swoop” will not meet its targets under the UN climate agreement says Josh Axelrod, an analyst with NRDC Canada.

“Today’s announcement gives that industry decades worth of growth potential, a fact that will ensure soaring Canadian emissions for the foreseeable future.

“Indeed, the annual lifecycle emissions from the oil carried by these two pipelines could exceed 271 million metric tons, the same as 57 million passenger vehicles.”

Adam Scott from the campaign group Oil Change International said the move had “squandered” Trudeau’s climate credibility and moves to embrace indigenous communities.

“There is no need for any additional pipeline capacity. Oil Change International recently released a report showing how the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers is misleading Canadians on the need for new pipelines,” he added.

“Vancouver will continue to raise concerns about Kinder Morgan’s massive expansion that could bring seven times the number of oil tankers to our waters,” said the city’s mayor Gregor Robertson.

“I – along with the tens of thousands of residents, local First Nations, and other Metro Vancouver cities who told the federal government a resounding ‘no’ to this project.”

The post Tar sand pipelines batter Canada’s climate leader tag appeared first on Climate Home News.

“It is the single largest and most destructive project on earth,” she says. Running for as far as the eye can see are “mines and open pits where toxic water is pumped out into areas the size of lakes.

“You can smell it and feel it. It is incredibly toxic – if you spend more a couple of hours your eyes start to run, your skin hurts.”

Labelled as a “whacked out nature worshipper” by the government in the 1990s, the veteran environmental campaigner has long had Alberta’s oil industry in her sights.

Where conventional oil is extracted by drilling, crude from the sands is excavated by huge diggers and intensively refined to turn it into a useable product.

The technique consumes large amounts of energy and generates 100 million litres of toxic water a day. But it’s also a huge money-spinner. In 2014, Alberta’s royalties hit C$5.2 billion.

This explains why previous attempts to nix the sands were non-starters.

Even some civil society groups were reluctant to call for government intervention to impose tough regulations, fearful of the wider funding implications for healthcare and education.

Yet in late November 2015, four of Canada’s largest oil sand producers agreed to a historic cap on their greenhouse gas emissions.

The limit agreed by Suncor, Cenovus, CNRL and Shell Canada with the provincial government was not that radical: 100 megatonnes a year, up from 70Mt today.

But for a province that relied on fossil fuel extraction for 70% of its revenues the cap, along with a 2030 coal phase out and planned $15 a tonne carbon price, was an unprecedented step towards a greener future.

“This is a game changer,” said Suncor CEO Steve Williams. “We are doing our part to address one of the world’s greatest problems,” said Alberta premier Rachel Notley.

Announced weeks before the Paris climate summit – where the UN hoped 195 countries would sign a new climate change pact – it was also a sign of Canada’s shifting position on global warming.

Report: Canada’s most populous province passes climate change law

Elected to power earlier that year, Notley’s New Democrat Party took most of the plaudits for the deal – which would have been unlikely to pass under the Conservatives, who held the office for 44 years.

Underpinning it, though, were controversial negotiations between the oil giants and green groups including ForestEthics, Environmental Defense and the Pembina Institute.

Running since 2013, the talks were unpopular with veteran Canadian environmentalists like bestselling author Naomi Klein, who had long fought the tar sand companies.

Not so Berman, who emerged as a key player in the discussions and rejects any accusation of selling out in an interview with Climate Home in London.

New Nature study: Tar sands are bad for the planet, but also really terrible for people https://t.co/b0TWddOvZo

— Climate Reality (@ClimateReality) July 7, 2016

“The oil companies have been between rock and hard place; the controversy around tar sands development has been so huge, international campaigns have been so effective,” she says.

“I would say the climate movement and indigenous groups have stopped or delayed every pipeline in North America coming from the tar sands in the last 10 years… it’s landlocked.”

Sensing the walls closing in, the industry turned to green groups in an effort to clean up its image.

For green groups, Berman argues it was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to at least start a conversation about an Albertan climate policy – one that previously had been off the agenda.

“To be clear, this is not policy that is equal to a 1.5 or 2C world,” she says.

“Like all climate policy it is historic and insufficient, but it does cap emissions which with today’s technology, mothballs a third of permits and millions of barrels will stay in ground because of that.”

Report: Alberta targets tar sands, coal in climate turnabout

The two-year dialogue took the form of eight meetings. Some companies sensed the “writing was on the wall” as a new UN climate deal turned into a reality, others eyed a new revenue stream.

Producers hope to stay under the emissions limit by investing in cleaner extraction technology, staying competitive as the carbon price rises from C$20 a barrel in 2017 to C$30 in 2018.

“More progressive companies believe they will be allowed to produce under the limit, because they are going to be the cleanest,” she says, adding she thinks production levels will be lower in 10 years.

“Their goal is to reduce emissions per barrel… but right now it’s a gamble – the oil companies think they will be able to compete for whatever smaller slice oil makes up in the pie in the future.

“Maybe that’s true, I think they have a tough hill to climb. It’s one of the most expensive and high carbon and still extremely controversial.”

Report: US, Canada, Mexico agree climate partnership

Now Alberta’s policy is in place, Berman says it’s game on, not only in the province but across the country, which under prime minister Justin Trudeau is taking a hawkish stance on climate.

In scenes virtually impossible under his predecessor Stephen Harper, Canada joined the “High Ambition Coalition” at the Paris talks, agreeing to target an ambitious 1.5C warming ceiling.

Subsequently, Trudeau has signed a number of climate accords with US president Barack Obama, most recently a clean energy pledge to source 50% of electricity from low carbon sources by 2025.

Part of this new dawn is linked to Alberta’s stance on emissions, says Berman, which “unlocked polarisation” among provinces and the federal government.

Severe floods in 2013 and intense wildfires in 2016 have only added to a national sense that climate change is a real and present danger, she argues.

Report: Saskatchewan denies climate science as wildfires lick its border

Still, it seems unlikely the tar sands will disappear anytime soon: Shell has invested in a $1.35 billion carbon capture facility in Alberta, which it hopes will capture 1 million tonnes of CO2 a year.

That suggests more collaboration and cooperation between natural enemies may be needed in the decades to come.

For her part, if it means she can get oil companies to agree tougher regulations, Berman is happy to engage.

“The solutions in the climate era are not black or white, they are various shades of grey. We’re not going go from no climate policy to the policy equivalent of 1.5C overnight,” she says.

“I’m going to do everything I can to ratchet up climate policy and also to support a growing and thriving movement that’s calling for the type of action we need to ensure climate safety.

“It’s not an either or. I think it’s both.”

The post Meet the woman who took on Canada’s tar sand barons appeared first on Climate Home News.

Canada’s tar sands are the world’s third largest proven reserves of oil (Flickr/ The Cooperative)

By Alex Pashley

The recently-elected government of Alberta has said it will double its carbon tax, in a bid to reassert the province as a responsible oil producer.

Leftwingers the NDP kicked out the 44-year centre-right incumbents in May, sending shockwaves through Alberta’s energy industry.

The levy hike on industrial greenhouse gas emissions is the first green policy move by leader Rachel Notley, who has also promised a review of oil and gas tax royalties and earlier phase-out of coal.

Canada’s failure to meet the climate target it agreed in Kyoto is due almost exclusively to tar sands extraction in the region, which could triple from 2005 to 2020, according to Environment Canada.

On Thursday, environment minister Shannon Phillips said its carbon tax, the first in North America, would increase over the next two years from CA$15 to 30 a tonne.

Analysis: Why Canada’s provinces are fighting the Feds on climate

That’s triggered for producers emitting over 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year. Participants must also progressively cut the emissions intensity of their activities, or CO2 for each unit of production.

“If we get it right, our environmental policy will make us world leaders on this issue instead of giving us a black eye around the world,” said Phillips, the Globe and Mail reported. “We were not taken seriously on the national or international stage; with this, that will change.”

Canada is the world’s fifth largest oil producer, with 75% of crude production coming from Alberta, according to the Canadian Energy Research Institute. Four-fifth of that comes from tar sands, which produce 17% more greenhouse gas emissions from extraction to consumption than regular sources.

The move comes amid lay-offs rise as the industry contracts on lower energy prices.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers warned its members face $800 million a year in new taxes as a result of the levy and a 20% rise in corporate taxes, though has said it will work with the government.

Anthony Swift of the National Resources Defense Council, on the other hand, said the effective levy would increase only from $1.80 to $6 due to limits on its scope.

“This is a measure of symbolic importance but unlikely to result in emissions reductions,” he wrote.

Alberta is off course to reach its 2020 emissions target, of a reduction of 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide below business as usual. Meeting the target would still mean a 12% rise on 2005 levels.

The NDP has said it will meet the target. The Pembina Institute think-tank calculates this will require a 27 million tonne cut between 2014 and 2020.

Report: Sweden takes Canada to task over tar sands pollution

Ed Whittingham, executive director at the Pembina Institute, said it would take more than this announcement for Alberta to have a climate change strategy of which it could be proud.

“We recognize the quick and decisive action that Premier Notley and Minister Phillips have taken to strengthen Alberta’s emissions regulations using the tools it has in place, and we look forward to seeing a more comprehensive climate strategy developed later this year,” he said.

Mike Hudema, a Greenpeace Canada climate and energy campaigner said: “We are excited by the new open and consultative approach to climate policy put forward by Environment Minister Shannon Phillips and are glad the change to the existing carbon pricing regulation is just an interim measure since the minimal carbon price increase won’t do much on its own.”

Some oil supporters said the tar sands would never receive approval from environmentalists and should instead focus on lowering costs and gaining regulatory approval for new pipelines.

The carbon levy was an “interim” measure, said Phillips, who didn’t rule out joining a cap-and-trade scheme being adopted by other provinces, Quebec and Ontario. Provinces are taking on the Harper government, which has done little to tackle Canada’s growing emissions. An election is scheduled for October.

“The federal government has completely marginalised itself and the provinces are building their own type of power in the field,” Karel Mayrand, Quebec director at environmental group David Suzuki Foundation told RTCC in May.

Notley will outline that planned review on oil and gas royalties on Friday, the Wall Street Journal reported.

The post Alberta beefs up carbon levy in climate policy boost appeared first on Climate Home News.

Oxford University has agreed to partially divest from fossil fuels, but not everyone is satisfied

By Megan Darby

Climate campaigners were divided on Monday after Oxford University agreed to avoid direct investment in coal and tar sands from its £2.8 billion endowment.

The hallowed academic institution, attended by many world leaders, said in a statement it has no direct coal or tar sands holdings at present and plans to “maintain this position”.

Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, which has coordinated a global fossil fuel divestment movement, praised the university’s decision.

“Today it has offered great leadership on the crisis of our time,” he said.

But 70 alumni – including journalist George Monbiot and solar entrepreneur Jeremy Leggett – are handing back their degrees in protest at the policy, which they say does not go far enough.

”The university has taken a step forward, but not a big enough one,” said Sunniva Taylor. “I, with others, have decided to hand back my degree, in protest.”

Report: Norway urged to divest state pension fund from coal

Scientists estimate more than 80% of oil, a half of gas and a third of coal must stay in the ground to avoid catastrophic climate change.

Divestment campaigners argue it is morally wrong to finance destruction of the climate. They aim to stigmatise fossil fuel companies using the same tactics deployed against tobacco and South African firms under apartheid.

In agreeing to partial divestment, the university accepted there was an ethical case for withdrawing cash from the most climate polluting fuels.

Philosophy lecturer Felix Pinkert said: “By excluding investments in coal and tar-sands extraction, the University of Oxford demonstrates that universities can carry out their academic mission while also acting with moral integrity in their investment choices.”

Oxford University’s Smith School is leading research on the fossil fuel assets that will be “stranded” by curbs on greenhouse gas emissions.

Report: Oxford mock UN climate summit offers lessons for everyone

Coal is the most polluting fossil fuel, making it a top target for divestment. Within the oil sector, tar sands are particularly carbon-intensive and costly to exploit.

The university has agreed to divest from companies that get more than 10% of their production from either source.

That allows it to continue investing in firms like BP and Shell, which get a lesser proportion of fuel from tar sands.

Andrew Taylor, fossil free campaigns manager at People & Planet, said: “Tar sands need to be kept in the ground and universities should divest from any company digging them out.

Report: Sweden takes Canada to task over tar sands pollution

“If you live in the shadow of tar sand extraction and your baby’s been airlifted to hospital after drinking the water after a spill, it doesn’t matter if under 10% of the culprit’s production comes from tar sands.”

And the university refused to disclose its investment portfolio in future.

Cara Turton-Chambers, student campaigner, said: “While we are pleased with today’s results, we as students feel that transparency is an issue within the university structures.”

Some 200 organisations worldwide with assets of US$50 billion have committed to full or partial fossil fuel divestment.

The post Activists split on Oxford University partial divestment appeared first on Climate Home News.

Syncrude Aurora tar sands, Canada
(Pic: Flickr/Elias Schewel)

By Megan Darby

Tumbling global oil prices have exposed tar sands and fracking projects as risky investments, analysts are warning.

The Brent crude benchmark price has fallen US$30 in the last few months to around US$80-85 a barrel. US crude futures dropped to a three-year low of US$76 today, following a price cut by Saudi Arabia.

Nine out of 10 barrels from Canada’s undeveloped tar sands will need a price of US$95 or more to be profitable, according to the Carbon Tracker Initiative.

That means investors are on the verge of sinking US$271 billion into high cost fuel exploration that may not pay off, the think-tank concluded.

“The economics of oil sands are getting more challenging. We expect to see more stranded assets, as expensive projects get shelved with no viable route to market,” said research director James Leaton.

Meanwhile, Halliburton chief executive Dave Lesar told industry blog FuelFix US shale oil fracking companies would curb production in light of the price slump.

Bloomberg, on the other hand, reported that US oil production was likely to keep increasing as long as the price stayed above US$70.

Divestment

Environmentalists have long opposed these fossil fuel ventures, raising concerns about both local and climate change impacts.

The majority of fossil fuels need to stay in the ground if the world is to avoid catastrophic global warming, they argue.

A growing movement of organisations including churches, universities and local authorities is divesting from fossil fuel companies to reinforce that message.

But it is difficult for major investors to follow suit, Bloomberg analysts say, due to a lack of large-scale green alternatives.

That leaves companies like pension funds and insurers locked into dirty energy investments.

The Carbon Tracker Initiative offers analysis to help these institutional investors steer clear of the most expensive projects, which are often also the most polluting.

It had already identified tar sands, along with deep sea drilling, as one of the most financially risky areas of oil exploration.

Oil companies could waste US$91 billion on the 20 highest cost undeveloped projects, it found.

Its latest update strengthens that conclusion, in light of the lower oil price.

The post Oil price slump exposes Canada’s tar sands risk – report appeared first on Climate Home News.

(Pic: Antonis Samaras/Flickr)

By Ed King

Canada’s commitment to tackling climate change has been questioned after the Office of the Auditor General said it could not see a clear strategy to curb carbon emissions.

A commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions 17% on 2005 levels by 2020 would be missed, it said, with current measures set to achieve just 7% cuts.

In a withering assessment of Environment Canada, Natural Resources Canada and Transport Canada, the three departments tasked with addressing carbon pollution, it said there was an “absence of effective federal planning”.

Plans to curb emissions from the oil and gas industry had been “repeatedly delayed”, despite projections the sector will contribute 200 million tonnes of emissions in 2020, 27 Mt more than 2012.

“Although detailed regulatory proposals have been available internally for over a year, the federal government has consulted on them only privately, mainly using a small working group of one province and selected industry representatives,” it said.

Another reason to reject Keystone Pipeline: Canada has no strategy to combat climate change. Scathing audit. http://t.co/rQ5Mo2T3wc

— Jeffrey D. Sachs (@JeffDSachs) October 8, 2014

Canada is the world’s fifth largest oil producer, the bulk of which is derived from tar sands in the state of Alberta.

According to the US Energy Information Administration the industry is dominated by Suncor, Syncrude, Canadian Natural Resources Limited, Imperial Oil and Cenovus.

Environment Canada had not supplied adequate information about future greenhouse gas emission regulations, the report added. Those that had been released lacked timelines or information on how heavy emitters would be affected.

It found only two carbon cutting measures for which the federal government could assess results: regulations on renewable energy and passenger vehicles. Even for these, it said government lacked tools to calculate overall compliance.

UN climate deal

The office of the Auditor General reports to the Canadian House of Commons, not government. It is tasked with providing “objective, fact-based information and expert advice” to MPs.

Published on October 7, the report also said there had been “no detailed federal objectives” for further emission cuts after 2020.

This line will concern UN officials working on a global climate deal, since Canada along with other developed economies is expected to release its projected emission curbs by March 2015.

“In our view the lack of a clear plan and an effective planning process is a particularly significant gap,” reads the report, which suggested that “evidence is now stronger” that its 2020 CO2 goal will be missed.

The lack of any federal objectives beyond 2020 will surprise other developed countries, given the level of long term planning now taking place in the EU and US.

Stephen Harper’s government is on record supporting efforts to secure an international climate agreement in 2015, although the prime minister declined to attend Ban Ki-moon’s summit of world leaders in New York last month.

In 2012, the country pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, the world’s only legally binding climate treaty. It has also supported Australia’s recent moves to scrap its carbon tax, which Harper described as “job killing” in June.

The one area the Auditor did find the government on its game was in accounting for its climate finance aid to developing countries, which amounted to CA$1.2 billion between 2010-2012.

But it said that around $615m of this was given on the condition it would be repayed to Canada, which could “increase the debt levels of the final recipients”.

Report: EU scraps plan to highlight tar sands pollution

In an official response to the Auditor General, the government declined to say it what its climate plans for post 2020 were, but said it would maintain its “sector by sector” approach to curbing emissions.

“Canada’s 2020 GHG emissions are projected to be about 130 Mt lower relative to a scenario with no action,” it said.

Protecting the environment while boosting economic growth would continue to be government policy, it added, stressing the economic importance of the Alberta tar sands.

“To support the responsible development of the oil sands, the Government, in partnership with Alberta, launched the world-class Joint Implementation Plan for Oil Sands Monitoring.

“Moving forward, we will continue to work with Alberta, in partnership with aboriginal communities, to enhance this world-class scientific monitoring program.”

Report: Carbon capture power plant opens in Canada

The post Canadian watchdog castigates government climate strategy appeared first on Climate Home News.

Tar sands in Alberta, Canada
(Source: Flickr/Howl Arts Collective)

By Ed King

The European Commission does not plan to make energy companies label fuel derived from tar sands, a stance green groups say is a victory for Canadian and US lobbyists.

This was revealed in proposals to implement the 2009 fuel quality directive, which aims to cut the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of fuel for road vehicles 6% by 2020.

The decision was released on the day a tanker carrying 700,000 barrels of crude from the Alberta tar sands arrived in Italy, the second such shipment to the EU this year.

It takes large volumes of energy and water to extract crude from tar sands before it can be piped for refining, making it a particularly carbon-intensive fuel source.

But in a development angering climate campaigners, the commission said refiners do not have to explicitly identify whether they use tar sands to make road fuels.

Instead, they only have to report the average carbon intensity of their petrol and diesel products, obscuring the impact of different feedstocks.

Outgoing EU climate chief Connie Hedegaard welcomed the proposals, admitting that resistance from some member states over the treatment of tar sands had slowed progress significantly.

“The commission is today giving this another push, to try and ensure that in the future, there will be a methodology and thus an incentive to choose less polluting fuels over more polluting ones like for example oil sands,” she said.

“I strongly recommend Member States to adopt this proposal and keep the safeguards that will allow cleaner fuels to be used in transport across Europe”.

A separate document says the lifecycle CO2 emissions from tar sands are 131 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per Mega Joule of fuel (gCO2eq/MJ), compared to 92.3 for conventional crude.

Nusa Urbancic from campaign group Transport & Environment said officials in Brussels had allowed Canadian and US lobbyists remove plans to single out tar sands after a “five year siege”.

“That is not just a tragedy for the climate; excusing the oil industry from carbon reduction efforts is unfair, inefficient, and costly as well,” she added.

Greenpeace’s energy and transport policy director Franziska Achterberg said recent trade talks between EU, Canada and the US had been used to weaken environmental regulations to allow an increase in tar sand exports.

She urged incoming commission president Jean-Claude Juncker to take a different approach to his predecessor, Jose Manuel Barroso.

“The Barroso commission has chosen to put trade deals like TTIP before the environment. This should be a lesson to Juncker and his team. Public opposition will only intensify if he allows trade deals to be used to undermine the EU’s environmental legislation,” she said.

The post EU scraps plan to highlight tar sands pollution appeared first on Climate Home News.

Pic: Greenpeace Finland

By Sophie Yeo

Shell has applied for a permit to drill for oil in the Alaskan Arctic next summer, in a move criticised by environmental campaigners.

The company hasn’t made a final decision to persevere with summer drilling in the notoriously difficult location, it said, but that the proposals submitted to Washington kept its options open.

“We are undertaking activities including submitting this plan, in order to keep the option of a 2015 season,” said Shell spokesperson Megan Baldino.

The plan proposes two drilling rigs in the Chukchi Sea, producing more than 400,000 barrels a day.

Environmentalists are staunchly opposed to oil exploration in the Arctic. They point to the difficult conditions and fragile landscape, which means an oil spill would be particularly damaging and challenging to contain.

Reserves

The US Geological Survey estimates that around 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves reside in the Arctic.

Climate campaigners, meanwhile, say it is illogical and financially risky to look for more oil when current reserves are more than enough to tip the planet into dangerous levels of warming.

Shell’s Arctic plans have been in motion for over a decade and cost around US$6 billion, but so far there is little to show for it. The company has drilled only two wells, neither of which struck oil.

Exploration in 2013 was thwarted by a series of errors, including Shell’s drilling barge, the Kulluk, running aground off the coast of Southern Alaska.

Plans were halted again in 2014, following a US federal court ruling that the area had been illegally opened to exploration.

“The company is lurching forward despite the flood of reports from government agencies and environmental groups that Arctic drilling is too risky, that the Arctic is too vulnerable, and that Shell itself is too incompetent to proceed,” said Greenpeace Arctic campaigns specialist John Deans.

“If the Obama Administration is serious about climate change, it needs to prove it by keeping Shell out of the Arctic.”

Tar sands failure

Shell’s failure to meet regulations in its exploitation of Canadian tar sands has given rise to further concerns that Arctic drilling could damage the environment.

Lorraine Mitchelmore, head of Shell Canada, admitted on Wednesday the company may not be able to meet its targets on reducing toxic waste produced by the oil sands.

“It’s going to be very challenging,” to meet targets for next year, she told the Wall Street Journal. She called for more flexible regulation that would ease requirements on the industry.

A report last year from Alberta’s Energy Resources Conservation Board said that Shell’s two tar sands mines had failed to meet 2009 clean-up goals. It waived financial penalties, angering environmentalists.

Louise Rouse from campaign group ShareAction said the failure to comply with regulation set a worrying precedent for Shell’s Arctic operations.

“It’s worrying to see Shell apparently failing, yet again, to comply with regulatory requirements on high-risk projects.

“Given the company’s highly controversial plans for US offshore Arctic drilling, investors should be troubled that the company’s focus appears to be on encouraging regulators to reduce requirements rather than ensuring full compliance with vital regulations.”

The post Shell prepares for 2015 Arctic drilling appeared first on Climate Home News.

Tar sand exploration in Alberta, Canada: a risky investment, says the Carbon Tracker Initiative

By Megan Darby

Green campaigners have sought to block oil exploitation of the Arctic and Canada’s tar sands in horror at the impact on the natural environment.

The Carbon Tracker Initiative (CTI) is taking a different tack: highlighting the financial risk of such projects.

Its latest research shows the top 20 undeveloped high-cost oil projects – which happen to be among the most environmentally damaging – risk wasting US$91 billion of investors’ money over the next decade.

If the major oil companies cancelled these and other risky plans they could return US$357 billion to shareholders by 2025, it found.

“Investors are concerned about the levels of capital being sunk into future fields by the oil sector, but are not getting answers on the economics of the projects from the companies,” said James Leaton, CTI’s research Director.

“CTI has responded to demand for detail to enable shareholders to challenge where money is spent.”

Oil companies are exploring ever more difficult environments, from ultra deep water to tar sands, to find resources.

From Greenpeace’s Save the Arctic campaign to Tar Sands Action, protesters have focused on the climate impact of such ventures and risk of oil spills in sensitive environments.

“Without the Ice the Earth Will Fall” Emma Thompson’s moving call to #SaveTheArctic http://t.co/1znyHS7GFu Join her > http://t.co/ApDeu1VQGh

— Save The Arctic (@savethearctic) August 13, 2014

Analysis from CTI shows such projects are also a gamble for investors, which include the pension funds and insurance companies ordinary people rely on to safeguard their money.

These projects depend on a high future oil price to get a return on the capital investment. Meanwhile, political action to halt dangerous climate change is expected to cut demand for oil, pushing the price down.

International negotiators are aiming for a deal in Paris next year to cut greenhouse gas emissions and keep world temperature rise to 2C.

If they succeed, then only a fraction of the world’s fossil fuel reserves can be burned within the remaining “carbon budget”, estimated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to be less than 500 gigatonnes of CO2.

Price gamble

The think-tank’s earlier research showed effective action on climate change should rule out ventures that need a price of more than US$95 a barrel to break even.

Some of the projects identified by CTI in its latest report need a price of more than US$150/bbl. That is according to data compiled by industry experts at Rystad Energy.

The most expensive was a US$2 billion Canadian tar sands venture by ConocoPhillips, which needs a price of US$159/bbl.

For the investment to pay off, the oil price would have to rise significantly from the US$105/bbl Brent benchmark price today. Oil prices can be volatile and have fallen as low as US$40/bbl twice in the last decade.

Shell is the most exposed, CTI found, with US$84 billion earmarked for risky projects. Exxon Mobil is next, with plans to spend up to US$56 billion on projects needing more than US$95/bbl to break even. Chevron and Total are each considering US$52 billion worth of high-cost ventures.

“This analysis demonstrates the worsening cost environment in the oil industry, and the extent to which producers are chasing volume over value at the expense of returns,” said Andrew Grant, CTI analyst.

“Investors will ask whether it is prudent for oil companies to bet on ever higher oil prices when they could be returning cash to shareholders.”

Industry position

Oil companies have shelved some risky projects already, as they try to keep capital spending under control.

Total, Suncor, Shell, BP, Chevron, Statoil and Eni have all cancelled or deferred oil sands and deep sea projects this year.

However, they have rejected the CTI’s analysis of the systemic problems in the sector.

The CTI put the “carbon bubble” concept on the map in March 2012 and it has been steadily gaining traction ever since.

This is the idea that fossil fuel companies are overvalued, because they are not taking account of climate change risk.

The report warned that to put the world on a 2C path, 80% of known fossil fuel reserves had to stay in the ground.

By continuing to explore new and expensive sources of fossil fuels, companies risk creating “stranded assets”. Their investments will become worthless as demand for their product is constrained.

In May, the CTI homed in on the oil sector. It has similar analyses of the coal and gas sectors in the pipeline.

It drew a defensive response from oil companies, with Shell branding the report “alarmist”.

A round-up of oil company arguments by Carbon Brief found they broadly accepted the science of climate change. However, they cast doubt on the likelihood of effective political action to curb emissions and insisted demand for their product would continue.

In a rebuttal to Shell’s assurances, CTI accused the company of “Orwellian doublethink”.

The sector has yet to reconcile the contradiction between its acceptance of the need to tackle climate change and its pursuit of high-risk oil projects, the CTI says.

The post Oil majors gambling US$91bn on 20 high-risk projects appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Alberta tar sands (Pic: Howl Arts Collective/Flickr)

By Paul Brown

Having repudiated the Kyoto Protocol on reducing fossil fuel use, Canada is still exploiting tar sands for oil − despite accepting that climate change is destroying its forests. 

Detailed evidence that Canada’s vast natural areas are undergoing major changes because of climate change is produced in a new report by Natural Resources Canada.

The government body describes problems with disappearing glaciers, sea level rise, melting permafrost and changing snow and rainfall patterns. One of the country’s most important natural resources, the forests that cover more than 50% of its land area, is under pressure because of pests, fire and drought.

There may, the reports says, be some pluses for Canada in climate change − at least in the short term − because some staple cereal crops will also be able to be grown further north because of warmer weather, assuming that the soil is suitable.

The report, Canada in a Changing Climate, concentrates on impacts and adaptation, but does not mention the causes, or the fact that Canada is now an international pariah in the environmental community because of its exploitation of tar sands for oil.

The country does attempt, for economic reasons, to be more energy efficient, but has repudiated the Kyoto Protocol and international efforts to curb fossil fuel use. The country had accepted a target of cutting emissions on 1990 levels by 5% by 2012, but the government backed out in 2011.

Report: Keystone climate impact ‘four times’ greater than estimates

Average greenhouse gas emissions for oil sands extraction and upgrading are estimated to be 3.2 to 4.5 times as intensive per barrel as for conventional crude oil produced in Canada or the US.

If Alberta, where the oil is produced from tar sands, was a country and not a merely a province of Canada, it would have the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the world.

The only mention the report makes of tar sands extraction is the problem caused by its large use of water, and it makes the point that the industry is recycling as much as possible.

Mitigation is not on the agenda, as the country’s politicians are intent on exploiting as much of the country’s oil and gas as possible.

A study of forests says that 224,410 people are directly employed in the sector, although it makes up only 1.1% of GDP. About 5% of the forests are damaged annually because of outbreaks of pests and fire.

Temperatures in the forest areas have risen far more sharply than on the rest of the planet, with far-reaching consequences for the future, the report says.

In 2009, over three million hectares of forest were destroyed by fire in a single year. The number of fires is expected to increase, with the area being burned being three to five times as much in Western Canada by the end of the century.

Large fires are raging again this year, but the quantity of the damage has yet to be assessed.

Severe outbreaks

One of the pests moving north and devastating mature trees is the mountain pine beetle. The beetle is endemic, but is killed by winter temperatures below 35˚C, thus limiting its numbers from year to year.

However, winter temperatures in many areas now fail to drop below this level, leading to larger and more severe outbreaks of the pest.

A report in 2012 concluded that 18.1 million hectares of forest dominated by mature Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) had been affected. Scientists conclude that productivity of the forests will decline rapidly in British Columbia, and thousands of jobs will be lost.

Meanwhile, the beetle is continuing to move north and east.

One advantage of the increased temperatures in Canada is that trees can grow further north and higher up mountains than previously, and there is a longer growing season.

Trees that live 100 years cannot migrate fast enough to take advantage, so local governments are going in for assisted migration.

This involves planting the seeds of suitable species 100 to 200 metres above the existing tree line on mountains, and in some cases two degrees of latitude northwards (about 100 miles) of the existing forests into what is currently tundra or scrub.

This article was produced by the Climate News Network

The post Canada ignores climate warnings in drive for tar sands oil appeared first on Climate Home News.

Pic: kris krüg/Flickr

By Sophie Yeo

The Canadian government has approved a pipeline to pump tar sands from Alberta to the country’s Pacific coast, in spite of opposition from environmentalists and indigenous people.

The 1,177 km pipeline, called the Northern Gateway, will transport 525,000 barrels of oil a day across the country from Alberta’s tar sands.

Tar sands are one of the most polluting forms of fossil fuel. A recent study by the European Commission found that they produce 23% more greenhouse gas intensive than conventional crude oil, as they require much more energy to produce.

Before construction can begin on the project, the company responsible, Enbridge, must fulfil 209 conditions to which the approval is subject. This has given hope to those campaigning against the pipeline that it could still be stopped.

“The proponent clearly has more work to do in order to fulfill the public commitment it has made to engage with Aboriginal groups and local communities along the route,” said Greg Rickford, Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources, in a statement.

Opposition

Canada is keen to create the infrastructure that will allow it to exploit its landlocked tar sands, concentrated in Alberta, and export them to global markets. The oil expected to flow through the Northern Gateway would be destined for Asian markets.

Plans for a controversial Keystone XL pipeline, designed to transport Canadian tar sands down to refineries on the US Gulf Coast, have faced delays as Obama weighs the environmental costs against the potential economic benefits.

Many are concerned that the pipeline could lead to a tanker spill, like the Exxon Valdez spill off of Alaska in 1989.

Jody Wilson, the British Columbia chief from the Assembly of First Nations, said that indigenous people were not opposed to resource development, but not if it had a heavy cost on the environment.

“First Nations and the majority of British Columbians believe this project poses an unacceptable risk to the environment, the health, the safety and livelihoods of all peoples throughout this province because of the undeniable possibility of pipeline and supertanker heavy oil spills,” she said.

British Columbia

The government of British Columbia has also imposed five conditions before they will allow construction to go ahead. They say that only one of these has so far been met.

These four conditions include an oil spill response plan for marine and land environments, addressing the treaty rights of First Nation people, and economic benefits for British Columbia.

“We understand the economic benefits that the Northern Gateway project may bring, but it will not be at the cost of our environment,” said Mary Polak, Minister of Environment of British Columbia.

“At the end of the day, we want to ensure any heavy oil pipeline development is done in a safe, responsible manner.”

The post Canada approves tar sands pipeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

Pic: 4BlueEyes Pete Williamson/Flickr

By Sophie Yeo

A shipment of oil from Canadian tar sands is due to arrive in Europe next week – the first time that the highly polluting fossil fuel has made its way into the continent.

The delivery will give rise to fears that Europe is now gearing up to take advantage of Canada’s oil reserves, creating a crucial market for the polluting fuel in the face of declining US demand and providing an incentive for Canadian companies to scale up production of the oil.

On 29 May, between 500,000 to 600,000 barrels of this Canadian crude oil are scheduled to arrive in the Bilbao port of Spain, which will then be transported into refineries owned by Spanish oil company Repsol.

“This would totally undermine the reductions that the EU is aiming at,” Franziska Achterberg, Greenpeace EU energy and transport policy director, told RTCC.

Tar sands are one of the most polluting and controversial forms of fossil fuel. A European Commission study found that tar sands are 23% more greenhouse gas intensive than conventional oil.

Fuel suppliers are bound under EU rules to decrease the carbon intensity of fuels 6% by 2020. If tar sands were to flood into the European markets, it would become more difficult and expensive to achieve this target.

Analysis released earlier this year by the Natural Resources Defense Council found that Europe is likely to get up to 6.7% of its crude oil and transport fuels from Canadian tar sands by 2020. This would raise the greenhouse gas intensity of Europe’s fuels 1.5% by 2020, or a quarter of the overall reduction target.

According to marinetraffic.com the Aleksey Kosygin will stop off at Klaipeda in Lithuania before heading to Bilbao

So far, EU countries have been unable to accept shipments of Canadian tar sands. This heavy form of oil needs extra processing to convert the crude into useable form – a complicated and energy intensive process, which European refineries have so far been unable to provide.

But that is changing, as European refineries invest heavily in upgrades that will allow them to receive this oil. “This is a test for the refining process, whether Europe can actually refine tar sands into fuel,” said Achterberg.

Repsol, who have purchased the oil, has several projects underway to increase its ability to process oil from tar sands, including one in Bilbao where the oil is to be delivered.

In Canada, major infrastructure projects are also being prepared that will allow oil to be piped to the coast for export, including the Energy East and the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline.

According to Torbjørn Kjus, an oil analyst at DNB Markets, as long as Canadian tar sands prove economic, EU refineries will be happy to import it.

“To the refiner, it’ll just be the price you can get and the product you get after refining it, so they wouldn’t care what the source is. They wouldn’t think about the carbon content at all.”

He added that it is a “trend we might see more of” in Europe, as Canadian companies close in on the continent as a possible market for the product.

Disincentive

The EU is currently working on a Fuel Quality Directive that will discourage the import of tar sands, by requiring them to be labelled as 25% more polluting than conventional oil.

This would be a major disincentive, as suppliers of transport fuel work towards achieving the EU’s 6% emissions intensity reduction target.

But Canada has been lobbying against the new measures, saying that the industry would be “stigmatised”, and the directive was “unscientific, discriminatory and opaque”.

With Europeans voting on the next EU Parliament this week, MEP Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy, vice-chair of the Environment Committee, told RTCC that it was “important” that the Fuel Quality Directive was finalised soon in order to stave off the potential influx of Canadian crude oil.

He said: “As long as we do not have the right position towards tar sands it’s going to be very difficult to not import them into the European Union.”

The post First shipment of Canadian tar sands heads towards EU shores appeared first on Climate Home News.

By John McGarrity

Opponents of the Keystone XL pipeline have stepped up their campaign after a State Department report on Friday downplayed impact of the project on climate change.

Supporters say the report increases the likelihood of approval by President Obama, who has the final say in whether the project can go ahead.

The final environmental review said the Canada-US oil pipeline would not greatly increase carbon emissions because oil sands in Alberta would be developed anyway and use other forms of transport such as tankers and rail.

But campaigners vowed to use the courts, civil disobedience and political pressure ahead of November’s Congressional elections to get the pipeline blocked.

“Keystone XL continues to fail all the tests that President Obama has said it must pass. It clearly fails the climate test that he laid out last summer, because every major climate change expert has concluded that it would significantly exacerbate climate change,” said Ken Winston, a spokesman for US green group Sierra Club in Nebraska.

There, the pipeline is particularly frought because landowners fear the impact it might have on supplies from North America’s largest source of groundwater, but others in the state are keen for the project to proceed because it will create jobs and raise revenues.

The pipeline has become an emotive political issue in North America, with Canadian musician Neil Young telling reporters that Keystone XL is a “terrible idea”.

“This fuel is going to China, which is probably the dirtiest place on the planet,” Young said before a concert in Winnipeg.

But researchers think that if Keystone is built, most of the oil exports from tar sands are more likely to go to Europe.

A report in January by the National Resources Defense Council said that US approval for Keystone could drive up Europe’s carbon emissions by 32 million tonnes a year after 2020 if the bloc discontinues a threshold on the carbon footprint of imported oil, which presently rules out oil from Canada’s tar sands.

Critics of Canada’s tar sands say the process is a ‘carbon bomb’ that will triple emissions to 100 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent a year from 2030,  meaning Canada won’t be able to commit to tough climate targets.

Billionaire Tom Steyer, a Democratic Party donor and a high profile opponent of Keystone XL, called on US Secretary of State John Kerry to review  “defective” analysis on the pipeline published by the State Department last week.

“How can the foreign companies who stand to financially benefit from the approval of the KXL pipeline assert that the pipeline is the key to their ability to develop the tar sands without these assertions being considered material to this report?” Steyer wrote in a letter to Kerry.

Decision

Supporters of Keystone said the State Department report should encourage President Obama to give swift approval to the pipeline.

“This report from the Obama administration once again confirms that there is no reason for the White House to continue stalling construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline,” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement. “So, Mr. President, no more stalling – no more excuses.”

Obama said last year that permission for the project could be withheld if it “significantly” increased emissions.

Over the next 30 days, John Kerry will evaluate the State Department report, while state agencies and the public will have almost three months to weigh in with their opinions.

After that, the decision is Obama’s alone, but the issue is highly divisive within his Democratic Party, with several senators and governors voicing support for pipeline ahead of mid-term elections.

The post Keystone foes to fight on after government downplays climate risk appeared first on Climate Home News.

Alberta’s oil sands at dusk (Pic: Kris Krug)

By John McGarrity

Oil from Canada’s carbon-intensive tar sands – one of the world’s single biggest sources of greenhouse gas pollution – could be used in the petrol tanks of European motorists from 2020 after the European Commission proposed to scrap curbs on imports of highly emissions-intensive fuels.

The EC’s executive arm said in its 2030 climate and energy framework yesterday that it wouldn’t set new thresholds on the carbon intensity of fuels used in transport from the start of the next decade.

Environmental groups said the EC’s proposal to drop a law curbing the carbon intensity of transport fuels would enable oil and products from tar sands to be brought to Europe, particularly if new pipelines are approved.

“[The EC proposal] is good news for oil companies and Alberta, with its high-carbon tar sands, but bad news for Europe in our move towards a more sustainable transport system,” said Nusa Urbancic, a campaigner with Transport and Environment in a statement.

Report: EU’s 2030 climate & energy package explained

The EU’s existing Fuel Quality Directive  aims to reduce the carbon intensity of Europe’s transport fuel by 6% by 2020.

“But the measures governing how the law will actually be implemented have yet to be released by the Commission, allegedly because of extreme pressure from oil companies and the Canadian government,” Urbancic said.

The measure to scrap the fuel law may be discussed at a meeting of EU governments in March on the climate and energy package, although a final decision on the 2030 proposals might not come until early next year.

On Wednesday, EU climate chief Connie Hedegaard told journalists: “There are still discussions on how to proceed on the fuels.”

A recent report from the US green group the National Resources Defense Council said the export of crude oil and refined products derived from tar sands could raise the carbon intensity of Europe’s fuel stocks by up to 32.5 million metric tons annually from 2020.

Canada’s tar sands, branded as ‘carbon bomb’ by environmentalists, could supply up to 7% of the EU’s fuel stock from the beginning of the next decade, the NRDC said.

US President Barrack Obama hasn’t yet decided whether to approve the northern branch of the hugely controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would enable tar sands crude to be refined and from the Gulf Coast to export markets in Europe.

Riddle of the sands

New export markets for tar sands oil would  help increase western Canadian tar sands production from 1.4 million barrels  per day in 2012 to 5.8 million bpd by 2030, the NRDC estimates.

Emissions from the process could triple to 107 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent a year by 2030 compared with 2011, according to the Canadian government’s own figures, driving up the country’s overall emissions at a time that developed countries will be expected to cut their carbon footprint in any future UN climate pact.

But green groups say that Canada has so far under-reported the carbon footprint of its oil sands industry, which has transformed Alberta’s economic fortunes and is a powerbase of Conservative Prime Minister Steven Harper.

The EC’s 2030 proposals yesterday also recommended that the EU drop the 10% target for renewables in transport that currently applies until 2020, a decision broadly welcomed by green groups.

They say the 10% requirement has mostly met with biofuels, which are blamed for competing with food crops and being even more emissions intensive than conventional fuels.

VIDEO: Quebec chief on region’s new cap-and-trade scheme

The post Canada tar sands set to benefit from EU 2030 climate plan appeared first on Climate Home News.

Source: Flickr/Howl Arts Collective)

1 – EU should act on tar sands, say scientists
Over 50 European and US scientists have written to the president of the European Commission, urging him to press ahead with a plan to label tar sand more polluting than other forms of oil, defying intensive lobbying from Canada. Speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity, scientists said that plans for trade deals between the US and Europe risks permanently freezing the legislation for good.

2 – Funding to jumpstart NY Green Bank
Governor Andrew Cuomo has announced US$ 210 million in initial funding for the New York Green Bank, an initiative he proposed in his 2013 State of the State address as the “financial engine” that will mobilise private investment in clean energy projects. With this funding, the Green Bank is expected to open for business and offer its first financial products in early 2014, reports the Central New York Business Journal.

3 – Australian government threatens protected forest
The Australian government has decided to push ahead with a plan to remove Unesco World Heritage Status from a swath of Tasmanian forest, the Guardian reports, potentially reopening bitter divisions over the state’s timber industry. The Coalition has argued the listing threatens jobs and investment in a region that suffers from relatively high unemployment.

4 – Yeb Sano one of ’10 people who mattered most’
Filipino Climate Change Commissioner Yeb Saño has been cited by international weekly science journal Nature as one of 10 people who mattered this year for having “focused the world’s attention – briefly – on global warming” reports GMA News Online. Sano gave an emotional speech at the UN’s climate change conference in Warsaw this year, pledging to fast until meaningful action had been achieved.

5 – Some plants will struggle to adapt to climate change
Researchers have suggested that some plants may not have the traits needed to respond quickly enough to human-induced climate change, reports the Business Standard. Scientists at the University of Florida found that some plant lineages, including many crops, will not have the underlying genetic attributes that will allow for rapid responses to climate change.

The post EU and US scientists call for tar sands embargo appeared first on Climate Home News.

(Pic: Colin O’Connor/Greenpeace)

By Nilima Choudhury 

The Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline will trigger a rush of investment for more carbon-intensive oil sands projects by up to 20% over the next decade, according to new research.

The controversial fourth phase of TransCanada’s $5.4 billion project, stretching 1,179 miles from Alberta in Canada to Nebraska in the US is under scrutiny from the Carbon Tracker Institute.

The report, Keystone XL Pipeline: A Potential Mirage for Oil-sands Investors, points out the question marks that still hang over the economic viability of the project.

“The vision of improved prices it promises could quickly be wiped out by increasing costs, meaning investors who believed the mirage of improved oil-sands economics with KXL will be left disappointed,” said Mark Lewis, external research adviser to Carbon Tracker.

The results suggest that a good return on investment in KXL is dependent on sustained high oil prices, but the report says that “in the long term such projects may still result in wasted capital and stranded assets.”

Reports have said there is a risk that ploughing money into fossil fuels, which need to stay in the ground to limit climate change, could create stranded assets worth $6 trillion in a decade.

Emissions

As the northern stretch of KXL crosses the Canadian border, it still requires approval from the US State Department.

The project is highly polluting, with the amount of additional CO2 emitted during its lifetime estimated to exceed the combined tailpipe emissions of every car in America for one year.

In its latest report, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change included for the first time the idea of a carbon budget, a finite amount of carbon that can be burnt before it becomes unlikely we can avoid more than two degrees of global warming.

The New York Times recently reported that Republicans had been planning on using the approval of KXL as a bargaining chip to support President Obama’s intention to raise the nation’s debt, which would have avoided the government shutdown it experienced October.

Continued investment in oil sands could be “decisive” in pushing global CO2 emissions beyond a 2C threshold, as less than a third of global oil, coal and gas reserves can be commercialized by 2050 if climate goals are to be met.

If given the green light, the report says that KXL could help to further expand the industry. KXL approval might lower the cost of financing additional rounds of new project investment by making oil sands producers more attractive to financial investors.

Analysts at RBC Capital Markets have estimated that between 2014 and 2017 up to $9.4 billion of investment in oil-sands projects may hinge on the outcome of KXL.

The Carbon Tracker report says that “investors are in effect allocating more capital toward assets that are likely to become stranded as a result of more stringent emissions regulation.”

Both Canada and the US need to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by 80% by 2050 if the carbon budget is to be achieved and have committed to cuts of 17% by 2020 from 1990 levels. While the US is on track, Canada’s emissions are way off course.

Greenpeace recently said that 20 members of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers are jointly responsible for almost one sixth of all CO2 and methane emitted by human activity since the “dawn of the industrial age”.

The report says additional projects sparked by KXL will lead to rising oil prices.

“KXL has the potential to be a catalyst for additional production. This has led to the discussion of carbon offsets which would increase prices further.

“From a carbon-budget perspective this is an unsustainable outcome laying the foundations for what may then become stranded assets.”

The post Keystone pipeline could increase oil sands investment by 20% – report appeared first on Climate Home News.

(Pic: Simpson/UC-Irvine)

By Nilima Choudhury

A new report says the air downwind of Canada’s largest oil, gas and tar sands processing zone has higher levels of contaminants than in some of the world’s most polluted cities.

The findings by UC Irvine and University of Michigan scientists reveal high levels of the carcinogens and other airborne pollutants in Alberta’s ‘industrial heartland’.

“We’re seeing elevated levels of carcinogens and other gases in the same area where we’re seeing excess cancers known to be caused by these chemicals,” said UC Irvine chemist Isobel Simpson, lead author of the paper in Atmospheric Environment.

The researchers captured emissions in the rural Fort Saskatchewan area downwind of major refineries, chemical manufacturers and tar sands processors owned by BP, Dow, Shell and other companies in the so-called “Industrial Heartland” of Alberta.

In the US, Shell has a programme in conjunction with the University of Texas which offers employees and their dependents cancer screening sessions.

The team compared the Alberta plumes to heavily polluted megacities. To their surprise, the scientists saw that levels of some chemicals were higher than in Mexico City during the 1990s or in the still polluted Houston-Galveston area.

A report last month showed that by 2100, up to three million people could be at risk of dying if leaders do not take action against greenhouse gas emissions.

Health impacts

The researchers obtained health records spanning more than a decade that showed the number of men with leukemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was greater in communities closest to the pollution plumes than in neighboring counties.

While the scientists stopped short of saying that the pollutants they documented were definitely causing the male cancers, they strongly recommended that the industrial emissions be decreased to protect both workers and nearby residents.

“For decades, we’ve known that exposure to outdoor air pollutants can cause respiratory and cardiovascular disease,” Co-author Stuart Batterman, a University of Michigan professor of environmental health sciences, said. “The World Health Organization has now also formally recognised that outdoor air pollution is a leading environmental cause of cancer deaths.”

Longtime residents near industrial Alberta have struggled to bring attention to bad odours, health threats and related concerns.

Ottawa MP David McGuinty told RTCC earlier this year that stopping the exploitation of the tar sands in Alberta would be impossible.

He also pointed out that a large proportion of the electorate were unconcerned by the risks posed by the region’s energy activities.

He said: “The government are not going to try and win the sustainability popularity contest because they have proven they don’t need to.”

The peer-reviewed study is one of few in the region and more investigation of the large and complex facilities is needed, say the researchers.

For example, Simpson said, it appeared in some cases that the companies were not reporting all of the tons of chemicals they release. She and her colleagues documented high levels of 1,3-butadiene that could only have come from one facility, but she said the company had not reported any such emissions.

Simpson said: “Our main point is that it would be good to proactively lower these emissions of known carcinogens. You can study it and study it, but at some point you just have to say, ‘Let’s reduce it.’ ”

BP, Shell and Dow did not reply to requests for a comment.

The post Cancer warning over Canada’s tar sand heartland appeared first on Climate Home News.

(Pic: 401(K)-2013)

By Nilima Choudhury

One of the largest private corporations in the US stands to make billions if the controversial Keystone XL (KXL) pipeline goes ahead, says a new report released today.

The report, Billionaires’ Carbon Bomb by think tank International Forum on Globalization (IFG) has found that David and Charles Koch, through their privately-owned oil supply and refining company, Koch Industries, own more than two million acres of land in Alberta, Canada, which would propel the brothers’ personal wealth and political power ever faster and upward.

IFG’s report reveals that Koch Industries’ role in KXL could generate potential profits of $100 billion, or one million more times than the average KXL workers’ wage over the lifetime of the project.

The brothers’ wealth would also see a total of $53 million in the pockets of groups and politicians who are pushing to fastrack the pipeline.

According to the report, Koch Industries has several profit streams all along the tar sands value chain from crude oil production on land holdings of Koch Exploration Canada in Alberta’s tar sands territory, to their 4,000 miles of pipeline operated by Koch Pipeline Company, to their lucrative oil derivatives dealing by Koch Supply and Trading.

Fuss

The impacts of more “Koch Cash” are cause for broader concern beyond today’s climate crisis, says the report.

In three years the Kochs have not only bought blocking power in the Congress but also created offensive capabilities to advance their anti-climate change agenda by shrinking Obama’s government by 8% via the seizing of federal funds which could have been used to enforce pollution laws, monitor extreme weather and finance clean energy projects.

Since the 2006 election cycle, Koch’s political action committee is said to have spent over $8.5 million on contributions to federal candidates, more than any other oil and gas company.

Republican Todd Tiahrt has been the biggest recipient of Koch Cash in Congress ($237,366) and is also a Tea Party favourite who consistently votes in the interest of so called “economic freedom”.

According to Greenpeace, the Koch Foundation has also been linked to leaked reports from think tank Heartland Institute which revealed potentially illegal plans to pay federal employees to write unscientific global warming material for school programmes.

Heartland’s plan showed it hoped to raise $200,000 in 2012 from the Koch Foundation.

On the other hand, the Koch Foundation has been applauded for its support of the Berkley Earth Surface Temperature project which was set up with the Bill Gates Foundation to systematically address concerns sceptical scientists had over the causes of climate change.

Keystone implications

2013 marks Keystone XL’s fifth anniversary since initial plans were unveiled. It could carry 830,000 barrels per day of tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast if it goes ahead.

One barrel can produce enough gasoline to drive a medium-sized car (17 miles per gallon) over 280 miles. That’s just under the distance between Los Angeles and Las Vegas or Brighton to York in the UK.

The concern around tar sands oil lies with the fact that it can produce three times the greenhouse gas emissions of conventionally produced oil.

The particularly toxic brew from the tar sands known as dilbit makes it even riskier, given that no one knows how to clean it should a spill occur.

In 2000, the EPA fined Koch Industries $30 million for its role in 300 oil spills that resulted in more than three million gallons of crude oil leaking into ponds, lakes, streams and coastal waters, so the company’s involvement in KXL does little to dampen worries.

Permitting the pipeline would enormously expand the financial war chest the Kochs use in their crusade to oppose any controls on carbon. The report says this would concentrate the Kochs’ control over carbon pollution policies.

Keystone approval

A decision on Keystone is not expected until next year, although many, including Koch Industries, are trying to force the issue.

Government members like Senator Heidi Heitkamp, a freshman Democrat from North Dakota said recently: “The Keystone Pipeline decision has taken longer than it took us to defeat Hitler. There’s just something wrong with this process.”

Critics of KXL – such as billionaire investor Tom Steyer – launched TV advertisements last month highlighting what he says are the economic negative effects of the pipeline.

RTCC contacted Koch Industries for a response. A spokesperson called the report “inaccurate” and said the company does not own the two million acres in Alberta as claimed by IFG.

The post Keystone will create ‘cash cow on steroids’ for Koch brothers appeared first on Climate Home News.

(Source: howlmontreal)

Canada: If Canada’s expansion of heavy crude oil from the Alberta tar sands continues growing as government and industry project, emissions are projected to double by 2020, which will send Canada’s greenhouse gases way over the 2020 climate change target it shares with the United States. (Environment News Service)

Canada: The Canadian government is unwilling to cut greenhouse gas emissions in exchange for approval of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, a condition U.S. President Barack Obama has said must be met if the project is to win his endorsement, Canadian environmentalists said Wednesday. (Point Carbon)

Research: Extreme heat waves will increase over the next 30 years, regardless of the amount of carbon emitted between now and then. (RTCC)

Fiji: Fiji’s government has identified more than 640 communities in the country which are vulnerable to climate change. (Radio New Zealand International)

US: BP on Monday sued the US government over a decision to bar the oil giant from getting new federal contracts to supply fuel and other services after the company pleaded guilty to manslaughter and other criminal charges related to the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill. (Huffington Post)

UN: UN talks on 2015 climate deal aimed at developing a global emissions reduction deal are ready to “shift gears” in the coming months, according to UN officials. (RTCC)

Europe: Campaigners plan to target the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development’s support for coal in a ‘Global Day of Action’ on Thursday. (RTCC)

Research: Google’s carbon footprint per user is equal to a person driving a car for one mile, the company has announced. (RTCC)

The post Canada’s tar sands could blow its 2020 climate target appeared first on Climate Home News.

Canada: Faced with uncertainty over its proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would link Canada’s oil sands with the American Gulf Coast, TransCanada said on Thursday that it would build a pipeline to eastern Canada. (NY Times)

China: A heat wave in China has left dozens of people dead in at least 40 cities and counties, mostly in the south and east. It’s been so hot that people are grilling shrimp on manhole covers, eggs are hatching without incubators and a highway billboard has mysteriously caught fire by itself. (NY Times)

Germany: Germany increased spending on energy research 77 percent in the past seven years, benefiting mainly renewable-power and efficiency projects as the country shuts nuclear reactors. (Bloomberg)

Japan: Siemens AG, Europe’s biggest engineering company, expects Japan to almost double its capacity of renewable energy by 2030, while continuing with nuclear power generation even after the Fukushima disaster. (Bloomberg)

Australia: Australia’s major cities could see four times the number of heat-related deaths by 2050, according to a new report commissioned by the Australian federal government. (Climate Progress)

US: In reaction to the updating of the social cost of carbon (SSC) by the Obama Administration, two Republican senators have put forward new legislation that would require any agency to allow a 60-day waiting period for public comment before establishing any new rule or guideline that involves the SCC. (Climate Progress)

Australia: A leaked Climate Change Authority report to the government advises that Australia should aim to slash emissions by 15% on 2000 levels by 2020. (Guardian)

Research: Shifts in climate lead to greater violence and conflict, according to a wide-ranging analysis in Science that draws upon data from dozens of studies. The team estimates that when temperature or rainfall rises by one standard deviation, violence between individual people increases by 4 percent and conflict between groups by 14 percent. (Conservation)

The post Tar sands pipeline to be built to eastern Canada appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Mackenzie River Basin, a vast globally important area in Canada, is at great risk from climate change and a catastrophic oil spill from the tailing ponds of tar sands mining, according to a panel of nine Canadian, American and British scientists.

The warning came just days after the Canadian Oil Producers Association says it expects oil production from tar sands in the region to double by 2030.

A report produced after a series of hearings last year says effective governance is vital for the river basin, which is five times the size of France. Water pours into the Arctic Ocean from the 1,800 kilometre long Mackenzie River at the rate of four Olympic sized swimming pools a second.

The watershed’s biodiversity and its important role in hemispheric bird migrations, stabilizing climate, and the health of the Arctic Ocean means it needs protection urgently.

The Mackenzie River runs 1,738 kilometres to the Arctic Ocean, draining a vast area nearly the size of Indonesia (Pic: Flickr/Bulliver)

Already the temperatures in the region have increased more than 2C as a result of climate change and permafrost areas are melting causing damage to roads, bridges and homes. It is also deforming the ground and changing water flows.

The report says that large quantities of methane trapped in the soil by permafrost are in danger of being released threatening to rapidly increase the rate of climate change.

Glacier cover has declined 25 % in the last 25 years and in spring snow cover on the Canadian Rockies disappears about a month earlier. The vast area contains 45,000 productive lakes, which also need protection.

The panel, convened by the US-based Rosenburg International Forum on Water Policy, identified the exploitation of the region’s mineral and fossil fuels as a major threat to its biodiversity, the Arctic and a threat to the way of life of the indigenous peoples.

Cutting the forests and the danger to river life from hydro-electric dams needs to be tightly controlled, the scientists say.

The biggest single current threat is the existing tailing ponds on the lower Athabasca River. If a breach occurred in the winter it would be “virtually impossible to clean up because it would disappear underneath the ice and run down through the whole waterway” through Lake Athabasca, the Slave River and Delta, the Great Slave Lake, the Mackenzie River and Delta and as far as the Beaufort Sea.

This would have an unprecedented effect on human societies in the North West territories.

Weak management

The report – concerned about the financial resources required to deal with a spill -includes a strong recommendation that “extractive industries be required to post a significant performance bond before site development and operations commence.

“This ensures that clean up costs and mitigation following closure of the site will be fully paid by the industry itself.

“Failure to require a significant performance bond or some similar incentive almost surely means that the legacy of despoiled environments, toxic wastes and other waste will continue unabated, and that taxpayers will be left to bear costs that are properly those of the mining industry,” the report says.

Another of the panel’s main findings was that the ecology, hydrology and climate of the region were all at risk and already changing as a result of planetary warming. Careful investigation was needed to try and reduce the effects and dangers. “This is essential to protect the welfare of people locally and to some extent globally,” the report said.

The basin is so large it is administered by three different Canadian states and although there was a Mackenzie River Basin Transboundary Waters Master Agreement of 1997 the Board that was set up to manage it is weak.

The Federal Government of Canada should take overall responsibility for the basin and the Board must be strengthened.

“A reinvigorated Board will need significantly more financial support and will benefit from the advice and counsel of an independent International Science Advisory Committee,” the report says.

This article was produced by the Climate News Network

The post Canada tar sands threatening biodiversity of Arctic circle wilderness appeared first on Climate Home News.

A group of senior academics issued a letter this week to the Canadian government, criticising it for ignoring the threat of climate change.

It was the latest in a long line of reprimands for a nation that has been described as a “pariah” at the international climate talks.

A recent report on the $674bn carbon bubble identified how meeting global climate targets would mean leaving large volumes of the world’s fossil fuel reserves in the ground.

The fear over the country’s oil sands joining these stranded assets could well be behind the blunt shift in Canada’s environmental policy, hastened along by the government of Prime Minister Harper.

On the international front it has withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol to reduce greenhouse gases, bizarrely pulled out of the UN’s drought agency and taken the Dodo award at the UN conference on biodiversity.

Brown pride

Environment Minister Peter Kent has said this and the Colossal Fossil award, given by NGOs to the nation that has done the most to hinder climate action are “worn with honour“.

It has also lobbied against European plans to tighten fuel quality regulations.

Back home emissions are rising, its only Green MP has been heckled in Parliament, it has approved drilling for fossil fuels in the Arctic and oil pipeline projects are dividing communities and facing growing opposition.

The motivation for all this is fairly straightforward. Its vast oil sands, the third largest proven oil reserves in the world.

“If you look at the carbon arithmetic, you cannot see how you can have a prayer of keeping climate change within 2°C while exploiting to the full the unconventional resources that are in Alberta, Venezuela and around the world,” says John Ashton, the UK’s former chief climate change diplomat.

“If Canada wants to be seen as part of the solution again, the first step is to recognize that.

Canada is tied to the expansion of its tar sands – not compatible with an ambitious global climate deal (Source: Flickr/Kris Krug)

“If you walk away, as Canada did, from the Kyoto Protocol you’re saying to the world: ‘you may think I’m part of the problem but I don’t mind’. You can’t then complain when people say ‘that is how we see you’. Canada is unashamedly part of the problem, because of the decision that it has taken,” adds Ashton.

This attitude is harder to take given the warm feelings that the country typically engenders as the USA’s safer, friendlier more polite neighbour.

The country has a target to reduce its emissions by 17% by 2020 compared to 2005 levels and claims to be halfway there. Critics say it is cooking the books.

Some in the government have sought to raise doubts about the dangers of climate change. Natural resources minister Joe Oliver raised eyebrows recently by suggesting fears around its impacts had been exaggerated.

“That’s a political judgement. It’s not an engineering or climate judgement,” says Tom Burke, co-founder of the independent environmental organisation E3G.

“Canada sees its economic future in frying the world basically – that’s where its economy prospers. If the world doesn’t fry all that lovely tar sands, that they hope will stop them from having to make or sell anything more complicated than oil, disappears.

“Because of their history the Canadians find themselves in a difficult position of wanting to retain the good feelings everybody had about them while behaving in an extremely bad way,” he adds.

Earlier this year, Ottawa MP David McGuinty told RTCC this attitude was representative of changing public attitudes as they place more focus on economic growth.

“The government are not going to try and win the sustainability popularity contest because they have proven they don’t need to,” he said.

Oilsands

Rhetoric on protecting the Canadian economy is often interchangeable with protecting the oil sands.

Canada wants to ramp-up production and that means a better distribution network. Approval for the Keystone XL pipeline headed south to refineries in the USA has turned into a four-year soap opera. A pipeline heading to ports on Canada’s west coast threatens to do the same thing.

Expanding output needs more refineries and more ways of getting the oil to them.

Simon Dyer, policy director of the Pembina Institute, an environmental think tank and consultancy based in Canada, told RTCC there is more to come from the tar sands.

“Current oilsands production has just reached two million barrels per day, but approved production that has not been built yet would take us to more than 5.25 million barrels per day,” he says. “The lag times in what has already been approved and the cumulative climate impacts, that is the real issue here.”

So where would a successful deal under the UNFCCC, the UN’s climate change agency, leave this pre-approved production increase?

“The current and proposed level of oilsands production is a symptom of the lack of climate policy and there is certainly a risk that some of that approved production would be stranded and not viable should climate policy be strengthened globally,” warns Dyer.

Greening the oil sands?

Some concerned with the climate impacts of the tar sands, but resigned to its ongoing development are working on proposals to limits its damage.

The environment minister of Alberta’s provincial administration surprised the government, and the oil industry, by proposing a set of regulations called 40/40. These would require a 40% reduction in emissions generated in the carbon intensive production of a barrel of tar sands oil and a $40 levy on every tonne of CO2 emitted beyond that limit.

Pembina’s Clare Demerse says the province could act without federal approval but it is more likely that it would ask the national government to adopt its proposals across the country.

“It’s a starting point, but 40/40 alone doesn’t get Canada on track to its 2020 climate target,” Demerse told RTCC.

Pembina has suggested adding $10 to the penalty every year so that the price per tonne hits $100 in 2020.

Changes

With the Harper Government bearing the brunt of the criticism, many look to the next election as an opportunity for the country to come back into the climate action fold.

The country’s third largest party, the Liberals elected a new leader in April 2013, opting for the charismatic Justin Trudeau who swept home on a wave of positivity.

In 2011 unpopular Environment Minister Peter Kent told Parliament he would refuse to allow the opposition to form part of Canada’s delegation to the UN climate talks in Durban. Trudeau yelled “Oh, you piece of shit”, and was swiftly rebuked.

That may have won him some friends in the environmental movement but he is yet to outline his climate change plans in detail and he has disappointed many others by backing the Keystone XL pipeline.

Trudeau’s best chance of gaining power would be with an alliance with other left and centre left parties. At the moment they can attract a combined 60% of the vote and still fail to get into power.

If there are to be changes in Canada’s direction on climate they will still be constrained by ongoing oil sands production and not until the next election.

This will take place one month before the UN’s crucial 2015 climate talks in Paris where the deadline falls to agree a global emissions reduction deal.

Just the sort of agreement that Dyer says could leave Canada’s oil sands high and dry.

The post Canada wears climate pariah label “with honour” appeared first on Climate Home News.

Outspoken politician says US scientist should be ‘ashamed’ of his ‘exaggerated rhetoric’ on exploitation of tar sands

Canada‘s natural resources minister, Joe Oliver, rarely bothers to hide his dislike for critics of the country’s carbon-heavy tar sands or the controversial Keystone XL pipeline.

But it still came as a surprise to hear Oliver lash out at one of America’s pre-eminent scientists, climatologist James Hansen, during a visit to Washington DC.

Oliver was in Washington on one of the now-frequent visits by Canadian politicians to try to build support for the pipeline.

The charm offensive evidently did not apply to Hansen. In remarks made at a Washington thinktank, Oliver said Hansen should be “ashamed” of his opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, and for warning that exploitation of the carbon-heavy tar sands would drive climate change past a point of no return.

Joe Oliver describes many of his critics as “clearly unhinged” and accuses green groups of trying to “hijack our regulatory system”

Hansen is known as the scientist who raised public awareness of climate change 25 years ago with his testimony to Congress.

In Oliver’s view, however, the scientist has had no business to keep speaking out as he has. “He was the one who said four years ago that if we go ahead with development of the oil sands it’s game over for the planet,” Oliver told the audience at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. “Well, this is exaggerated rhetoric. It’s frankly nonsense. I don’t know why he said it but he should be ashamed of having said it.”

It’s not clear why Oliver was so vehement. The minister launched his attack on Hansen just 48 hours after a report from the Environmental Protection Agency essentially reaffirmed the climate scientist’s concerns about the development of the tar sands.

The EPA said developing the tar sands would indeed have a negative impact on the environment, releasing as much as an additional 935m metric tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere over the next 50 years.

But Oliver has made a name for himself in the past by his efforts to take down critics of Alberta’s tar sands. He wrote an open letter last year denouncing such critics as “radicals” in the pay of foreign special interest groups.

The ministerial outspokenness this week during an interview in Montreal also raised questions about whether Oliver even believes climate change is happening.

If Oliver’s belief in climate science is waning, however, the minister suggested that Hansen was also to blame. “Crying wolf all the time does not advance serious debate,” he said.

The article first appeared on the Guardian

RTCC is part of the Guardian Environment Network

The post Canada’s oil chief Joe Oliver slates climate expert James Hansen appeared first on Climate Home News.

The protests singled out US Secretary of State John Kerry and called on him to block the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline.

The project to transport oil from Canada’s tar sands to refineries on the US Gulf Coast requires approval from the State Department as it crosses an international border. The outcome is currently finely balanced.

US Secretary of State John Kerry is the focus of protests as G8 foreign ministers meet (Source: Flickr/StateDept)

Secretary Kerry’s credentials as an advocate of climate action had raised hopes among environmentalists that he would block the controversial plans. A report on the impacts of the pipeline released last month claimed that the climate impacts of Keystone XL would be negligible.

Climate scientist James Hansen has described the exploitation of the Canadian tar sands as “game over for the climate”. Only the proven oil reserves of Venezuela and Saudi Arabia are larger.

Climate blocked

Last month RTCC reported that climate change had been blocked from the agenda of this year’s G8 meeting by an advisor to UK Prime Minister David Cameron. Britain is the host and chair of this year’s talks that will take place in Lough Erne, Northern Ireland.

Protesters from several UK groups were joined by residents from Texas whose land has been seized for the construction of the southern leg of the project, which does not require State Department approval.

They have travelled to the UK to appear at the BP AGM. BP has significant operations in the oil sands.

Canada hopes to export the oil, which begins life as a thick bitumen like substance that must undergo “upgrading” to make it suitable for refining into usable products.

The EU’s proposed Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) would classify Canadian tar sands products in a higher emitting category ensuring that existing carbon regulations would make it unlikely to be imported to Europe.

Despite previous discussions on climate change and reforming fossil fuel subsidies, the meeting of Foreign Ministers will focus on Somalia, cybersecurity and Burma.

A protest in Washington DC meanwhile will focus on the failure of new sources of climate finance such as a ‘Robin Hood tax’ on financial transactions at the same time that public money has been spent on bank bailouts.

Polar bears, walruses, students, and Robin Hood will play tug-of-war against Wall Street bankers over a giant halfpenny to illustrate their point.

The post Climate protesters converge on London ahead of G8 meeting appeared first on Climate Home News.

NASA’s climate science chief James Hansen has urged President Obama to reject the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline.

Writing in the LA Times, Hansen said approving the plan to build a pipeline from the Canadian tar sands to refineries on the US gulf coast, would deliver a “crushing blow” to the climate.

“Researchers now say that the Alberta tar sands contain 360 to 510 billion tons of carbon – more than double that of all oil burned in human history,” he wrote.

“The President stands at a fork in the road: Rejecting the pipeline will show the world we are serious and determined to be on the right side of history. Approving it will signal we are too entrenched with business-as-usual to do what’s right by the people, planet and future generations..

“All of President Obama’s achievements will fade if he doesn’t act swiftly and decisively on climate change. Rejecting Keystone is the first step.”

Hansen announced his imminent retirement from NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies this week. He said he could not contribute to legal action against the US government if he was working for one of its agencies.

James Hansen has urged President Obama to block Keystone XL as a first step to a positive legacy on climate change (Source: Flickr/Chesapeakeclimate/Josh Lopez)

The State Department will issue its recommendation to President Obama later this year with no decision expected until late summer 2013.

Canada is looking for tar sands oil buyers with a number of plans underway to access the refineries and ports required to export it.

“Only with a substantial increase in pipelines to the coasts, and with access to markets overseas, can the tar sands industry meet its eye-popping production targets — a full tripling of output in coming decades — along with the crushing blow that would deliver to our climate,” said Hansen.

Tar sands oil is more energy intensive to extract than conventional sources, and generates higher emissions when used.

The Keystone XL pipeline proposes to transport unrefined bitumen-like oil at high pressures making it different to most pipelines that transport lighter crude oil.

Two small spills of thick tar sands oil in the US this week have demonstrated the additional damage it can do. It subsequently emerged that Exxon-Mobil does not pay the 8¢ per barrel contribution to the US spill defence fund for tar sands products as they are not technically classified as oil.

A tars sands oil spill in the Kalamazoo river was the largest onshore spillage in US history. It received little attention as it coincided with the Deepwater Horizon accident.

Backers of the pipeline say it will create jobs during construction and by the extra capacity it will create at US refineries.

The post Hansen urges Obama to abandon Keystone XL pipeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

The oil from Canada’s tar sands is widely regarded as one of the dirtier fuels produced, not least because it takes more energy to extract it.

Canada’s First Nations are anxious to stop the oil being exported to Europe.

A leader of Canada’s Indigenous peoples has arrived in Europe to try to stop the tar sands industry, which he says is “destroying the way of life of First Nations peoples”, from making inroads here.

He is Chief Bill Erasmus, head of the Dene Nation in the Northwest Territories, who has come to Europe ahead of a vote by the European Council later this year which could make the export of oil from the tar sands to Europe more difficult.

Canada has huge oil reserves, mostly in the form of unconventional crude, including tar sands – deposits that need more energy to extract than conventional crudes.

The oil, found in clay-like deposits, is widely judged one of the oil industry’s most polluting fuels.

Local environmental activists projected a message on the side of the Canadian Embassy in downtown Berlin (Pic: © www.david-biene.de)

The European Union, in its Fuel Quality Directive, describes tar sands as one of the world’s dirtiest forms of crude oil. Its studies show that mining a barrel of oil from tar sands generates about 20% more emissions than from conventional crudes.

Chief  Erasmus says the extraction process is making his ancestral homeland uninhabitable, contravening still-extant treaties.

“The extraction of the oil does not recognise our sovereignty over the land as set out in the treaties concluded between our peoples and the British”, he told the Climate News Network.

He said the mining squandered vast amounts of fresh water, needing three times more than the drilling of conventional crudes to heat and cool the sands and to separate the oil. It wasted gases, left lakes of sludgy toxic pollution and released carcinogens into the environment.

Wildlife affected

If that sounds familiar, perhaps it is – the sort of protest often prompted by conventional mining and drilling of conventional fuels. But Erasmus says it’s more than that.

“The problem is that there’s no plan in Canada”, he says. “There’s no search for new ways of extraction, or for disposing of effluents.

“The Government denies that it’s dirty oil, it says it’s ethical. There’s no discussion with people and no thought of sustainable development.”

What really bothers him is the effect he sees on wildlife. Still hunting and trapping at nearly 60 years of age,  he says animal behaviour is changing – and he thinks the pollution the tar sands industry is causing is partly to blame.

“We’re caribou people”, he explains. “We’re hunting them now. But their migration patterns are changing, and we’re getting a lot more moose, which are starting their rutting earlier.

“There are cougars now from the south, and deer which we’ve never had before. In the last 15 years we’ve been seeing magpies.

“The bears used to stay in their dens till May, but now they’re emerging in March. It’s partly because the climate is changing, and partly because of the way the oil industry and the chemicals it’s using are changing the environment and harming the animals in the food chain.”

‘Indelible impact’ 

Canada withdrew at the end of 2011 from the international treaty designed to tackle climate change, the Kyoto Protocol.

Environment Canada, the Canadian Government’s agency responsible for protecting the environment, set up an Oilsands Advisory Panel, chaired by a former head of the UN’s Environment Programme, Liz Dowdeswell.

The Environment Minister asked the Panel whether or not Canadians had a first-class state-of-the-art monitoring system in place in the oil sands. The Panel’s answer was “no – but…”

The “but” was added because the Panel was “convinced that the current activities could be transformed into a system that will provide credible data for decisions – a system that will allow us to know the current conditions and trends in the oil sands ecosystem and encourage the necessary foresight to prevent a compromised environment.”

But… it submitted its findings to the Minister – A Foundation for the Future: Building an Environmental Monitoring System for the Oil Sands – and added this comment: “…as a final note, our site visits had an indelible impact. It is hard to forget the sheer extent of landscape disruption, the coke piles and the ubiquitous dust.”

RTCC VIDEO: Tom Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environment Network labels tar sands exploration in Canada the ‘worst single example of polluting’ he has ever witnessed

This article was produced by the Climate News Network

The post Canada’s First Nations lead battle against Alberta tar sands appeared first on Climate Home News.

Speaking in Washington she said that opting out of a major fossil fuel project would represent a landmark decision.

“If you had a USA administration that would avoid doing something that they could do, with the argument that in the time we are living in and with climate change we are faced with, we should not do everything we can do, then it would be a very, very interesting global signal,” she told the New York Times.

Hedegaard praised the repeated pledges by President Obama to tackle climate change in his State of the Union and Inauguration speeches.

“That is, of course, sweet music to European ears,” she said.

The Keystone XL pipeline would transport thick, bitumen like tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the US Gulf Coast.

The Canadian tar sands are the second largest oil deposit in the world behind Saudi Arabia (Source: Greenpeace/John Woods)

The EU is currently pushing through regulations to classify oil derived from tar sands as more polluting than crude oil in the face of fierce lobbying from Canada.

The Canadian tar sands are the second largest reserves of oil in the world behind only Saudi Arabia.

During the visit Hedegaard will meet with US climate change negotiator Todd Stern, members of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which regulates emissions from power stations and US politicians currently attempting to pass climate legislation.

Plans to tackle greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation sector could also be on the agenda during the trip, after the US recently proposed a solution to the long-running spat.

The EU suspended the inclusion of international flights in its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) after opposition from China, India, Russia and the US among others, who want a global agreement set through the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) instead.

ICAO’s three-yearly general assembly takes place this autumn and US plans to exclude emissions from flights while they are over international waters could be one proposal on the table.

Momentum

There has been an upsurge in climate action in the US since November’s election. Climate change was noticeably absent as a campaign issue for both candidates until Hurricane Sandy.

California launched its carbon trading scheme, which has so far held a stronger price than many expected.

Two senators revealed proposals for a $20 carbon tax last month in a plan expected to garner more supported than cap and trade legislation that was flatly rejected in 2010.

The EPA is looking to extend its regulations on high emitting coal power stations. It also face a legal challenge over its classification of carbon dioxide as a pollutant, the key condition that allows it to regulate the greenhouse gas.

Rajendra Pachauri, the head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the UN’s climate advisory body, has pleaded for President Obama to base any future decisions on climate action, firmly in the science.

“I have always believed if you want action in the field of climate change, it has to be driven by an understanding, an application of what science has told us, what the IPCC has been telling us,” said Pachauri.

“So from that point of view, I think what President Obama said was particularly heartening.”

The post EU climate chief calls on US to block Keystone pipeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

The world could be locked into dangerous levels of global warming if 14 planned fossil fuel projects get the go ahead, according to a new report commissioned by Greenpeace.

Emissions from the developments, which include expansion of the Canadian tar sands and Arctic oil drilling, would increase greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels by 20% making the 2°C limit on warming unattainable.

“In 2020, the emissions from the 14 projects showcased in this report – if they all were to go ahead – would raise global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels by 20% and keep the world on a path towards 5°C to 6°C of warming,” states the report which was written by the Ecofys consultancy.

The projects in the Point of No Return report include the expansion of Indonesian and Australian coal exports, a tripling of production from the Canadian tar sands and extensive offshore drilling in Brazilian waters.

All in all, the 6,340 million tonnes of CO2 a year by 2020, more than the total output of the US.

CLICK TO EXPAND

“To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, the rise in global temperatures needs to be limited to below 2°,” the report reads.

“Therefore, the addition of CO2 of this magnitude in the next few years would push the climate beyond the point of no return, locking the world into a scenario leading to catastrophic climate change, and ensuring that we run out of time.”

Based on a number of scenarios developed by Ecofys that plot a route to keep the world within 2°C of warming, these projects, if fully developed, would limit the probability to less than 50%.

“The Ecofys 75% [probability of staying within 2°C] pathway requires ensuring emissions peak by 2015 and then drop by 5% annually. The new CO2 emissions avoided by cancelling these dirty energy projects would cover about one third of the total reductions needed to head off catastrophic climate change.”

The IEA has pinpointed surging demand from India and China as the main driver of the expansion of coal use while the rising oil price has made more expensive oil and gas exploration such as tar sands more economical.

The 14 projects’ annual emissions by 2020 (millions of tonnes of CO2)

China – Coal mining – 1,400
Australia – Coal exports – 760
Arctic – Oil and gas drilling – 520
Indonesia – Coal exports – 460
USA – Coal exports – 420
Canada – Tar sands – 420
Iraq – Oil drilling – 420
Brazil – Oil drilling – 330
Gulf of Mexico – Oil drilling – 350
Kazakhstan – Oil drilling – 290
USA – Shale gas – 280
Africa – gas drilling – 260
Caspian Sea – Gas drilling – 240
Venezuela – Tar sands – 190

Total 6,340 million tonnes of CO2 by 2020

The post Greenpeace: 14 big oil megaprojects will set off carbon bomb appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Friday 11 January

EU: The EU has reacted with caution to speculation that President Obama intends to dramatically step up efforts to combat climate change in the wake of record temperatures and the impact of Hurricane Sandy. “You will remember that there was once a hurricane called Katrina that also led to big discussions [about climate change] so only time will tell. A single swallow doesn’t make a summer,” an EU source told the EurActiv news agency. (EurActiv)

China: The Chinese economy has cleaned up a little with the government announcing that carbon intensity, the volume of greenhouse gases per dollar of GDP, fell 3.5% during 2012. The country is aiming to reduce intensity by 40-45% by 2020 compared to 2005 levels as it shifts away from a manufacturing-based economy. (China Economic Review)

Canada: Indigenous people in Canada have vowed to “bring the economy to its knees” if the government does not halt plans to build an oil pipeline across western Canada. The Idle No More campaign, which has already been blocking railways, says native Canadians are unhappy with the proposal to connect the country’s Alberta tar sands to ports on the west coast, where it would be exported to Asia. (Reuters)

UAE: The UAE is to complete its greenhouse gas emissions inventory this year having already completed the work for the two most populous of its seven emirates, Dubai and Abu Dhabi. At the UN climate change conference in Doha last month, it pledged along with Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Qatar that it would make a commitment to cut emissions through the UN in the near future. (The National)

US: Google has invested $200m in a wind farm in Texas. The figure put Google’s total investment in renewable energy at $990m. (EarthTechling)

The post EU cautious on Obama climate change u-turn appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Tuesday 08 January

Last updated: 0830

US: Environmentalists have stepped up their campaign urging President to vote against the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline with 70 groups signing a letter to Barack Obama. The project will transport tar sands across the US from Canada but there are concerns about leaks of the thick, volatile, potential contamination of water sources as well as with the effect burning the carbon heavy fuel will have on the climate. (The Guardian)

Canada: A new study has found levels of toxic and carcinogenic compounds in lakes near Canada’s tar sand fields have increased by as much as a factor of 23 since the 1960s. While some can be attributed to forest fires they found industry related chemicals had spiked sharply since the 1990s. (Nature)

South Korea: Nuclear power will continue its expansion in South Korea despite a new survey showing the proportion of the public who think it is safe fell to 34.8%. In January 2010 this figure was 71% and while the government says it will seek to regain this trust, its plans to develop more reactors continue. South Korea is currently establishing a domestic carbon market to reduce its emissions. (Reuters)

Arctic: The Shell oil rig that ran aground off the coast of Alaska is back under control after a week-long rescue operation. More than 600 people were involved in the salvage operation which was one of a string of difficulties facing the company’s operations in are during the last 12 months. (Reuters)

Brazil: A dry summer has left Brazil’s hydropower dams short of water raising the spectre of energy rationing for the first time since 2001. The hot dry weather also boosted demand lowering the level of reservoirs further as turbines sought to meet the demand. (Reuters)

The post Pressure increases on Obama to block Keystone XL pipeline appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Friday 04 January

Last updated: 1440

Pakistan: There are signs that there could soon be enhanced climate action in Pakistan as its new Ministry for Climate Change prepares to turn its list of priorities into policies. After complex consultations with powerful provincial governments, projects dealing with adaptation, water, agriculture and disaster risk reduction are now under development. (AlertNet)

Canada: The proposed Northern Gateway pipeline can still be completed Canada’s natural resources minister Joe Oliver has said. The project will transport crude oil from the Alberta oil sands to the country’s west coast for transport to Asian markets but faces fierce domestic opposition from indigenous people, environmentalists and the provincial government of British Columbia. The Keystone XL pipeline, to move unrefined tar sands oil to the US has also been delayed. (Reuters)

Arctic: Shell’s grounded oil rig off the coast of Alaska has been damaged by waves and flooding but is yet to spill any of its fuel, according to emergency response teams. The Kulluk drilling rig was part of the company’s early efforts this summer to develop production in the Arctic. The project suffered a series of calamities and delays by harsh weather and unexpected sea ice levels. (New York Times)

Science: The El Nino weather pattern’s link to climate change is unclear, according to a new study in the US. A link between El Nino’s strengthening and climate change was found to be statistically significant but historical records that predate global warming show the same variations. The cycle creates a warm mass of water in the Pacific causing heavy rainfall and triggering drought in other parts of the globe. The La Nina cold phase does the opposite. (AFP)

US: As the post mortem of the fiscal cliff deal continues, it has emerged that US biofuels received an extra boost. As well as regaining tax breaks that lapsed this time last year, the biofuel industry can also retrospectively claim $1 a gallon for its 2012 production while the subsidy support was paused. (New York Times)

The post Obama boosts support for biofuels industry appeared first on Climate Home News.

May has called on countries to call Canada to account for exiting from Kyoto (Source: m.gifford/Creative Commons)

Canada’s unpunished withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol damaged the treaty’s integrity and the prospects of a future climate deal, according to the country’s only Green Party MP.

Speaking to RTCC ahead of the UN climate talks in Doha, Elizabeth May said that the Canadian government’s decision – announced just days after last year’s summit – encouraged other countries to follow suit.

“When we are trying to negotiate binding legal terms, Canada’s behaviour has been able to denigrate the impact of signing onto a binding legal target,” she said.

“We have also undermined [Kyoto] and created the space for Russia and Japan to stay out of the second commitment period group of targets – although they are not legally withdrawing from Kyoto.”

An extension to the Kyoto Protocol is top of the agenda at the forthcoming climate talks in Doha. It will take over from the current agreement, which expires at the end of 2012.

The EU, Norway, Switzerland and Australia have announced they will continue with the Protocol, while Japan, New Zealand and Canada are among developed states who have confirmed they will not.

May said countries should denounce Canada on the international stage for their withdrawal, which comes into effect on 16 December, arguing the country should not be allowed to participate in negotiations on the second phase.

“I’m horrified that our appalling government believes that it will negotiate in the room on the second phase of Kyoto even though we filed a letter to legally withdraw,” she said.

“I think that civil society around the world and other governments should take Canada to task for having the gall to be planning to negotiate rules around the second commitment period of Kyoto even though we filed a legal notice of intent to withdraw.

“If we want to be in the room negotiating then we should tear up the letter.”

Missing the boat

The government – led by Prime Minister Stephan Harper – received sharp criticism for its withdrawal from Kyoto. Making the announcement, Environment Minister Peter Kent said the Protocol had become ‘irrelevant’ as it did not include some of the world’s biggest emitters, particularly China and the US.

He said a new global deal, to be agreed by 2015 and enforced from 2020, is now the priority. Earlier this week, however, Kent did speak out on climate change calling it a “very real and present danger” for Canada.

Talking in response to Superstorm Sandy which hit the US earlier this month, Kent said increasing extreme weather had “focused minds” on global warming.

While praising the words of the Environment Minister, May said she expected this to equate to “better rhetoric” in Doha but not in increased action.

And for the Green Party leader, ambition in Doha will be essential as she says a 2020 deal will be too late for the environment.

“We know they [the Canadian Government] are very much focused on the long term agreement to come into effect in 2020,” she said. “But any legally binding agreement that doesn’t come into effect until 2020 misses the boat because if you look at the science, we have to ensure emissions stop rising by 2015.

“It is not something I am prepared to allow; the politics to drive the science. The science has to drive the politics.”

Tar Sands

Canada has previously been criticised for its failure to set clear legislation for big emitters to cut their emissions.

The country takes a sector-by-sector approach to emissions reduction, having brought in rules for cars and coal-fired plants but not for other polluting industries.

In particular it has been in the spotlight for the exploitation of the Alberta tar sands, which produce around 1.7 million barrels of oil a day. Current approved projects could take this to 5 million.

The tar sand extraction process is energy and water intensive; 3-4.5 times more intensive that conventional oil production in Canada. Vast amounts of forest and peatlands have also been cleared for the extraction process – further intensifying the climate impact of the projects.

Campaign group the Price of Oil warns the production of tar sands oil could smash the world’s hopes of preventing a 2°C temperature rise.

In British Columbia (BC) protests erupted over the potential of laying pipelines across the region carrying bitumen from northern Alberta to a tanker port on the BC coast.

May is on the frontline on efforts to halt the expansion of the tar sands. She has called Prime Minister Stephan Harper to quit many times, and faced heckling by the New Democrats in Parliament, when she asked whether their leader had any policies to take action on climate change.

But she believes public opinion is against the oil sands and calls for a more sensible approach to its production.

“Canadian public opinion is still 80% concerned about the climate crisis,” she said. “I’d say most Canadians wouldn’t say shut down the oil sands but neither does the Green Party. We say look lets make sure we stop expanding them until we can reduce the energy and water input per barrel of oil.

“Let’s have a plan for national energy security which we currently don’t have, and national energy conservation that we currently don’t have.

“Canadians have been upset about the impact of the oil sands for a long time and it is a question of figuring out how do we have a national strategy that takes into account that Alberta does have this resource, how does it get used, how do we ensure that it is used in a way that does not put Canada in the lead of climate villains globally.”

The post Canada’s lone Green MP says govt has damaged hopes of global climate deal appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Thursday 15 November

Last updated: 1650

Australia: The Australian energy and resources minister Martin Ferguson has said the country may have to turn to nuclear power if other clean technologies do not become price competitive. “The Australian government’s responsibility is to test all forms of clean energy and if at some point in the future we don’t get the breakthrough on baseload clean energy, Australia will need to think seriously about considering nuclear,” said Ferguson. (World Nuclear News)

Brazil: The lead Brazilian climate change negotiator has said that Doha should not attempt to increase the scale of emission reduction pledges. “We have to be very focused on what needs to be done in Doha and not be diverted to other important issues that probably can’t be solved quickly, such as the ongoing question of ambition,” said Luiz Alberto Figueiredo. (Guardian)

Bonn: The United Nations climate chief has called on China’s new leadership to ensure the country remains committed to a low-carbon future and engaged in the next round of negotiations later this month. In an interview with RTCC, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN climate change secretariat, the UNFCCC, said it was “absolutely critical” that China’s new Communist Party leader Xi Jinping maintained levels of investment in renewable technologies and energy efficiency measures. (RTCC)

USA: President Obama has pledged more work on climate change during his second term and to use green growth to develop national support for the climate agenda. Speaking at his first press conference since re-election, Obama said consultations on this new push would begin immediately. (RTCC)

Brazil: The future of the Kyoto Protocol should be the main focus of the COP18 talks in Doha according to Brazil’s lead negotiator Ambassador Luiz Alberto Figueiredo. He says the debate on whether the world needs stronger greenhouse gas cuts to keep the planet from warming by 2C should be postponed till 2013. (Guardian)

EU: The European Parliament will vote on whether the EU should adopt a 30% emissions reduction target under the Kyoto Protocol ahead of the UN climate change conference in Doha. The vote will take place at the Parliament’s plenary next week.

Qatar: COP18 President Abdullah bin Hamad Al Attiyah is meeting with the Cypriot Ambassador to discuss the upcoming climate change talks. Cyprus currently holds the rotating EU presidency and will take a leading role in the negotiations that start at the end of the month. (The Peninsula)

Canada: Canadian oil sands emit 9% more greenhouse gases than other crude oils, according to the IHS CERA. The figure is a slight increase on previous estimates. A decision on the new Keystone XL pipeline to export oil sands from Canada to US refineries is expected early in the New Year. (Reuters)

UK: The UK has continued its gradual tidal energy roll out with a further three projects given approval. Fledgling tidal energy technologies have largely been limited to trial projects but the UK now has 41 sites operational or in development. The government believes marine energy could account for 20% of the UK’s electricity demands. (Reuters)

UNFCCC: The UN climate chief Christiana Figueres spoke to RTCC yesterday with less than two weeks to go till the next climate summit in Doha. She talks to Ed King about her hopes for the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, the role of China and the US at the talks and what Doha must deliver on climate finance.

The post Canada’s Alberta tar sands emit more carbon than previously thought appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Tuesday 13 November

Last updated: 1655

Kenya: An environmental advisor in the Prime Minister’s office has described interest among candidates in the upcoming Presidential election as “lukewarm”. The country’s Climate Change Authority Bill, which tackles mitigation and adaptation is yet to be ratified. There are now fears that the legislation could be side-lined if it is not passed before parliament is dissolved prior to the Presidential election. (AllAfrica)

China: Airbus China has said that it is confident that a $12bn order with Chinese airlines will go ahead now the EU aviation row has been put on hold. “We hope we will go back to business as usual … and that we won’t have to worry about ETS when we do business here,” said Laurence Barron, president of Airbus China. (Reuters)

Nigeria: African scientists must work to combat climate change and not just talk about it, Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan has said. Speaking to an audience of scientists he said: “Beyond science, climate change is also about the future of Africa and the survival of its citizens. Rather than discuss simply as representatives of science academies, participants should seize this platform to relate science and climate change to the future of our continent and humankind.” (News24Nigeria)

Qatar: Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker joined the condemnation of the EU’s aviation stance saying the EU “goofed” on its decision to include international airlines in its regional carbon trading scheme. “I know that maybe the EU is trying to back track and they realised they have goofed on this matter, and this is a face saving way to say they are going to delay,” he told Arabian Business.

Asia: The EU is still negotiating “with the gun on the table” according to the Association of Asia Pacific Airlines. The group was responding to the news that the EU will suspend the inclusion of international aviation for one year to allow a global deal to be agreed. The EU warned however that if there is no agreement, conditions will automatically return to their current state. (Reuters)

EU: The EU has proposed postponing the auctioning of 900m carbon credits in an attempt to boost the prices of emissions allowances in its carbon trading platform. Three proposals had been under consideration to withhold 400m, 900m or 1.2bn allowances. (Reuters)

New Zealand: Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark has refused to be drawn on the current government’s decision not to commit to the second phase of the Kyoto Protocol. The UN Development Programme Administrator did however point to the growing prominence of climate change in the US saying: “In this second term there has to be a prospect that the president will see tackling climate change as part of his legacy.”

Clark’s own organisation recently joined the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, which targets reductions in soot, methane and a number of other short-lived chemicals that drive global warming and in some cases also directly affect human health. (Stuff)

US/Canada: Trains could provide an alternative to pipelines for the transport of heavy tar sands oil from Canada to US refineries. With the Keystone XL pipeline project the continued focus of protests one company is set to open a dedicated rail terminal for tar sands. While this would answer many of the environmental concerns about the pipeline’s operation, it would not resolve the effects of carbon-heavy tar sands oil on the climate.

Protests at Keystone XL construction sites have entered a second month. (Calgary Herald)

The post EU to hold back 900m carbon credits in attempt to boost price appeared first on Climate Home News.

– The day’s top climate change stories as chosen by RTCC
– Tweet @RTCCnewswire and use #RTCCLive hashtag
– Send your thoughts to jp@rtcc.org
– Updated from 0830-1700 BST (GMT+1)

Thursday 1 November

Last updated: 1710

UK: Planning documents have revealed that the UK’s recently appointed Energy Minister, a vocal opponent to wind farms, blocked an application for a new development on his first day in office. The project for two 126m turbines was seven miles from his family home. (GreenWise Business)

Green Climate Fund: A prospective levy on the shipping industry could be worth as much as $10bn a year to the Green Climate Fund, according to WWF. Mark Lutes told RTCC that a prospective deal could compensate poor nations, reinvest in energy efficiency within shipping and still have at least $10bn for climate finance. Negotiations on a market based mechanism to reduce the industry’s CO2 output are ongoing.

Climategate: Following a BBC Radio documentary on the Police inquiry into the Climategate email theft, the journalist behind the programme has released some of the additional material he acquired from a Freedom of Information request. The material handed over by detectives working on the case includes the staff list of a right-wing think tank and the Police’s media strategy, which was designed to reduce impact on the UN climate talks in Copenhagen, which immediately followed the release of the stolen emails. (BBC)

Antarctica: Nations have failed to agree a deal to establish new conservation areas off the coast of Antarctica amid opposition from Ukraine, Russia and China. The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) hopes to establish protected areas for the benefit of marine life as well as to improve research into the effects of climate change. CCAMLR, made up of 25 nations plus the EU, will meet again in July next year to try to break the deadlock. (Reuters)

US: Calls for New York City to build a series of flood barriers have been renewed in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. Several proposals have been put forward in the past but the State’s governor Andrew Cuomo has voiced support for a serious review of the solutions on offer. One proposed scheme would cost $6bn, around half the estimate of Hurricane Sandy’s insured damage.  (Daily Mail)

US: The US Green Party’s presidential candidate has been arrested at the site of a protest against the Keystone XL pipeline. Jill Stein was arrested in Texas for criminal trespass after bringing food to protesters taking part in a sit in at a construction site for the pipeline. Keystone XL will transport tar sands oil from Canada to the US Gulf Coast to be refined. (Reuters)

China: The solar energy trade war has taken a new turn with China adding the EU to its current anti-dumping and anti-subsidy investigation of the US and South Korea. The EU is already examining accusations that China is deliberately selling its own solar products at artificially low prices while the US has placed heavy import duties on Chinese solar products. (Reuters)

US: Shell has shut down its Arctic drilling programme off the coast of Alaska for the season. The company’s efforts suffered a series of delays during the summer with a key support vessel struggling to acquire the necessary coastguard permits to sail in the region. The company was able to drill test wells but ran out of time to explore for actual oil reserves. (New York Times)

South Africa: The South African government has signed a $5.4bn renewable energy deal. The agreement will see two concentrating solar energy plants, eight wind farms and 18 solar farms constructed. The country is targeting the installation of 3.7 GW of installed renewable energy by 2020. The latest deal represents 1.4 GW of that goal. (Independent)

Maldives: The former President of the Maldives and prominent climate activist Mohamed Nasheed will go on trial on Sunday. Nasheed was removed from office and charged with abuse of power. Writing in the Financial Times, he said the outcome of his trial is a foregone conclusion adding that his country, at severe risk to rising sea levels, was now literally and metaphorically slipping into the abyss. (Financial Times)

The post Shell forced to abandon Alaska drilling without tapping any oil appeared first on Climate Home News.

The Canadian Government may not be enjoying the best of reputations in climate circles these days, but some of its residents are ignoring its inaction and pushing for change.

The country withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol during last year’s climate change negotiations and continued investments in carbon-heavy tar sands extraction has made it deeply unpopular with environmentalists at home and abroad.

If the Sierra Youth Coalition (SYC), the youth branch of the country’s chapter of the Sierra Club, get its way, the situation can only improve.

Gabriela Rappell from the SYC told RTCC why she still sees cause for optimism in Canada.

What are your group doing and what areas of work do you focus on?

SYC is the youth branch of Sierra Club Canada. We mostly work with youth working to change the institutions in their lives. We work a lot with universities, colleges and high schools and try to make them more sustainable generally, which involves working on climate change issues and reducing greenhouse gas emissions at schools.

We have a couple of major programmes, Sustainable Campuses works with universities and colleges across the country; Sustainable High Schools, which works with high schools in the Ottawa area and on Vancouver Island and occasionally on the lower mainland in British Columbia (BC).

Then we have programmes called Youth Action gatherings that are essentially week-long summer camps, which happen every year and which are sort of an introduction for youth who are high school aged to environmental issues and sustainability.

We also have a new project, which started last October, which is associated with Sustainable Campuses but is also its own unique thing. It is called the Campus Food Systems Project (CFSP) and it is working to help connect campuses to local food and improve university and college food security.

What results have you seen from your work so far?

We started in 1996, so we are coming up on our 16th birthday this year and in that time Sustainable Campuses has kind of been our huge success.

It started off as just a group of university students who wanted to improve the sustainability of their campus. We were lucky enough to get students really involved in the programme enough to a point where one of them developed an actual sustainability assessment framework.

It was one of the first of its kind. We got that out to universities across Canada and through working with the Sustainable Campuses programme they were able to bring sustainability coordinators to their universities.

It was a really pioneering project and it was incredibly successful. That is probably one of the biggest successes in our history.

What are the challenges you have faced in your work?

It is always a challenge working with existing power structures. Because of our focus being really grassroots and student and youth based our focus tends to be on working with students and helping them work with their administration.

We spend a lot of time doing multi-stakeholder work and that is always a challenge. It can be a really emotionally draining experience when you are working with people who just aren’t receptive to your ideas, especially when you have so much energy on your side.

You can see that a project is going to be really interesting and you just cant get the administration on board at your school for whatever reason. We have had a lot of trouble with that over the years.

As long as you keep everybody motivated and try and work with all of the parties then we usually come out successful in the end.

What support have you seen for your activities?

One of the good things about working with a broad group of stakeholders is you get a lot of partners on your side. We spend a lot of time working with the Canadian Youth Climate Coalition (CYCC); we are working with them and all of the other partners on Powershift.

We have a wide list of partners, we work a lot with an organisation called the Meal Exchange on our Campus Food Systems project and they’re also a group which works with youth but they traditionally work from a hunger focus whereas we work on the climate and sustainability focus.

Those are our two biggest partners right now. We have also worked with Earth Day Canada, we work with different chapters of Sierra Club – the Sustainable High Schools project that I mentioned is co-authored with Sierra Club BC.

SYC members at a Sustainable Campuses Now conference in British Columbia. (Credit: SYC)

We work with a lot of different groups from the environmental movement in Canada. But our biggest partner is probably other chapters from within Sierra Club and Sierra Club Canada, Meal Exchange and the CYCC.

We recently incorporated a campaign called Lack of Speak Out in Canada which was a reaction to the changes in the budget which eliminated environmental assessment as it was in Canada and replaced it with a new system which we feel really is not up to scratch and altered the Fisheries Act so that it removed protection for certain species.

Basically it changed it so things had to be of commercial value to be protected, that we really disagree with.

All of the major opposition parties were supportive of that campaign. We don’t actively work with politicians but essentially all of the opposition parties tend to be fairly supportive of the type of work that we have been doing and are much more supportive of the environmental movement in general.

There has been a lot of hostility in Canada recently on the part of the governing party towards environmentalists. They have a very business-focused perspective and fail to see the inherent value of nature and fail to account for the economic impacts of climate change.

Certain members of the governing party have indicated at times that they do not believe that climate change is actually happening, that is a little frustrating.

We don’t tend to focus on political work too much in what we do. Not that working with politicians isn’t solutions-based but we tend to focus on really solutions-based work with institutions. Sometimes we are a little less active on the political front but when we are, we tend to work in cooperation with the CYCC.

What are the impacts you are seeing in your country and local area from climate change?

It is hard to pin down specifically what is happening on a local level where we are in Ottawa. This summer we had a class two drought, which had never happened as early as it did this year in a summer in anyone’s memory. From that perspective locally we have had some brushfires; there have been certain crops that are failing too.

It was really crazy back in March there was a heatwave and a lot of things started flowering that were not supposed to flower until May or June.

Some of the fruit crops have either been coming earlier or are, like the Apple crop this year, not great quality.

On a local level for us those are some of the things that have been happening.

But in Canada there are a lot of challenges that we are facing, especially up north. As a northern country climate change is a bit of a double-edged sword.

Certain areas of Canada are going to be experiencing improved crop yields; others are going to be essentially a dustbowl. The prairies are projected to lose 30% of their output. They are really considered the breadbasket of Canada so that is going to be a big challenge.

Up north is really going to be where the biggest impacts are going to be and where the most negative impacts are going to be.

Huge areas of the north are permafrost and that has started to melt. A lot of glaciers have experienced dramatic loses. The sea ice is never really reforming in a proper way. We have a lot of open areas that have never been open before in the Arctic Ocean and that are making the problem worse in two ways.

First, it is opening up shipping lanes and potential oil and gas developments that are going to make things worse from our perspective in the long-term.

Secondly, it is causing a lot of challenges for local populations. There are entire towns that are probably going to have to move because they are situated on permafrost. As it melts it becomes really sponge-like and very difficult to build on. Accessibility is expected to decrease because a lot of the roads are on permafrost and you can’t really drive on it once it is melted.

Canada is going to see a lot of changes, some of them have already started but it is still at the point where a lot of people are saying that this could still be a coincidence. But it is also at the point where there are so many coincidences that you can’t call it a coincidence anymore.

What would be your vision for 2050?

That is something for me changes depending on my mood. Sometimes I am really positive and I think ‘yes we can all get onto green energy and we can all realise the effects that we are having on the environment and pull together and really get our CO2 emissions down and prevent catastrophic climate change’.

And there are other days when I am a little less optimistic and think there is no way we are going to get our act together in time.

A brainstorming session at the Sustainable Campuses Now conference in British Columbia. The campus-focussed project has been one of SYC’s most successful. (Credit: SYC)

Depending on the day I either think we will pull together and we will make a shift to green energy and will catastrophic climate change and realise the value of the environment in this country and really fix a lot of the damage that has been done legislatively.

It switches between that and well we are going to keep using fossil fuels and temperatures are going to change and the projections, which I spoke about, are going to happen.

Today I think I am having an optimistic day and I think we can pull together. I think a lot of the work that we have been doing has been really successful and they are making a lot of progress with campus food security and I feel that if we can do this with universities, we can do it as a country.

And if we can do it as a country, Canada has really been a laggard internationally on action on climate change, but if Canada can get its act together then we as a world can get our act together and really move towards a more sustainable future.

What would help your group to move forward in its work?

I think one of the biggest challenges in Canada right now is the funding situation. A lot of the traditional funding for environmental organisations has really dried up so a lot of us want to be working together but are in a sense forced to compete for shrinking pots of funding. That would be one of the biggest things that could happen, more funding to actually get the work that needs to be done, done.

We are really working a lot on improving communications within the movement in Canada. There are great organisations out there. We are lucky enough to work with an organisation called the McConnell Foundation on our CFSP project and they’re really working to ensure that everyone working on food issues – at least that they are working with – are trying to work with broader groups as well and are really communicating and ensuring everyone is working cooperatively where possible in order to support the greater movement.

Applying ideas like that to broader areas beyond just food security would be a great advantage.

It is starting to work. There has been a lot of progress on this one project and I think we can bring it to others as well.

Why did you get involved in the group? What do think young people bring to the debate?

I have been involved in environmental stuff for as long as I can remember. I grew up next to a park in Toronto called the High Park so nature has always been really important to me. It has just been a natural progression from caring about nature to getting involved locally in environmental issues, getting involved in my high school eco club. From there I got involved in a wider network within the city of Toronto of eco clubs and that introduced me to the Sierra Youth Coalition. I have been involved in the SYC in one way or another since 1999, back when I was a young high school student.

It has really just been a natural progression. Really in the environmental movement everything is linked and the environment is linked to climate change, climate change is linked to social justice and so for me it is just a natural progression to be involved in all of those issues. They have always been linked for me because from a time when I was in high school our environmental group at our school was called ‘Students Concerned About Oppressed People and the Environment’ so it always had a social justice focus to its environmental actions.

I think young people add valuable energy. We haven’t lost that little bit of idealism that I feel a lot of older people have. We can still choose to be optimistic. And it is really our future and I feel that makes us more willing to fight for the necessary changes. It is a lot easier when you are not going to have to see the outcomes of catastrophic climate change. You can just think I can live my life the way I am living it and I don’t have to worry. Whereas we as a generation, it really is a legitimate concern for us, we are going to have to live through this, we are going to have to deal with the consequences. So I think it is a lot more real to us.

And while we can balance the fact that it is real to us with our youthful optimism and that makes us really motivated to work on the issues and actually get things done.

More RTCC Youth Profiles:

Youth Profile #14 Costa Rica’s youth eye a carbon neutral future

Youth Profile #13: Giving youth a platform at the European Parliament

Youth Profile #12: European activists demand governments put their futures ahead of ‘dirty industry’

Youth Profile #11: China’s young activists out to prove they do care about climate change

Youth Profile #10: Life on climate change’s frontline with the Australian Youth Climate Coalition

Youth Profile #9: Young entrepreneurs driving sustainability at US campuses

Youth Profile #8: Why education is key to developing climate awareness in Ghana

Youth Profile #7: Why Indonesia’s biodiversity is at the front line of the fight against climate change

Youth profile #6: Meet the African coalition that brings together 54 countries to tackle climate change

Profile #5: Bangladeshi youth fight to give world’s second most climate vulnerable country a voice

Youth Profile #4: Nepal’s youth fight to save Himalayan paradise from effects of pollution and climate change

Youth Profile #3: Canada’s climate coalition on taking on the Tar Sands lobby and fighting for Kyoto

Youth Profile #2: How PIDES are working on practical solutions to climate change in Mexico

Youth Profile #1: How Nigerian Climate Coalition are building green bridges ahead of COP18

The post Canadian youth rise above dirty domestic policies and push for climate action appeared first on Climate Home News.

The London-based think tank Chatham House is perhaps most famous for the Rule named after it. Chatham House Rules dictate that while what is said during its debates and discussions maybe be reported, they cannot be attributed to the speaker of to the organisation they are affiliated to.

The idea is to promote frank and free discussions. This week UNFCCC chief Christiana Figueres, Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent, EU Climate Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and a host of other high-profile speakers gathered to have such a discussion.

Thanks to twitter, the comments of those choosing to forego the house rules were swiftly in the public domain.

Main sponsors Shell and Canadian Minister Kent drew protests from anti tar sands activists, unhappy with the company’s carbon intensive Athabasca tar sands operation in Alberta, Canada. They suggest that Shell and Canada have “strangled” opposition to the project.

Just been strangled by #Shell and Canada outside #climate conference at Chatham House! twitter.com/NoTarSands/sta… #CHClimate #tarsands

— Jess Worth (@jessworth) October 15, 2012

The activists were even able to hand Minister Kent a flyer as he arrived at the venue…

Canadian Environment Minister Peter Kent receives a flyer from a protester outside Chatham House. (Source: NoTarSands.org)

Inside the conference, Connie Hedegaard suggested a new way of thinking to help account for the carbon emissions, beyond their economic impact.

We need to move beyond GDP, to account for environment when economic decisions are made – Connie Hedegaards #CHclimate

— Brindusa Fidanza (@brindusaf) October 15, 2012

The idea of a measure of development to replace the purely economic Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of a nation was given tentative approval at the Rio+20 summit on sustainable development in June.

While the presence of big oil and gas companies left some uncomfortable, there reminders from inside the summit of the potential role they could play in the future…

China seen as buying new tech incl CCS when commercial, they need it, the world needs them to use it #chclimate #statoil

— Hege Norheim (@hnorheimstatoil) October 15, 2012

The protests from outside the event spilled indoors later in the session with both Minister Kent and Shell’s speeches interrpted by protesters.

We just invaded the stage at Chatham House before speeches by Shell and by Canada’s tarsands-loving Env Minister! Film and photos soon…

— Danny Chivers (@chiversdanny) October 15, 2012

If you want to know what Minister Kent actually said, his speech on Canada’s climate change efforts is available below…

Via @environmentca @ec_minister outlines #Canada’s progress on climate change at home & abroad @chathamhouse ow.ly/etZ1w #CHClimate

— Connect2Canada (@connect2canada) October 15, 2012

Away from the protests, economist Dieter Helm reminded delegates of the importance of energy efficiency…

We need to reduce carbon consumption not just carbon production – v important point by Dieter Helm at #CHclimate

— Marie Sauer-Johansen (@mariesajo) October 15, 2012

UNFCCC chief Christiana Figueres laid her thoughts on the climate change “opportunity” and expressed optimism ahead of the next round of international climate change negotiations in Doha this November.

UN climate change chief, Christina Figueras, expresses good hope for important progress in Doha later this year #chclimate #statoil

— Hege Norheim (@hnorheimstatoil) October 15, 2012

Day two of the conference takes place on Tuesday 16th October.

The post Twitter report: Chatham House climate change conference appeared first on Climate Home News.