Category Archives: Canada

Ontario skips provincial review of Enbridge Line 9

Ontario skips provincial review of Enbridge Line 9

Canada, Energy and Resources, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics
Share

Ontario skips provincial review of Enbridge Line 9

TORONTO – Ontario won’t conduct its own environmental assessment of a plan to reverse the flow of the Line 9 oil pipeline that runs through the province, Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli said Monday.

Calgary-based Enbridge Inc. (TSX:ENB) wants to reverse Line 9 and increase its capacity to move 300,000 barrels of crude oil per day, up from the current 240,000 barrels.

It has also asked for permission to move different types of oil between southwestern Ontario and Montreal, including a heavier form of crude.

Liberals abandon provincial assessment

The proposal has sparked protests by hundreds of demonstrators, who have rallied outside the National Energy Board hearings in Toronto and Montreal.

Ontario’s New Democrats are pushing for a separate provincial assessment of the proposal, but Chiarelli said that’s not necessary.

The assessment is a federal responsibility because the pipeline crosses provincial boundaries, he said.

Ontario has intervened in the recent hearings to emphasize that public safety and environmental protection must come first, he said.

The province also called for a “stress test” for the whole system to be assured that the pipeline is safe, Chiarelli said.

“At this point in time, constitutionally we have to rely on what’s there in federal legislation,” he said.

Complain to your local MP

Chiarelli said that if residents feel that the National Energy Board isn’t doing its job to protect the public, then they should complain to their local MP and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

“If Ontario does its own environmental assessment … that cannot override,” he said.

“That might inform, but the National Energy Board is responsible for getting the right information on which to make a decision.”

NDP: Ontario has responsibility for protecting water

It’s not the black-and-white issue that Chiarelli makes it out to be, said NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns.

Ontario has passed legislation that spills into areas of federal jurisdiction, such as the Toxics Reduction Act, he said. Other provinces are looking at consultations over pipeline projects.

“The NEB may have jurisdiction over approving a pipeline, but Ontario has a responsibility for protecting its water, it has a responsibility for protecting its land and its air,” he said.

[quote]The federal government can challenge Ontario if it wants, but Ontario is the only jurisdiction that’s going to look out for itself on this.[/quote]

Sending the Tar Sands East

Line 9 originally transported oil from Sarnia, Ont., to Montreal but was reversed in the late 1990s to pump imported crude westward.

Enbridge is now proposing to flow oil back eastward to service refineries in Ontario and Quebec.

The NEB panel has heard from interveners who said the reversal would put First Nations communities at risk, threaten water supplies and could endanger vulnerable species in ecologically sensitive areas.

The Common Sense Canadian has documented similar criticism of the BC Liberal Government’s choice to forgo a provincial assessment of the proposes Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline.

Share
Ontario Liberals gut environmental protections for Ring of Fire

Ontario Liberals gut environmental protections for Ring of Fire

Canada, Politics
Share
Ontario Liberals gut environmental protections for Ring of Fire
Ontario Legislature

TORONTO – Ontario’s governing Liberals have “snuck in” changes that are dismantling environmental protections and could have “disastrous results” for the province, environmental commissioner Gord Miller said Thursday.

“Major” changes in last year’s budget give the government the power to hand over Crown land — which makes up 87 per cent of the province — and natural resources to private companies, he said.

Said Miller after releasing his annual report:

[quote]Why would they change it to allow the cabinet of Ontario, by regulation, to hand that responsibility over to an independent third party? It could be anybody. It could be any kind of corporate entity…There’s a lot of wealth, a lot at stake here.[/quote]

It’s “galling” that those changes, which should be of particular concern to northern Ontario residents, were shielded from public scrutiny, he said. They were in the 2012 budget bill, which is exempt from a requirement for the government to post environmentally significant decisions.

It’s opening the door to turning Ontario’s far north into “the Wild West,” Miller said.

450,000 square km, no environmental monitoring

There’s no formal environmental monitoring in the region covering 450,000 square kilometres, he said, despite intensive mineral exploration and development around the Ring of Fire — believed to be one of the largest chromite deposits in the world.

“Why are they changing the laws quietly, without public consultation, to allow this wide open exploitation with no rules?” Miller said. “What’s going on?”

Natural Resources Minister David Orazietti disputed the commissioner’s findings, saying the changes were posted publicly.

“It certainly wasn’t snuck in,” he said.

[quote]There was consultation with respect to those lands and those are not lands that are being turned over to private landholders. They continue to require all the environmental protection of Crown lands.[/quote]

The changes apply to the minister’s ability to delegate management of crown land to a third party, Orazietti said.

“Without these powers to delegate, we have no ability to allow a third party to help us manage Crown land. Let me be clear, in no way does this allow the government to sell off Crown land.”

Government: Changes “minor”

Orazietti said there were “minor changes” to permits that related to dredging and removing small vegetation that have “minimal environmental impacts.”

The Liberals also defended their work on the Ring of Fire, saying the government is working with companies and First Nations to address environmental concerns, infrastructure development and resource revenue-sharing.

“Realizing the full potential of the Ring of Fire region is an extremely complex undertaking,” Northern Development and Mines Minister Michael Gravelle said in a statement.

“It’s one that our government takes very seriously, we need to get it right the first time.”

Budget cuts and regulatory changes

Miller’s annual report also slammed the cash-strapped Liberals for gutting the Ministry of Natural Resources through budget cuts and regulatory changes, which he says weakens important safeguards for provincial parks, at-risk species and hunting.

He warned that major industrial development could proceed almost unchecked, provincial parks are being turned into revenue streams and there’s no funding or plan to deal with invasive species like the emerald ash borer and Asian carp.

Cuts to regulations, staff and programs at the ministry are “short-sighted and regressive” and pose significant ecological risks, he said. It could have “disastrous results” for Ontario’s natural heritage and disrupt the way of life in the north.

“We’re talking about handing over this land to third parties over which we have no control,” Miller said. “So it’s profound change on the highest level.”

Ontario’s enforcement spending lower than other provinces

Ontario spends less of its total budget on natural resource management and environmental protection than five other provinces, including British Columbia, Alberta and Manitoba, he noted.

“When we start to treat nature and species like a bunch of widgets in a factory, we’ve completely lost sight of what’s truly important for our communities and our very identity as Ontarians,” Miller said in a statement.

Private industry benefits from these changes, said Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner.

“Go to the Elections Ontario website and see who donates to political parties and you’ll see who benefits from these changes,” he added.

“Ridiculously low” extraction levies

The government should reverse cuts to the ministry by raising Ontario’s “ridiculously low” levy for extracting aggregate resources — which the industry supports, Schreiner said.

It’s 11.5 cents per tonne in Ontario, compared to 50 cents in Quebec and $2 in the United Kingdom, he said.

“The government’s failed to act and the opposition parties have failed to force them to act,” he said.

The Progressive Conservatives have promised to spur economic development by cutting red tape and repealing legislation that bans development in half of northern Ontario.

Tory critic Michael Harris said the government needs to “balance environmental protection with economic development.”

The New Democrats, who helped the minority Liberals pass the 2012 budget said it was “very sneaky” of the Liberals to put those changes in the bill.

“We were very concerned about the deregulation in that bill and we did as much as we could,” said NDP critic Jonah Schein. “We worked very hard and we still have massive concerns about what’s happening.”

Share
Harper government claims to be a leader on climate change action

Harper government claims to be leader on climate change action

Canada, Climate Change, Climate Science, Politics
Share

Harper government claims to be a leader on climate change action

OTTAWA – The Conservative government has responded to an international report on “unequivocal” global warming by slamming past Liberal inaction and renewing its warning of an alleged NDP carbon tax.

The latest report Friday from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms the planet is heating up and that it’s “extremely likely” human activities are the cause.

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia,” said the scientific report released in Stockholm.

[quote]The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.[/quote]

The report says the effects are especially apparent in the Northern Hemisphere, affecting everything from sea ice and snow fall to permafrost.

“Multiple lines of evidence support very substantial Arctic warming since the mid-20th century,” says the document.

Haper government playing ‘leadership role’ on climate change?

While environmental groups and some governments around the world used the report as a clarion call for action, Conservative Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq issued a statement saying her government is already “playing a leadership role in addressing climate change.” Said Aglukkaq in the release:

[quote]Unlike the previous Liberal government, under whose watch greenhouse gas emissions rose by almost 30 per cent, or the NDP, who want a $21-billion carbon tax, our government is actually reducing greenhouse gases and standing up for Canadian jobs[/quote]

Canada, however, is on pace to achieve only half of its 2020 promise to reduce greenhouse gases by 17 per cent below 2005 levels, according to Environment Canada.

And of the reductions made, 75 per cent were attributed to provincial actions in a 2012 report by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy — a group the Conservative government has since closed down.

US on track to meet its targets

The State Department in Washington, meanwhile, reported Thursday that the United States is on track to meet its 2020 target.

John Kerry, the U.S. secretary of state, is nonetheless calling Friday’s IPCC report “another wake-up call.”

“Once again, the science grows clearer, the case grows more compelling, and the costs of inaction grow beyond anything that anyone with conscience or common sense should be willing to even contemplate,” Kerry said in a statement.

Harper won’t take ‘No’ for an answer on Keystone XL

The contrast in tone on the climate file between Ottawa and Washington was reinforced Thursday when Prime Minister Stephen Harper told a forum in New York that “you don’t take ‘No’ for an answer” on the controversial Keystone XL pipeline.

The TransCanada project to export Alberta bitumen to refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast, which still needs President Barack Obama’s approval, has become a potent symbol for American environmentalists.

Critics fuming over Conservative comments

Aglukkaq’s sharp-elbowed, partisan response to the IPCC report left environmental critics fuming.

“We have an opportunity to rise to the challenge of protecting our kids’ future, so let’s not blow it to score political points and prop up oil company profits,” said Keith Stewart of Greenpeace Canada.

New Democrats said the minister’s comments embarrass Canada.

“This report should be a call to action for one of the greatest environmental challenges of our generation,” said NDP environment critic Megan Leslie, “not the basis for Conservative attacks on non-existent NDP policies.”

John McKay, the Liberal environment critic, labelled Aglukkaq’s release “really stupid.”

“As long as you’re not serious about pricing carbon, you’re not serious about climate change,” said McKay, something he said a number of provincial governments have already recognized.

Canada will face disproportionate effects from climate change

The IPCC report, the fifth by the UN-sanctioned intergovernmental panel, is designed to provide governments with solid scientific evidence to support policy making.

The reports also make up the baseline for UN negotiations toward a new global climate deal, which is supposed to be completed in 2015.

To that end, the IPCC reported that each of the last three decades has been successively warmer than any since 1850.

“In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983–2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1,400 years,” said the report.

Canada can expect disproportionate climate effects because of its northern latitude.

“From a Canadian point of view it’s important to remember that the temperature change we experience in Canada is larger than the global average temperature change,” Greg Flato, a climate scientist with Environment Canada, said in an interview.

“That’s been the case in the historical observations and that’s been projected to continue in these climate model projections of the future.”

Fossil fuels driving climate change

Burning fossil fuels is the driving force, says the report.

Thomas Stocker, a co-chair of the IPCC working group, flatly asserted in an accompanying release that “substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions” are required.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers noted that global energy demand is expected to grow by 35 per cent by 2035.

“Most economists agree that most of this demand will be met by fossil fuels for the foreseeable future,” CAPP spokesman Alex Ferguson said in an email.

Ferguson said the oilsands account for just 0.14 per cent of global GHG emissions, and Alberta requires a carbon tax of $15 per tonne — something many other oil exporting countries don’t have.

That won’t dissuade environmental critics who have long argued the Harper government’s emphasis on pipeline building, energy exports and oilsands expansion simply can’t be reconciled with overall emissions reductions.

Amid the accusations and counter-claims, Ian Bruce of the David Suzuki Foundation said the IPCC report actually does offer a message of hope, if governments have the will to hear it.

“Our parents’ generation didn’t know about climate change, but we do,” Bruce said. “It’s really up to our generation to tackle this problem.”

Share
Rafe: Harper won't succeed in bribing First Nations over pipelines

Harper won’t sell First Nations on Enbridge, Kinder Morgan pipelines

Canada, Energy and Resources, First Nations, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics
Share
Rafe: Harper won't succeed in bribing First Nations over pipelines
Stephen Harper meets with National AFN Chief Shawn Atleo in 2011 (Reuters)

So Prime Minister Stephen Harper and members of his cabinet have been meeting with BC’s First Nations chiefs in order to get them onside with the Enbridge and Kinder Morgan pipelines. This is a gross insult and I believe will be seen as such.

Bribing First Nations

What Harper must do is get First Nations onside and this is impossible unless it takes the form of an acceptable bribe. For that is what Mr. Harper and the pipeline companies are doing. And they may be able to do it as companies have been able to in isolated circumstances with private power projects. But before we conjure a sneer at any First Nations’ possible breaking of ranks, let’s remember Robbie Burns saying, “O wad some power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as others see us”.

We Europeans accept bribes all the time. That’s what political promises are and we swallow some pretty unpalatable gunk, wrapped in a party package every time we go to the polls. We also, in making judgments, must  “walk a mile in the other man’s moccasins”

Many nations live in poverty consistent with 75% unemployment and a “political promise” from the Prime Minister will be listened to. Moreover, the bands that have hitherto rejected pipelines and tanker traffic have dissension within their ranks and that’s to be expected. For example, any political offer to all municipalities would receive different response from different places.

Mr. Harper starts off wrong-footed, as he and his arrogant Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver have made it clear that the Enbridge line will go through, irrespective of findings by the Joint Review Panel looking into the environmental challenges of the Enbridge line.

This is the kind of government move that takes the breath away, but Harper & Co hope that they can still make a deal. As this process takes place, most non-natives are on the sidelines cheering First Nations along.

In my travels around the province I have met many aboriginal leaders and my sense of it is that they will remain steadfast no matter which “vigorish” is presented in a brown envelope.

Grand Chief Phillip: Ministers had nothing to offer First Nations

Curiously, according to the Union of BC Indian Chiefs’ Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, the ministers with whom he met made little effort to win him over. Phillip described separate meetings with Oliver and Aboriginal Affairs Minister Bernard Velcourt to the Vancouver Observer

[quote]There was just a lot of rhetoric about not dwelling on the past, looking towards the future, and realizing the benefits of the vast natural resource wealth that this country has been blessed with. Pretty much a Canadian Apple Pie lecture…There wasn’t any engagement or dialogue in terms of Minister Oliver saying ‘what will it take? What are your recommendations?…He just sat there and repeated his talking points.[/quote]

Phillip suspects this flurry of unexpected meetings – after years of being ignored or insulted as “radicals” opposed to development, by Oliver in particular – is about papering over consultation with First Nations that has been sorely lacking, paving the way for the pipelines through the argument of “national interest”.

If this experience is indicative of what other First Nations leaders are seeing from Harper’s pipeline push, then sooner or later the government will find this approach too is failing – forcing them to put some tangible goodies on the table.

Selling Enbridge

To sell this project to First Nations, Mr. Harper must persuade them that Enbridge has a marvelous track record, when in fact they average a spill a week or more.

He must convince them that his government has put in strict rules regarding spills (never admitting the obvious inference that there will be spills), hoping that no one will notice that fines will hardly frighten Enbridge, which already has them marked off as an expense of doing business – or the fact that he has actually gutted environmental regulations.

In saying this, you will not be hearing Harper & Co playing the famous Glenn Miller hit of another epoch, Kalamazoo, for that is the living symbol of the company’s utter inability to handle a spill, which was right along side a highway. It’s been over three years and the mess has yet to be cleaned up and it never will be.

The cleanup is a major concern for all of us, but especially for First Nations. The company cannot say they will have no accidents, for even big companies, serial liars all, know you can go too far. They dissemble, obfuscate an make promises they have no intention of keeping. This means, somehow, Enbridge and Harper must convince First Nations that there will be no damage from a burst pipeline or leaky oil tanker. I don’t think they can do it.

Taking it into the street

We should see these visits for what they are: an unpopular Prime Minister paying homage to Alberta MPs and Conservative-held seats in BC. Harper needs to show his western base that he’s prepared to go the extra mile for these pipelines.

We have no right to tell First Nations what to do but we can let them know that they are supported by their fellow citizens.

In fact, that is precisely what Grand Chief Stewart Phillip asked of us, following some of these meetings last week:

[quote]My message to those who have been very diligent in their efforts to bring their concerns forward about the possibilities of catastrophic oil spills and oil line ruptures is, ‘Now is the time to bring these issues into the street, to be visible and vocal while these federal officials are in BC.’ [/quote]

Thus I close by saying that this decaying Prime Minister and his lickspittle outsiders must be dealt with by First Nations, with our support, and that I believe that they will continue to see this Harper/Enbridge road show as the covey of snake oil salesmen it really is.

[signoff1]

Share
Suzuki, Morton headline Monday rally for science

Suzuki, Morton headline Monday rally for science

Canada, Climate Change, Climate Science, Politics
Share

 

Suzuki, Morton headline Monday rally for science
Salmon biologist Alexandra Morton (from “Salmon Confidential”)

Over the past several years, the Harper Government has waged an unprecedented war on science in Canada – in favour of advancing its fossil fuel agenda. This has prompted a series of rallies across the country this coming Monday, co-organized by the group Evidence for Democracy.

Rallies will take place in 16 cities, including Ottawa, Toronto, Halifax, Fredericton, Winnipeg, Edmonton and Vancouver (see below for a complete list with times and locations).

Vancouver rally

At the Vancouver rally – which takes place Monday, Sept. 16 from 11AM at the Vancouver Art Gallery – high-profile scientists like Dr. David Suzuki and salmon biologist Alexandra Morton will be joined onstage by leading conservationists Joy Foy from the Wilderness Committee and Dr. Craig Orr.

Morton has experienced firsthand the Harper Government’s “see no evil, hear no evil” approach to science as she’s tried to raise the alarm over salmon viruses in BC.

[quote]I have co-published on a European salmon virus in BC’s waters and have received no response from government, so I see the strong need to stand up for science. I believe our economy and our lives depend on it.[/quote]

Dr. Orr’s organization has taken the federal government to task for not taking action on the recommendations of the $26 million Cohen Commission into disappearing Fraser River sockeye.

Gutting environmental protections

The list of cuts to environmental laws, monitoring, enforcement and research under the Harper Government is too long to publish here – but here are a few of the big ones:

The list goes on and on – for a detailed review, I recommend Joyce Nelson’s story on the subject.

As Canada’s most recognizable advocate for science, David Suzuki has been the target of much of the Harper Government’s offensive. Following attacks from Harper and his Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver, Suzuki extricated himself officially from his own foundation, so as to be able to speak freely without risking reprisals for the foundation. (Incidentally, Revenue Canada’s $5 million audit of environmental organizations – based on wild-eyed allegations of “money laundering” from Oliver – proved to be a total waste of tax dollars, finding not a single green group in violation of charitable laws).

In a story titled, “We ignore science at our peril”, published a few months ago in these pages, Suzuki noted:

[quote]We can and must change the way we act. That requires listening to scientists and those who are working on solutions, and not to the naysayers and deniers who would keep us stalled in a doomed spiral.[/quote]

A “Scientific Dark Ages”

To Morton, the covering up of fish science has been a constant concern – particularly the muzzling of DFO’s Dr. Kristi Miller after making important discoveries using leading-edge genomic research to zero in on salmon diseases.

“We’re in a form of scientific dark ages here and that was evident in the treatment of Dr. Miller, who discovered what is likely the cause fo the Fraser sockeye decline – a deadly virus,” Morton told The Common Sense Canadian by phone. “This government has has done nothing visible about Miller’s findings.”

Details for rallies across Canada

Vancouver
Vancouver Art Gallery – North plaza on Georgia Street, 11am – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/364664120302614/
Contact: Pamela, S4S.Vancouver@gmail.com, 604-786-9521.

Salmon Arm, BC
Art Gallery front steps, noon – 1pm
Contact: Warren Bell, cppbell@web.ca

Abbotsford, BC
University of the Fraser Valley (33844 King Rd) – Meet on “The Green”, noon
Bring a lab coat and signs if you can.

Edmonton
September 14, Winston Churchill square, 2pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/569543279770489/
Contact: Krystal, StandUp4Science@outlook.com

Lethbridge
University of Lethbridge, noon – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/289078114564171/

Yellowknife
In front of The Greenstone Building (5101 50th Ave), noon – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/504283992999086/

Winnipeg
University of Winnipeg (in front of Wesley Hall), 12:30 – 1:30
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/612342002158861/
Contact: sosrallywpg@gmail.com

Toronto
South side of Queen’s Park, 11:45 – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/371506262976184/

Hamilton
Press conference, City Hall, 9am

Ottawa
Parliament Hill, noon – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/639576056054837/

Kingston
Queens campus – Stauffer Library (101 Union St.), noon – 1pm
Facebook event:https://www.facebook.com/events/297246783748951/
Contact: Raly Chakarova, r.chakarova@hotmail.com, 416-937-7302

Kitchener – Waterloo
Meet at Kitchener City Hall, 5pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/444399535673713/

Montreal
Complexe Guy-Favreau, noon – 1:30pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/606078736081800/

Halifax
Dalhousie Student Union Building, room 307, 1pm – 3:30pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/171325193051947/
Contact: Justin Singer, justin.singer@dal.ca, 647-407-2443

Fredericton
City Hall, noon – 1pm
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/122105531293444/
Contact: Jeff Clements, j.clements@unb.ca

St. Andrews, NB
Information rally and barbecue
Water St and King St, 10am – 1pm
Contact: Caroline Davies, sos.oceanscience@gmail.com

Background information on the Stand up for Science rallies is available here.

Share

Canada’s Green Economy needs public investment

Canada, Climate Change, Economics, Energy and Resources, International, Politics, Renewables
Share

Both the Intergovernmental Panel and Climate Change and the International Energy Agency have concluded that public policies, rather than the availability of resources, are among the key determinants for a shift from fossil fuels to clean technology development and deployment.  Public banks are critical agents for change along these lines.

Public financial institutions and the green economy around the world

Starting with some of the largest public banks, in July 2013, both the World Bank and the European Investment Bank announced that they will limit to the bare minimum investments in fossil fuel projects, while shifting the lion’s share of their respective energy investments to renewables.

The World Bank’s Jim Yong Kim – the first scientist to head the institution – said it is impossible to tackle poverty without dealing with the effects of a warmer world.  “We need affordable energy to help end poverty and to build shared prosperity. We will also scale-up efforts to increase renewable energy and improve energy efficiency – according to countries’ needs and opportunities.”

Based on perspectives not very different from that of the World Bank, in July 2013, The European Investment Bank (EIB), in line with the current European Union climate policy, announced it will implement new lending criteria that skew heavily towards renewables and screen out nearly all coal and lignite plants.

The significance of the EIB shift is illustrated by the fact that the EIB invests, lends and leverages $13.2B/year for energy initiatives.  The leveraging of EIB investments in turn fosters private financing, especially important for the capital-intensive offshore wind sector.  Many offshore wind projects have benefited from the low cost EIB loans in recent years.

In the UK, the Green Investment Bank, headquartered in Glasgow, was created in 2012 with $3.6B (£3B) in initial capital to carry it through until 2015.  Its mission is to respond to the specific financing challenges of commercial green infrastructure projects by tackling the finance gaps which remain despite the advent of new government policies.  Like the EIB, this mission includes leveraging its investments to bring in other lenders and investors.

To raise additional capital, GIB’s capital base is, and will be, regularly reinforced with pollution permit proceeds and the newly announced carbon tax revenues.  Beginning in the 2014-2015 period, bonds will be issued to raise additional capital.

In Germany, the state bank, kfw, is backing offshore wind development to the tune of $7.2B (5B€).

Meanwhile, the Chinese Development Bank (CDB) has been a key player in making China the world’s largest clean tech player.  In 2012, total investments in renewables was $67.7B, compared to its closest rival, the US, with $56B in investments in that same year.

The CDB is a formidable player, especially because it appears to have no limits on the billions of dollars with which to work.  About 2 years ago, the CDB committed a whopping $45B over 5 years to smart grid development and deployment.  Smart grid platforms are the key to the massive integration of intermittent renewable energy production, such as energy from wind and solar sources, by storing surplus energy for redeployment as required.

More recently, the CDB provided Goldwind, a state-owned wind turbine manufacturer, with $6B to finance international business development.  Similarly, Ming Yang, a smaller Chinese turbine manufacturer, acquired $5B from the CDB for loans and credit facilities between 2011 and 2015 to prepare for its entry into international markets.

This significant CDB support for China’s clean tech sectors has contributed to accusations of global clean tech dumping – specifically from the US and the European Union.  Both the US and the EU have responded to the alleged dumping by imposing steep tariffs on imports of clean tech products from China.

By contrast, Canada has taken an opposite course by being oblivious to the problem of dumping of clean techs by China.  To this effect, the proposed Canada-China trade deal stipulates that there will be no commercial barriers applied to environmental technologies.  Evidently, the Harper regime is prepared to give China what it wants, in order for Canada to sell tar sands oil them.  Either the Harper administration is unaware of the significance of China’s request, it simply does not care, or a combination of both!

Yet another innovative model for public financial institutions to support domestic clean tech manufacturing is that of Brazil’s Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social.  As of January, 2013, Banco Nacional requires that wind turbine manufacturers source 60% of components in Brazil and produce or assemble in Brazil at least 3 of the 4 main wind technology components – towers, blades, nacelles and hubs – between now and 2016.  Under the Banco Nacional model, turbine makers have to meet the staggered manufacturing phases established by the bank, which will be stepped up every six months, until 2016.

Turning to the US, there the US Export-Import Bank, which represents 7 US government agencies, was created to finance renewable energy projects in emerging markets and, most important, to support the US clean tech industry with its requirement for 30% US content.  India, one of the bank’s 9 key markets, accounted for approximately $7B of the its worldwide credit exposure as of the end of fiscal 2011.  Another example of Ex-Im Bank loans was the $1B credit package to fund wind power development in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam, in collaboration with the Vietnam Development Bank.

Lastly, there is the pension fund green investment model, such as that established by Denmark’s Dong Energy. Dong is 75% owned by the Government of Denmark and is involved in 30% of all offshore wind projects in the world.  Currently, Dong uses Danish pension funds for its financial activity in offshore wind projects in Denmark and partners with the Japanese trading firm Marubeni for equity financing for projects outside Denmark.

These government and pension fund connections have translated into Dong being a very special kind of energy investor in that 85% of its current portfolio is associated with fossil fuels and 15% renewables – but its mission is to reverse this ratio by 2040.

Canada falling behind

With the examples of the World Bank, the European Investment Bank China, the UK Green Investment Bank, Germany’s kfw, the Chinese Development Bank, the US’ Ex-Im Bank and Brazil’s Banco nacional, showing the way to the effect that publicly funded investment institutions can play critical roles in assuring a migration to renewables and clean techs, the question to raise in Canada is as follows:  Why can’t Canada do similar things via the Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC) and Export Development Canada?

Indeed these Canadian investment vehicles offer excellent options for the financing the development of Canada’s clean tech sectors.  The BDC, like the other institutions mentioned in this article, could leverage its venture capital funds to attract additional support from Canada’s private banks and financial cooperatives.  What an excellent way to take on the challenge of reaching US equivalency with regard to 20% of venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 going to clean tech sectors.

As well, the BDC could take a page from Brazil’s Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social and include Canadian content requirements, thus assuring optimal benefits for Canadian economic development and job creation.  It is  conceivable that BDC-supported local economic development along these lines could fly under the radar of free trade agreements.

As for an approach for supporting Canadian exports of clean technologies, the models described like those of the Chinese Development Bank and the US Export-Import Bank, may be tough acts to follow, since these institutions have billions of dollars to work with. Nevertheless, the fact that the US Ex-Im Bank brings together 7 US national government organizations, suggests this US model could provide some insights for a made-in-Canada model.  For example, if the Canadian International Development Agency would partner with Export Development Canada, the Government of Canada would be able to support the setting up of clean energy micro-grids in isolated communities without necessitating the prohibitively expensive land infrastructure connections to distant, centralized electricity generation plants.

Canada’s pension funds could also have a role to play, along the lines of Denmark’s partially pension-funded Dong Energy. There are Canadian precedents for major investments of pension funds in clean tech sectors.  For instance, in February, 2013, the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec – the financial arm for Quebec’s pension fund – invested $757M to purchase half of Dong Energy’s 50% share in the world’s largest offshore wind energy project, the UK’s 850 MW London Array.  Just prior to that, in January, the Caisse purchased $500M in shares of 11 Invenergy wind farms in the US and Canada, representing 1500 MW and including 2 wind projects in Canada, one of which is in Quebec.

This raises a second question: why can’t the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) create a clean tech portfolio to optimize Canadian participation in one of the world’s fastest growing industries for job creation, the clean tech sector?

From my previous dealings with the CPPIB, I know that their answer is that their job is to get the maximum return for pensioners and, consequently, no particular preference is given for Canadian investments. This is faulty logic for 2 reasons.

First, it is not unusual for investment vehicles to be associated with more than one objective.  Second, and most importantly, investments in growth sectors in Canada that offer high-paying jobs would bring additional revenues for the CPPIB in the form of greater contributions from both employers and employees – in addition to the traditional form of returns on investments.   Indeed, from time-to-time, the Caisse has adopted priorities for investments in Quebec with similar motivations.

It can be done

In conclusion: 1) innovative clean technology roles for the BDC and EDC to support and leverage venture capital and finance exports and 2) the creation of a clean tech portfolio for the CPPIB, could both significantly help Canada catch up to its competitors in the global migration to the high-growth and high-job creation green economy, all while making good money in the process.  Earnings from completed projects would in turn finance more projects.  These are opportunities that make good sense for Canada to embrace.

As Jack Layton used to say, “Don’t let them tell you it can’t be done.”

Will Dubitsky worked for the Government of Canada on sustainable development policies, legislation, programs and clean tech innovation projects/consortia. He lives in Quebec.

Share
With Justin Trudeau, Canada now has two Conservative parties

With Justin Trudeau, Canada now has two Conservative parties

Canada, Oil&Gas, Pipelines and Supertankers, Politics, Renewables, Tar Sands
Share
With Justin Trudeau, Canada now has two Conservative parties
Christinne Muschi/Reuters

With so many Canadians eagerly awaiting the end of the anti-democratic, unaccountable Harper regime, some seem to be inclined to support any alternative that may stand a chance for replacing the Cons in 2015, after the next federal election.  But maybe we should take a pause to think this through just a little more.  Canadian Idol Trudeau, though he hasn’t said that much so far, has already shown that he shares many of the policy positions of Harper.  This is where things get scary.

With Duffy, Wallin, Wright and Harb making the news, it might seem that now is a good time to call attention to Trudeau not believing in a need for changing the Senate status quo. For Trudeau, it’s just a matter of choosing good Senators – that is to say, the Senate would be improved if Trudeau got to choose Liberal senators instead of Harper choosing Conservative ones.  But these are merely small  distractions from the frightening resemblances between Trudeau and Harper.

Indeed, there are extraordinary similarities between Harper and Trudeau on:

Consider the following:

The Middle Class, Corporate Taxes, Health Care and Trade with China

Justin Trudeau claims to be a champion of the middle class.  Sound good so far?

Well, never before in the history of Canada have inequalities between Canadians been more pronounced.  Thanks to the corporate tax cuts initiated by the Liberals and accelerated by the Conservatives, those with power and money – especially the petroleum industry and the banks – are sitting on $600 billion in liquidity.  The Conservatives tell us we must tighten our belts, that young people have to accept low wages and precarious jobs.  Meanwhile, our cities are clogged for lack of investment in sustainable transit alternatives, etc., because the Conservatives tell us the cupboard is bare.

Yet, Justin Trudeau, self-proclaimed champion of the middle class, has said he will not raise corporate taxes.  When push comes to shove, Liberals like Conservatives, always seem to cede to money and power.

Justin Trudeau thinks there are no money problems associated with health care, just management challenges.  This position is necessary because Trudeau would lead a government short of revenues, thanks to the lowest corporate taxes among G8 nations!  Conservatives couldn’t agree more.  The Cons plan on cutting health care funding within 3 years.  So much for caring about the middle class!

But there is much more middle class stuff that makes the celebrity Prince Trudeau a scary prospect.  A case in point is Justin Trudeau favoured the sale of Nexen to state-controlled Chinese interests because he said it would pave the way to free trade with China, which would in turn pave the way to more prosperity for the middle class.  The Conservatives have said the same thing.  Yet the North American Free Trade Agreement has been around for a long time and middle class revenues/wages are stagnating or going down.  The middle class is being hollowed out.  The required fixes are internal/domestic.

Regarding the aforementioned, proposed Canada-China trade agreement, in response to massive dumping on global markets by China’s clean tech industry, the US has imposed trade tariffs running from 31% to 250% on solar tech imports from China, along with tariffs of 45% to 71% on imports of Chinese wind turbine towers; 2) the European Commission is considering tariffs averaging 47% on solar tech imports for China; and 3) Canada is the only country dumb enough to accept, under the proposed China-Canada agreement, a guaranteed exemption for environmental technologies from commercial barriers.

Guns: an integral part of Canadian culture

Justin Trudeau thinks that guns are an integral part of Canadian culture and that the gun registry was ineffective.  Stephen Harper has similar views.  This, despite the fact that the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs supported the gun registry as: 1) an effective tool for police in the line of duty; 2) regarding the development of evidence related to judicial proceedings.

Environment, submission to the fossil fuel Lobby, Tar Sands, Kinder Morgan and Keystone

Then there’s the matter of the environment. Trudeau and Harper say they favour sustainable development but the legacies of both of their parties suggest otherwise.  Prior to their defeat, the Liberals had several climate change action plans.  They all failed to do the job, because when you got down to the details, their plans were concessions to money and power.  Jean Chrétien promised the petroleum industry that, in the event of a price on carbon, there would be a very affordable ceiling on the price of carbon.  Stéphane Dion came out with his billions for a Climate Fund just before the Martin government was defeated, a fund that would have the government pay the largest emitters to reduce their respective emissions or invest in carbon offsets.  In other words, the more one emits, the more the government would subsidize – a pay-the-polluter principle rather than the polluter pays.  No wonder Canada’s emission levels spiked upwards during the Liberal reign!

Thanks to Conservatives’ narrow focus on accommodating the fossil fuel lobby, Canada is one of the rare developed nations that is not a full participant in one of the greatest job creation areas of our time, the clean tech sectors. China had 1.6 million jobs, and Germany 372,000 jobs in clean tech sectors in 2011.  Today, there are over 500 wind tech manufacturing facilities in the US; wind energy was the largest source of new electrical power generation in the US in 2012; the US solar sector employed 119,000 Americans in 2012; and 20% of US venture capital activity in 2011 and 2012 went towards the US clean tech sectors.  Yet Canada is barely participating in green economy and, the few advancements that are being made, are thanks to provincial policies

What can we expect from Trudeau on environmental matters?  Don’t get your hopes up.  Justin Trudeau has already ceded to power and money by being very vague on environmental matters so as not to offend anyone.  Following the Jean Chrétien model, Boy King Trudeau supports the Keystone pipeline and the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline to Vancouver (to export tar sands oil to Asia), while saying he is a champion of the environment – even though the emissions associated with tar sands-related production for these pipelines would negate any of the Trudeau’s nebulous motherhood notions of being on the side of the environment.

Poor Sense of Priorities: Pot Over the Lac-Mégantic Tragedy

More recently, Trudeau has shown his true colours on priorities, with the July 2013 refusal of both the Conservatives and Liberals to interrupt their summer break for the purpose of holding sessions of the Parliamentary committee on Transport to look into the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster that left an estimated 47 people dead.  One doesn’t need to await the report of the Transportation Safety Board to figure out that the Transport Canada approval of the Montreal Maine and Atlantic Railway request to have only one person operate a train with 72 wagons of dangerous cargo was a stupid decision.

Former Transport Canada employees have said that, under the Harper regime, safety has taken a back seat to corporate profits.  The odds of the tragedy ever happening with 2 people in charge of the train would have been very minimal.  But Trudeau thinks the top message for the lazy, hazy days of summer is about legalizing pot.  Glad to see he has got his priorities right.

Employment insurance

It was the Liberals who started gutting Employment Insurance and the Conservatives have merely followed through.  Justin Trudeau must be counting on the short memory of Canadians.

Wrap-up

Wrapping up, juggling complex issues such as taxation fairness, equal opportunity and participation in the global migration to a green economy, health care, day care etc., requires well-thought-out, synergistic policies with real depth.  But both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau prefer to operate in sound bites and clichés on such matters.  Harper answers all tough questions with, “but it’s the economy.”  As for Trudeau, he simply repeats his aforementioned mantra that he is for the middle class without any references as to what he would do now that income inequalities have reached an historic high and corporate tax revenues aren’t sufficient to do anything meaningful for the middle class.

Unfortunately, you won’t see much of the above-mentioned criticisms in the media.  With very few exceptions, journalists are not interested in the policy details or comparative analyses. The majority of English newspapers in Canada are partisan and represent, first and foremost, corporate Canada, money and power.  Canadians have been criticized by some journalists for falling for a superficial Justin Trudeau brand, but the reasons for this can, in part, be found in the lack of depth by the journalists making such criticisms.

Once again, the Liberals are presenting themselves as the best option to address their own poor legacy.

With Trudeau at the helm, Canada now has two Conservative parties.

Share

Audio: Damien Gillis on ‘Multi-Issue Extremism’, Liberal Gas Agenda

Canada, Politics
Share

Listen to Damien Gillis and Nanaimo’s CHLY host Rae Kornberger discuss how activism is becoming “extremism” – even terrorism – under the Harper Government’s petro-state regime. Invoking new, secretive anti-terrorism laws, federal agencies including CSIS and the RCMP are being directed to infiltrate, spy on and harass “multi-issue extremists”, whom they define as “activist groups, indigenous groups, environmentalists and others who are publicly critical of government policy.” The pair also cover the Christy Clark Government’s bold – and Gillis suggests foolish – vision to turn BC into a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) superpower. (from June 26, 2013)

 

Share

EcoEnergy money went to Carbon Capture, Tar Sands – No Clean Tech funding for this year

Canada, Politics, Renewables
Share

Last month’s announcement by Stephen Harper of EcoEnergy Innovation Initiative recipients and other Government of Canada investments in clean tech provided an excellent example of false and misleading information coming straight from the Prime Minister’s Office.

First, the EcoEnergy Innovation Initiative call for statements of interest came in the form of regional launches across Canada in September 2011. The deadline for submissions of statements of interest for one part of the program was just two weeks after the launches, the second part in mid-October 2011.

While those who have had their projects approved were advised to this effect 2 years ago, the Prime Minister made the official announcementof approved projects on May 3, 2013, to purposely mislead the public to the effect that the government is doing something now. But there is no new funding for clean tech innovation in 2013-2014 – zero!

Note, as well, that 30% of the EcoEnergy Innovation Initiative funding awarded — $24.942M out of the total $82M — went to carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, the greenwashing technologies to make it appear that the fossil fuel industry has the environment at heart. Also, $8.826M, or 11% of all funding, went to tar sands projects.

As for the merits of CCS, according to this article from La Presse: 1) one third of the energy produced by a pilot CCS application to a coal-fired generating unit of the Boundary Dam facility in Saskatchewan is necessary to run the CCS component; 2) TransAlta, despite $800M in funding from Ottawa, abandoned its CCS project in Pioneer, Alberta.

Further on recent investments in clean tech, note that:

1) Sustainable Development Technology Canada, which averaged $56.4M/year in investments in clean tech innovation in the past, was allocated in the last Budget only $1M for 2013-2014 and $12M for 2014-2015;.

2) Obama recently announced an increase in clean tech research funding by 30% to reach $7.9B and an acceleration of the permitting approval process for renewable energy production and distribution projects on federal lands – federal lands make up 20% of the continental US land mass;

3) in August 2012, the Government of China announced financial commitments up to the year 2015 in the amount of $372B for emissions and pollution reductions and energy efficiency. http://www.ibtimes.com/china-spend-372-billion-reduce-pollution-encourage-energy-efficiency-759575 This complements the $67.7B in investments in clean techs in China for the year 2012; and

4) the global totals for clean tech investments in 2011 and 2012 respectively were $302.3B and $268.7B, the drop in investments in 2012 in part a reflection of the decline in clean tech prices, policy uncertainty in the US and European economic woes.

Will Dubitsky worked for the Government of Canada on sustainable development policies, legislation, programs and clean tech innovation projects/consortia. He lives in Quebec.

Share

Heritage Minister Excludes Watershed Sentinel from Funding

Canada, Politics
Share

Unless you are a magazine publisher, you’ve probably never heard of the Canada Magazine Fund. Administered by Heritage Canada, the CMF was established 24 years ago to “contribute towards the production of high-quality magazines showcasing the diverse work of a wide cross-section of Canadian creators” and to build “capacity to help ensure the continued growth and vitality of the Canadian magazine publishing industry.”

Over the years, the CMF did indeed help many Canadian publications, including small but important arts and issues-oriented magazines.

In 2010, the Conservative government incorporated the funding role of the CMF into the newly created Canadian Periodical Fund (CPF).Concerns were raised about the negative impact the accompanying changes could have on small magazine publishers. However, the remit of the new fund was reassuringly similar: to provide “financial assistance to Canadian print magazines, non-daily newspapers and digital periodicals to enable them to overcome market disadvantages and continue to provide Canadian readers with the content they choose to read”.

The emphasis on the word “they” is mine and made for reasons which will soon be clear.

Watershed Sentinel, BC’s scrappy environmental magazine, is a past and very grateful recipient of financial assistance through the CMF and the now defunct Publications Assistance Program. Last year the magazine applied for CPF funding to improve its on-line services for readers.

In April, editor Delores Broten was informed in a letter written on behalf of Heritage Minister James Moore, that the application had been rejected. Apparently the magazine did not meet the government’s objective to fund projects which “meet the needs of Canadians.”

So who, exactly, decides what the needs of Canadians are?

In the past year, Watershed Sentinel has revealed:

  1. The betrayal of Canada’s own energy security by the rush to export liquefied natural gas to Asian markets.
  2. The backroom machinations of General Electric Canada, Talisman Energy, and other members of the murky Aqueduct Alliance seeking to grab up rights to Canada’s water.
  3. The suspect process by which Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency approves the use of pesticides, including the continued use of the neonicotinoids strongly linked to the global demise of crucial bee populations.
  4. How the Canadian government (along with major tar sands players), having abandoned all pretence of meeting Kyoto goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, is throwing money at carbon capture and storage, and other dubious money-making geo-engineering projects.
  5. The glaring inadequacies and corporate hijacking of safety regulations and enforcement in Canada and the US.
  6. How the absence of the precautionary principle in the approval process for chemical pollutants has led to dramatic increases in childhood ailments, including asthma, diabetes and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.
  7. The known and suspected links between synthetic chemicals in the environment and the current breast cancer epidemic – and the role of Canadian and US breast cancer charities in keeping the focus not on prevention, but on the never-ending race for an ever-elusive cure.
  8. The vested interests behind plans to pipe diluted bitumen from Alberta’s tar sands through Canada’s most populous areas to east coast refineries.
  9. How Bill C-38 has dismantled environmental protection and blocked public participation.
  10. The growing body of evidence linking hydraulic fracturing with a variety of health and environmental problems.
  11. The dangers of the rush to embrace nuclear energy, after decades of failing to act on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
  12. How the Harper government’s decision to tie foreign aid to the interests of Canadian mining companies harms the world’s most needy. (This March 2013 article prompted an indignant rebuttal from Julian Fantino, Minister of International Co-operation. Two days later, the government announced it was rolling the Canadian International Development Agency into the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.)
  13. The close connection of Environment Minister Peter Kent and PR giant Hill and Knowlton, whose tar sands clients have successfully lobbied for the evisceration of Canada’s environmental protection laws.
  14. The full extent and dire consequences of Stephen Harper’s war on science.

Call me crazy, but I think these are things Canadians need to know.

Like science, environmental reporting is not popular with the Harper government. Earlier this year, the 25-year-old National Roundtable on Energy and Environment produced a final report before it shut down for good. The report is entitled “Reflections of Past Leaders of the NREE.” Environment Minister Peter Kent forbade the public posting of the report (a leaked copy of which has been posted by DeSmog Canada) or any of the agency’s previous reports.

In the case of Watershed Sentinel, I’m not saying that what the magazine reports is why Heritage Canada rejected its funding application. But I am wondering.

Miranda Holmes is an associate editor of Watershed Sentinel.

Share