The blog was started to highlight the good news about pipelines and carbon tax among all the bad
news available on the internet. Post 1 is still the most important entry. The
other posts cover subsequent findings, mainly related to carbon tax. It is
hoped that in particular those environmentalists who claim that our export of
oil increases the word’s GHG emissions will start campaigning for a global
carbon tax because that is the only tool to decrease demand for oil.
Diminishing our present an immediate future exports won’t change the total GHG
emission because others will take up the slack. Those who question the safety
of pipelines could look at the end of post 1 and demand that all the questions
related to the Enbridge line will be answered. The required instrumentation,
maintenance procedures and oversight apply to all pipelines and firm
commitments should be made before any approval. Some points are repeated in subsequent
posts because many people will only read one or two posts. The description
below of each post will help finding the new subjects covered in each post:
Post1
Pipelines and carbon tax 2013 10 08
This post is based on 3 emails to the Prime Minister of
Canada and Enbridge, followed by 2 further emails to Enbridge, suggesting to
make far more positive information available to counteract all the bad news
shown on the internet. The subjects found are seldom discussed in newspapers
and magazines. It is shown how Canada’s poor environmental record and the
dismal performance of several pipelines has created national and international
protest against new pipelines. The lack of pipeline capacity means that we have
to sell our oil at bargain prices. In 2013 Alberta’s energy minister estimated
that his province loses $20-$30 billion per year in revenue by selling the oil
at $37 per barrel below the price of West Texas Intermediate, which is the
North American benchmark. This must have cost billions of dollars in lost tax
revenue for Ottawa. That money could have been spent on all those improvements
which are so desperately needed throughout the country
The first article is a summary of the increase in global
GHG emissions, the advantages of a revenue neutral carbon tax, environmental
progress in China, opposition to carbon tax and opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline.
The second article is a detailed account to show how
carbon tax as well as cap and trade discourage the use of fossil fuel in order
to make green energy more competitive. It describes for both systems how the
money is collected and how it flows back to those who paid extra for fossil
fuel. It records in detail how the Heritage Foundation in the US and the Frazer
Institute in Canada are unaware of this re-distribution or ignore it and
publish totally unrealistic figures how carbon pricing affects households.
The second article further records the successes of
carbon pricing in Europe, 10 US states and the province of British Columbia,
advantages of carbon tax over cap and trade, Australia’s debates leading to a
carbon tax, mixed reaction from industries, the money Canada loses by not
having a carbon tax, Canada’s poor environmental records, development and costs
of green energy, the need for a global carbon tax to allow applying it to
carbon exports, the low taxes in British Columbia due to carbon tax refunds and
its effect on the US coal trade, the dismal records of pipeline transport,
rules and regulations for pipelines and
a list of unanswered questions related to the Enbridge pipeline and marine
transport.
The internet search was initiated after reading the
publisher’s advertisement and table of contents of a new book “Rediscovering
Sustainability”, which among many economic aspects stresses the need for carbon
pricing. It revived a long-time desire to do something about carbon tax and I
wrote my first email to the Prime Minister referring to that book and
suggesting to consider a carbon tax. When I found out that without tax Canada
may face countervailing duties and had read a lot about Enbridge’s
pipeline problems I sent a second email
to the PM and asked Enbridge to make some good news available on
instrumentation and proposed maintenance procedures to counteract all the
problems recorded in that email. When President Obama stated in the inaugural
address for his second term that the US would be far more serious about taxing
carbon and Alberta tried to increase their carbon pricing to win support for
the Keystone XL pipeline I looked at many more details about carbon pricing and
wrote the third email. The 2 subsequent emails to Enbridge are further
suggestions to explain specific technical improvements, including provision for
earthquakes, to the general public.
The Prime Minister received all points covered in post 1 while
Enbridge received the entire post with a special note that at the very end it
contains a list of questions, which may change opponent’s minds when their
answer shows how things have improved. The
Executive Correspondence Office in the Prime Minister’s Office assured me that
the comments have been carefully considered, while Enbridge continued thanking
for the support. Unfortunately there still is not enough information about it
in newspapers and magazines. I sent post 1 with backup documents to several
environmental groups, newspapers and a national magazine. Only one newspaper
responded to a specific comment so I hope to reach more readers with this
blog. It is mainly read in the US,
followed by Europe, Canada, South Korea, India, Pakistan and China.
Post 2 More talk about pipelines and
taxing polluters 2013 10 17
After the public attention had shifted from Enbridge to
Kinder Morgan this posts lists a number of details yet to be published to
convince the public that the project will be safe. It is based on the same 8
points listed for Enbridge at the end of post 1. The taxing of polluters refers
to a positive note in the Throne speech, which could mean that we finally will
move towards a national carbon tax.
Post 3 Blog Summary 2013 10 22
It was realized that the 2 articles on post I are rather
long so this summary contains most points without reference to the backup
documents. Those backup documents can’t be uploaded to the blog but can be
emailed upon request by leaving a comment on any of the posts. They contain
quotes from specific websites. In the latest posts the reference websites are
shown to overcome that problem but it takes a bit longer for readers to find
the particular quote and it’s context.
Post 4 Oil spills from tankers 2013 10
28
This post repeats that only 5% of oil spills comes from
tankers. It also notes that none of the tankers transporting Kinder Morgan oil
ever had a spill in its 58 years of operation. It refers to websites of
inspection companies to show that if all rules are followed, little can go
wrong. It also shows that some points brought up at the inquiry still have not
been clarified. These are the use of 20 year old first generation double hull
tankers which are at the end of their service life, the number of pilots and
tugboats and the handling of ballast.
Post 5 Enbridge pipeline, unanswered
questions 2013 11 05
On November 6th the
Enbridge pipeline was in the news again and it was stressed that acceptance by
the public and in particular by the First Nations is of prime importance. This
post Is a repeat of the 8 points shown at the very end of post 1. Enbridge
received the entire article with a special note: “Having seen how much
opposition there is based on past problems I have included at the end of my
article a number of questions which may change opponent’s minds if you can once
in a while point out how things have improved on specific points.” Since the
newspapers and magazines still not cover these important matters it was worth
repeating.
Post 6 Coal export protest is fine but
carbon tax works better 2013 11 09
When searching for oil stories you come across reports of
demonstrations against coal terminals in British Columbia, Washington,
Oregon, Louisiana and Australia Here again everybody complains about rising
GHG emissions but seldom mentions that a global carbon tax is the only answer
to lower the ever increasing demand for coal. The post shows some figures on
how fast the demand is rising and where most of the coal comes from.
It also details, how, thanks to British Columbia’s carbon
tax refunds, the BC taxes are so low that US companies are able to buy their
coal through BC subsidiaries and ship it through BC terminals in order to avoid
the higher US taxes.
Post 7 Carbon tax becomes more popular
2013 11 14
It repeats the figures of a 2012 report showing how fast
the GHG emissions are rising and how businesses are well ahead of politicians
in combating this trend. It repeats a post 1 comment that Shell, Statoil and
Cathay Pacific are among the 100 multinationals who demanded a carbon tax by
signing the Carbon Price Communiqué. It also shows that ExxonMobil and a slew
of energy related companies favour the carbon tax over cap and trade.
Another
great development is that Washington and Oregon will initiate a carbon tax
similar to British Columbia’s because they signed the Pacific Coast
Collaborative in October 2013. It will bring or enhance carbon pricing in
California, Alaska, Oregon, Washington and B.C. The four states and one
province have a combined population of 53 million people, with a gross domestic
product of $2.8-trillion.
Post 8 Support for Enbridge’s pipeline increases from
35% to 42% despite negative statements about carbon tax 2013 11 26
The statement comes with the following warning: A new poll suggesting support for the Northern Gateway
project is increasing isn’t “deep seated” opinion and one well-publicized oil
spill would likely result in a dramatic change in British Columbians’ opinions
on the issue, according to two University of B.C. professors.
We are not so fortunate with
the carbon tax. Mr Harper still does not accept that by opposing the tax we
hurt our environmental image, creating more opposition to pipelines.
Post 9
Pipelines and carbon tax update 2013 12 20
After I supplied some factual
information on the characteristics of diluted bitumen and a few other details
about pipelines to a newspaper columnist who had written about the subject, I
was asked to consider submitting a long article on pipelines. This post shows the article in full, starting
at “How things change” It contains the same information as shown in post 1 and
the emails to the government and Enbridge. It was extended to include most of
the later developments. The EP and CT page numbers would not have shown in the
final edited version and the article was submitted without headings. From the comments the columnist made I gather
it is too controversial: “I've
learned in a hurry that pipeline companies are ready to charge will
all guns at the ready - not surprising, since they have a lot to lose if they
don't get their permits.” The paper also wanted to know my background and "where you come from" on the
topic. Things like, whether you belong to the corporate side, the environmental
side, political, etc.” I replied that I come from all three sides but that was
the end of publication. I can only hope that all the media people and
environmental organisations who have the story and the backup documents will
publish at least some of it.
Post
10 Global Carbon tax required to achieve acceptable export oil flow 2014 01 12
It is shown in
more detail how essential global carbon tax is and that the opposition to
carbon tax is caused by not understanding how the money raised is returned to
the businesses and individuals who paid the tax. This enables everybody to make
up their own mind if they want to make some extra money by reducing their use
of fossil fuel or not.
In BC the
government
must show how all of the carbon tax revenue flows back to individuals and
businesses as tax reductions. To ensure this occurs, by law the government must
table in the Legislature an annual plan that clearly outlines how every cent of carbon tax revenue will be
returned to taxpayers in tax reductions. That plan shows 16 specific tax
reductions and credits for 2012, 2013 and the projection for 2014 Part of the table showing the most significant
items is included in the post.
Post 11
Carbon tax and oil export summary 2014 01 26
From time to time I send
updates with backup documents to family, friends and ex colleagues for
forwarding to others. There were several requests for a shorter story so I
posted it on the blog as well.
Post 12
Four oil companies demand a carbon tax 2014 04 22
Shell, BP
ExxonMobil and Statoil all demand a global carbon tax and this post explains
the reason. They all have large natural gas reserves and a healthy carbon tax
would make coal so expensive that coal based power companies are forced to
switch to natural gas, which emits only half the amount of CO2. Cathay Pacific,
the world’s third largest airline, also demands a global carbon tax. Their airplanes
are fuel efficient and higher fuel prices will enhance their competitive
position until other airlines catch up. The post also shows the importance of
Unilever, EDF Energy, Braskem, Swiss-Re,Ricoh and Swanska, who are among the
100 multinationals who signed the Carbon Price Communiqué, demanding a global
carbon price.
The post also
quotes a recent speech by a government MP who sees the carbon tax as “irresponsible
economic management, whose $20-billion carbon tax would raise the price on
absolutely everything. However, our government rejects that idea to impose a
job-killing carbon tax.” This shows how outdated the government policies are. The
“job killing” predictions are quite unrealistic. 73% of the 103 studies
analysed by the World Bank showed that carbon pricing has a positive impact on employment.
To show some of the many potential green jobs, directly reducing GHG emissions,
there is a cost and benefit analysis of a heatpump system for home heating. With
a carbon tax this will become more affordable. It can be paid for with the
money people gain in refunds by
consuming a below average amount of fossil fuel.
Post 14 Vancouver tries to stay
green by rejecting 2 oil pipelines 2014 06 21
The post
shows again how the requirement for a global carbon tax is ignored by
politicians. In their speeches the politicians try to persuade people to reject
pipelines claiming that our oil export increases the world’s greenhouse gas
emissions. That would be true if we were the only country which can supply oil.
While 20% of the world’s GHG emission is covered by carbon pricing that is far
too little. It has to become global in order to avoid unfair competition and
complicated duty arrangements between countries. Only after a global tax has
been in place for a while and green energy becomes more common, the demand for
oil will level off. By that time the economy will not suffer because we will
have all that extra income from the carbon tax.
Post 15 How safe is the Northern
Gateway tanker traffic 2014 07 23
There is a
list of unanswered questions in point 14 of post 1. Further details are shown
in post 4 (Oil leaks from tankers). This
post 15 was submitted by a Chief Engineer with 37 years of sea time in the BC
and arctic waters. Most of those years he served on Fisheries Patrol and Ocean
Science vessels, He knows the BC inlets well and has heard many stories from
other mariners who manoeuvred through the critical channels, He has also supervised the re-fitting of ships
and knows that, despite all the rules, mistakes can go undetected
without strict oversight by several independent authorities. He sat down and
wrote about the improved navigation aids and many rules and regulations. He
also clarified modern tanker design, personnel training, ship selection
inspection and certification.
It is clear that a lot of money has to be spent by the
shippers and the government to strictly follow all rules. Questions have been
raised by protesters where the money will come from. I noted throughout my
posts that Alberta lost $20- 30 billion per year because due to lack of
pipeline capacity they had to sell their oil at a $37 per barrel discount.
Later on I read that vastly increased rail transport had lessened the losses
but saw no hard figures. Only lately I saw from an article by Sherry Cooper,
former VP and chief economist at the Bank of Montreal that the losses were $ 25
billion in 2012, $20 billion in 2013 and
will remain at $ 15 billion per year until we have more direct access to Asian markets
by pipelines or trains. Spending a lot of extra money to do all the work
properly, including providing ample personnel and equipment for cleanup of oil
spills will be insignificant compared to the $15 billion per year we gain by
doing it right
Post 16 Carbon tax progress
2014 08 04
In 2014 businesses were encouraged to sign the
trillion ton communiqué, which like the carbon price communiqué demands a
global carbon tax. The trillion ton puts more emphasis on an environmental
tipping point. By now over 1000 companies in over 60 countries has signed
either communiqué. It is important to
know that, as noted before, four major oil companies and a major airline will
gain from the tax while the signatures include those of major multinationals in
food processing, petrochemical, construction, insurance and computer industries.
In June 2014, the Obama administration
announced its biggest policy yet to address
global warming — a proposed rule to cut carbon-dioxide emissions from the
nation's power plants as much as 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. This
ruling can’t be contested in the courts so some influential Republicans would
rather see a revenue neutral carbon tax which obtains the same results but gives
better control on how the savings are spent. They also like to impose import
duties from countries without carbon tax. The Sanders Boxer bill introduced in
2013 may be the answer. It starts at $ 20 per ton of CO2 and has
provisions for border tax adjustments.
In order to promote pipelines and carbon tax I placed
long comments on articles in on-line newspapers dealing with pipeline protests.
My main concern is that many protesters don’t realize that a global carbon tax
is the best tool to diminish the demand for oil. I recently counted how many
people read my comments since April 2014. They were read by at least 7500
people and 60% agreed with my arguments. That is encouraging.
Post 17 Cost of taxed oil and coal, wind
power progress 2014 08 10
Based on the BC rates the price of crude oil would go up
by 9% and the cost of thermal coal would rise by 70%. This explains why oil
companies with natural gas reserves demand the carbon tax. It would force all
coal fired power plants to convert to natural gas while the rising oil prices
don’t affect them more than historic fluctuations did.
Carbon tax is more effective to encourage development of
green energy than subsidies. The inequality of subsidies is shown by comparing
results in the US and Ontario. In the US the last minor subsidies will be
terminated. According to the Department of Energy, the average electricity cost
from a new natural gas plant in 2018 will be 6.7 cents per kWh, compared with 8.7 cents for wind, 10 for coal
11 cents for nuclear power and !4.4
cents for solar. By comparison Ontario has to pay 13.5 c/KWH for wind power and at least 40c/KWH for solar until long term contracts are running out
Post 18 pipeline protests cause
widespread oil transport by rail 2014 08
24
Sufficient loading stations are being built in Alberta
and new rolling stock is being delivered to ship by the end of 2014 a total of
1 million barrels per day from Alberta. The Gulf Coast refineries are well
equipped to handle our bitumen and prefer it over the North Dakota oil. Since
the ultimate capacity of the Keystone XL pipeline is 850,000 bpd it can be seen
that we don’t need it anymore except for safer and cheaper transportation.
.
The Northern Gateway and the new Kinder Morgan pipeline
with a total capacity of 525,000 + 590,00 = 1,115.000 bpd can be replaced by
the G7G railway from Alberta to Alaska for shipment through the under-utilized
port of Valdez. With a single track it could transport 1,500,000 bpd and double
tracked 5,000,000 bpd. It could also be used to export grain, potash lumber,
minerals and general merchandise. It was original conceived by Alaska and the
Yukon in 2005 and 2007 who did a $ 6 million feasibility study. Pipeline
opposition revived the project and it was discussed with First Nations, who
will participate. The original estimates were updated and a 1.8 million pre
feasibility study funded by the Alberta Government is almost complete. A main
advantage is that the controversial tanker traffic in BC waters will be
avoided. Another advantage is that Valdez is 2-4 days closer to Asian
destinations than the BC ports.
Post 19 Canada’s carbon tax problems. 2014
11 02
Our tough stand on taxing carbon was developed years ago.
Based on new information on the impact of carbon pricing on the economy it is high
time to change. This will be difficult because following years of negative slogans
it will be hard to show the public how important the tax is and that with a revenue
neutral system like we have in BC nobody suffers. The post once more explains how
in BC all carbon tax collected is ,via 17 refund categories ,returned to those who
paid the tax. It also shows that Canada will fall far short of its Copenhagen agreement
while the US will likely meet its agreement which is identical to ours.
Post 20 The US -China climate agreement and
European progress 2014 12 02
On 11 November 2014 the US moved to cut emissions at
least 26% by 2025 and China’s undertook to level emissions in 2030. Earlier in
the year 27 European countries announced that they would cut emissions by 40%
in 2030. With the stringent EPA rulings introduced in June 2014 and possible
approval of the revenue neutral carbon tax bill introduced by senators Sanders
and Boxer there is a good chance that the US will approve a carbon tax. Even
some republican senators like it because it includes border tax adjustments
(import duties) on goods from countries without carbon tax.
China launched
pilot emissions trading systems in
seven cities and provinces in 2013 and 2014 and plans to create a national
system in 2016. It has a goal to reduce emissions intensity by 40-45 percent
compared with 2005 levels by 2020. When China and the US start national
taxation systems it will bring the carbon pricing from 20% of the world’s
greenhouse gas emission to 60%. Meantime South Korea and Mexico have targeted
reductions of 30%. In Mexico it will hopefully be achieved by the national
climate change law while
South Korea launched its ETS in January 2015, covering 525 businesses from 23 sectors that account
for about two-thirds of the country's national emissions.
Post 21 Wind Power for British
Columbia 2015 02 17
The BC clean
energy act envisages export of renewable energy. It requires the province to be
self sufficient while 93 % has to be renewable energy. On extreme cold winter
days the demand during the peak hour is 12-13% above the average for that cold
day and that demand has to be met without help from wind power or other
variable renewable sources. About 9% of our energy is generated for us in the
US where under the Columbia River Treaty we built dams to control the flow in
our part of the river in exchange for 50% of the extra power the US generates
due to that controlled flow. We sell that power to the US and don’t count on it
for self sufficiency. Instead BC recently approved a new hydro project (site C),
which will supply about the same amount of electricity as our Columbia River
Entitlement. It will mean flooding of an important valley and people are in
uproar. Since we have better wind conditions than all but one other province and
the cost per KWh for new hydro stations and wind farms is about the same we
should favour wind over hydro. Wind and hydro work very well together because
when there is excess wind, hydro turbines have to work less, saving water to
generate extra power when there is little wind.
Most BC
Hydro’s power plants were built years ago and can deliver power at 4c/KWh.
which for years attracted industry to the province. BC Hydro is obliged to buy
all the renewable power which Independent Power Producers (IPPs) can provide.
It amounts to 12% of our total but only 1.5% is from wind. It creates a huge surplus,
which is often hard to sell because there is far too much competition from coal
fired power plants. The IPP power is expensive and in particular most of the
run of river power has to be bought in the spring when it is not needed. BC
Hydro buys the IPP power for 8.5-10c/KWh but to accommodate it hydro
turbines are forced to work less, driving up their cost per KWh. At times the
reservoirs flow over, which means the power is wasted. As a result the IPP
power, bought at 8.5-10c, actually costs 11-13c. while the spot market often is
as low as 4c/KWh. The problem can be solved by forcing Alberta to use less
fossil fuel for oil extraction, which would make our oil export pipelines more
acceptable. Our present system has an over capacity of at least 16%. If we add
20% in wind power and redirect our Columbia River Entitlement we could sell 45%
of our power to Alberta. A carbon tax would help to achieve it
-----------------------------
.jpg){kind=link}