Jump to content

Sorry Albertans, stuff your fossil fuel


Recommended Posts

Headline in the G&M today.........

Gas, fracking, nuclear: Three energy sectors on Europe’s rethink list as war threatens Ukraine

I thought about this 15 years ago. Isn't it amazing that all those supposedly smart people over there listened to the frauds. That is what happens when you listen to frauds.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/18/2019 at 11:27 AM, Mitch Cronin said:

The world needs it to stay right where it is, so give it up. Stop raping forests and pumping filthy oil for temporary profit. Start thinking of priorities other than cash... you know, things that really matter, like long term survivability for our next generations.

Resistance to fossil fuel industry is growing and will keep doing so, so best you just give it up. 

Adam Pankratz: Ukraine invasion shows why Canada needs to become an energy superpower

The reverberations of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine will be felt for months, and likely years, to come. To understand our responsibility to the people of Ukraine and the actions needed on a global scale, we need a holistic understanding of how we have come to this point and why Putin felt confident and empowered enough to take the gamble he did. One theme stands out as particularly relevant to Canada: oil and gas.

Energy development has a mostly bad name among political leaders who are more concerned with winning elections via wedge politics than facing larger realities. In the last 10 years, the enlightened class within the European Union, Canada and the United States suddenly decided oil didn’t matter and was bad.

This dogma was taken up by certain members of Canada’s political class. Oil and the pipelines used to transport it were demonized, even as our oil consumption grew and grew. The growth was no different than elsewhere in the world: in 2019, global oil consumption peaked at around 100 million barrels per day, and that number is likely to be surpassed as the post-COVID recovery takes hold.

European demand paired with its reliance on Russia for fossil fuels has already given Putin a hydrocarbon sword of Damocles to hang over the heads Europe’s leaders. Early in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, we are already seeing Europe’s fear and dependence on Russian energy play out in depressing but entirely foreseeable ways.OBA_TRANS.png

Calls from the United Kingdom and others, including Ukraine, to eject Russia from the SWIFT system of global payments are being resisted by Germany and other European nations. Can no one in Brussels or Washington draw a line between Nord Stream 1 — the natural gas pipeline running under the Baltic from Russia straight into Germany — and Germany’s reluctance to stand up to Russia?

Germany’s revocation of Nord Stream 2 is being hailed as a major step — and it may yet prove to be — but Nord Stream 1 remains a sledgehammer just waiting to land. Removing Russia from SWIFT would ultimately lead to freezing, and possibly dead, Germans.

Ever since the British navy converted its fleet to oil from coal in 1914, there has been a recognition of the crucial role hydrocarbons play in war and sovereignty. The chase for oil shaped colonial ambitions in the Middle East, pushed Japan and Germany to foolish military engagements before and during the Second World War and has continued to form government policy, notably in United States, for the last 70 years.

However important oil is to our way of life, it has lately been under siege by the environmental, social and governance movement. Green is the way forward, or so we have been told. Wind, solar and hydro power are all we need.

These energy sources can no doubt play a role, and oil companies can certainly do better in terms of their environmental impact. But, as Europe has been finding out to devastating effect this year, the wind doesn’t always blow when you want it to. Ask U.K. consumers what January in Scotland feels like when your gas provider goes bust.

Waking up cold isn’t the only consequence of the realpolitik of energy independence. Today we’re reminded that invasion is also on the table when you have oil and gas leverage and the others don’t. The jury is no longer out on the energy transition question: it will take decades to move away from oil and gas and Canada had better start thinking about how to position itself given that reality.

Our lack of action, and inability to profit economically off the current energy crisis, is depressing. More discouraging is that the West will continue to buy oil and gas from Russia, even as troops bear down on Kiev. Sanctions are being imposed internationally but, so far, not on energy.

The U.S. imports almost 600,000 barrels of oil today from Russia, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. The latest figures confirm Nord Stream 1 continues to flow at maximum capacity, as will other pipelines that run from Russia, through Ukraine to central Europe. This is unlikely to change any time soon.

Any Canadian up in arms about this and wondering what we could do need only look to what we could have done: build pipelines and get our oil and gas to market. Further oilsands development along with Keystone XL could have filled the hole that a U.S. ban on Russian crude would have created.

Energy East or other gas pipelines could be sending tankers of LNG to Europe non-stop to ease the dependence on Russian gas. All of these would have had the added bonus of filling Canadian government and private coffers to pay for the services and products we all enjoy on a regular basis.

We ultimately came to our collective senses with the Trans Mountain pipeline, which, despite delays, will be seen through to completion. It’s time to double down on that inspired decision and take advantage of the resources we have in this country, which will have the added benefit of deterring aggression based on energy supremacy elsewhere in the world.

The Ukrainian invasion and obvious Russian energy leverage should make Canada drastically reconsider its role in the geopolitics of oil and gas. Our oilsands reserves are some of the largest on the planet, with well over 100 billion barrels in the ground. We also have enormous gas reserves, many of which are not yet tapped.

Canada has a real chance to become a world energy superpower if we build pipelines and encourage development and exploration. This will take great political will, but the benefits of resource development and energy sovereignty will accrue in our communities, our First Nations and our country for decades to come.

image.pnghttps://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/adam-pankratz-ukraine-invasion-shows-why-canada-needs-to-become-an-energy-superpower/ar-AAUjpKk?ocid=msedgntp

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Junior said:

European demand paired with its reliance on Russia for fossil fuels has already given Putin a hydrocarbon sword of Damocles to hang over the heads Europe’s leaders.

Yup, reliance on single source essentials, be it energy, pharmaceuticals, chips, defence materials/metals (or whatever) from potentially hostile trading partners is a singularly bad idea and always will be.

Pointing that out when times are good and everyone is fat and happy will get you nothing but snark and ridicule. Pointing it out after it’s taken a large bite out of progressive butts gets you labeled Capt Obvious because POOF, suddenly even they can see it as a potential vulnerability... and of course, it’s all Trump’s fault.

Here ya go, it's all OK now. 

Psaki pushes renewable energy to stop dependence on foreign oil instead of increasing US production

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Junior said:

Canada has a real chance to become a world energy superpower if we build pipelines and encourage development and exploration. This will take great political will, but the benefits of resource development and energy sovereignty will accrue in our communities, our First Nations and our country for decades to come.

The ONLY way this is possible is through a massive defeat of Trudeau in an election, which I don’t see happening for a while yet. Canadians still would prefer to vote in a “Hair-do” rather than a leader.
 

I don’t recall where I got this from (Wolfhunter?) but it becomes more relevant  every passing day.

 

“ The danger to Canada is not Justin Trudeau, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with being Prime Minister. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of a Trudeau government than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their prime minister. 

The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Trudeau, who is a mere symptom of what ails Canada. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The country can survive a Trudeau, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their Prime minister”

Edited by Jaydee
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada banning all oil imports from Russia

'Act quickly because Russia is threatening a cut-off attack' warns the Polish Prime Minister

Author of the article:
Christopher Nardi
Publishing date:
Feb 28, 2022  •  1 hour ago  •  3 minute read  •   15 Comments

According to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Canada imports roughly $550 million worth of crude oil a year from Russia. This is mostly consumed in Eastern Canada where there are no pipelines to get oil across the country. "These prices will get passed on to consumers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/pierre-poilievre-canada-must-get-tough-on-russia?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NP Platformed newsletter 2022-02-28&utm_term=NP_Comments

 

We’re in a global crisis: Russia has illegally invaded Ukraine — and it has shocked the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin has violated every one of the West’s shared democratic principles and the world must respond with strength. Rhetoric and virtue signalling are not enough. We must take concrete action.

 

I was honoured to serve in a previous government that stood up to Putin. Prior to 2016, under the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, we made support for Ukraine a cornerstone of Canada’s foreign policy. We responded forcefully in the face of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and worked to exclude Putin from the G8.

 

The current government has not taken the same approach. The Government of Ukraine has been pleading for years for Canada to provide it with weapons, in order to bolster its defensive capabilities. This plea was rejected until earlier this month, on the very cusp of the invasion. Even then, the urgently needed anti-tank weapons were reportedly dropped from the shipment.

 

The tragedy in Ukraine is the result of a failed western policy. To mitigate the damage of this tragedy and try to prevent it from happening again, Canada should take a number of concrete steps.

98D62461-F254-48A9-8D11-44B0C6415794.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Kargokings said:

Canada banning all oil imports from Russia

Typical Trudeau. A big splash about SFA.  He would have achieved more by banning the breathing of Russian Air !!

 

“ Canada's natural-resources minister, Jonathan Wilkinson, said earlier Monday that Canada hasn't imported any crude oil from Russia since 2019. Although Western countries have moved rapidly to impose a number of hard-hitting sanctions on Russia in recent days, one area they have so far avoided is oil and natural gas”

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No need to even read Rex's article. The headline says it all... and the answer to his question is no. It's too late to awaken the woke.

Rex Murphy: 'Greenism' has helped Putin fuel his war machine 

Will the horror of what is occurring in Ukraine wake up the environmentally 'woke' governments of the world to their folly?

Edited by Wolfhunter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

No need to even read Rex's article. The headline says it all... and the answer to his question is no. It's too late to awaken the woke.

Rex Murphy: 'Greenism' has helped Putin fuel his war machine 

Will the horror of what is occurring in Ukraine wake up the environmentally 'woke' governments of the world to their folly?

From the article 

 

For some environmentalists, nothing is more important

 

“ How relentlessly have you heard from every high bishop of the environmentalist creed that “the future of our planet is a stake?” From Elizabeth May, to the young Greta, to the vapid Al Gore, to the sublimely ridiculous John Kerry (who publicly worried that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine could damage its “commitment” to reducing emissions), their voices are as one. They are on a “mission,” which is nothing less than “saving the planet.” They have a “calling.”

 

The embrace of this ideology by governments, world leaders, the world’s press and the rich and famous has been the great folly of our time. It has led to great economic injury, instability, graft and — in my view — the greatest infusion of pure propaganda over three decades that we have ever seen.

 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-greenism-has-helped-putin-fuel-his-war-machine?fbclid=IwAR3Nja-0qTMCXpb8JDZd-h1sVWFBW1yYie1F9ymox6riW7lVNqgqsZE3owY

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 11:27 AM, Mitch Cronin said:

The world needs it to stay right where it is, so give it up. Stop raping forests and pumping filthy oil for temporary profit. Start thinking of priorities other than cash... you know, things that really matter, like long term survivability for our next generations.

Resistance to fossil fuel industry is growing and will keep doing so, so best you just give it up. 

Just think about the hundreds of billions of money Canada is forgoing because enough people were willing to listern to advice like this. 

Not to mention how we are literally funding a massacre as we speak.

Thanks for the advice.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Near the end of this article there is a piece on BC and why their gas is more expensive than the rest of Canada.

Why Canadian gas prices are higher than ever before (it's not all Ukraine)

Tristin Hopper  4 hrs ago
image.png.0b0d6f491b697a62c839373d02a3ff32.png

If you’re one of the 27 million Canadians who possess a driver’s licence, you may have noticed that gasoline is more expensive than at any other time since motorized transport was first popularized in North America. Gas prices in Toronto are set to surge to a never-before-seen 167.9 cents. While in Victoria, a litre of gasoline already costs a near-unbelievable 194.9 cents.

%7B© Provided by National Post Motorists fill up at a gas station in Montreal on March 3, 2022.

Below, a quick explanation of how this all came to pass (and why it’s not the gas stations’ fault). Special thanks to Rory Johnston, author of the free newsletter Commodity Context, who helped break down many of the technical details of the Canadian oil sector.

The Ukraine war has sent the oil world into a bidding frenzy

It’s not Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that sent oil prices into a tizzy, per se, but the avalanche of sanctions that the world community threw at the country in response.

So far, oil and gas is one of the only Russian commodities that the international community hasn’t sanctioned. Although Canada banned Russian oil imports on Monday , much of Western Europe is so dependent on Russian petroleum that they can’t turn off the taps without sending their own economies into a tailspin.

However, Russia’s increasingly financial isolation from the rest of the world is causing Western energy firms to voluntarily pull out of the Russian market: Shell, BP, and Exxon-Mobil, among others, are all announcing plans to hightail it out of Siberia . So even if virtually no governments are sanctioning Russian oil directly, the net effect is that it’s getting harder and harder for Russia to sell its petroleum abroad. As of this writing, Russia can’t find buyers for more than 70 per cent of its oil — even when they discount it to near-ridiculous rates.

Under normal circumstances, Russia is one of the world’s largest oil producers. By removing much of that Russian oil from the world market overnight, refineries and other oil buyers are now forced to scramble for whatever’s left — which means higher prices.

The world economy is reopening and it’s thirsty …

Of course, Canadian gas prices were already sky-high before a single shot was fired in Ukraine. On the eve of the invasion, Toronto-area gas prices were already hitting historic highs above $1.60 per litre.

The main reason is that the world economy is just now waking up from two years of COVID lockdowns, and is burning way more oil as a consequence. For a local example, just look at this week’s new guidance ordering much of the Canadian civil service back to the office. Fewer civil servants working from home means more of them are going to be commuting, which means they’ll be buying more gas to run their cars.

The oil-guzzling cruise industry is making a comeback. So are the airlines. Around the world, millions of internal combustion and jet engines are being fired up for the first times in months, and all of them are desperate for fuel. Oil demand is really, really high , in other words.

… while oil production remains in a COVID-induced coma

The cruise industry and the civil service might be returning to normal, but not so much with the energy sector. After whole oilfields were placed into mothballs during the pandemic, it’s proving exceptionally difficult to get them up and running again.

In past years, this would have been the time that U.S. shale oil production would have come to the world’s rescue. Shale oil refers to the oceans of previously inaccessible U.S. petroleum reserves, which the Americans recently figured out how to extract via fracking. The technology is the singular reason that the United States was able to become the world’s largest producer of oil in the years before the COVID-19 pandemic.

But the shale sector absolutely lost its shorts in the first years of 2020, so investors are particularly hesitant about ramping up production this time around. The OPEC nations are slowly ramping up production , but not nearly enough to bring prices back to normal levels (which is the point; they are a cartel, after all).

Canadian oil production can’t turn on a dime, either. Extracting oil from sand in the middle of northern Alberta is expensive and takes a long time to get going. So while Alberta is poised to make an absolute ton of money from peaking oil prices, it’s not like they can produce more oil by just sticking a bunch of pumpjacks in the ground.

Gas prices are way higher in B.C. because of pipelines (or a lack thereof)

All of the factors described above are due to international forces beyond our control. Regardless of what Canada says or does on energy policy, our gasoline is guaranteed to skyrocket in price any time a major oil producer like Russia gets crowbar-ed out of the world market.

But that still doesn’t explain why the situation is so much worse in B.C., where gas prices are as much as 20 cents higher than the already-high gas prices everywhere else.

In that case, B.C.ers are paying extra simply because it’s really, really difficult to sell gas to them.

Cities like Toronto and Montreal are both plugged into a North American latticework of pipelines joining together dozens of refineries everywhere from Chicago to the Gulf Coast. But on the southwest coast of B.C., there’s only a single overstretched refinery in Burnaby, a tiny 1960s-era pipeline to Alberta and whatever gasoline can be barged in from Washington State.

By design, coastal B.C. is an enclave that has largely isolated itself from the typical infrastructure used to fill up service stations with gas — and this means that whatever gas they do get comes at a premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gas prices reach record highs across Canada

Not nearly high enough to satisfy the goals of the original poster or to act as a deterrent. It's a burden for struggling families to be sure, but not a deterrent.

In order to start hitting the goals (of some here), we need to raise the carbon tax to $200 a ton and start hacking large pieces out of industry and agriculture. 

As always, my question is do you really want what you're asking for and what do y'all want to cut? 

Gas prices will continue to rise... this is a low grade test of resolve for leftists. If you don't like this you sure won't like what you've been advocating for.  

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Smith: Ukraine should be a wake-up call for Canada on energy

Danielle Smith  12 hrs agoimage.png.695480785a5c3f6c2a7e2ff86e076154.png

Will the Ukraine invasion finally be the wake-up call Canada needs to assert our role in the world and provide more secure, affordable, environmentally responsible energy?

© Provided by Calgary Herald This file photo taken on Sept. 7, 2020 shows a road sign directing traffic towards the Nord Stream 2 gas line landfall pipeline, set to double natural gas supplies from Russia to Germany, was a bargaining chip for the West in its bid to stop Moscow from invading Ukraine. The pipeline, which Germany has defiantly pursued despite criticism from the United States and Eastern Europe, was completed in 2021 but still requires regulatory approval. Germany has now withdrawn approval after the invasion, despite a severe energy crisis that has sent gas prices soaring in Europe.

Over the last several years, we’ve seen a split in the environmental community between those who are seeking an unachievable utopia and those who want a practical plan to achieve emissions reductions, while still maintaining our quality of life.

 

Last year  Green Party MP Elizabeth May  tabled a bill to address what she calls environmental racism, which would require the federal government to collect data on links between environmental hazards, race, socioeconomic status and health and then develop a national strategy to address the harms caused by environmental racism.

Why has no one tabled a bill to address energy racism?

I’d like to know how escalating power and home heating bills and rising costs of gasoline are impacting new Canadians and our other most vulnerable citizens. Because when gas and electricity bills double over normal — as they have for many people this winter — that has a disproportionate impact on those who are at the lowest end of the income scale.

Extrapolate that to the world environment and Canada’s unwillingness to export more secure, affordable, environmentally responsible energy is now contributing to global instability, war and displacement. In the case of Ukraine, there are now one million new refugees and there will likely be many more before the Russian invasion is over.

Michael Shellenberger, author of Apocalypse Never, represents the other camp emerging in the environmental community. In a recent article,  The West’s Green Delusions Empowered Putin , he offers a devastating critique of how our focus on frivolous and ineffective environmental issues has directly created this new global threat.

While Canada made it a priority to ban plastic straws, Russian President Vladimir Putin was busy increasing the production of oil and natural gas, and then he doubled Russia’s usage of nuclear energy so he had even more oil and natural gas to export. Meanwhile, Germany, the powerhouse of Europe, shut down nuclear plants and natural gas fields, turned up its nose at fracking, and massively invested in intermittent and unreliable renewables.

The results are as you’d expect. “Russia produces 11 million barrels of oil per day but only uses 3.4 million. Russia now produces over 700 billion cubic metres of gas a year but only uses around 400 billion.” They export the rest. In 2016, their thirsty European neighbour sourced 30 per cent of the natural gas it consumed from Russia; by 2021 this was up to 47 per cent. What’s more, Germans pay 50 per cent more for electricity and their CO2 emissions are eight times higher than neighbouring France, powered principally by nuclear.

This week we’ve now all discovered we can’t easily replace the amount of oil and natural gas Russia provides the world. And so global prices for oil, natural gas and gasoline are skyrocketing, and our poorest and most vulnerable citizens are paying the price.

There’s no need for it.

Every week, I take part in a call looking at the latest developments in environment, social and governance policy, a strategy called “stakeholder capitalism” by the World Economic Forum . Canada’s biggest energy players have committed to improving their metrics, including Arc, Cenovus, CNRL, Enerplus, Imperial, Suncor, Syncrude and Vermilion Energy. This week I learned, in comparison with the world, Canada has the highest number of energy companies in the “most sustainable” quadrant because they score high on all measures.

One top-rated company, Suncor, has a net-zero target of 2050; it recycles 92 per cent of the water it uses at its mining operations; it has reclaimed 2,850 hectares of land since 1967, including a tailings pond, and it’s recorded 55 different species of wildlife at its sites. It also has had Indigenous board representation since 2000; 36 per cent of the management team are women and it has increased visible minority representation by nine per cent. Plus, it has made $36 million in community investments and employees have volunteered 73,979 hours.

And, yet, Europe would rather source its vital energy from Gazprom than us.

Time to give our collective heads a shake. The world needs Canada to spend less time worrying about what Greta Thunberg thinks and more time celebrating the fact that our energy industry is already the best in the world, and will only get better. Canada needs to step up.

Danielle Smith is the president of the Alberta Enterprise Group. She can be reached at danielle@daniellesmith.ca

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

Gas prices reach record highs across Canada

Not nearly high enough to satisfy the goals of the original poster or to act as a deterrent. It's a burden for struggling families to be sure, but not a deterrent.

In order to start hitting the goals (of some here), we need to raise the carbon tax to $200 a ton and start hacking large pieces out of industry and agriculture. 

As always, my question is do you really want what you're asking for and what do y'all want to cut? 

Gas prices will continue to rise... this is a low grade test of resolve for leftists. If you don't like this you sure won't like what you've been advocating for.  

According to Gas Buddy…Diesel in Ontario this morning 

 

 

0C4A4A06-07B5-474B-9563-5FFEF3A685E1.jpeg

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CLIMATE

Why a California city is trying to build the state’s last fossil-fueled power plant

PUBLISHED SAT, MAR 5 20229:15 AM EST
SHAREShare Article via FacebookShare Article via TwitterShare Article via LinkedInShare Article via Email
KEY POINTS
  • Glendale, home to Walt Disney Imagineering and the famous Brand Boulevard, could be the last city in California to build a fossil-fueled power plant.
  • The move has angered residents and environmentalists who are urging the city to invest in clean energy to slow the climate crisis.
  • The debate over the plant highlights a broader issue over how California must figure out how to eliminate planet-warming fossil fuels while continuing to power communities.

In this article

 

People gathered in Glendale in February to protest the city's approval to build a fossil-fueled power plant.

People gathered in Glendale in February to protest the city’s approval to build a fossil-fueled power plant.
Courtesy of Morgan Goodwin

Glendale, a Los Angeles suburb that’s home to Walt Disney Imagineering and the famous Brand Boulevard, could be the last city in California to build a fossil-fueled power plant. The move has angered residents and environmentalists who have urged the city to invest in clean energy to slow the climate crisis.

Glendale has proposed to spend $260 million on five new natural gas-powered generators that will produce about 93 megawatts at the Grayson Power Plant, enough to power a midsize city. The decision comes after the state passed legislation requiring 100% clean energy by 2045.

 

The ongoing debate over the plant highlights a broader issue over how California must figure out how to eliminate planet-warming fossil fuels while continuing to power communities, an effort utility providers say will require continued investment in natural gas. The electricity sector accounts for about 16% of California’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to the California Air Resources Board.

Environmentalists have pointed out that the power plant is less than a mile from several schools, childcare centers and other community centers and will increase greenhouse gas emissions in a city already suffering from poor air quality. They argue that the plant would lock in more pollution for years to come and that investment to fund the new generators is a waste as the state transitions to cleaner energy sources.

But Glendale Water & Power, the local state-run utility, has argued that its proposed thermal generation would only run at 14% capacity — significantly less polluting than the gas engines in place now — and provide vital back-up power for the city. The new generators, it said, will provide power in the event that transmission lines are shut down to mitigate wildfire risk, as well as supply air conditioning during unbearable heat waves.

The ‘bridge fuel’ argument for natural gas

This week, the city council voted for an amendment to pause any purchase of gas-fired units until the end of the year, a move environmental groups said was just a temporary delay but praised as a step in the right direction.

Mark Young, the general manager of Glendale Water & Power, said the delay was disappointing and failed to consider the importance of providing reliable thermal generation for the city when residents need back up power.

 

“My job is to make sure that everyone has enough electricity when they need it. It feels like I’m the big bad wolf who loves thermal generation,” Young said. “I don’t – I love reliable generation.”

“Our portfolio keeps gas generators on only when we need them in the event of a problem,” Young said. “We’re trying to balance the needs of the environment and needs of the residents for reliable favorable energy.”

 

The Grayson Power Plant is located on the border of Glendale and Burbank.

The Grayson Power Plant is located on the border of Glendale and Burbank.
Courtesy of Morgan Goodwin

As part of a broader assignment from the city to invest in clean energy, Glendale Water & Power is working to implement 75 megawatts of battery energy storage at the power plant. The utility is also working on a virtual power plant that would produce 28 megawatts of solar energy by installing solar panels and batteries at homes and apartments throughout the city.

Young said that the utility’s clean energy options are maxed out, due mostly to the fact that it doesn’t have enough transmission capacity on power lines to bring in energy sources from outside the L.A. Basin.

“We’re being extremely progressive in our vision and we’re not getting credit for it,” Young said. “Natural gas is supposed to be a bridge to get to 100% clean energy.”

But environmental groups don’t buy it.

Byron Chan, an associate attorney for the environmental law firm Earthjustice, said that more than 400 residents mobilized and protested the utility’s proposal to burn fossil fuel in 2018. Since then, the utility still hasn’t fully addressed the concerns of the community, he said.

“Given what we know about emissions from natural gas, it’s incredulous that in 2022 we’re making investments in fossil fuel when there are clean energy options that are decreasing in price and becoming more and more readily available,” Chan said.

Environmental groups have also argued that the proposed gas engines won’t be able to run after the 2045 deadline and will therefore become stranded assets. However, Glendale Water & Power has argued the utility will eventually be able to run the units on green hydrogen, which is made from the electrolysis of water powered by solar or wind and is still in its infant stage.

Morgan Goodwin, a Glendale resident and the senior director of Sierra Club’s Los Angeles chapter, said the main fight over the power plant is whether or not fossil fuel production plays a role in the solution to climate change.

“The answer is clearly no,” Goodwin said. “But the messaging we get from the fossil fuel industry is still touting bridge fuel benefits. If our elected leaders are willing to say ‘No fossil fuels means no fossil fuels,’ then that’s the example of what we want to see nationally.”

“We’re asking Glendale Water & Power and other utilities to make some deep changes to how they operate,” Goodwin said. “This is their opportunity to demonstrate leadership and courage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2019 at 11:27 AM, Mitch Cronin said:

The world needs it to stay right where it is, so give it up. Stop raping forests and pumping filthy oil for temporary profit. Start thinking of priorities other than cash... you know, things that really matter, like long term survivability for our next generations.

Resistance to fossil fuel industry is growing and will keep doing so, so best you just give it up. 

In the interest of kindly getting along with other members of the forum, I kindly request that you read this response to the quote that started this thread.

 

The West’s Green Delusions Empowered Putin

While we banned plastic straws, Russia drilled and doubled nuclear energy production. 

 

How has Vladimir Putin—a man ruling a country with an economy smaller than that of Texas, with an average life expectancy 10 years lower than that of France—managed to launch an unprovoked full-scale assault on Ukraine?

There is a deep psychological, political and almost civilizational answer to that question: He wants Ukraine to be part of Russia more than the West wants it to be free. He is willing to risk tremendous loss of life and treasure to get it. There are serious limits to how much the U.S. and Europe are willing to do militarily. And Putin knows it.

Missing from that explanation, though, is a story about material reality and basic economics—two things that Putin seems to understand far better than his counterparts in the free world and especially in Europe. 

Putin knows that Europe produces 3.6 million barrels of oil a day but uses 15 million barrels of oil a day. Putin knows that Europe produces 230 billion cubic meters of natural gas a year but uses 560 billion cubic meters. He knows that Europe uses 950 million tons of coal a year but produces half that.

The former KGB agent knows Russia produces 11 million barrels of oil per day but only uses 3.4 million. He knows Russia now produces over 700 billion cubic meters of gas a year but only uses around 400 billion. Russia mines 800 million tons of coal each year but uses 300.

That’s how Russia ends up supplying about 20 percent of Europe’s oil, 40 percent of its gas, and 20 percent of its coal. 

The math is simple. A child could do it.

The reason Europe didn’t have a muscular deterrent threat to prevent Russian aggression—and in fact prevented the U.S. from getting allies to do more—is that it needs Putin’s oil and gas. 


The question is why. 

How is it possible that European countries, Germany especially, allowed themselves to become so dependent on an authoritarian country over the 30 years since the end of the Cold War? 

Here’s how: These countries are in the grips of a delusional ideology that makes them incapable of understanding the hard realities of energy production. Green ideology insists we don’t need nuclear and that we don’t need fracking. It insists that it’s just a matter of will and money to switch to all-renewables—and fast. It insists that we need “degrowth” of the economy, and that we face looming human “extinction.” (I would know. I myself was once a true believer.)

John Kerry, the United States’ climate envoy, perfectly captured the myopia of this view when he said, in the days before the war, that the Russian invasion of Ukraine “could have a profound negative impact on the climate, obviously. You have a war, and obviously you’re going to have massive emissions consequences to the war. But equally importantly, you’re going to lose people’s focus.”

But it was the West’s focus on healing the planet with “soft energy” renewables, and moving away from natural gas and nuclear, that allowed Putin to gain a stranglehold over Europe’s energy supply. 

As the West fell into a hypnotic trance about healing its relationship with nature, averting climate apocalypse and worshiping a teenager named Greta, Vladimir Putin made his moves.

While he expanded nuclear energy at home so Russia could export its precious oil and gas to Europe, Western governments spent their time and energy obsessing over “carbon footprints,” a term created by an advertising firm working for British Petroleum. They banned plastic straws because of a 9-year-old Canadian child’s science homework. They paid for hours of “climate anxiety” therapy

While Putin expanded Russia’s oil production, expanded natural gas production, and then doubled nuclear energy production to allow more exports of its precious gas, Europe, led by Germany, shut down its nuclear power plants, closed gas fields, and refused to develop more through advanced methods like fracking. 

The numbers tell the story best. In 2016, 30 percent of the natural gas consumed by the European Union came from Russia. In 2018, that figure jumped to 40 percent. By 2020, it was nearly 44 percent, and by early 2021, it was nearly 47 percent. 

For all his fawning over Putin, Donald Trump, back in 2018, defied diplomatic protocol to call out Germany publicly for its dependence on Moscow. “Germany, as far as I’m concerned, is captive to Russia because it’s getting so much of its energy from Russia,” Trump said. This prompted Germany’s then-chancellor, Angela Merkel, who had been widely praised in polite circles for being the last serious leader in the West, to say that her country “can make our own policies and make our own decisions.”

The result has been the worst global energy crisis since 1973, driving prices for electricity and gasoline higher around the world. It is a crisis, fundamentally, of inadequate supply. But the scarcity is entirely manufactured.

Europeans—led by figures like Greta Thunberg and European Green Party leaders, and supported by Americans like John Kerry—believed that a healthy relationship with the Earth requires making energy scarce. By turning to renewables, they would show the world how to live without harming the planet. But this was a pipe dream. You can’t power a whole grid with solar and wind, because the sun and the wind are inconstant, and currently existing batteries aren’t even cheap enough to store large quantities of electricity overnight, much less across whole seasons. 

In service to green ideology, they made the perfect the enemy of the good—and of Ukraine. 

https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-43
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In North Vancouver, Supreme is up to $2.28 per litre. A bit more and it will start having the deterrent effect the original poster (and others here) are seeking. The only answer to the headline question below should be a resounding YES.

If it's not, ground arms and leave the field... you're not up to the task.

So, is Ottawa still going to insist on that carbon tax increase?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Wolfhunter said:

In North Vancouver, Supreme is up to $2.28 per litre. A bit more and it will start having the deterrent effect the original poster (and others here) are seeking. The only answer to the headline question below should be a resounding YES.

If it's not, ground arms and leave the field... you're not up to the task.

So, is Ottawa still going to insist on that carbon tax increase?

The folks in North Vancouver elected

Quote
North Vancouver · Member of Parliament

So they are seeing a great example of beware of what you ask (vote) for. 😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Canada’s Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act a Parliamentary Placebo?

Summary

  • People given placebos in drug tests often feel better because they expect they will. Legislation can have a similar placebo effect. Canada’s Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act is an example: it makes people feel better despite being ineffective, unnecessary, and potentially harmful.
  • The minister responsible has described the Act as setting “legally-binding targets.” That is incorrect. It legislates a target but doesn’t bind anyone to meet it.
  • Both the previous government and this one have set emissions targets without using legislation to do so, so this Act is unnecessary for that purpose.
  • The Act will encourage lawsuits that will seek to enforce compliance with the target, which the government might not defend vigorously.
  • A government media release says the Act provides transparency and accountability but that is also unnecessary because Canada’s commitment to file such reports under the Paris Agreement already does that.
  • Despite the promised transparency the Act is opaque on the single most important issue: the cost to Canadians of the rapid transition to net-zero emissions. Predictably, the rapid transition is inflationary and will make food, home heating, electricity, and transportation much costlier.
  • Contrary to popular misconception, the Paris Agreement does not require any specific emissions reductions but allows each country to determine its own targets.
  • China, India, and others (representing two thirds of the global population) have decided to increase their total emissions. Canada, prior to the COVID-19 lockdowns, was actually increasing its greenhouse gas emissions, making it unlikely that the country will meet the net-zero target.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/is-canadas-net-zero-emissions-accountability-act-a-parliamentary-placebo?utm_source=The+Hub&utm_campaign=468b58ea38-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_03_07_07_26&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_429d51ea5d-468b58ea38-522638043&mc_cid=468b58ea38&mc_eid=09433e3d5d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...