- Reaction score
- 12,126
- Points
- 1,040
Doesn't quite fit the theory that you can't use the master's tools to dismantle the master's house. Which is OK, because the theory is asinine.
Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread
- Thread starter Cdn Blackshirt
- Start date
- Status
OceanBonfire
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 394
- Points
- 1,080
Faster adaptation to climate change will save Canada billions: analysis | Globalnews.ca
Beyond higher reconstruction costs, Canada is also facing massive economic disruptions as factories are closed during storms or extreme heat and supply chains are disrupted.
globalnews.ca
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,534
- Points
- 1,210
Well duh, its amazing how things go if you don't build on flood plains, vulnerable coastlines, difficult to access forested areas. It also helps if you leave wetlands and coastal marsh areas alone and don't allow deadfall in forests to build up.
Faster adaptation to climate change will save Canada billions: analysis | Globalnews.ca
Beyond higher reconstruction costs, Canada is also facing massive economic disruptions as factories are closed during storms or extreme heat and supply chains are disrupted.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 22,728
- Points
- 1,260
Years ago - ln the late 80s IIRC and forest guy said with all the build up of deadfall there would be issues. They used to do controlled burns of older dieing parts of the forest....but.....Green Peace and politicians eager to suck up stopped that.
- Reaction score
- 12,126
- Points
- 1,040
Could ditch the word "change" and headline would still make sense, and be closer to the root of the issue. Going head-to-head with natural forces is rarely prudent.
- Reaction score
- 13,665
- Points
- 1,160
Or emphasise the word "change" and teach kids that change happens. And we're still here.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 47,342
- Points
- 1,160
Prescribed burns were stopped because citizens complained about smoky summers, and the occasional burn 'gets away' from the crew and burns houses and other infrastructure, which is also unpleasant. The solution is not to the let the First Nations do their traditional thing...
BC's Forest Practises Borad is doing a few audits on the subject, FYI:
2. Barriers to Prescribed Fire
Prescribed burning is a well-known and cost effective way to reduce forest fuels, but it has not been widely practiced in BC for over 30 years. This is despite the fact that prescribed fire is known to mitigate wildfire risk, help restore and enhance forest and range, and is a culturally significant practice for many Indigenous communities across BC. Several factors, including policies, limited prescribed burning knowledge and practice, and public opinion are believed to have contributed to the drastic decline in use of prescribed fire. This special investigation will focus on Section 23 of the Wildfire Regulation (resource management, open fires) and examine barriers in policy, practice and public opinion to using fire for resource management purposes, offering solutions for government and practitioners to overcome them.
Issue #26 - Winter 2022 - Forest Practices Board
Here in BC we didn’t want another reminder of our changing climate and its effects but we got it anyway… The floods of November 2021 will rank as one of the most costly natural disasters in Canadian history and the impacts will be with us for years to come. Water is a critical resource to […]
www.bcfpb.ca
- Reaction score
- 12,126
- Points
- 1,040
After decades of fuel build-up, I can guess that prescribed burns won't behave the way people "remember" from long ago.
"Yeah, we used to do this all the time."
"Wow, look at it go!"
"Yeah, we used to do this all the time."
"Wow, look at it go!"
OceanBonfire
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 394
- Points
- 1,080
This 100% solar community endured Hurricane Ian with no loss of power and minimal damage
Babcock Ranch calls itself 'America's first solar-powered town.' The streets in this meticulously planned neighbourhood are designed to flood so houses don't, and power and internet lines are buried to avoid wind damage. While Hurricane Ian obliterated the nearby Fort Myers and Naples areas...
www.ctvnews.ca
I came here to post this! I thought it was interesting how they’ve kept power on with solar. It says that they produce more than they need, so presumably they’re normally tied to the rest of the grid and selling the excess.This 100% solar community endured Hurricane Ian with no loss of power and minimal damage
Babcock Ranch calls itself 'America's first solar-powered town.' The streets in this meticulously planned neighbourhood are designed to flood so houses don't, and power and internet lines are buried to avoid wind damage. While Hurricane Ian obliterated the nearby Fort Myers and Naples areas...
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 47,342
- Points
- 1,160
It's not looking great right now... and there's no rain expected in the foreseeable future:
FSTO
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 7,534
- Points
- 1,210
Florida is still going underwater.
- Reaction score
- 13,665
- Points
- 1,160
Is there hope for Alberta?
Freeland's speech in Washington may not have been a one off.
The Liberal Organ signs off on hydrocarbons.
What if Canada could have a bigger oil and gas industry, and lower emissions? It’s possible
THE EDITORIAL BOARDPUBLISHED 13 HOURS AGOUPDATED 50 MINUTES AGO
:format(jpeg)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/MPGH4LELIJIC7D4SKH4ELSTHHA.JPG)
The Suncor tar sands processing plant near the Athabasca River at their mining operations near Fort McMurray, Alta.TODD KOROL/REUTERS
50 COMMENTS
SHARE
BOOKMARK
LISTEN TO ARTICLE
There’s a big difference between promise and action.
Last Friday, Canada’s oil sands companies started to bridge that chasm, moving from a vague pledge to reach net-zero emissions to a $24.1-billion plan to get a third of the way to the goal by 2030.
A brief history: The oil sands of northeastern Alberta had long held a visible bounty of crude. But it wasn’t until the 1960s and 1970s that the riddle of turning bitumen into usable oil was solved, in part with significant support from governments. The region remained a fringe part of the oil business until the 2000s, when a boom took off, again in part propelled by government support. It made Canada into the world’s fourth-largest oil producer.
Transforming bitumen into oil, however, takes energy. Using fossil fuels to make fossil fuels, along with everything else involved in the process, produces lots of greenhouse gas emissions.
Last year, the oil sands companies said they could achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, and drew up a conceptual road map, starting with cutting emissions by a third by 2030. But as the months passed, with no details or spending plans, this page and others wondered about what was happening – or rather not happening. In February, we urged industry to invest some of its windfall profits and get more ambitious.
Friday marked a big step – $24.1-billion, two-thirds of it going to carbon capture and storage, and the rest to other projects. Of the $16.5-billion budgeted for carbon capture, taxpayers will foot almost half the bill, with subsidies of $7.1-billion through to 2030 outlined in Ottawa’s April budget.
The long history of the oil sands is important because it illustrates the shared role of industry and governments in unlocking a massive resource. On emissions, it had so far been Ottawa out in front. Now, industry has shown up.
Also important is a shift in rhetoric, from both industry and Ottawa. “Our perspective is, ‘Watch us now,’” said Kendall Dilling, head of Pathways Alliance, the coalition of oil sands companies. “We have made that fundamental mindset shift that our future is a carbon-free production of our product.”
This is key. There is a global demand for Canadian oil and natural gas, and this country will be producing both for years to come. Canadians receive enormous economic benefits from the fact this country is a major producer, and so do our allies. Canada needs to cut emissions across the economy, and the oil and gas industry has to lead, significantly and steadily reducing its emissions. But forcing an artificial cut in production of Canadian oil and gas, when global demand exists, is not the way to get there. The void would be filled by OPEC, Moscow and others. It would leave us poorer and weaker, and would benefit neither us nor our allies.
The future of oil and gas has polarized Canadian politics. The left demonizes crude, the right lionizes it, and both sides miss the point. Conservatives don’t much like talking about climate change or emissions reductions. And the Liberal government – despite investing $26-billion in buying and expanding the Trans Mountain oil pipeline – doesn’t much like talking about how vital oil and gas are to Canada, or how important the resource is for the democratic world.
But some Liberal tongues have suddenly loosened.
Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, in a speech last week in Washington, said Canada needs to focus on “fast-tracking” energy and mining projects that “our allies need to heat their homes and to manufacture electric vehicles.” Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly, in South Korea and Japan last week, celebrated the fact that Canada is set to become a major supplier of natural gas to those countries, once the big LNG Canada export facility opens in 2025, on British Columbia’s northwest coast. Ms. Joly went on to say: “There is a lot of interest for all of us to go even further.” As in possibly more projects, exporting more Canadian gas. The first phase of LNG Canada would see more than 10 per cent of this country’s natural gas shipped to Asia, where it could help ease reliance on coal power. A second phase would double that volume – and that second phase, with new technology, could be the world’s lowest-emissions LNG.
All of which is, just maybe, a sign of industry and Ottawa starting to sing in harmony – with Ottawa less reluctant to talk about the importance of oil and gas to our prosperity and security, and industry acknowledging how much work it has to do to cut, cut and further cut emissions.
/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/MPGH4LELIJIC7D4SKH4ELSTHHA.JPG)
Globe editorial: What if Canada could have a bigger oil and gas industry, and lower emissions? It’s possible
Ottawa and oil sands companies are starting to sing in harmony, in recognizing how much work industry has to do to cut emissions and Ottawa becoming more open to the importance of oil and gas to our prosperity and security
www.theglobeandmail.com
- Reaction score
- 18,540
- Points
- 1,160
It takes roughly 10 years from proposal to shipment for a big LNG plant. There is a lot and I mean a lot of ground work to be done. You need access to the gas and a long term customer first. Then you need to figure out a pipeline route, taking into account existing, environmental, geophysical, cultural, industrial and infrastructure along the route. Plus archaeological. Then you need to find a plant site, negotiate ownership. Plus you need a port and terminal. Once you have reach FID, then you need to order the modules, which you have been negotiating and selecting a contractor for. You need to build a MOF to unload those modules, a Camp to house the workers, electrical supply, road access. You need an combined environmental assessment, NEB export permit, likley a Fisheries Act authorization(s), CNWA approvals, EC Ocean disposal for dredging is possible and likley 300 or so Provincial permits for road use, roading building, stream crossings, cutting permits, fish salvage, quarries, water extraction, etc, etc. Not to mention foreshore lease, pipeline ROW. And then there is aboriginal consultation at the environmental assessment stage and for every approval, permit and authorization. You likley want to negotiate soon revenue sharing agreements first.
- Reaction score
- 13,665
- Points
- 1,160
My lord man! What a lot of Koolaid you have drunk.
Where is your sense of Urgency?
- Reaction score
- 18,540
- Points
- 1,160
I sold it when I retired......
There is only so much you can shave off a project to speed things up, otherwise you end up hitting snags that delay the project or drive the costs way up. Finding the right medium of planning and prep to make sure you don't have to big of an issue is the key along with accepting some risk. The FN thing is not going away and it's better to negotiate up front and early (I told proponents to do it before they even submitted their project.).
Even under the Harper era of environmental regs, I was told by numerous people that have done projects around the world that ours was the most vigorous they had dealt with.
- Reaction score
- 12,126
- Points
- 1,040
The first step was just getting someone in government to start talking openly about the advantages of helping others move from higher-emission fuels (eg. coal) to lower-emission fuels (eg. naturals gas).
The next step would be to ask them whether there is truly a "climate crisis", and if they so believe, to act as if they mean it: burn all red tape preventing expedient construction of means for exporting LNG. There's no reconciling "climate crisis" with "allow the litigation to take the usual amount of time to unfold".
The next step would be to ask them whether there is truly a "climate crisis", and if they so believe, to act as if they mean it: burn all red tape preventing expedient construction of means for exporting LNG. There's no reconciling "climate crisis" with "allow the litigation to take the usual amount of time to unfold".
- Reaction score
- 18,540
- Points
- 1,160
Shaping operations underway Who We Are | Pathways Alliance
- Status
Similar threads
