Sask., Ottawa reach deal on greenhouse gases

[captain morgan]

The present state of CCS is that the total sequestered to this time (annually) is about 1/10th. of 1% of the amount by wich emissions need to be reduced.

The majority of emissions are produced at the consumer level. Expecting CCS or a carbon tax on the energy producers will do nothing to curb the practices of the largest demographic that emits this terrible, naturally occurring gas.

This is why the current focus to 'solve' this 'problem' is disingenuous at best.

 

[petros]

Where is the ideology in noting what scientists are saying or statistics are showing? How is citing observation and experience ideological?

You might like to read this and the links, including one to an update by Socolow concerning his wedges.

RealClimate: Carbon Capture And Storage

The present state of CCS is that the total sequestered to this time (annually) is about 1/10th. of 1% of the amount by wich emissions need to be reduced.

I wrote of Norway because it is, by far, the most advanced in the technology and in experimental facilities. Norway, with much fanfare, a couple of years ago, announced a new facility to both sequester and test technologies. Unfortunately, it would sequester only 1/10th. of the emissions from the plant where it was to be installed. It has been delayed because, as Norway now syas, the investment is slow since it needs a price for carbon of about four times that of the present. Norway's investment has turned out to be many times what was thought to be required.

Alberta has also delayed and probably, ended some of its projects.

The point is, that CCS has been touted as the saviour and has turned out to be nothing more than a band aid. The Conservative government and the Alberta governments have been trying to sll CCS as their answer to Canada's emissions for several years. Their pretense is now blown.

In Europe several projected facilities have been stalled for the same reason.

Ummmmmmmmm NO! You keep bringing up SHELL? Why are they the ones behind CCS in SK?

Andrew Scheer, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole and Member of Parliament for Regina-Qu’Appelle, speaking on behalf of the Honourable Lynne Yelich, Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification, made the announcement, which allows IPAC-CO2 to proceed with start-up activities and ultimately focus on developing a greater understanding of how geological CO2 storage projects function.

“Our Government is committed to supporting innovative projects that will strengthen our economy and improve our competitiveness,” said MP Scheer. “Today’s investment for IPAC-CO2 builds on Saskatchewan’s strength as a leader in carbon capture and storage research, laying a knowledge foundation that solidifies our global presence in this field and ensures that we emerge from the tough economic times stronger than before.

“This federal funding will go a long way toward ensuring Saskatchewan remains a leader in carbon capture and storage,” Regina South MLA Bill Hutchinson said on behalf of Energy and Resources Minister Bill Boyd. “We are proud to add Western Economic Diversification Canada to our list of partners in the innovative IPAC-CO2 centre here at the University of Regina.”

With today’s $4 million federal investment, IPAC-CO2 will purchase sophisticated analytic equipment to better understand what is happening to CO2 in the subsurface and to provide better data on storage sites. It will create a Community of Practice to work with researchers, industry and regulators around the world. IPAC-CO2 will conduct modeling of carbon capture systems and, finally, it will work with the Canadian Standards Association and the International Standards Organization to develop the first national and international standards for geological storage.

Today’s funding bolsters the Government of Saskatchewan and Shell Canada commitments of $5 million each announced in November 2008 to establish IPAC-CO2 as a centre that will help make western Canada and a network of international experts the leaders in the large-scale deployment and acceptance of CCS internationally. Saskatchewan and Shell Canada have both provided a portion from their commitments to today’s announcement, while the University of Regina has contributed over $100,000 to make IPAC-CO2 a success.



More:Government of Canada supports CO2 assessment centre

 

[Cabbagesandking]

Ummmmmmmmm NO! You keep bringing up SHELL? Why are they the ones behind CCS in SK?

Andrew Scheer, Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole and Member of Parliament for Regina-Qu’Appelle, speaking on behalf of the Honourable Lynne Yelich, Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification, made the announcement, which allows IPAC-CO2 to proceed with start-up activities and ultimately focus on developing a greater understanding of how geological CO2 storage projects function.

“Our Government is committed to supporting innovative projects that will strengthen our economy and improve our competitiveness,” said MP Scheer. “Today’s investment for IPAC-CO2 builds on Saskatchewan’s strength as a leader in carbon capture and storage research, laying a knowledge foundation that solidifies our global presence in this field and ensures that we emerge from the tough economic times stronger than before.

“This federal funding will go a long way toward ensuring Saskatchewan remains a leader in carbon capture and storage,” Regina South MLA Bill Hutchinson said on behalf of Energy and Resources Minister Bill Boyd. “We are proud to add Western Economic Diversification Canada to our list of partners in the innovative IPAC-CO2 centre here at the University of Regina.”

With today’s $4 million federal investment, IPAC-CO2 will purchase sophisticated analytic equipment to better understand what is happening to CO2 in the subsurface and to provide better data on storage sites. It will create a Community of Practice to work with researchers, industry and regulators around the world. IPAC-CO2 will conduct modeling of carbon capture systems and, finally, it will work with the Canadian Standards Association and the International Standards Organization to develop the first national and international standards for geological storage.

Today’s funding bolsters the Government of Saskatchewan and Shell Canada commitments of $5 million each announced in November 2008 to establish IPAC-CO2 as a centre that will help make western Canada and a network of international experts the leaders in the large-scale deployment and acceptance of CCS internationally. Saskatchewan and Shell Canada have both provided a portion from their commitments to today’s announcement, while the University of Regina has contributed over $100,000 to make IPAC-CO2 a success.



More:Government of Canada supports CO2 assessment centre

Try to keep up! The information I posted told you what is happenoing now that reality has set in. It is not 21/2 years old.

 

[petros]

I just posted reality. You've posted antiquated tripe.

 

[Cabbagesandking]

The majority of emissions are produced at the consumer level. Expecting CCS or a carbon tax on the energy producers will do nothing to curb the practices of the largest demographic that emits this terrible, naturally occurring gas.

This is why the current focus to 'solve' this 'problem' is disingenuous at best.

Carbon taxes have been shown to work. Most developed nations now have such taxes. Even Canada and the US have modest starts at these taxes.

 

[petros]

A 4 cent per Kw/h hike in electricty rates is funding CCS in SK.

 

[Kakato]

Carbon taxes have been shown to work. Most developed nations now have such taxes. Even Canada and the US have modest starts at these taxes.

No,its just the east trying to get some of the wests hard earned dollars back to the east,we dont trust you guys since the nep and probably wont in my lifetime so get used to it.

Funny but I thought we were a developed nation.

Shell has some of the brightest peeps in the world working for them.
I loved working for Shell! They taught me lots about reclamation and I will have work for the rest of my life because of them.

 

[petros]

Yo cabbaggefartknocker....why is SHELL funding CCS in SK if they proved it doesn't work in the North Sea?

"As an original funder of IPAC-CO2, Shell is pleased to see additional support for IPAC and recognition that IPAC is a key enabler of developing CCS globally," said Rob Seeley, General Manager Sustainable Development, Shell Canada. "All potential pathways to reduce CO2 emissions need to be pursued - including energy efficiency, renewable energy, low carbon energy and CCS."

 

[captain morgan]

Carbon taxes have been shown to work. Most developed nations now have such taxes. Even Canada and the US have modest starts at these taxes.

A consumer tax will work even more effectively. How come you aren't proposing such a tax?

After all, this is about saving the planet and clearly the most rapid and effective results will be through curbing actual consumption. So, how about it, are you interested in saving the planet or simply adding more graft money into general revenues of gvt?

 

[petros]

SkyTrain expansion is costing BC consumers 15 cents a litre on gasoline to fund the damn thing. That's ontop of carbon taxes.

 

[captain morgan]

SkyTrain expansion is costing BC consumers 15 cents a litre on gasoline to fund the damn thing. That's ontop of carbon taxes.

But they haven't even hit the power producers for a royalty-style payment yet.... Changes the economics really fast.

 

[petros]

But they haven't even hit the power producers for a royalty-style payment yet.... Changes the economics really fast.

That would effect their number one power consuming industry.... growing pot.

 

[captain morgan]

I guess that the cost of an ounce will be heading North soon.

 

[taxslave]

Of course it is a failure and I have said clearly why it is. I expect the Bear to try to put down the references I gave but you know better who they are and how credible they are. It is a failure because it cannot deliver on the promise. Storage capacity is far more limited than thought and the security is not so great. It also, as I said, can be of litle practical se in alleviating the problem it supposedly addresses for many years by which time, it will be far too late.

Why would I say electric vehicles are a failure? They will be part of the long term solution but, not until the source of their fuel is taken away from the sources of CO2 that need sequestration.

I see it is a failure because you said so. Now we are all clear on that factoid.

 

[petros]

I guess that the cost of an ounce will be heading North soon.

It already has.

 

[captain morgan]

It already has.

In retrospect, that might explain why OWS faded away

 

[taxslave]

I just posted reality. You've posted antiquated tripe.

From a not very reliable source.

 

[petros]

Yeah, I know. My sources suck raw moose dick apparently.

 

[Cabbagesandking]

A consumer tax will work even more effectively. How come you aren't proposing such a tax?

After all, this is about saving the planet and clearly the most rapid and effective results will be through curbing actual consumption. So, how about it, are you interested in saving the planet or simply adding more graft money into general revenues of gvt?

A consumer tax will not. A carbon tax is revenue neutral and a consumer tax is not. Economists as well as scientists are in favour of a carbon tax. Interestingly, several European countries show that the populatios also favour carbon tax and pricing. They have not faced the massive disinformation campaigns that the fossil fuel industry and Right Wing political interests have foisted on Canada and the USA.

All economic examinations (or nearly all) of carbon pricing and taxing have concluded that there will be a modest cost to economies and consumers. However, that cost is on a straight comparison of economic activity and they do not account for the external benefits some of which are not measurable. When the damage to health of the present range of fuel uses and the incalcuable damages that climate change will bring, the economic benefits of ation to halt emissions and nitigate climate change are enormous.

You might like to skil through these scenarios that the USA failed to follow though with and the analyses.

The economic impacts of carbon pricing

 

[taxslave]

Yeah, I know. My sources suck raw moose dick apparently.

That too but I was referring to the cabbage kids link. Then again if the moose dick was cooked or pickled would it be more reliable?



On a more important note.
Why is it that we have a federal environment ministry and each province has an environment ministry of their own? Seems to me like a duplication of effort, cost and a bunch of redundant bureaucraps. IE a make work project for people that would otherwise qualify for welfare with a little training.

A consumer tax will not. A carbon tax is revenue neutral and a consumer tax is not. Economists as well as scientists are in favour of a carbon tax. Interestingly, several European countries show that the populatios also favour carbon tax and pricing. They have not faced the massive disinformation campaigns that the fossil fuel industry and Right Wing political interests have foisted on Canada and the USA.

All economic examinations (or nearly all) of carbon pricing and taxing have concluded that there will be a modest cost to economies and consumers. However, that cost is on a straight comparison of economic activity and they do not account for the external benefits some of which are not measurable. When the damage to health of the present range of fuel uses and the incalcuable damages that climate change will bring, the economic benefits of ation to halt emissions and nitigate climate change are enormous.

You might like to skil through these scenarios that the USA failed to follow though with and the analyses.

The economic impacts of carbon pricing

Do tell, how is a carbon tax revenue neutral without cutting some other tax? And if it is revenue neutral why have one in the first place unless your goal is to provide more government jobs for people with no real job skills?